Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
...Any thoughts on P-39 vs A6M or even compared to the F4F that might mitigate what seems to me to be a gross misrepresentation of the Bell fighter's relative performance?
Wow.
Seriously?
That is all I have to say.
When I met Saburo Sakai and bought an autographed print, I asked him how fast the Zero was. His reply was that, like all aircraft, it depended on altitude and the condition of plane, engine,and propeller. He said an A6M5 Model 52 (like the one we have at the Planes of Fame) could get to 355 mph at best altitude but was, of course, not that fast at sea level. He didn't really say 355 mph ... he said kph, but I converted.
Some few minutes later, he left to go for a ride in Bill Hane's P-51D and loved that! That was in the early to mid 1980's at the Champlin Fighter Museum in Mesa, Arizona (Falcon Field) ... now a defunct museum. For many years it was the home of the American Fighter Aces Association. I have fond memories of that place.
I still have the autographed print of him in a Zero over Mount Fuji.
Our Zero WILL go that fast, but doesn't most of the time except in a dive during mock dogfights. Right now, it is undergoing a complete overhaul of the airframe, but should be flying again in the October - November timeframe.
Again, JoeB's old answer:
JoeB 01-13-2007 04:43 AM
No, it only covers to the end of the first set of Japanese offensives in that area around the beginning of March. For New Guinea I'm comparing the Japanese losses given in Sakaida "Winged Samurai" w/ the US claims and losses given in Hess "Pacific Sweep".
The 8th FG (P-39) claimed 45 enemy aircraft April 30-June 1 1942, 37 of them Zeroes, losing 26 P-39's in air combat almost all to Zeroes. They were the only Allied fighter unit at Port Moresby having relieved 75sdn RAAF (P-40) when they arrived. The unit opposing them was the Tainan Air Group, A6M's, with suffered 11 pilots KIA in the same period. So actually I misrecalled 1:3 before looking back at notes, sorry, it's more like perhaps 1:2 considering in this case some of the combats were over the Japanese airfields and they could have lost some planes w/ surviving pilots, though it's not mentioned in any specific accounts I know of.
According to the excellent book "Eagles of the Southern sky" by Luca Ruffato Michael Claringbould, during the period 1 April to 15 November 1942, the Tainan Kokutai shot down 38 Airacobras for a loss of 12 Zero's (1 by collision). These are confirmed victories, not claims.
Wildcat's post says it all in a nutshell. Confirmed victories vs claims. Truth be told the Tainan Group overclaimed as much as the Allies did during the New Guinea campaign. There were alot of politics at state during the period when the USAAF was being torn up in the Pacific. MacArthur was all PR and it shouldn't have surprised anyone, even back then that most if not all that he put out was BS. Nevertheless his positive comments about the P-39 gave Arnold some cover during a time when there was an uproar about inferior aircraft being sent into combat. Finally, while the P-39 vs Zero comparison is interesting, and, more than frequently discussed, the fact is that Harmon was not concerned with a fighter vs fighter problem as much as he was with a lack of high altitude performance to shoot down bombers. While the F4F was a very poor climber, at least when it got there it could operate
at the G4M's bombing altitude. The P-39 would fall out of the sky, if it ever got up there.
Duane
You lucky sob. Im jealous as hell
Another resounding numbers success.
The real kill ratio is somewhere between 45 : 26 and 12 : 38, depending on which account you believe. Since the P-39 was maligned in the press after the war, many believe the 12 : 38 is gospel while others think it wasn't so bad after all and lean toward the 45 : 26.
Now that's what I call accuracy with a kill ratio is anywhere from 2 :1 to 1 : 3! Now that's nailing it down, isn't it?
In the reference that quotes the 1 : 3, I wonder where the author got his numbers. I have been searching for Japanese records for many years and have yet to find one, much less one that specifies confirmed victories instead of claims. In fact, I never even HEARD of a Japanese unit that ever mentioned claims versus confirmed victories. I haven't even seen anything in print anywhere that mentions Japanese claims versus confirmed victories unless it was written by western authors who rarely give sources for numbers. The Japanese themselves didn;t keep public records of combat victories in the air ... it was a record for the unit, not the individual.
Not saying Wildcat is wrong or his source is, I'm just wondering where the numbers came from ... for BOTH sets of numbers. not just one.
In my mind the whole issue begs the question, "What was Arnold's role in dedicating R&D to developing the turbo charger?" Did he understand or was he willing to acknowledge the importance of the 2-stage SC? or was it just a political comment to denigrate/deflect any potential criticism of the army's reliance on a technology that wouldn't pay off until years too late? I can't help but wonder if feedback from SoPac and earlier from the FEAF pilots wasn't making waves and causing some folks to sweat at home in R&D circles?
Pars, those performance numbers are eye-opening for both the A6M and the F4F-4! Thanks for the detailed post.
You lucky sob. Im jealous as hell
I sat next to Joe Foss on a flight back in 1970. I recognized him right away and asked his wife if that was indeed Joe Foss. He was quite nice and let me pump him with questions. I was in the Army at the time and in uniform he noticed my Air Crewman wings and we wound up having quite a chat.
Duane