J2M Raiden Jack vs. P-38J - Aircraft of World War II

Soundbreaker Welch? · 01-28-2009, 07:44 PM

Ok, maybe this could be interesting.

Who do you think could win?

drgondog · 01-28-2009, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soundbreaker Welch?

Ok, maybe this could be interesting.

Who do you think could win?

For any aircraft of near equal capability the outcome of a fight will depend on the tactical situation and pilot skill - same here.

Fokker D21 · 01-28-2009, 11:59 PM

In comparison: P-38J vs J2M5

The P-38J has a speed advantage (402 mph versus 382) and is problaby more manoeuvrable at low speeds. The J2M has a climb rate advantage (3838 ft/m vs 3076 ft/m). The J2M5 has more firepower (4 x 20 mm vs 1 x 20 mm and 4 x .50) but the P38 has everything in the nose and the J2M in the wings.

In a fight in the vertical I would say the J2M wins.
A low speed turning battle favors the P-38.
In a boom and zoom anyone can win.

delcyros · 02-01-2009, 03:29 PM

I see it from a different perspective wrt low speed maneuverability.
A low speed turning battle is much to the taste of the J2M, a dive& zoom favour the P-38´s significantly better zoom climb.

proton45 · 02-02-2009, 11:35 AM

The P38 had the numbers...maybe not the type of answer you where looking for (lol), sorry...

fly boy · 02-02-2009, 12:32 PM

i have never seen a jack

Soundbreaker Welch? · 02-02-2009, 08:07 PM

Here's one, the only restored Raiden in a museum.

Pong · 03-04-2009, 06:02 AM

Wow. Where is that museum?

Thorlifter · 03-04-2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drgondog

For any aircraft of near equal capability the outcome of a fight will depend on the tactical situation and pilot skill - same here.

Agreed.

Ivan1GFP · 03-04-2009, 02:49 PM

Both aircraft were seriously underrated for speed. The 371 mph typically quoted for a J2M was done with external tanks. TAIC test actually put the speed of this aircraft at 407 mph.

- Ivan.

Soundbreaker Welch? · 03-04-2009, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Wow. Where is that museum?

I think it's at Chino Airport in California. Wish I could visit.

RabidAlien · 03-06-2009, 06:43 PM

Agree with everyone who said "depends on pilot/situation"....but I voted for the P-38 just cuz I love that bird!

Sweb · 03-07-2009, 06:30 PM

I read in a book - don't remember now - that the Japanese planes were in most ways superior to ours in performance. Robustness was our claim to fame and, of course, the Allies had some pretty remarkable machines with heavy firepower and range. The report was based upon Allied testing of captured planes that were returned to flying condition. One thing the Japanese could not do was produce the 100 octane fuels needed for their engines. The best they produced was 80. With 100 octane a couple types flew circles around all period Allied inventory during the Allied testing of them. The Hayate (Ki-84) in particular was the best of them. The Shiden came next. With 100 octane fuel the Ki-84 was faster than any Allied type, had an embarrassingly better ROC and with its combat flaps and airfoil out maneuvered all of its period counterparts and opponents. Because it was much lighter than its opponents it could literally firewall the throttle and take advantage in a fight or simply run away never to be caught by any other type except perhaps the H version of the P-51 which had some pretty good giddy-up. I remember reading it in one of the books I bought when building a 1/4 scale RC model of it. If the Japanese had the higher octane fuels the PTO might have turned out much differently than it did.

evangilder · 03-07-2009, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sweb

If the Japanese had the higher octane fuels the PTO might have turned out much differently than it did.

I highly doubt it. Prolong the war, maybe, but change the outcome? No.

FLYBOYJ · 03-07-2009, 09:20 PM

There is no doubt that the Japanese produced some superior hardware however maintainability and interchangeability presented a problem though out the war and of course got worse later in the war. I think someone posted on here a narrative by a Japanese fighter pilot based in the Solomons complaining about the quality and maintainability of his aircraft.

View Poll Results: Which plane would outmatch the other?
P-38J	24	46.15%
J2M Raiden Jack	8	15.38%
Equally matched	0	0%
It depends on the Pilots	20	38.46%
:Other	0	0%
Voters: 52. You may not vote on this poll

01-28-2009, 07:44 PM	#1
Soundbreaker Welch? Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 1,893	J2M Raiden Jack vs. P-38J Ok, maybe this could be interesting. Who do you think could win? __________________ "His motor's conked out!" "What's the differance, they're all Nazis!" "Luke, shut up!" "Fear the hook!" "Oh.....I wanna fly." "You mean the kind that go under water and fly up the stairs?" "What you doing? Oh Nooooo!"

01-28-2009, 11:59 PM	#3
Fokker D21 Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Dordrecht Posts: 62	In comparison: P-38J vs J2M5 The P-38J has a speed advantage (402 mph versus 382) and is problaby more manoeuvrable at low speeds. The J2M has a climb rate advantage (3838 ft/m vs 3076 ft/m). The J2M5 has more firepower (4 x 20 mm vs 1 x 20 mm and 4 x .50) but the P38 has everything in the nose and the J2M in the wings. In a fight in the vertical I would say the J2M wins. A low speed turning battle favors the P-38. In a boom and zoom anyone can win. __________________ Ceteris Paribus (meaning everything else is considered to have no influence on our investigation) http://members.tele2.nl/harmstolk/gunpower.htm Last edited by Fokker D21; 01-29-2009 at 12:03 AM. Reason: Spelling

02-01-2009, 03:29 PM	#4
delcyros Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg) Posts: 1,726	I see it from a different perspective wrt low speed maneuverability. A low speed turning battle is much to the taste of the J2M, a dive& zoom favour the P-38´s significantly better zoom climb. __________________ ---delcyros---

02-02-2009, 12:32 PM	#6
fly boy Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 853	i have never seen a jack __________________

02-02-2009, 11:35 AM	#5
proton45 Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 414	The P38 had the numbers...maybe not the type of answer you where looking for (lol), sorry...

02-02-2009, 08:07 PM	#7
Soundbreaker Welch? Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 1,893	Here's one, the only restored Raiden in a museum. __________________ "His motor's conked out!" "What's the differance, they're all Nazis!" "Luke, shut up!" "Fear the hook!" "Oh.....I wanna fly." "You mean the kind that go under water and fly up the stairs?" "What you doing? Oh Nooooo!"

03-04-2009, 06:02 AM	#8
Pong Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 495	Wow. Where is that museum? __________________ "I'm sure as hell not a killer, but combat flying is like a game, and a guy likes to come out on top." -Maj. George E. Preddy, killed on Christmas Day, 1944

03-04-2009, 02:49 PM	#10
Ivan1GFP Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 270	Both aircraft were seriously underrated for speed. The 371 mph typically quoted for a J2M was done with external tanks. TAIC test actually put the speed of this aircraft at 407 mph. - Ivan.

03-06-2009, 06:43 PM	#12
RabidAlien Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Hurst, Texas Posts: 2,825	Agree with everyone who said "depends on pilot/situation"....but I voted for the P-38 just cuz I love that bird! __________________ Pillage, then burn. Argue not with dragons, for thou art crunchy and go well on toast.

03-07-2009, 06:30 PM	#13
Sweb Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 277	I read in a book - don't remember now - that the Japanese planes were in most ways superior to ours in performance. Robustness was our claim to fame and, of course, the Allies had some pretty remarkable machines with heavy firepower and range. The report was based upon Allied testing of captured planes that were returned to flying condition. One thing the Japanese could not do was produce the 100 octane fuels needed for their engines. The best they produced was 80. With 100 octane a couple types flew circles around all period Allied inventory during the Allied testing of them. The Hayate (Ki-84) in particular was the best of them. The Shiden came next. With 100 octane fuel the Ki-84 was faster than any Allied type, had an embarrassingly better ROC and with its combat flaps and airfoil out maneuvered all of its period counterparts and opponents. Because it was much lighter than its opponents it could literally firewall the throttle and take advantage in a fight or simply run away never to be caught by any other type except perhaps the H version of the P-51 which had some pretty good giddy-up. I remember reading it in one of the books I bought when building a 1/4 scale RC model of it. If the Japanese had the higher octane fuels the PTO might have turned out much differently than it did.

03-07-2009, 09:20 PM	#15
FLYBOYJ IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA Posts: 16,050	There is no doubt that the Japanese produced some superior hardware however maintainability and interchangeability presented a problem though out the war and of course got worse later in the war. I think someone posted on here a narrative by a Japanese fighter pilot based in the Solomons complaining about the quality and maintainability of his aircraft. __________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT"

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