Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 137

Thread: Japanese Zero vs Spitfire vs FW 190

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like

    Japanese Zero vs Spitfire vs FW 190

    How good was Zero against famous Spitfire or German FW 190?

    Can a Zero beat them any chance at all?


  2. #2
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,981
    Post Thanks / Like
    the spit's got the zero beat.........

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    "the spit's got the zero beat........."

    I believed Zero actually outclassed Spitfire in early Pacific war, due to its superior dog fight and its unbelieved long range capability.

    "The British fared no better than the Americans did. The RAF squadrons stationed in Malaya were flying the American Brewster Buffalo; a short barrel shaped fighter that was outmoded before it reached the front. Aware of its lack of performance the British had banished the fighter to Burma, away from combat with the superior German Bf-109. The general impression was that the Japanese had nothing but outdated biplanes that would not be a match for the Brewster fighter. When the British Buffaloes came in contact with the A6M they were sliced to ribbons.

    To reduce their losses the RAF decided to replace the outmatched Buffalo with the more formidable Hawker Hurricane, famed for its decisive role in the Battle of Britain. Unfortunately, its pilots also found that fighting a Zeke on its terms was practically hara-kiri. Finally, the British threw their best at the Japanese, the fabled Supermarine Spitfire. To the Allies dismay, this fighter also could not compare with the incredibly nimble Zero. In only two engagements, Zeros downed 17 of 27 while losing 2 of their own.

    It seemed the A6M was an unstoppable juggernaut. It soon gained the reputation of being invincible. Everywhere it was encountered, the Zero vanquished its enemies."

    -http://www.chuckhawks.com/p-40_vs_zero.htm

  4. #4
    Banned Soren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like
    The Fw-190 would B&Z a Zero to death, and so would faster Spit's such as the IX. However going into a Dogfight with the Zero was stupid, especially below 300 mph where it could be called suicide.

  5. #5
    Glock Perfection Matt308's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    20,140
    Post Thanks / Like
    I have to agree. See your adversary first, zoom the Zeke pilot and he won't have a chance. Not a competition with equal piloting skills.

    "Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if
    they made a difference in the world. But, the [U.S.]
    Marines don't have that problem."
    -- Ronald Reagan

    Master of Duplicate Posts

  6. #6
    Senior Member CharlesBronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cordoba - Argentina
    Posts
    3,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Off course, the heavy armament of the FW can make a flyng torh of ANY cero version.

    And eve if it took some hits from the jap craf, his superior armour woud protect it very well.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    "However going into a Dogfight with the Zero was stupid,"

    Ya, I have to agree on that, Zero was a superior dogfighter, probably the best dogfither. I also want to point out that Zero was a very capable plane which was designed as long range and carrier based plane. It unsurpassed range gave it upperhand in the conflict of Spitfire in Pacific.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    104
    Post Thanks / Like
    "Off course, the heavy armament of the FW can make a flyng torh of ANY cero version."

    Not too sure about that, as I post evidence earlier, Spitfires proven itself inferior to Zero in Pacific war. So, if a Zero can deal easier with Spitfire, it probably had good chance against with FW.

  9. #9
    IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO FLYBOYJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    21,646
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Chiron
    "the spit's got the zero beat........."

    I believed Zero actually outclassed Spitfire in early Pacific war, due to its superior dog fight and its unbelieved long range capability.

    "The British fared no better than the Americans did. The RAF squadrons stationed in Malaya were flying the American Brewster Buffalo; a short barrel shaped fighter that was outmoded before it reached the front. Aware of its lack of performance the British had banished the fighter to Burma, away from combat with the superior German Bf-109. The general impression was that the Japanese had nothing but outdated biplanes that would not be a match for the Brewster fighter. When the British Buffaloes came in contact with the A6M they were sliced to ribbons.

    To reduce their losses the RAF decided to replace the outmatched Buffalo with the more formidable Hawker Hurricane, famed for its decisive role in the Battle of Britain. Unfortunately, its pilots also found that fighting a Zeke on its terms was practically hara-kiri. Finally, the British threw their best at the Japanese, the fabled Supermarine Spitfire. To the Allies dismay, this fighter also could not compare with the incredibly nimble Zero. In only two engagements, Zeros downed 17 of 27 while losing 2 of their own.

    It seemed the A6M was an unstoppable juggernaut. It soon gained the reputation of being invincible. Everywhere it was encountered, the Zero vanquished its enemies."

    -http://www.chuckhawks.com/p-40_vs_zero.htm
    Tactics had alot to do with the dismal performance of the Spit against the zero. The Brits were still flying tight finger 3 formations (most figured out not to do that after the battle of britian) and attempted to dogfight the zero in the horizontal. Until the zero was taken on in pairs And the fight was done in the "vertical," the zero couldn't be beat.

  10. #10
    Senior Member CharlesBronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Cordoba - Argentina
    Posts
    3,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Sorry my awful spell, I mean "Flying torch"

    Seems that yesterday I forgot to take my medication.

  11. #11
    Senior Member the lancaster kicks ass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    19,981
    Post Thanks / Like
    and the spit did fine against the zero...........

    "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

  12. #12
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Geelong, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    1
    Post Thanks / Like

    Spitty vs Zero

    Check this link - Supermarine Spitfire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The top article is by my Dad who flew the Spitfire in the Australian test against a Zero. The tail of the Spitfire was bent 9 degrees in the manouvering. Both machines are pretty awesome in their own right. I still like the Spitty though.
    Cheers
    Clive Wawn (jr)
    Last edited by Wawny; 02-06-2012 at 09:14 PM. Reason: Not fully explained

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,870
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Chiron View Post
    "Off course, the heavy armament of the FW can make a flyng torh of ANY cero version."

    Not too sure about that, as I post evidence earlier, Spitfires proven itself inferior to Zero in Pacific war. So, if a Zero can deal easier with Spitfire, it probably had good chance against with FW.
    There is no doubt that in the early combats between the Spit and the Zero the Spit was hammered, but its wrong to assume that this was the natural situation.
    They went against the Zero and tried dogfighting and we know the result was. It was a natural mistake seeing how the Spits excelled at dogfighting everywhere else.
    However once the lesson was learnt the Spits were able to gain the upper hand.

    Of the three assuming that we are talking about the Spit V then its
    1) FW190
    2) Spit V
    3) Zero

  14. #14
    Senior Member renrich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montrose, Colorado
    Posts
    4,542
    Post Thanks / Like
    I think you nailed it Glider. In a turning angles fight below 275 mph the Zero had no peers. The Spitfire pilots could not use the the same tactics used against the BF109. However a Zero with an expert pilot flying it could be tough to handle unless you surprised him.

  15. #15
    Senior Member mkloby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Jacksonville, NC
    Posts
    3,561
    Post Thanks / Like
    Is it true that all Japanese planes did not carry a radio? I think I recall reading this, and anyone who has done military flying can attest that that is a SERIOUS handicap. Aerial combat is based upon tactics - not the sexy spreadsheet figures that we try to break a plane down into. Granted, superior performance gives advantages, but different A/C had strengths and weaknesses. It's the tactics and training that set apart the pathetic force that Japanese aviation degenerated into vice the juggernauts they butt up against.
    If the Army and the Navy ever look on heaven's scenes, they will find the streets are guarded by United States Marines



Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •