Superlative Performance of Japanese Aircraft with Uprated Engines (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

79
23
May 13, 2023
I've seen numerous claims on the internet that some Japanese pilots over-tuned their aircraft and, in battle, demonstrated performance beyond official specifications. These claims extend even to early-war Japanese aircraft, including the infamous Zeke and, I believe, the Oscar as well. Supposedly, there exist accounts by pilots, in interviews or otherwise, of aircraft, the Frank most notably, achieving or even exceeding speeds as high as 700kph (434 mph, 377kt), far beyond the usual sub-600kph (372mph, 323kt) and sub-644kph (400mph, 347kt) speeds given for such aircraft. From what I've read on the J-aircraft forums and elsewhere, the Japanese did have small stocks of high-octane fuel, primarily 100 octane. At least some of this fuel was captured from the Allies. This high-octane fuel was, if I remember correctly, reserved for prototype aircraft, but could some of it have been delivered to front-line aircraft? Is there any truth to these claims?

I've also heard claims that there were accounts by American pilots, flying in aircraft like the P-51 over Iwo Jima and elsewhere, of the excelsior performance of late-war aircraft like the Frank, how they were difficult to hit, that it was primarily the inexperience of their pilots that prevented them from being as lethal as they could potentially have been. Certainly, the accounts of Oscar pilots as presented in the book covered in this thread suggest that the Frank, possibly at lower altitudes, was somehow capable of evading the P-51 thanks to its speed, and primarily its speed; dives were said to have been more effective against the Frank compared to the Oscar due to its reduced manoeuvrability. The Frank's relatively lacklustre manoeuvrability was also noted during combat trials with the Seafire, as detailed in a report covered in this video. I wonder if anyone here has any Frank encounter reports on hand, particularly with P-51s, or encounter reports with other late-war Japanese aircraft, for that matter. Such reports could shed further light on the performance of these aircraft, anomalous or otherwise, at least to some degree.

If this article is to be believed, the Homare could handle boost pressures higher than its specified take-off/emergency boost of +500 mmHg (1.66 atm, 49.61 inHg), up to approximately +800 mmHg (2.05 atm, 61.42 inHg), its uppermost limit. Presumably, other Japanese aircraft engines like the Kasei were similarly capable of handling excessive boost pressures. From this other article on the same website, the Frank was recorded as having a top level flight speed of 634-5kph (394mph, 342kt) operating with a boost pressure of +350 mmHg (1.46 atm, 43.70 inHg). How much faster could the Frank have flown with the excessively high +800 mmHg boost? Would its critical altitude be low enough to negate any potential gains in performance? Would any fuel the Japanese possessed in any significant quantity, including their aforementioned stocks of 100 octane gas, be capable of supporting this high boost in engines like the Homare during flight? The Frank certainly would have hardly been capable of evading superior late-war Allied aircraft with the inferior speeds, and, given its good power-to-weight ratio, poor climbing presented in the article.
 
the Japanese did have small stocks of high-octane fuel, primarily 100 octane. At least some of this fuel was captured from the Allies.
Question is which allies?

In 1940 the US was buying/distributing 100/100 fuel. This was the stuff with less than 2% aromatic compounds. Yes it was a lot better than either 91 octane or 96 octane.
At some point the US specified 100/125 fuel but it doesn't seem that much entered the supply chain, some engines were rated on it at the factories. The US and the British had agreed to a common fuel specification before Pearl Harbor but I don't know if it was just a few months or in the spring of 1941. How much of the better '100' octane fuel made it to the Philippines to get captured I don't know. The P-40C and P-40Es would run just fine on 100/100 fuel, you just couldn't use the really high over boost that the British were using in NA.
Now what were the British sending to Burma and Malaya for fuel in 1941?
Standard British 87 octane? (which was actually a bit better but they never measured it at rich rating)
Standard British 100/130 of mid 1941?
Something in-between from Dutch refineries?
The engines in the Buffaloes did not need 100/130 fuel. At the most they needed 100/100 fuel.

Japanese supplies of 100/130 fuel would be mostly from crashed aircraft unless the Allies had shipped in 100/130 fuel to Burma/Malaya and the Philippines before they fell.
Problem for the US was that the 100/130 fuel tended to dissolve the rubber fuel tank linings and other rubber parts in the fuel system. The 100/100 didn't.

100/100 is my name for the early US 100 octane as it is easier than typing out "2% or less aromatics" every time I mention the early fuel.
 
Question is which allies?

In 1940 the US was buying/distributing 100/100 fuel. This was the stuff with less than 2% aromatic compounds. Yes it was a lot better than either 91 octane or 96 octane.
At some point the US specified 100/125 fuel but it doesn't seem that much entered the supply chain, some engines were rated on it at the factories. The US and the British had agreed to a common fuel specification before Pearl Harbor but I don't know if it was just a few months or in the spring of 1941. How much of the better '100' octane fuel made it to the Philippines to get captured I don't know. The P-40C and P-40Es would run just fine on 100/100 fuel, you just couldn't use the really high over boost that the British were using in NA.
Now what were the British sending to Burma and Malaya for fuel in 1941?
Standard British 87 octane? (which was actually a bit better but they never measured it at rich rating)
Standard British 100/130 of mid 1941?
Something in-between from Dutch refineries?
The engines in the Buffaloes did not need 100/130 fuel. At the most they needed 100/100 fuel.

Japanese supplies of 100/130 fuel would be mostly from crashed aircraft unless the Allies had shipped in 100/130 fuel to Burma/Malaya and the Philippines before they fell.
Problem for the US was that the 100/130 fuel tended to dissolve the rubber fuel tank linings and other rubber parts in the fuel system. The 100/100 didn't.

100/100 is my name for the early US 100 octane as it is easier than typing out "2% or less aromatics" every time I mention the early fuel.
Hi
The Anglo-Persian Oil Company's refinery at Abadan (Iran) ended up supplying high octane aviation fuel to India etc. However, it may not have been until 1943 onwards after the 'Cold Alkylation process' was introduced. Ultimately sources mention about 90 percent of the refinery's capacity was involved. Presumably prior to that high octane fuel was supplied from the other refineries that were producing it. Lower octane fuels could be supplied by Indian refineries, Digboi (in northern Assam) and Rawalpindi (North-West Frontier).
I would have thought that any 100 octane fuel captured by the Japanese during their 1941-42 advances would have been in rather short supply by 1944-45. I am not sure how many allied aircraft crashed in places that were easily accessible to remove and transport the remaining fuel to reuse, jungle and sea are not good locations for recovery, China may be better I suppose.

Mike
 
When did British high grade fuel get delivered? Australian Spit V's were limited to 9 lbs boost.

Neil

Could they even run on lower octane fuel? All the Spitfire V manuals specify '100 octane only' (emphasis mine), while manuals with aircraft using older engines (Merlin II, III, VIII, Mercury XV) give details for either fuel. Including as late as the June 1942 Pilot's Notes for the Blenheim V.
 
Question is which allies?

In 1940 the US was buying/distributing 100/100 fuel. This was the stuff with less than 2% aromatic compounds. Yes it was a lot better than either 91 octane or 96 octane.
At some point the US specified 100/125 fuel but it doesn't seem that much entered the supply chain, some engines were rated on it at the factories. The US and the British had agreed to a common fuel specification before Pearl Harbor but I don't know if it was just a few months or in the spring of 1941. How much of the better '100' octane fuel made it to the Philippines to get captured I don't know. The P-40C and P-40Es would run just fine on 100/100 fuel, you just couldn't use the really high over boost that the British were using in NA.
Now what were the British sending to Burma and Malaya for fuel in 1941?
Standard British 87 octane? (which was actually a bit better but they never measured it at rich rating)
Standard British 100/130 of mid 1941?
Something in-between from Dutch refineries?
The engines in the Buffaloes did not need 100/130 fuel. At the most they needed 100/100 fuel.

Japanese supplies of 100/130 fuel would be mostly from crashed aircraft unless the Allies had shipped in 100/130 fuel to Burma/Malaya and the Philippines before they fell.
Problem for the US was that the 100/130 fuel tended to dissolve the rubber fuel tank linings and other rubber parts in the fuel system. The 100/100 didn't.

100/100 is my name for the early US 100 octane as it is easier than typing out "2% or less aromatics" every time I mention the early fuel.
Hi
According to the OH 'The War Against Japan Volume II' page 469, the Burmah Oil Company at its Yenangyaung facility in upper Burma was by the beginning of 1942 doing the following:
"Production of motor spirit, 800,000 gallons a month, with a target of 2 million. (Distribution difficulties arose when production exceeded 1 million gallons). Refining arrangements were improved to produce 87 octane spirit for the armoured brigade and 90 octane spirit for the RAF."

Mike
 
Hi
The Anglo-Persian Oil Company's refinery at Abadan (Iran) ended up supplying high octane aviation fuel to India etc. However, it may not have been until 1943 onwards after the 'Cold Alkylation process' was introduced. Ultimately sources mention about 90 percent of the refinery's capacity was involved. Presumably prior to that high octane fuel was supplied from the other refineries that were producing it. Lower octane fuels could be supplied by Indian refineries, Digboi (in northern Assam) and Rawalpindi (North-West Frontier).
I would have thought that any 100 octane fuel captured by the Japanese during their 1941-42 advances would have been in rather short supply by 1944-45. I am not sure how many allied aircraft crashed in places that were easily accessible to remove and transport the remaining fuel to reuse, jungle and sea are not good locations for recovery, China may be better I suppose.

Mike
It's rather easy to forget that Japan conquered wast areas in China in 1944, the objective was to deny the B-29 bases from which to bomb Japan. While I have no idea about grades and what may have been stored, China is indeed a candidate as a source of captured fuel.
 
Didn't the Japanese have access to Brunei's oil fields? Did they even need to scavenge fuel from any crashed Allied aircraft?
 
Hi
According to the OH 'The War Against Japan Volume II' page 469, the Burmah Oil Company at its Yenangyaung facility in upper Burma was by the beginning of 1942 doing the following:
"Production of motor spirit, 800,000 gallons a month, with a target of 2 million. (Distribution difficulties arose when production exceeded 1 million gallons). Refining arrangements were improved to produce 87 octane spirit for the armoured brigade and 90 octane spirit for the RAF."

Mike
Something seems a little off, here.
What was the Armoured Brigade running for tanks/vehicles in 1941-42 that required 87 octane fuel or was that in anticipation of what would be needed in 1943-44 (assuming that Burma did not fall)?
The US in 1952 was using vehicles (trucks, cars, tractors, buses) that ran on 70-75 octane fuel (US octane?) and ALL WW II American tanks would run on 80 octane. They may have used aviation type engines but they were set up to run on 80 octane.
Miscommunication?

I don't think the RAF ever actually specified 90 octane fuel? Planned to at some point? Standardize with US 91 octane fuel (a common grade in the US before, during and after the war)?
Planned for fuel for lend-lease American aircraft? The engines in the Lockheed Hudsons and Buffaloes would run on 90-91 octane depending on exact model and allowable boost.

Industrial planning was often looking 1-2 years ahead.
By the end of 1942 the British/US were on their 3 specification for 100/130 fuel and this was different than the British 100 octane used in the BoB. Different upper limits on lead and not just different limits on aromatics as a whole but different limits on specific aromatics and/or other compounds. The refineries had to be kept running at close to max capacity and different 'recipes' that allowed for short term shortages ( a few days or weeks) kept up production.
 
The Japanese specification for fuel for their aircraft was 91 octane for the Navy and 92 Octane for the Army.
I believe most folks here already know that. There were some batches that were a bit better than that depending on the source but they were just sourced from different places.
As for Japanese aero engines, I believe they can be divided into two categories. The early war types such as the Sakae, Kinsei, and Ha-40.
They typically were not equipped with ADI early in the game though some acquired it later. Typically their boost limits were fairly low, so they really didn't need the ADI to achieve Take-Off power.
What is interesting is that some of the early engines such as the Sakae 12 were quite tolerant of higher than official boost pressures.
For Sakae 12, typical maximum performance is recorded at +150 mm, however, its "Take-Off" setting would raise that to +250 mm. Beyond that was a setting called "Overboost" which is a lot harder to pin down but from what I have found would allow the engine to run up to +350 mm.
There is no question that this setting exists and this increased boost limit is why I believe Saburo Sakai's claim of 345 MPH for the A6M2.
There is an equivalent setting on the later Sakae 21/31 which Sakai mentions using in combat though I have not found any reference for what the boost limit was for that. This was even noted in TAIC description for the OSCAR about high "Flash Performance" and pilots ignoring engine limitations and getting away with it.

The second category of Japanese aero engine are typically from later in the war such as the Late model Kasei and Homare. Those engines still used the same 91/92 octane fuel standard, but carried a LOT of ADI for any power setting above cruise. On those, I do not believe a higher octane fuel would really make much of a difference unless some very talented mechanic were to chance the automatic engine controls to adjust when the ADI would come on and how much to use with higher boost limits. By the late war, these guys were probably happy to get just the claimed performance rather than any increased performance with custom settings. Many of their engine accessories such as ignition systems and fuel systems were really not performing up to claims to the point that newer designs (Low pressure fuel injection) had to be substituted.

As for captured aviation fuel, I do not believe that was a significant performance enhancer, but one source I have not seen mentioned is the fuel that was supplied to PT boats in the PI. I have no idea what grade that was though.

- Ivan.
 
As for captured aviation fuel, I do not believe that was a significant performance enhancer, but one source I have not seen mentioned is the fuel that was supplied to PT boats in the PI. I have no idea what grade that was though.
I would guess that it was either 91 octane or 100/100 octane.
You are not going to run those Packards on truck gas and get good performance.
Setting up a different fuel supply for the PT boats than using standard US Navy or AIr Corp aviation fuel is too much trouble/work.
The PT boats did have lot of trouble with fuel in the Philippines. Poor performance and clogged fuel filters. Even if fuel was good at the main base, fuel at alternative bases, especially during the retreat, was questionable.
The number of boats was only 6 in the US Navy so stocks of fuel would not be great. Philippine navy had a few British built boats but their engines may have run on lower octane fuel.

 
Thanks for the reminder about karyu.org I may have seen it in past but forgot it. Its rare to see a website that uses primary source documents.

The Frank certainly would have hardly been capable of evading superior late-war Allied aircraft with the inferior speeds,

Up to 20,000ft a properly running Ki-84 was in the same performance league as late war USAAF planes, thats what the USAAF themselves wrote in the Ki-84 reports. Pilot combat reports are interesting but need to be evaluated as an experience.
 
Could they even run on lower octane fuel? All the Spitfire V manuals specify '100 octane only' (emphasis mine), while manuals with aircraft using older engines (Merlin II, III, VIII, Mercury XV) give details for either fuel. Including as late as the June 1942 Pilot's Notes for the Blenheim V.
US manuals for the P-40 note the limits for the 91 oct fuel when used on V-1710 and V-1650-1.
Merlins were among the engines with lowest compression ratio, so the lower octane fuel will not be a biggie (although one can kiss goodbye the fine levels of boost the high oct fuel allowed for).
 
US manuals for the P-40 note the limits for the 91 oct fuel when used on V-1710 and V-1650-1.
Merlins were among the engines with lowest compression ratio, so the lower octane fuel will not be a biggie (although one can kiss goodbye the fine levels of boost the high oct fuel allowed for).

There is a HUGE difference in the concept of operations between an engine in a P-40 and one of the late war Japanese fighters.
A P-40 engine depends on octane to prevent detonation with higher boost and I don't believe any operational P-40 used ADI for any reason.
An aircraft such as the Ki-84 used ADI for EVERYTHING above a moderate CRUISE. It wasn't just for emergency or Take-Off power. That is why they carried so much ADI for the amount of internal fuel that was on board.
This is an extract from the Middletown test report (page 126):
Look at third paragraph on this page.

Ki84_ADI.jpg


Note that 37" Hg is only +180 mm boost which is not even a fast cruise.
Engine Power
2000 HP @ 3000 RPM Altitude: Sea Level +500 mm Hg Boost T-O & Emergency

1790 HP @ 3000 RPM Altitude: Sea Level +350 mm Hg Boost Rated Model 21
1890 HP @ 3000 RPM Altitude: 1700 m +350 mm Hg Boost Rated Model 21
1625 HP @ 3000 RPM Altitude 6100 m +350 mm Hg Boost Rated Model 21

1430 HP @ 2780 RPM Altitude: Sea Level +200 mm Hg Boost
1550 HP @ 2780 RPM Altitude: 2500 m +200 mm Hg Boost

- Ivan.
 
Now what were the British sending to Burma and Malaya for fuel in 1941?
A mixed bag by the sound of it:

"The scene at Kuantan about this time as depicted by Roy Bulcock in Of Death But Once, p. 35, was far from encouraging : ... The four old five-hundred-gallon tankers towed by tractors could not possibly cope with the three octanes necessary for the various aircraft passing through, and they still had to be refilled from the bulk supply near the town." Chapter 9 – Degrees of Readiness

Australia had some 100 octane by April-May 1942 and they had been at the absolute bottom of the list. So I would guess at least some 100 octane (maybe not 100/130) in Burma and Malaya earlier in the year.

"Supplies of 100 octane fuel were comparatively small and most of the storage capacity was in New South Wales and Victoria." Chapter 24 – Command and Supply
 
US manuals for the P-40 note the limits for the 91 oct fuel when used on V-1710 and V-1650-1.
Merlins were among the engines with lowest compression ratio, so the lower octane fuel will not be a biggie (although one can kiss goodbye the fine levels of boost the high oct fuel allowed for).

I have a copy of 'Flight Operating Instructions' for the P-40 F and L and it only mentions 100 octane, but I see it there in the 'Pilot Training Manual'. If anyone was stuck with that it would limit things to a painful 44.2 inches / +7 lb boost.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back