How good was Japanese aviation? - Page 10 - Aircraft of World War II

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-10-2005, 05:23 PM

So have we ever figured out the Spitfire issue.

plan_D · 07-10-2005, 07:19 PM

It first arrived in the CBI in November 1943 with 607 and 615 squadrons.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-11-2005, 04:28 PM

Okay I will buy that.

mosquitoman · 07-11-2005, 06:20 PM

Mossies were sent out there to replace the Beaus but they found that the hot and damp conditions weren't good for the planes so late mark Beaus were brought in. Mossies returned in the PR role later in the war though

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-12-2005, 04:51 PM

Why coudl the mossie not handle the hot damp climate? Was the wood of the aircraft.

FLYBOYJ · 07-12-2005, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

Why coudl the mossie not handle the hot damp climate? Was the wood of the aircraft.

Yep - the Isrealis operated them in the late 40s and early 50s. Had tons of problems with them,

arras · 07-12-2005, 05:02 PM

Lets compare Spitfire with Zero

A6M2:
performed its first war mission on Augut 19, 1940

Wing load: 107 kg/sq m
Weight empty: 1 680 kg
Weight loaded: 2 410 kg
Specific power: 384 HP / tonne
Maximum speed: 533 kph
Initial climb: 1377 m/min.
Service ceiling: 10 300 meters
Range: 1 867 km
2 x 20mm Type 99 guns (120 rounds)
2 x 7.7mm Type 97 (Navy) machine guns (1000 rounds)

Spitfire II-A:
appeared at the end of 1940

Wing load: 117 kg/sq m
Weight empty: 2 182 kg
Weight loaded: 2 624 kg
Specific power: 448 HP / ton
Maximum speed: 580 kph
Initial climb: 770 m/min.
Service ceiling: ???
Range: 637 km
8 .303" Browning M2 machine guns

A6M2 advantages:
better turning ability: 107 kg/sqm vs 117 kg/sqm
much better climb: 1377 m/min vs only 770 m/min
more than trilpe range: 1 867 km vs 637 km
probably better armament: canoons vs rifle caliber MGs

Spitfire II-A advantages:
higher maximum speed: 580 kph vs 533 kph
probably slightly better in dive 2 624 kg vs 2 410 kg
better defensive equipment: self sealing tanks + armored plate vs nothing

From that we can ques that in dogfight Spitfre would be dead meat since Zero outperform it in both vertical and horizontal maneures. Slight advantage of Zero in armament would be negated by lack of protection and it would be vulnerable even to rifle caliber MGs of Spitfre.
Spitfre would be better in level and probably in dive flight too. Zero can escape in climb.

All in all in my eyes comparism is showing planet to be at last equal.

plan_D · 07-12-2005, 06:02 PM

The Spitfire IIA being a much faster aircraft in accerlation, speed and dive would enable the Spitfire to easily dictate the fight. The Zero wasn't far superior to the Spitfire in turning - infact, it was only superior up to 275 mph.

The armament of the Spitfire was more than adequete to deal with the weak Zero. Hawk-75s of the Vichy French Air Force managed to down several Wildcats with six .303 cal - imagine what eight Browning .303 cal would do to a Zero!

The Zero had climb and low-speed turning as the advantage. If the Spitfire was used well - using it's energy correctly with speed advantage and dive advantage, it would make easy meat of a Zero.

The Zero would have to keep the fight low and slow when engaged.

evangilder · 07-12-2005, 06:15 PM

Plus the zero did not have self sealing fuel tanks, so .303s would be fine. Line up a bead on the wing and let the fire do the rest. The dive capability on the zero was bad, the wing cord is thick, so there is alot of drag when diving. I got the dive info from the pilot of the zero in our museum.

plan_D · 07-12-2005, 06:22 PM

See, things like that aren't something the paper stats tell you.

Glider · 07-12-2005, 07:01 PM

My belief is that the Spit IIa had a ceiling of 37,000ft making that around 11,250m
Also the max climb was around 900m/min still a lot less than the Zero but more than indicated. Interestingly the numbers that I have found for time to 20,000 ft are similar. The Zero taking 7.2mins and the Spit IIa 7.0

Re the Zero ammunition for the A6M2 was 60 rounds for the 20mm which was common for all 20mm at the time with the exception of the USSR. Later versions increased the capacity initially to 100rds with the A6M3 then to 120.
The British also had the Spit IIb with 2 x 20 around the end of 1940 which you may want to include in the debate.

plan_D · 07-12-2005, 07:02 PM

The British had the IB as well but in the case of Zero Vs. Spitfire the Hispano 20 mm aren't needed. Eight Browning .303 cal would be more than enough to down a Zero.

Glider · 07-12-2005, 07:07 PM

Don't disagree with you, but extra firepower never hurt anyone (who was firing it)

evangilder · 07-13-2005, 12:10 AM

I can tell you from personal experience, the skin on that Zero is realy thin. A well placed bb that could make a spark could penetrate the wing and set that fuel tank on fire. Exaggeration, maybe, but there are parts of the wing that we are NOT allowed to walk on at all. The areas to step are clearly marked in English and Japanese.

FLYBOYJ · 07-13-2005, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by evangilder

I can tell you from personal experience, the skin on that Zero is realy thin. A well placed bb that could make a spark could penetrate the wing and set that fuel tank on fire. Exaggeration, maybe, but there are parts of the wing that we are NOT allowed to walk on at all. The areas to step are clearly marked in English and Japanese.

The man is correct! I took photos of Evan's Zero in an old post comparing the wing skin thickness to other aircraft (Corsair, Mustang, Hellcat). It's built like a Coke can!

07-10-2005, 05:23 PM	#136
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	So have we ever figured out the Spitfire issue. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

07-10-2005, 07:19 PM	#137
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	It first arrived in the CBI in November 1943 with 607 and 615 squadrons. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

07-11-2005, 04:28 PM	#138
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	Okay I will buy that. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

07-11-2005, 06:20 PM	#139
mosquitoman Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Saffron Walden/Sheffield Posts: 2,991	Mossies were sent out there to replace the Beaus but they found that the hot and damp conditions weren't good for the planes so late mark Beaus were brought in. Mossies returned in the PR role later in the war though __________________ When you realise that the light at the end of the tunnel is actually an oncoming train, you know it's time to run for your life

07-12-2005, 04:51 PM	#140
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	Why coudl the mossie not handle the hot damp climate? Was the wood of the aircraft. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

07-12-2005, 05:02 PM	#142
arras Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 35	Lets compare Spitfire with Zero A6M2: performed its first war mission on Augut 19, 1940 Wing load: 107 kg/sq m Weight empty: 1 680 kg Weight loaded: 2 410 kg Specific power: 384 HP / tonne Maximum speed: 533 kph Initial climb: 1377 m/min. Service ceiling: 10 300 meters Range: 1 867 km 2 x 20mm Type 99 guns (120 rounds) 2 x 7.7mm Type 97 (Navy) machine guns (1000 rounds) Spitfire II-A: appeared at the end of 1940 Wing load: 117 kg/sq m Weight empty: 2 182 kg Weight loaded: 2 624 kg Specific power: 448 HP / ton Maximum speed: 580 kph Initial climb: 770 m/min. Service ceiling: ??? Range: 637 km 8 .303" Browning M2 machine guns A6M2 advantages: better turning ability: 107 kg/sqm vs 117 kg/sqm much better climb: 1377 m/min vs only 770 m/min more than trilpe range: 1 867 km vs 637 km probably better armament: canoons vs rifle caliber MGs Spitfire II-A advantages: higher maximum speed: 580 kph vs 533 kph probably slightly better in dive 2 624 kg vs 2 410 kg better defensive equipment: self sealing tanks + armored plate vs nothing From that we can ques that in dogfight Spitfre would be dead meat since Zero outperform it in both vertical and horizontal maneures. Slight advantage of Zero in armament would be negated by lack of protection and it would be vulnerable even to rifle caliber MGs of Spitfre. Spitfre would be better in level and probably in dive flight too. Zero can escape in climb. All in all in my eyes comparism is showing planet to be at last equal.

07-12-2005, 06:02 PM	#143
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	The Spitfire IIA being a much faster aircraft in accerlation, speed and dive would enable the Spitfire to easily dictate the fight. The Zero wasn't far superior to the Spitfire in turning - infact, it was only superior up to 275 mph. The armament of the Spitfire was more than adequete to deal with the weak Zero. Hawk-75s of the Vichy French Air Force managed to down several Wildcats with six .303 cal - imagine what eight Browning .303 cal would do to a Zero! The Zero had climb and low-speed turning as the advantage. If the Spitfire was used well - using it's energy correctly with speed advantage and dive advantage, it would make easy meat of a Zero. The Zero would have to keep the fight low and slow when engaged. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

07-12-2005, 06:15 PM	#144
evangilder "Shooter" Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Moorpark, CA Posts: 14,807	Plus the zero did not have self sealing fuel tanks, so .303s would be fine. Line up a bead on the wing and let the fire do the rest. The dive capability on the zero was bad, the wing cord is thick, so there is alot of drag when diving. I got the dive info from the pilot of the zero in our museum. __________________ http://www.vg-photo.com For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci

07-12-2005, 06:22 PM	#145
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	See, things like that aren't something the paper stats tell you. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

07-12-2005, 07:01 PM	#146
Glider Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London Posts: 3,655	My belief is that the Spit IIa had a ceiling of 37,000ft making that around 11,250m Also the max climb was around 900m/min still a lot less than the Zero but more than indicated. Interestingly the numbers that I have found for time to 20,000 ft are similar. The Zero taking 7.2mins and the Spit IIa 7.0 Re the Zero ammunition for the A6M2 was 60 rounds for the 20mm which was common for all 20mm at the time with the exception of the USSR. Later versions increased the capacity initially to 100rds with the A6M3 then to 120. The British also had the Spit IIb with 2 x 20 around the end of 1940 which you may want to include in the debate.

07-12-2005, 07:02 PM	#147
plan_D Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 11,978	The British had the IB as well but in the case of Zero Vs. Spitfire the Hispano 20 mm aren't needed. Eight Browning .303 cal would be more than enough to down a Zero. __________________ "When you go home tomorrow, don't expect anyone to know what you have been through. Even if they did know, most people probably wouldn't care anyway. Some of you may get the medals you deserve, many more of you will not. But remember this, all of you are now members of the front-line club, and that is the most exclusive club in the world." - Lt. Col. Matthew Maer CO 1st Battalion, the Princess of Wale's Royal Regiment. Camp Abu Naji, Oct. 2004 To those in that club.

07-12-2005, 07:07 PM	#148
Glider Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London Posts: 3,655	Don't disagree with you, but extra firepower never hurt anyone (who was firing it)

07-13-2005, 12:10 AM	#149
evangilder "Shooter" Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Moorpark, CA Posts: 14,807	I can tell you from personal experience, the skin on that Zero is realy thin. A well placed bb that could make a spark could penetrate the wing and set that fuel tank on fire. Exaggeration, maybe, but there are parts of the wing that we are NOT allowed to walk on at all. The areas to step are clearly marked in English and Japanese. __________________ http://www.vg-photo.com For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode