![]() |
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Member Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 44
| "jack" fighter plane I AM sorry to ask so many questions contemporary allied fighters? ie turning, speed, manueverability and so on Thanks everyone!
__________________ (img)(/img) |
| | |
| | #2 |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO ![]() Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,775
|
__________________ > I Support Doug Gillis < |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,765
| Hi Ralph, >I AM sorry to ask so many questions 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) |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Member 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 |
| | |
| | #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." |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Senior Member 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.
__________________ |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Senior Member 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. |
| | |
| | #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. |
| | |
| | #9 |
| Banned 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! |
| | |
| | #10 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Adelaide
Posts: 522
| Quote:
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.
__________________ | |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Senior Member 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. |
| | |
| | #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. |
| | |
| | #13 |
| Senior Member 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 |
| | |
| | #14 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 473
| Quote:
| |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |