SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That woke up a brain cell. I recall the line about "getting in each other's way".
What fighter of 1939-40 could compete with fighters of 1944-45?
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
SpicyJuan11
Senior Airman
No, I disagree. Authors post their honest opinions in the conclusion, that's hardly helpful for book sales. Indeed, since there is such limited information and literature on the He 100, I would argue that Hood's opinions are even more important than other authors writing on other subjects.Of course they would, they are trying to sell books about them.
Regarding performance and the cooling system, there was a thread a few years ago on the LRG forum where Erwin Hood answered some questions on the subject. I'd be happy to post the discussion in a new thread on this forum if you or anyone else is interested.
GregP
Major
Saburo Sakai was attacked by a flight of Hellcats and he evaded them until they are left. He was injured, but made it home. As I recall it was some 6 - 8 Hellcats. All of them used exactly the same tactics and he evaded them. He said they fought like they trained and they had not trained against a maneuverable aircraft like the Zero. I heard this story at an art sale at the Champlin Fighter Museum in the mid-1980s when Saburo was a guest speaker there.
Later, he went for a ride in Bill Hane's 2-seat P-51 and loved it. I still have the signed print of his zero over Mount Fuji.
Later, he went for a ride in Bill Hane's 2-seat P-51 and loved it. I still have the signed print of his zero over Mount Fuji.
Well I'll disagree on this point, they were trained against maneuverable aircraft like the Zero, they kept their speed up and B&Z instead of getting into a slow speed turning fight.
Hornchurch
Airman
- 38
- Jul 3, 2020
'
Rob', Try these TWO links, below.....
Avro Anson taking on Me.109's on the 'wrong-side' of the English Channel (Belgium)
Dates DON'T Tally Up, But Again, ANSON vs Multiple Me.109's
My eyes are just about 'frazzled' at the minute & I don't have the patience, but, check the TWO out, in detail. **
** Could be "one & the same event", but just different-dates - My recollection of the name 'Peters' is there though, I'd seen him mentioned.
Haven't read Juhan's full-article, but what isn't often told is this.
On ONE of those ANSON flight/Dunkirk-Evac' missions over the Channel, the 'G.I.B' actually WAS the Sqdn's very own gunnery-officer !
Whilst the 0.303 calibre gun MIGHT well be 'weak' in terms of air/air combat in it's "singular" form, it DOES have a high cyclic-rate of fire.
Whatever happened, I do remember reading-up that on that occasion, that several Messerschmitt Me.109's "came a cropper" (shot-down)
Lastly, one of those 'Detling' based "shoot-down-a bunch-of 109s" Avro Ansons WAS made available in 1/72nd scale diecast....
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Cool!
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
That's some good stuff my friend. Thank you. I might just have a new favorite twin engine fighter!
Reluctant Poster
Tech Sergeant
- 1,672
- Dec 6, 2006
In his book "The First Team" John Lundstrom gives an accounting of the Japanese attack on the Lexington and Yorktown at Coral Sea.
"His strike force comprised sixty nine aircraft: eighteen fighters, thirty-three carrier bombers, and eighteen torpedo planes."
"A total of twenty Grumman F4F fighters and twenty-three Douglas SBD dive bombers participated in the defence of Task Force 17. Their losses totalled three F4F s (two from VF-2, one from VF-42) and five SDBs shot down, while another SDB was lost in a landing accident on board the Lexington. Other fighters and dive bombers damaged beyond repair managed to land on board the carriers. American victory claims amounted to ten fighters, four dive bombers, and one torpedo plane for Fighting Two and Fighting Forty-two, while the three dive bombing squadrons reported the destruction of six fighters, one dive bomber, and ten torpedo planes, for a grand total of thirty two enemy planes. From a correlation of Japanese and American sources it appears reasonable that the F4Fs actually shot down no Zeros, but perhaps splashed three dive bombers and one torpedo plane, while the SBD crews accounted for no Zeros, but downed one dive bomber and five torpedo planes- total ten Japanese aircraft destroyed by aerial engagement. American antiaircraft fire from the ships likely destroyed one dive bomber and two torpedo planes. Many other Japanese planes sustained heavy damage from all causes, as out of the strike group seven ditched and twelve were later jettisoned."
I have bold some of the text for emphasis.
If the USN claims are to be believed they shot down 16 of the 18 Zeros they faced. According to Lundstrom they shot down zero.
As to the USN attacks on the Shokaku, Lundstrom notes the following claims by the Yorktown Air Group
"SDB crews reported eleven Zeros destroyed, while VF-42 claimed three (one to McClusky, two to Woollen)."
He does not list the Lexington Air Group claims, does note the actual Japanese losses as follows:
"Sixteen Zeros participated actively in the defense of MO Striking Force, and their losses were two fighters shot down and two shot up."
Yorktown's SDBs alone claim to have shot down 11 of the 16.
There seems to have been a lot of double think going on in the USN at the time. The combat reports speak of respect for the Zeros, whereas the claims indicate shooting them down was as easy as swatting flies.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
Much of the claims are inflated by honest over claiming where 4 pilots fire at a target and see it dive away trailing smoke. They all report a claim the officer in charge of assigning victories goes through the reports discards 1 awards 1 pilot a victory and 2 half victories to the other 2 pilots.
Meanwhile the shot down fighter aircraft that dived away full throttle trailing black smoke because the pilot in a panic slammed the throttle open and caused a rich mixture. With some bullet holes in his aircraft the pilot makes it home with brown underwear and claims 2 victories which are awarded because he definitely hit 3 aircraft with his cannon and everyone knows a cannon hit is a victory.
No aircraft were shot down but 4 victories were awarded. In 80 years time people on something called an internet will argue endlessly that their airforce was 100% truthful and trustworthy and the other guys were lying snake tongued sneaks.
In my opinion cut all victory claims in half and discard the obvious lying windbags like Marseille.
Meanwhile the shot down fighter aircraft that dived away full throttle trailing black smoke because the pilot in a panic slammed the throttle open and caused a rich mixture. With some bullet holes in his aircraft the pilot makes it home with brown underwear and claims 2 victories which are awarded because he definitely hit 3 aircraft with his cannon and everyone knows a cannon hit is a victory.
No aircraft were shot down but 4 victories were awarded. In 80 years time people on something called an internet will argue endlessly that their airforce was 100% truthful and trustworthy and the other guys were lying snake tongued sneaks.
In my opinion cut all victory claims in half and discard the obvious lying windbags like Marseille.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
I just finished The First Team. From the after action reports (see chapter 18) the Zero was a better performer that demanded respect BUT it could be countered. With new tactics and an ace or two up its sleeve, the Wildcat could survive and carry out its mission. Just hold on until better planes arrive.
As to multiple claims, I thought my guys honest and the other guys were lying forked tongued snakes too. Then I read the about the air battles over the carriers. I can see it happening. An F4F dives into a cloud pursued by a Zeros. 1st time he's shot down. Pops out into another group of Zeros blazing away at him. Dives into another cloud. 2nd time he's shot down. Repeat. Same thing for the other guys. Getting hits on an opponent, break break, no time to look. Must have gotten him.
As to multiple claims, I thought my guys honest and the other guys were lying forked tongued snakes too. Then I read the about the air battles over the carriers. I can see it happening. An F4F dives into a cloud pursued by a Zeros. 1st time he's shot down. Pops out into another group of Zeros blazing away at him. Dives into another cloud. 2nd time he's shot down. Repeat. Same thing for the other guys. Getting hits on an opponent, break break, no time to look. Must have gotten him.
Quite possibly, but the fact that they weren't put into mass production and service says more than what Petrick and Hermann does in their book on the Fw 187 (I have this book, by the way). That the RLM chose the Fw 190 as the Luftwaffe's 'second iron in the fire' makes enormous sense in hindsight as that was an exceptional aircraft throughout the war that was adopted in a variety of roles.
Then there's the story of the CAC Wirraway that shot down a 'Zero' - it was a Ki-43 but that's 1942 aircraft recognition for you...
DSC_5442
Aircraft is on display in the Australian War Memorial, Canberra. In typical Aussie fashion, when the aircraft got back, a signal went out saying "...shot down a Zeke, repeat, a Zeke! Send two crates of beer"!
Aircraft is on display in the Australian War Memorial, Canberra. In typical Aussie fashion, when the aircraft got back, a signal went out saying "...shot down a Zeke, repeat, a Zeke! Send two crates of beer"!
Shortround6
Major General
Marseille overclaimed and his claims were particularly exaggerated the last month or so, he was not worse than many others in that regard, but not 'obviously lying'.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
There is also the moral boosting effect of claims, even if the claim numbers were off, they still gave the pilots a boost.
Especially if the enemy had a better fighter and/or superior numbers.
Especially if the enemy had a better fighter and/or superior numbers.
Saburo Sakai was an ace and the Zero rewarded excellent flyers while it turned rookie or merely indifferent flyers into fireballs.
Acheron,
The Zero was a highly maneuverable slow speed fighter. Probably one of if not the best in those categories for the entire war. If a pilot knows how to use his strengths against another's weaknesses he should be victorious. In this case surviving would be victory for Saburo as he was heavily outnumbered. However, if a pilot doesn't know or understand he will be stymied or lose, as in the case of the Corsair drivers. However, a well flown Corsair should be victorious over a well flown Zero as long as he avoids the slow speed arena.
Cheers,
Biff
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Imagine the surprise of those Hellcat pilots when they engaged a Zero thinking it'll be an easy kill only to find out (too late) that they were facing Nishizawa.
From my knowledge, the Zero could outmaneuver pretty much any fighter but couldn't take any damage. In other words, zero tolerance for mistakes, as you are unlikely to survive one. An ace pilot might survive an encounter with multiple hostiles. A normal pilot is likely to die against a single similar opponent, who has a much greater change to survive an error.
A normal pilot who meets someone noticeably more skilled than they are will likely not live to tell about it (regardless of performance disparity in WW2 fighters).
Cheers,
Biff
