I disagree with the Zeke being overrated. Late war models, perhaps, but the most important phase of the Pacific War was from 41 to 43, where it was the A6M2 vs the F4F, with shorter range operations left to A6M3 and Corsairs respectively (the former due to limited fuel compared to the M2, the latter due to unsuitability for carrier Ops initially).
The A6M2 DID have severe flaws. But what people forget is that EVERY aircraft that pushes boundaries has severe flaws. And the Zero's tradeoff was being one of the fastest and best climbing aircraft in the PTO at the time, and contrary to popular belief, Japanese pilots tended to prefer Boom and Zoom tactics, which the Zero was capable of using against Wildcats prior to the introduction of Thatch weaving. Even this wasn't entirely sufficient for the Wildcats to really turn the tides back, although it was a tremendous boon. What really hampered the Zero was the military using it, which used tactics that devalued rescue of experienced pilots and also left carriers vulnerable to air attack. If even ONE of these were accounted for, then there would have been more experienced personnel available during the Guadalcanal campaign, which, while insufficient to win the war, would have been a much bloodier affair and potentially encouraged the US to accept a conditional surrender to avoid a drawn out 2 front war
Instead, I'd consider the Bf 109 more overrated. Specifically the LATE model 109s. It was a fine plane, but people tend to not realize how badly over encumbered it was by the end of the war. That the RLM desperately wanted to replace it, but simply couldn't. So they simply added bigger engines and heavier guns to the basic 109F airframe, making a plane almost impossible for a new pilot to fly. And almost all that REMAINED by the war's end were new pilots. I'd argue that an earlier attempt to fit a 190 with a DB series engine after the greater potential of the 190 was demonstrated could have made the 1943 air campaign much more hazardous. This would still be insufficient to win the war, but it would still be better strategically than to develop more 109s in 1944.
www.defensemedianetwork.com
