Soviet vs. Japanese Fighters

[Admiral Beez]

By the time the Soviet Union declared war on Japan on 8 August 1945 the Pacific War was essentially over.

Germany–Japan relations - Wikipedia

Führer had repeatedly suggested to Japan that it reconsider plans for an attack on the Soviet Far East throughout 1940 and 1941. In February 1941, as a result of Hitler's insistence, General Oshima returned to Berlin as ambassador. On 5 March 1941, Wilhelm Keitel, chief of OKW issued "Basic Order Number 24 regarding Collaboration with Japan": \\

It would, of course, be up to Japan to act as it saw fit, but Japan's cooperation in the fight against the Soviet Union would be welcomed if the [Japanese] advance to the south should run into difficulty because of supply and equipment. — Adolf Hitler to Ambassador Oshima (2 June 1941)[48]

I think we can all agree that Japan would be insane to declare war on the USSR in support of the Germans, especially after the Soviets soundly beat Japan in the 1930s. But let's put that aside, I want to compare the fighter aircraft. Let's assume the Japan army and air force attacks the Soviet Union in early spring 1942, during the German's apparent huge success in the USSR, and Japan's own Army and AF climax of success in the SEA and whilst jealously watching the IJN's successes (before Midway rattles their confidence).

So, putting aside the older Polikarpov I-16 and Nakajima Ki-27, how do the fighters compare (info below from Wikipedia)?

USSR
LaGG-3, introduced 1941, 366 mph top speed, power/mass 0.21 hp/lb, 1xmg, 1x20mm cannon
MiG-3, intro 1941, 400 mph, 0.18 hp/lb, 3xmg
Yak-1, intro 1940, 368 mph, 0.19 hp/lb, 1xmg, 1x20mm cannon
Yak-7, intro spring 1942, 355 mph, 0.16hp/lb, 2mg, 1x20mm cannon

IJAF
Ki-43, intro 1941, 330 mph, 0.20 hp/lb, 2xmg
Ki-44, intro spring 1942, 376 mph, 0.23 hp/lb, 4xmg

IMO, until the later La-5 and Yak-3 enter service it appears Japan is quite competitive, though in the era of eight gun Spitfires and Hurricanes, both the Soviet and Japanese fighters seem under armed with their 1-2 mg and single cannon. The lightly-built Japanese have the advantage of high power to mass. What made the Russian fighters so heavy? Did they provide armour and self sealing fuel tanks? Both the Yak-7 and Ki-44 enter service at almost the same time, meaning pilots complaining about their performance vs. the enemy will have an upgrade at hand.

 

[tomo pauk]

USSR
LaGG-3, introduced 1941, 366 mph top speed, power/mass 0.21 hp/lb, 1xmg, 1x20mm cannon
MiG-3, intro 1941, 400 mph, 0.18 hp/lb, 3xmg
Yak-1, intro 1940, 368 mph, 0.19 hp/lb, 1xmg, 1x20mm cannon
Yak-7, intro spring 1942, 355 mph, 0.16hp/lb, 2mg, 1x20mm cannon

IJAF
Ki-43, intro 1941, 330 mph, 0.20 hp/lb, 2xmg
Ki-44, intro spring 1942, 376 mph, 0.23 hp/lb, 4xmg

IMO, until the later La-5 and Yak-3 enter service it appears Japan is quite competitive, though in the era of eight gun Spitfires and Hurricanes, both the Soviet and Japanese fighters seem under armed with their 1-2 mg and single cannon (1). The lightly-built Japanese have the advantage of high power to mass. What made the Russian fighters so heavy? (2 )Did they provide armour and self sealing fuel tanks? (3) Both the Yak-7 and Ki-44 enter service at almost the same time, meaning pilots may be complaining about their performance vs. the enemy will have an upgrade at hand. (4)

1 - Majority of Soviet fighter was cannnon-armed, so IMO here the Soviets have the nod. Especially since job of a fighter is to kill bombers, too. The Ki-43 cannot reliably take-over the Pe-2, nor it can dish out enough of firepower to kill Il-2. Soviet HMGs and LMGs are also a bit better than Japanese.
2-3 - Liquid-cooled engine adds the cooling system to the weight. Soviets have had armored backrests by the time I-16 was mature, Japanese not so. Liquid cooled engines were also reason why Soviet aircraft were faster, especially against the Ki-43 that have had both bigger and thicker wing. BTW - the MiG-3 have had problematic cockpit canpoy, so pilots preferred to fly & fight with canopy retracted, resulting in much lower top speed than often quoted 630 km/h.
4 - Ki-44 is non-factor before 1943 - less than 170 were made in whole 1942. You will not hear Soviet pilots complaining.

Soviets have a problem that none of their fighters carry drop tank(s), that needs to be adressed sooner rather than later.
Japanese have problem with fast and tough Soviet bombers.

 

[Clayton Magnet]

A Ki-43 vs Yak-1 fight would be interesting, with both pilots knowledgeable of their opponents capabilities. Has the makings of a "knife fight in a phone booth" sort of scenario

 

[Admiral Beez]

A Ki-43 vs Yak-1 fight would be interesting, with both pilots knowledgeable of their opponents capabilities. Has the makings of a "knife fight in a phone booth" sort of scenario

I agree, definitely a good match.

Per Wikipedia the Yak-1 could not tolerate negative G forces due to carburetor design and "had breakdowns of magnetos and speed governors and emitted oil from the reduction shaft." The Yak-1's robust wooden construction should hold up well against the Ki-43's two machine guns.

When I saw the Ki-43 Oscar at the Boeing Air Museum in Seattle last summer I was struck by how small it was compared to the Spitfire and Bf 109 nearby. Here's a pic I took.

Captured Japanese airplanes.

 

[Admiral Beez]

1 - Majority of Soviet fighter was cannnon-armed, so IMO here the Soviets have the nod. Especially since job of a fighter is to kill bombers, too. The Ki-43 cannot reliably take-over the Pe-2, nor it can dish out enough of firepower to kill Il-2.

it's a good point. I don't think the IJAF has anything that can tackle Russian bombers at this time.

 

[tomo pauk]

it's a good point. I don't think the IJAF has anything that can tackle Russian bombers at this time.

Ki-45 perhaps, if/when in favorable position? At least it had a cannon onboard (regardless how good/bad it was).
Granted, a head-on-attack might've worked with a Ki-43 vs. bombers, again depending on circumstances.

 

[Milosh]

hen I saw the Ki-43 Oscar at the Boeing Air Museum in Seattle last summer I was struck by how small it was compared to the Spitfire and Bf 109 nearby.

Ki-43

• Length: 8.92 m (29 ft 3 in)
• Wingspan: 10.84 m (35 ft 7 in)
• Height: 3.27 m (10 ft 9 in)
• Wing area: 21.4 m2 (230 sq ft)

Spitfire V

• Length: 29 ft 11 in (9.12 m)
• Wingspan: 36 ft 10 in (11.23 m)
• Height: 11 ft 5 in (3.86 m)
• Wing area: 242.1 ft2 (22.48 m2)

BF109G-6

• Length: 8.95 m (29 ft 4 in)
• Wingspan: 9.925 m (32 ft 7 in)
• Height: 2.6 m (8 ft 6 in)
• Wing area: 16.05 m2 (172.8 sq ft)

 

[pinsog]

it's a good point. I don't think the IJAF has anything that can tackle Russian bombers at this time.

Ki43's shot down every type of US fighter and bomber they encountered.

 

[The Basket]

Japan was more insane to go to war with USA. It was the perception of the time that USSR would collapse like house of cards so Japan jumping in would have been very beneficial as this may have been the straw to break the camels back.



Wasn't the most numerous fighters the Polikarpov types? I wouldn't be too concerned if my enemy flew those types.

 

[Milosh]

Japan got soundly trounced in a war with the USSR at Khalkhyn Gol in 1939.

 

[fubar57]

​

 

[tomo pauk]

Ki43's shot down every type of US fighter and bomber they encountered.

Not just US type, but also British.
However, Ki-43 have had much easier time against Blenheims, Dauntlesses, Buffaloes or Hurricanes than against Mosquitoes, B-29s, Corsairs, Spitfires or Mustangs.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Japan got soundly trounced in a war with the USSR at Khalkhyn Gol in 1939.

Yep, covered that in post 1.

I'll repeat that the IJAF would be insane to try again, but Japan's military and government did make some poor decisions throughout the period. But here we are regardless, 1942, Ki-44 vs. Yak-7 and the like.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Ki43's shot down every type of US fighter and bomber they encountered.

Wikipedia has the Ki-43 shooting down....

"From October to December 1944, 17 Ki-43s were shot down in air combat; their pilots claimed seven C-47s, five B-24 Liberators, two Spitfires, two Beaufighters, two Mosquitoes, two F4U Corsairs, two B-29 Superfortresses, one F6F Hellcat, one P-38, and one B-25."

When would the Ki-43 encounter two Mosquitos? And two B-29s? How do you shoot down a 350 mph B-29s with a 330 mph Ki-43 armed with 2x 12.7 mm machine guns?

 

[pinsog]

Wikipedia has the Ki-43 shooting down....

"From October to December 1944, 17 Ki-43s were shot down in air combat; their pilots claimed seven C-47s, five B-24 Liberators, two Spitfires, two Beaufighters, two Mosquitoes, two F4U Corsairs, two B-29 Superfortresses, one F6F Hellcat, one P-38, and one B-25."

When would the Ki-43 encounter two Mosquitos? And two B-29s? How do you shoot down a 350 mph B-29s with a 330 mph Ki-43 armed with 2x 12.7 mm machine guns?

The 3rd book in Bloody Shambles described a photo recon P38 and photo recon Mosquito being intercepted and shot down by a Ki43. I was shocked. The Ki43 was below the Mosquito, seemed like the Mosquito was at 27-29,000 feet, dived to pick up speed, zoomed back up and shot down the Mosquito. Looking at specs on paper it's hard to imagine how that happened.

 

[swampyankee]

One wonders, giving the emphasis on turning combat by Japanese fighter pilots, whether they would fight to the I-153's strengths. This may not be a winning tactic.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Wasn't the most numerous fighters the Polikarpov types? I wouldn't be too concerned if my enemy flew those types.

One wonders, giving the emphasis on turning combat by Japanese fighter pilots, whether they would fight to the I-153's strengths. This may not be a winning tactic.

Were those still in service in Spring 1942? Poor devils.

 

[pinsog]

One wonders, giving the emphasis on turning combat by Japanese fighter pilots, whether they would fight to the I-153's strengths. This may not be a winning tactic.

The Japanese actually preferred boom and zoom early in the war until the P38 Hellcat and Corsair finally arrived. The Zero and Ki43 could outturn anything at low speed, the Ki43 maintained its maneuverability to much higher speeds, but the Japanese made firing passes and broke off when fighting at Guadalcanal. The Wildcat pilots were confused as to why they didn't simply get on their tail and stay there

 

[Admiral Beez]

The IJAF took its time replacing the Ki-44, and both it and the Ki-43 will be hard pressed to deal with the Lavochkin La-5.

The superlative Ki-84 Hayate (424 mph, 2xmg, 2x20mm) and Kawanishi N1K did not enter service until 1944, around the same time as the equally excellent Yak-3 (401 mph, 2xmg, 1x20mm) and La-7 (411 mph, 2x20mm). How do these compare? I would think the later 1944-45 IJAF fighters are being optimized for high altitude bomber interception, whilst the Soviets of the same generation are optimized for low level dogfighting and army CAS.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Soviets were in a bad way after Germany's offensive and scrambling to get everything they could to the Eastern Front to slow the German advance.

So I can't see Stalin keeping any top-line fighters or substantial numbers in the far East. This in turn, would have given Japan the edge had they launched an offensive.