Saburo Sakai Zero vs Bf-109

[Anonymous]

Man, thats record is amazing!

But, how did Japanese pilots LEARN to counter US air superiority? I meant Kamikazi was used to destroy ships, Japanese airmen must learned to how to maintain their control of air, right? Zeros maybe now outclassed by Hellcats, but proper tactics maybe still useful.

LOL - they didn't! It's as simple as that.

 

[Anonymous]

Of course, you have to remember that the numbers I'm reporting are taken from the actual reports of the action. They are, therefore, somewhat on the high side. I am not, however, in the business of second-guessing the combat observations of the folks on the scene from sixty-one years later. I like the "feel" of the original data and almost invariable defer to the reports from the scene. If I can put a date, timeframe, name, squadron, location and combat result for each aircraft reported as shot down, probably shot down, or damaged, then that is good enough for me.

That being said, here's quick reference a compilation of action in the Marianas between 11 June 1944 and 30 June 1944. The results of action by USN carrier aircraft were as follows (Figures do not include action around Iwo Jima on 16 June or 24 June 1944):

Carriers in Action:
CV: 7
CVL: 8
CVE: 11
Action Sorties: 8,202
Tons of Bombs on Targets: 2,282
Enemy Aircraft Engaged: 1,393
Enemy Aircraft Destroyed, Air: 704
Enemy Aircraft Probably Destroyed, Air: 102
Enemy Aircraft Damaged, Air: 68
Enemy Aircraft Destroyed, Ground: 135
Aircraft Losses to Enemy AAA: 101
Aircraft Losses to Enemy Aircraft: 41
Aircraft Losses to Operational Causes: 120

Specifically for the 19 June – 20 June 1944 period, US carrier plane losses were in the range of

19 June –
Aircraft Losses to Enemy Action: 23
Aircraft Losses to Operational Causes: 6

20 June –
Aircraft Losses to Enemy Action: 17
Aircraft Losses to Operational Causes: 79

But, how did Japanese pilots LEARN to counter US air superiority? I meant Kamikazi was used to destroy ships, Japanese airmen must learned to how to maintain their control of air, right? Zeros maybe now outclassed by Hellcats, but proper tactics maybe still useful.

Simple answer, they didn't. As far as the Japanese being able to adapt A6M tactics in order to deal with the threat posed by US technology and training, they, frankly did not have a lot to work with nor did they have time to do so. In the Marianas, their average pilot had about three months experience, outside their flight training program. In contrast, the average USN aviator had about two years flying experience and about 300 hours in type (oddly enough, less than what one finds for some USN VF squadrons at the beginning of the war). With the losses suffered in this battle, the result was that the next crop of flight school graduates became their front line pilots, with next to no experience, facing the increasingly experienced Americans. So, it wasn't just a matter of the quality of the aircraft, but the quality of wresting the optimal performance out of the aircraft, something that only comes from training and experience. The Japanese had little time for training and almost no time to build on experience. The operational tempo was speeding up. The invasion of Saipan was scheduled originally for November 1944. It happened in June. By October, US forces would be in the Philippines. At the end of that month, the next crop of IJN carrier aviators would be launched from their carriers and instructed to land ashore; their training was incomplete and most could not land back aboard a carrier. This, of course, left the IJN carriers in their sacrificial mode for the action off Cape Enango, no planes to defend themselves, no planes with which to launch their own strikes. And so it went. The Japanese were faced with a continuing downward spiral. Pilot losses meant shortened training cycles to make up the losses. Lack of fuel meant less flight training time, both in primary training and once they got to their units. Increased pressures from US forces meant more losses to make up with still less training and still less fuel since the US submarines were snuffing out the Japanese tankers one by one. By the end of the war, in the summer of 1945, US carrier aircraft could, and did, roam almost at will over the Japanese home islands. The Japanese could see the writing on the wall, the Americans were coming and their intent was to finish it once and for all. The Japanese had some 9000 to 13000 planes (estimates vary) of all types left in their inventory. They had fuel for two or maybe three sorties each. Pilot experience, overall, was next to nothing. Other than for a very few extremely specialized fighter squadrons (like, maybe, two) there was no fuel to be wasted chasing around after US raiders. And even in those special squadrons, where what was left of the cream of the Japanese experience pool was concentrated, scrambling against the F6Fs and F4Us roaming the countryside meant a quick hit an run attack, in and out, before they turned on you and swarmed like a pack of mad blue dogs. And those experienced aviators, like every other resource essential to the Japanese, began a slow process of being winkled out one by one . . . there was just so many times one could tempt fate. There was no turn and burn dog fights of the early days, that took time and the longer one was exposed, the more USN fighters showed in for a piece of the action. Overall, this was another losing proposition. For the rest, it was disperse the planes and keep them de-fueled and hidden. USN photo planes were coming back with photos showing aircraft hidden as much as 5 miles from the nearest airfield. And the ACIO folks on the carriers were taking those photos and assigning the destruction of individual planes, one by one. In those last 45 days of the war, in 13 combat mission days, pilots from TF-38 destroyed some 1100 plus planes on the ground versus 124 in the air; and 53 of those air-to-air credits were shot down between 13 August and 15 August. Returning strike pilots noted in the same time period that they were seeing more of the planes attacked on the ground catching fire and burning. This meant that at some fields dispersed aircraft were being fueled and, presumably, readied for some action. Whatever that was, the surrender put a stop to it. For the most part, though, the Japanese air forces, army and navy, were biding their time and waiting for the anticipated arrival of the American invasion fleet. At which point, they still had thousands of airplanes could still fly, and enough pilots, with enough training to get off the ground and head in the general direction of the American ships, to man them. Landing was not a required skill. In the end, there was a pool of at least 10000 pilots who did not have the dubious opportunity to attempt to crash into an American ship. Would some have them have gotten through first the fighter screens and then the AAA fire? Most certainly, and if it was only 5%, then that's 500 planes. And if only half of them actually hit a ship, that's 250 hits. Moreover, the Japanese had learned their lesson; the target was to be transports, not warships. Not a very attractive outcome for all concerned, Japanese or American, and, fortunately, one way or the other, in the end, avoided.

Rich

Rich, I enjoy reading what you write. But could you please use paragraphs some? The above needs them badly - it's just hard to read.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

The only advantage the zero had over the 109 was range. A 109E could turn just as well as a Zero. Yes the range would have been more effective in the Battle of Britain but a 109 would have held up easier against the Spits and Hurricanes then a flimsy Zero. She may have had range but she was not very well armed nor was she well armored and as she was shown in the Pacific she would have been cut to pieces by the RAF.

As was stated before about the 109T. The Japs had already evaluated the 109 by the time the T came out and even if they had not they would not have taken it for the simple fact that the undercarraige on the 109T would have made for very dangerous landings. I would not have wanted to land one on a carrier.

An interesting thing though is that the Japanese accepted some Fw-190's to evaluate them and even though it was superior to the Zero, I wonder why they did not take it.

I disagree that the 109E turned just as well as the Zero. It turned about equally to the Spitfire, and we know the Zero substantially out turned the Spitfire.

The Japanese could not build the BMW radials, they didn't have the industrial tech for it, so that may explain why they didn't build their own. Without importing German casting technology it was kinda pointless.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[R Leonard]

paragraphs

Mea Culpa. Sometimes I get carried away.

R

 

[Anonymous]

Fw-190?

Well, I think Japanese had technology to produce superior fighters to their rivals.

No they did not. They could not produce sufficiently powerful engines, and without that the rest is mute.

Just look at the Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate, which was proven by US as superior to P-38 and even P-51.

First that plane was not proven superior, only that it was competitive. Also, that plane had a US fuel system and other components in it and was running US hi-test fuel. The info you are refering to invariably comes down to the following quote:

In 1946, a captured late-production Hayate was restored and tested at the Middletown Air Depot in Pennsylvania. At a weight of 7490 pounds, the aircraft achieved a maximum speed of 427 mph at 20,000 feet, using war emergency power. This speed exceeded that of the P-51D Mustand and the P-47D at that altitude by 2 mph and 22 mph respectively. These figures were achieved with a superbly maintained and restored aircraft and with highly-refined aviation gasoline, and were not typical of Japanese-operated aircraft during the later stages of the war.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki-84.html

It should be noted that the Middletown test data is virtually unavailable, only rumors of pilot comments about the plane exist. Also, the speed figures at 20,000 feet represent unrealisic performance for that plane since the Japanese did not posess the refinery technology to produce 150 grade fuel, and had problems with their own engine design (especially the fuel system). And finally, the speeds for the P-51 and P-47 reflect Normal (or Military) power performance. At 20,000 feet at full WEP both the P-51D and the P-47D could manage about 420 mph, a difference of only 7 mph off the claimed Middletown Frank data - and that is for a normal service plane, a tweaked plane (as the Frank was tweaked) could of course have gone faster.

By that, Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate can surely be the plane that can beat any plane from Axis or Allies, Fw-190, Spitfire.....

Well, it's entirely speculation. Actual performance of the plane in combat was not that good. P-47N's and Corsair's ate Franks for lunch!

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

Advanced FW-190 feature:

"The engine was controlled by an ingenious, advanced Kommandogerat-a sort of electronic brain box that greatly relieved the pilot's responsibility to control airscrew pitch (rpm), fuel mixture and engine boost (throttle) in combat. In addition, the engine's two-speed supercharger shifted automatically at about 21,000 feet, and control of the important oil-cooler flaps was automatic, thus relieving the pilot of two more major cockpit duties. The pilot needed only to keep his hand on the throttle and his eye on his assailant. In the heat of combat, it was very easy for an Allied fighter pilot to forget to move one or both of the other two required controls if he needed immediate full power to beat his opponent."

In todays world this is called FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control).

A system which failed badly at a certain altitude. Had the 190A's not have had the Kommandogerat on them they would have been effective up to at least 30,000 feet. The thing relied on the difference between internal and external pressure, and when external pressure dropped to low, it effectively got a "divide by zero" error and fell into "safe mode". I'm not sure if this was fixed by the Dora9's entry into the war, or if it maybe had a bypass feature, but this was a serious problem for the 190A's.

Also, a decent pilot can adjust manifold pressure and throttle easily, mixture needs little messing with for combat settings, the pitch control was automatic, and the cooling flaps on US planes were automatic (with manual override). Controlling these things became second nature for a well trained pilot and US evaluations of the FW's unified control system concluded that a well trained pilot could extract more performance from his plane than such an automatic system would provide.

It was (of course) an analog system, not a digital one as FADEC.

Attached is the NACA report on the Kommandogerat if you're interested.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

Japan suffered from shortage of resources in the late WWII, and all major factories were bombared by B-29. Ki-84 project therefore was surffered from lack of testing and lack of adaquate materials. I meant some K-84 even made up woods, and steels. Japan was in more desperate stage than in Germany. So, I dont see why Ki-84 is inferior plane to Fw-190, but it was merely a plane that came out too late, and appeared at wrong time. I meant even the famous Flying Tiger, who equiped P-51, had trouble to intercept Ki-84 in China. Americans would said: "Its Frank, forget it!" to describe how fast the newest Japanese fighter was that ijt was simply nonsense to go after it. Even under such desperate stage, with shortage of high quqlity engine fuels and metals, Ki-84 still demonstrated its unsurpassed air superiority, Ki-84 was undoubtedly the best Japanese plane in WWII.

That "It's a Frank, forget it!" comment has to do with scrambling fighters to intercept one going horizontally at altitude just in the reach of the radar, something that the Frank pilot's did frequently. It was impossible to launch fighters which would have to climb and travel 50-100 miles to make that intercept. When P-51's, P-47's, or F4U's were already in the air and in the area, they did intercept the Franks.

I agree the Frank was the best Japanese fighter of WWII, but lets not be over-rating it. It was a 410 mph (best case) fighter with fuel system problems. It was facing the 450 mph P-51, 440 mph P-47D, 465 mph P-47N, and 455 mph F4U-4.

P-47N's ate Franks piloted by the most experianced Sentia remaining to Japan for lunch over Korea!

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Anonymous]

The Ki84 was an excellent aircraft and had it been supplied in sufficient numbers {and quality) been a problem for anyone. Can I ask why no one seems to rate the Shiden N1K2 which was better armed and had a clear advantage in combat over all USN fighters in particular the Hellcat.

How did the George have any advantage over the F4U-4? It was a good match for the Hellcat, but it was outclassed by the Corsair, P-47, and P-51 in most repects - most notably speed.

And its guns were powerful, but also of relatively low RoF. The Ki-84-Ib's guns (4 x Ho-5 20 mm's) were probably superior for fighter vs. fighter combat.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Umm.. the Bf109 could have been made suitable for Carrier ops, in fact I think there was a version intended for that German CV that never got finished. However, I think the liquid cooled engines were really not suitable for over water operations - they were too suceptable to cooling system damage or failures.

As covered in one of my posts in this thread the 109 would not have been a very good carrier aircraft. The Bf-109T which you are referring to was the carrier version made for the Graf Zeppelin and it basically was a Bf-109E with lenghtend wingspan and wings that folded, and an arrestor hook. Nothing was changed to the landing gear which would have made landing on a moving carrier even more dangerous.

The Messerschmitt Me 109T was the projected carrier version of the Me 109E model. About 70 planes of this version were build by Fieseler, several modifications had to be made to adapt these single seat fighters for the use on aircraft carriers:

T-0: 10 Me 109E-3 modified by Fieseler in 1939/40, Span enhanced to 11.06 meters, arrestor hook and catapult mountings. Those aircraft were planed to be used on the Graf Zeppelin and were later used by I/JG 77.
T-1: like T-0, 60 build by Fieseler and delivered to JG 5. Since the carrier was not completed, all planes were modified to T-2
T-2: All equipment for carrier operations removed.
The first 10 aircraft were of the pre production Series (T-0), followed by 60 production aircraft of the T-1 series. When construction of the Graf Zeppelin was halted in 1940, further development of the Me 109 T was stopped, too. In late 1940 Fiesler was ordered to complete the 60 T-1 models but to remove all all carrier-equipment. The result were 60 aircraft of the now called T-2 series which were able to operate from short land airstrips.

The first aircraft were delivered in the beginning of 1941 and were used in Norway until the summer of 1942. The surviving aircraft were then transferred to the Helgoland, a small island in the North Sea, where they were used for point defense up to late 1944.
http://www.german-navy.de/kriegsmarine/aviation/carrierbased/me109/index.html

Dimensions
Length: 8,76 m
Span: 11,08 m
Height: 2,60 m
Empty weight: 2253 kg
Max weight: 3078 kg
Crew: 1
Weapons
MG 17 (7,92 mm): 2 (forward fuselage)
either MG 17 (7,92 mm): 2 (wing mounted)
or MG FF (20mm): 2 (wing mounted)
Engines
Engines: 1
Type: Daimler Benz DB 601N inverted V-piston engine
Engine performance: 1200 hp (895 kw)
Performance
Max. Speed: 575 kph
Max. Range: 915 km (568 miles)
Max. Altitude: 10500 m (34450 ft)

 

[Soren]

Said in the reference you presented RG:

The Hayate was fully the equal of even the most advanced Allied fighters which opposed it, and was often their superior in many important respects

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Yeah that often happens, only quoting what one needs for there source, we all do it from time to time.

 

[Soren]

Well, it's entirely speculation. Actual performance of the plane in combat was not that good. P-47N's and Corsair's ate Franks for lunch!

And there's a very obvious reason for that ! The pilots of the Franks were extreemly inferior in training !

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ki-84:

The North American P-51D Mustang and the Republic P-47D Thunderbolt were both left behind, the first with 3 Mph (5 km/h), the second with 22 Mph (35 km/h).
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki84.html

3 mph not that much of a difference!

Ki-84
Strengths:


Good performance
Good protection
Good armament
Good maneuverability

Weaknesses:


Problems with fuel pressure and hydraulic systems
Weak landing gear struts

Problems with fuel pressure and hydraulic systems

Big problem!

 

[Anonymous]

Well, it's entirely speculation. Actual performance of the plane in combat was not that good. P-47N's and Corsair's ate Franks for lunch!

And there's a very obvious reason for that ! The pilots of the Franks were extreemly inferior in training !

That is flat wrong. The Ki-84 pilots were the best the Japanese had. The IJAAF 22nd and 85th Sentais were vetran units. The 85th Sentai was formed in March 1941 and claimed a 4:1 kill ratio. The 22nd Sentai was formed in March 1944 out of vetran pilots and was the first to recieve the Frank, and they fought in the Philippines, China, and over Japan.

In general, only vetran pilots recieved Franks. The IJAAF was no where near so talent depleted as the IJN. The argument that the the Ki-84 was flown by rookie pilots simply does not wash!

=S=

Luantic

 

[Anonymous]

Ki-84:

The North American P-51D Mustang and the Republic P-47D Thunderbolt were both left behind, the first with 3 Mph (5 km/h), the second with 22 Mph (35 km/h).
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki84.html

Those speeds are at Normal or Military Power. At WEP the P-51D was capable of about 445 mph @ 26,500 pulling 67" of manifold pressure feet and the P-47D was capable of 441 mph @ 27,700 feet pulling 64" of manifold pressure. Both planes could pull more manifold pressure with 150 octane fuel, especially the P-47.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Chiron]

"US pilots who flew in both theaters consistantly reported that the Japanese were the more dangerous foe."

Holy!

I guess Saburo Sakai was right about superiority of Japanese pilots as individual. But, I never thought that Japanese pilots were EVEN dangeous than their German counterparts!!!

 

[pbfoot]

from what i've learned the japanese pilots didn't like the high wing loading on 109

 

[Anonymous]

Keep in mind that most theater transfers were from the PTO to the ETO, so they would have faced the best of the Japanese pilots and not enjoyed a superiority of aircraft. Going to the ETO after a significant break they'd have entered that theater when the US was gaining parity or even advantage.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ki-84:

The North American P-51D Mustang and the Republic P-47D Thunderbolt were both left behind, the first with 3 Mph (5 km/h), the second with 22 Mph (35 km/h).
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/nakaki84.html

Those speeds are at Normal or Military Power. At WEP the P-51D was capable of about 445 mph @ 26,500 pulling 67" of manifold pressure feet and the P-47D was capable of 441 mph @ 27,700 feet pulling 64" of manifold pressure. Both planes could pull more manifold pressure with 150 octane fuel, especially the P-47.

=S=

Lunatic

If you read my full post, I said that it was not a relevent difference.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, I think if you look at the real wartime performance of the Ki-84 the speed advantage lies with the US planes by at least 30 mph. And also the peak speed is not so important, the Ki-84 would not have been able to sustain those speeds nearly as long as the enemy planes.