What does your 1941-1942 carrier plane force look like?

[plan_D]

Certainly the Allied forces would have lost many more men, but even with German tactics the Japanese airmen were in no situation to combat the Allied greats. I, personally, think the advantages of the Allied aircraft in combat were better than those of the Japanese. How could a Zero, honestly, hope to achieve success against a Corsair if the F4U pilot had a slight knowledge of his plane? He can't.

Keep the combat fast, and the Japanese could not win.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by plan_D

Keep the combat fast, and the Japanese could not win.

And the USAAF and the USN learned that within 6 months of the war.

Again the mystical Zero could never do better than a 2 to 1 kill ratio over F4Fs, P-39s and P-40s. Highly over-rated!!!!

[syscom3]

The corsair was for 1943, not 1942.

Later model Japanese fighters when flown by the surviving veterans were more than capable of holding their own against the F6F, F4U, P51 and P38.

Good for the allies that they were the rarely encountered

[plan_D]

Hardly capable, and I know the Corsair was 1943. I was making a statement about the Japanese throughout the war. The Japanese fighters were not capable planes all the Allied aircraft were just too fast for it. It was luck, rather than skill, that achieved kills for the Japanese against Allied fighters in the later years.

[syscom3]

Plenty of allied pilots were shot down thinking that the Japanese fighter they were going to "smoke" turned out to be piloted by a competent pilot.

Dont under estimate them. A competent pilot of any nationality flying a decent fighter is a dangerous foe.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by syscom3

Plenty of allied pilots were shot down thinking that the Japanese fighter they were going to "smoke" turned out to be piloted by a competent pilot.

Dont under estimate them. A competent pilot of any nationality flying a decent fighter is a dangerous foe.

Agree, but at the end of the day the numbers said it all! I think that was more the exception than the rule!!

[syscom3]

Just pointing out that when the Japanese had a good pilot in a good airplane, they were just as good as anyone.

It is a fallacy to think otherwise. They built good planes towards the end of the war, and suffered primarily from a complete lack of experienced pilots.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by syscom3

Just pointing out that when the Japanese had a good pilot in a good airplane, they were just as good as anyone.

Agree, but usually they had one without the other - my point was that although they managed to inflict losses, for the most part most pilots did not underestimate them.

Originally Posted by syscom3

It is a fallacy to think otherwise. They built good planes towards the end of the war, and suffered primarily from a complete lack of experienced pilots.

Agree...

[rebel8303]

I say Seafire (apart from landings)

[loomaluftwaffe]

the Jap's pearl harbor veterans like died.
And the replacements had engine troubles with the MK9 Mamoru and NK9 (army designation Ha-45) Homare.
if those engines were reliable, then the zero would have been phased out earlier

[syscom3]

The Seafire is a dubious choice. Fragile airframe not designed for carrier ops, and poor endurance for a naval aircraft.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Just like the Bf-109T.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but better looking..........

but for the atlantic and med. they needed an intorceptor, which the spit was, you want to go off bombing somewhere or provide escort, take a firefly.........

[syscom3]

I will agree better looking. However, for convoy protection you want a fighter with a good radius of action so it can intercept the intruders as far away as possible.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by the lancaster kicks ass

but better looking..........

Thats a matter of opinion.