Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums
 



Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Aviation

Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-28-2008, 01:03 PM   #1
Member
 
ralphwiggum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 44
"jack" fighter plane

I AM sorry to ask so many questions but, (there's no books on the Japanese Air force in my area) so here I go How did the "Jack" fighter compare to
contemporary allied fighters? ie turning, speed, manueverability and so on
Thanks everyone!
__________________
(img)(/img)
ralphwiggum is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2008, 01:06 PM   #2
IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
 
FLYBOYJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,775
Mitsubishi J2M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
> I Support Doug Gillis <
FLYBOYJ is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-2008, 01:26 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
Hi Ralph,

>I AM sorry to ask so many questions but, (there's no books on the Japanese Air force in my area) so here I go How did the "Jack" fighter compare to
contemporary allied fighters? ie turning, speed, manueverability and so on

From a quick look at the TAIC data on the Jack, comparing it to the BuAer data on the F6F, I'd say the J2M was slightly faster, significantly better climbing and clearly more manoeuvrable than the F6F-5 at least.

Now TAIC data is wartime intelligence and where in error likely to err on the side of caution, but the J2M weighed in at 7080 lbs compared to the F6F's 12740 lbs while the engines were roughly comparable (1870 HP take-off power for the J2M, 2000 HP for the F6F-5), so I think the above conclusions are fairly reliable.

(Food for thought: Under combat load, the F6F-5 is listed with a load factor of just 6.6 in the BuAer data. Never noticed that before!)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
HoHun is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2009, 11:09 PM   #4
Member
 
TenGunTerror's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 42
It actually matched up well against allied fighters and surprised the heck out of them as it was the first Jap plane with speed and climb rate coming before maneuverability. It simply came too late in the war to make a difference. Sorry that's all I know
__________________
I need to lean to keep my mouth shut
TenGunTerror is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2009, 05:24 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 3,491
The J2M is another example of an airplane on paper that looked good but the reality did not match up. According to "Aircraft of World War Two" was " a fundamentally good design that never quite made the grade." " It was beset by structural failures, engine problems and production difficulties." Vmax was 371 mph. "The Great Book of WW2 Airplanes" says, "Problems with the engine and related vibration delayed it's accepetance by the Navy until Oct. 1942." " Although it retained the undesirable features of poor visibility, engine vibration and short flight duration, it's outstanding speed and climb made "Jack" the most successful fighter used against the B29."
renrich is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2009, 09:55 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Watanbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 522
I think a problem with all the later Japanese designs is the lack of quality materials and skilled manufacturing. They resorted to desperate circumstances to produce planes. I imagine that a well built one produced with the correctly specified materials would of been a real handful for any Allied pilot, but encountering one as such is a different matter.
__________________
Watanbe is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2009, 12:40 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
proton45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 473
I'm pulling this out of my bad memory...but I think that Jiro Horikoshi complained (in his book) that the Navy big wigs kept pulling the resources he needed to properly develop the J2M. The Navy pressed him into "up-dating" the aging A6M so that it could "keep-up". Horikoshi was very frustrated that he was not allowed the time to work the bugs out of the J2M...as he had been given the time develop the A6M.
proton45 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2009, 09:30 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 3,491
Proton, the conditions you mentioned were also mentioned in one of my sources. The Japanese seemed to always have difficulties with developing higher powered engines. If one thinks about it, the best designs in WW2 all had outstanding engines. Having said that, I have read that captured Zekes tested by the US seemed to have been well constructed and the engines were reliable in that particular model. One thing we know is that the Japanese know how to build reliable and powerful engines today at least in autos.
renrich is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2009, 03:25 PM   #9
Banned
 
Soren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 6,625
I think the only real area where the Japs were truly behind from the start of the conflict until the end was in tank design. God their tanks sucked!
Soren is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 08:21 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Watanbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 522
Quote:
Originally Posted by renrich View Post
Proton, the conditions you mentioned were also mentioned in one of my sources. The Japanese seemed to always have difficulties with developing higher powered engines. If one thinks about it, the best designs in WW2 all had outstanding engines. Having said that, I have read that captured Zekes tested by the US seemed to have been well constructed and the engines were reliable in that particular model. One thing we know is that the Japanese know how to build reliable and powerful engines today at least in autos.
A lot of their reliability in cars and manufacturing arose from what they learned in WW2 producing Aircraft.

The Japanese built tanks for Jungle fighting, I reckon had they been in the European theatre they could of produced some good designs. Imagine them coming up against a Tiger in a large European field, the guys in the Tiger would just close the lid, sit back and laugh.
__________________
Watanbe is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 11:26 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Messy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ankeny, Iowa
Posts: 1,662
To add a comment about the availability of materials for Japanese planes, I have a Flight journal where a Zero is test flown, and the author commented about the simpleness of the planes, IIRC, the cockpits were completely open below the pilot. The thing that caught my attention the most was the author was very surprised to notice that the wheel flaps were opened and closed by the use of lengths of bamboo that upon opening or closing would contact a catch or hook on the wheel flap when the wheel opened or closed. Just really was hard for me to imagine Japans premier fighter throughout most of the war used bamboo rods to actuate wheel flaps. That really stuck with me, and explains a lot of how Japanese planes were built, using anything available because the materials were not always available, even for something as simple as a steel rod to open/close the flaps. can you imagine trying to develop a new, better plane in this environment?
__________________
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
George S. Patton

"When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt

Last edited by Messy1; 06-29-2009 at 11:34 AM.
Messy1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 04:06 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 27
It was somewhat similar to the Hawker Tempest in that it was plagued by structural problems which were never completely resolved.

The Japanese had quality control issues before the B-29 bombing campaign started. After that, it was all downhill.
Deanimator is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 04:20 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Messy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ankeny, Iowa
Posts: 1,662
Quality issues along with material supply issues in a country who has very few natural resources and you have ill have hard times trying to develop new aircraft in that environment.
__________________
"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
George S. Patton

"When you are at the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on!" Franklin Roosevelt
Messy1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2009, 09:23 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
proton45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 473
Quote:
Originally Posted by renrich View Post
Proton, the conditions you mentioned were also mentioned in one of my sources. The Japanese seemed to always have difficulties with developing higher powered engines. If one thinks about it, the best designs in WW2 all had outstanding engines. Having said that, I have read that captured Zekes tested by the US seemed to have been well constructed and the engines were reliable in that particular model. One thing we know is that the Japanese know how to build reliable and powerful engines today at least in autos.
Ya, agreed...aeroplanes with development problems are pretty common throughout history... If you looked at the amount of time and money that is spent today, by our own government, in aeroplane development it would be astounding. Japan pretty much lacked "time" and resources...However, despite the problems they had with engine heat, and vibration (at certain RPM), the TAIC report still found the J2M3 to be one of Japan's best fighters.
proton45 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
Design by HTWoRKS


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124