Military Review

Combat aircraft. Suicide plane

156

Many will be outraged right after the headline. Author, what are you talking about? "Zero" does not crawl out of ratings of the same as you, films were made about him and in general ...


And in general, and in particular especially. I will not tire of repeating that the “rating”, where the pre-war carrier-based fighter is adjacent to the late-war fighter-bomber and the twin-engine heavy fighter, is the same rating where the VAZ-2101 will be considered next to the Ferrari. Approximately the same degree of “directness” of comparison. And what, both Italian models, on four wheels, with gasoline engines ...

So the ratings, where Zero are put on a par with Mustang, are so-so.


But first, let's talk about the plane. And for a snack we’ll leave why it suddenly turned into “the best”.

The birthday of Fighter Zero, or, in our opinion, Zero, was April 10, 1938. To say that the plane “didn’t enter” in the first time is to say nothing. Everyone criticized the project, both conservatives and progressives. The first did not like the closed cabin, for example. There was such a fashion for pilots deck aviation, lean out of the cockpit and control the landing glide path visually.

In addition to this trifle, which caused lively debate, the parties clashed in a serious battle following the presentation of the aircraft model in terms of weapons and speed priority over maneuverability, or vice versa. By the way, supporters and opponents were approximately equally divided.

That is, half were supporters of a super-maneuverable fighter with light weapons (2 rifle-caliber machine guns), the second half advocated a fast and well-armed fighter.

The debate is at an impasse, and I must say that all these disputes could have ruined the project, but diplomat Jiro Horikoshi, chief designer, promised to satisfy the demands of both parties.

Combat aircraft. Suicide plane

That is, to create a fast, maneuverable fighter with good weapons.

There are no miracles. Horikoshi was a very good designer. I would even say - at the world level, since I created more than one decent aircraft. But not brilliant. And the promise bordered either with genius or with deception.

What was more - judge for yourself.

On April 25, 1939, with official speed measurements, the “Project 12” (future “Zero”) developed only 491 km / h. Competitor F2A "Buffalo", born in 1937, produced 542 km / h in similar tests. As they say, feel the difference.

It is clear that it was not the airplane project that was to blame, but the engine. Japan, like all countries of the second aircraft manufacturing league, was content with what it was. Therefore, when the Americans, British and Germans already put 1 hp engines on their planes and higher, the most powerful engine from Mitsubishi, Zuisei 000, produced only 13 horses.

The Ministry of the Sea found a way out in installing an engine from Mitsubishi’s direct competitor, Nakajima. Nakajima-Sakae 12 gave out 940 hp, which was, in principle, comparable with world analogues, although this alignment was unlikely to please Mitsubishi specialists.

And with the Sakae engine, the plane did not just fly, but it flew very promisingly. And the Naval Ministry liked it so much that it was launched into the series without completing the main part of the tests, under the official designation "carrier-based fighter pilot type 0", or A6M1.


If you look impartially, you have to admit: the plane became a victim of propaganda. The Japanese military department was so eager to convince everyone of the creation of something so transcendental that it itself believed in it. Because the tests were held under sheer pressure from naval command.

Moreover, the military department insisted, contrary to the opinion of Mitsubishi, on the military tests in China, where by then military operations were in full swing.

The tests were conducted on the first six pre-production fighters as part of the 12th combined air group in July 1940. In parallel, another group of aircraft of the pre-production batch was tested on board the Kaga aircraft carrier, and after the tests it was also included in the 12th group.

Looking ahead, let's say that the combat tests were more than successful. After testing, the aircraft received the name "Marine type zero carrier-based fighter model 11" (A6M2 model 11) - "Rei-Siki Kanzo Sentoki", in short - "Reisen".


Zero’s actions in China sparked a wave of rave reviews. Newspapers were filled with reports of how a new fighter packs Chinese planes in packs.

On September 13, 1940, 13 Zeros were escorted by bombers and entered into battle with 30 aircraft of the Chinese Air Force, shooting down 25 of them (two of them still collided in the air). Of course, this caused a proper resonance, but ... "Zero" fought with I-15 and I-16 type 5 Soviet-made. And these planes, inferior in speed to a good hundred kilometers per hour and armed with two ShKASs, can be called full-fledged rivals? And under the control of Chinese pilots?

But enough for the Japanese. They really believed that the new fighter is worthy of the prefix "super". So an opinion was formed that stated that the Zero alone costs from two to five of any enemy aircraft. Well, blessed are those who believe.

And how, in fact, did the new aircraft stand out so much?

Armament. Yes, the standard of pre-war armament from 2-4 rifle-caliber machine guns (Bf.109C and D, Gladiator Gloucester, I-15, I-16 was blocked by Zero equipment, since 7,7 mm guns were added to two synchronous machine guns two 20 mm Mauser wing guns, licensed.

Maneuverability. It was. We will not deny it. But without hanging tanks. And without tanks, the range immediately became uninteresting. And in battle, tanks were often not dumped, and the Zero immediately became an iron. But, in principle, it was a very maneuverable fighter, it is worth giving it its due.

Speed. Yes, there was speed. The usual average speed for a monoplane fighter of that time was 500 km / h.

Range. Range - yes. Beautiful and real figure. “Zero” could fly at a cruising speed of 300 km / h very far, it does not matter, accompanying the bombers or performing their tasks. For us, the most important thing is that the plane could fly far.


Moreover, the “Zero” was not a feather. He weighed more than Messer, more I-16, as much as Kittyhawk and Hurricane. That is, the “feather” that will flutter, destroying everything around it, “Zero” was not.

But what was paid for all the good characteristics?

I already said that Horikoshi was not a genius. He was a very good specialist who understood what he was doing. And if he promised that the plane would be fast, nimble, able to fly far and shoot well, that would have to be done. Due to what? Given that the motor was very so-so for a car of this weight, we only have one parameter that could be played.

Protection that was not


Yes, of the three tons of A6M1, not a single gram was spent on protection. Protected tanks, an armored head, an armored head, in general, everything with the prefix “armor” on the “Zero” was not present. That is, in the frontal projection, the pilot was still somehow protected by the engine, but on the other sides - no. And ANY rifle caliber bullet could be the first and last for the Zero. Especially hitting the pilot.


Until now, we have a very erroneous opinion that the Zero is something small and maneuverable. Alas, many were mistaken, including our authors too. I will cite an example from an article Legendary "Zero".

“Having a motor power less than that of any Allied fighter, the Zero significantly exceeded enemy vehicles in speed and maneuverability due to a thoughtful and lightweight design. The fighter of the Mitsubishi company successfully combined its small size and low specific load on the wing with a not very powerful engine, cannon armament and excellent behavior of the aircraft in the air, including an exceptional range. Only with the advent of Mustangs and Spitfires, Hellcat and Corsairs, pilots from the USA and Great Britain were able to start fighting the Zero. ”

Let's stick to some phrases.

So, about the "thoughtful and lightweight" design. If the reasonableness is that everything that could give the pilot a chance to survive the battle is removed from the plane ... No, I still can’t call THIS “reasonableness”. This is despair in half with stupidity. But - a little later about this. Now I’ll just note that the “ingenious” creator of Zero, Jiro Horikoshi, was for some reason subsequently suspended from work on the development of the aircraft. Suddenly so.

"The fighter of the Mitsubishi company successfully combined small sizes."

This is a very interesting passage. Let's compare, perhaps ... With the P-40 Tomahawk and the Yak-1, for example.

So, A6M2 / R-40C / Yak-1.

Wing span, m: 12,0 / 11,38 / 10,0
Wing area, sq. m: 22,44 / 21,92 / 17,15
Length, m: 9,05 / 9,68 / 8,48
Maximum mass, kg: 2 757/3 424/2 995

Doesn't add up. Yes, “Zero” is easier than classmates, it is. But about the sizes - sorry. The Tomahawk was that bandura, and, as you see, it didn’t exceed its size. So if anyone here was small, this is not about Zero. This is about Yak.

Speaking of weight. Yes, the A6M2 was lighter, but who said it was good? It was for these aircraft that there was a restriction on the speed of diving, because the Zero could not be dispersed “to the stop”. It just fell apart. What the Allies used, moving away from the Japanese precisely on a steep dive.

How they won the Zero


Mostly on the pages of newspapers. There victories were simply amazing.


“Completely bewildered by the flashing brisk Zero maneuvers, the three Chinese pilots hurriedly jumped parachutes out of their intact aircraft.”


Nimble "Zero" that re-I-16 and I-15 biplane? You believe? Me not. And this could be finished.

“As a result of air battles, the pre-production A6M2 pilots, together with replenishment from production vehicles, announced 99 victories in the loss of two Zeros.

Hartman and Rally as one. However, as Suvorov used to say: "Write a hundred thousand, why are you Basurmans sorry!" Lied and Hartman, and Rally, the Japanese worse? So it was possible to say anything at all, if only there was any sense.

However, it is worth a look, but in general, how did Zero have successes?

But not very luxurious.


If you do not take the battle in Pearl Harbor, then for the rest all the bravura reports are Japanese propaganda. In fact, the Asia-Pacific region (APR) was equipped with far from the best aviation units of allies with not the most modern technology.

It is logical: in 1941, the British Spitfires reflected German air raids on the islands and in North Africa, and no matter how the colonies were. Accordingly, the Brewsters, Buffalo and Hurricanes of the first models did not look at all against Zero. Approximately the same as the Chinese I-15.

This, in fact, is the key to the success of Zero. Experienced pilots at the controls of the latest aircraft in 1940-41 against not the best contingent of allies on older aircraft.

Naturally, the Japanese beat everyone in the tail and mane. Naturally. Americans and British washed their face with blood, but studied. And then? Quote again.

“It was only with the advent of the Mustangs and Spitfires, Hellcat and Corsairs that pilots in the USA and Great Britain were able to start fighting the Zero.”

Hmm ... also doubtful. "Mustang" became a plane for battle, and not to increase enemy statistics only in 1944, "Spitfire" as it were from 1936 in a series, but it was produced very tightly. Corsair and Hellcat? Sorry, the Wildcat in the confrontation with the Zero had a ratio of 5,1 to 1, which means that for 5 downed Zero there was one Wild Cat.

The battle in the Coral Sea has already put everything in its place. 3 Japanese aircraft carriers versus 2 American. Losses are equal, but the Americans foiled the attack on Port Moresby. And two battered Japanese aircraft carriers (Zuikaku and Shokaku) did not take part in the battle at Midway Atoll, which ended in a deafening slap in the face of the Japanese fleet.

So why didn’t such disparate Zeros compete with American (not Mustangs and Corsairs) airplanes?


And one cannot help recalling April 18, 1943, when the Zero could not do anything with the American planes that sent Admiral Yamamoto to the other world. Moreover, the “Zero” did not even fight with the Wildcat, but with the Lightnings. Twin-engine long-range fighter R-38. Yes, there were 14 against 6, but they were Zero!

As a result, both bombers and a pair of Zeros shot down the R-38, and only one fighter was lost.

In general, I can continue indefinitely, that is, until September 1, 1945. The essence of this will not change. “Zero” was good only against aircraft that could not provide him with proper resistance. I emphasize that I have good pilots on board.

And with the flight crew of the Japanese, problems began already in 1942.

Indeed, how do you like? 2-3 bullets of any caliber - and instead of “Zero” we observe a good such torch. Given the frank frostbite of Japanese pilots who did not want to escape, surrender, and so on, a downed plane usually meant a lost pilot.

Therefore, by 1942, the pilots for the paper Zero began to simply end. And in 1943, such apparently “trained” pilots missed the Americans who flew nearly 500 nautical miles and staged Yamamoto's ascension. And came back.

Yes, in Japan, when the resource of the pilots began to melt rapidly from the fact that they burned down with shot down "beautiful" aircraft, they began to move. But it was too late.

Six or eight large-caliber wing machine guns of American fighters (and the bombers did not yawn, because everyone wanted to live) were smashed to pieces and flaps of the Zero, killing the pilots.


Guns do not even need, why? Six trunks spit out such a heap of metal, there would be at least something horrible. But horrible - "Zero" ended his journey with a short but spectacular torch. Together with the pilot.

And the Japanese, we must pay tribute to them, came to their senses and rushed in pursuit. Already in 1941, Horikoshi was removed from the post of chief designer and appointed Mijiro Takahashi. The latter succeeded by reducing the wing and hardening the structure to increase the dive speed to 660 km / h.

We tried to squeeze at least something out of the Sakae engine, but ... Speed ​​increased on the A6M5 model by as much as 20 km / h and amounted to 565 km / h at an altitude of 6000 m.

A6M5 went into series in 1943. That's right when the Americans got the Hellcat. Six large-caliber "Browning" regularly sent the Japanese to the temple of Amaterasu, and 7,7 mm bullets safely bounced off the armor of American fighters. Yes, and shells "Hellcat" with a creak, but kept. So the beating of Japanese pilots simply entered a new orbit.

At the beginning of 1944, another version of the Zero appeared - the A6M5b model 52b, on which - finally! - tried to introduce protection for the pilot. And in general to do at least something for the sake of the fighter from the word "exterminate", and not "exterminate."


On the plane appeared 50 mm bulletproof glass! On this, however, with the armor finished, but nonetheless. The attempt was counted.

Also on the plane there was a carbon dioxide engine fire extinguishing system. In the event of a fire, carbon dioxide from the high-pressure cylinder instantly filled the fuselage fuel tank and engine compartment.

Well, and quite miraculously looks strengthening weapons. One of the synchronous 7,7 mm machine guns was replaced with a 13,2 mm Type 3 machine gun. I wrote about this monster, a pirated copy of the Browning M2, converted to a 13,2 mm cartridge from the licensed Hotchkiss. What was, then set. This was the first strengthening of weapons since the start of serial production. Let me remind you, 1944.

It is clear that everything looked sad, but alas, the Zero could not be completely replaced: for the A7M, Repp could not bring the engine to mind, and the J2M Raiden did not want to fly at all.

It is clear that in 1944, a plane born in 1938 was simply irrelevant, but nevertheless, they tried to squeeze something else out of it.

A6M5s model 52s received a pair of the same 13,2 mm Type 3 machine guns in the wings, and the remaining synchronous 7,7 mm machine gun was finally thrown out as unnecessary.

The pilot received an 8-mm armored back! Just for the sake of comparison: the same armor plate was on the Polikarpov I-15 fighter in 1933. But on the A6M5s they also installed 55 mm bulletproof glass in the rear of the flashlight!

The speed difference with the same “Corsair” was 90 km / h, I don’t know what the American machine gun bullets said, stitching an 8-mm armor back with the pilot, maybe laughing. But the fact, in 1944, “Zero” finally turned into a whipping boy.

The latest modification of the A6M8 with the new Kinsay engine is as much as 1500 hp. in the series did not go, because Japan ended as such. But tests were carried out in 1945.

Weapons were reduced to two 20-mm guns and two 13,2-mm machine guns, the synchronous one was removed, since it simply did not fit in the compartment with the new engine. The aircraft could carry a 500-kg bomb under the fuselage and two 350-liter outboard fuel tanks under the wing.

A6M8 in tests developed a speed of 573 km / h at an altitude of 6000 m without external suspensions. For 1945 - a sad result. "Corsair" at the same height gave out more than 700 km / h.

So, excuse me, where is the “miracle plane” that scared everyone and everything? I do not see.


I see a rather weak and defenseless aircraft made of sticks and matter, really suitable for fighting planes with a lower class. No more.

But the point is not even LTH, now we will come to the essence of the material.

Almost 11 "Zero" of all modifications. How many pilot lives did they take? Lot. By 000, there were almost no experienced naval pilots in Japan, and those who remained could not resist the Americans with more advanced aircraft.

So the A6M Zero can be safely called a plane that left naval fighter aircraft without pilots. They simply died under bullets and burned in the cabins of this “miraculousweapons».


But that is not all. Continuous attempts to make this squalor become a full-fledged fighter led to the fact that Mitsubishi was spending resources on the Zero, and work on the Raiden and Repp was greatly inhibited.

“Raiden” began to develop in 1939, “Repp” in 1942, when it became clear that the “Zero” is really zero. But the first flew only in 1942, and the second in 1944. When it was already clearly late. And fast and armored American "cats" and "pirates" ruled the ball in the sky.

LTX A6M-5


Wingspan, m: 11,00
Length, m: 9,12
Height, m: 3,57
Wing area, м2: 21,30

Weight, kg
- empty aircraft: 1 894
- normal takeoff: 2 743
- Maximum takeoff: 3083

Engine: 1 x NK1F Sakai 21 x 1100 hp
Maximum speed km / h: 565
Cruising speed, km / h: 330
Practical range, km: 1920
Maximum rate of climb, m / min: 858
Practical ceiling, m: 11 740
Crew, person: 1

Armament:
Synchronous on the fuselage:
- two 7,7 mm machine guns or
- one 7,7 mm machine gun and one 13,2 mm machine gun or
- two 13,2 mm machine guns.
Two 20 mm wing guns.

A6M "Zero" has the right to the title of the worst carrier-based fighter of World War II, since it did not at all correspond to the canons of the fighter of that time. Such a plane could only appear in Japan, with its frankly hateful code "Bushido."

He appeared. And he took so many pilots with him that Japan actually lost the sky in 1942, a year after entering the war.

Where, you ask, all these tales that the Zero was so cool? Yes, everything is from there. Stories in favor of the losers. The fact that Japan staged a blitzkrieg in the Pacific Ocean, even cooler than Germany in Europe, is a fact.


And so the victory on such a serious opponent seems to be twice as honorable. So some “historians” talk about the invulnerable “Zero” and other wonders of the Japanese military genius.

Believe it or not is a private matter for everyone. At one time (the war with China in 1940), the Zero was nothing, then it was just an airplane for a one-time kamikaze, nothing more.
Author:
156 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. polpot
    polpot 14 July 2020 18: 22 New
    12
    Thank you, as always, an interesting and innovative approach to the topic and a great sense of humor.
    1. dauria
      dauria 15 July 2020 15: 56 New
      +2
      and a wonderful sense of humor.


      "I see a rather weak and defenseless plane from sticks and matter ... "
      Is this humor? It was rationally designed all-metal High culture design. Cladding was only covering ailerons and rudders.
      Yes, he is not "magnificent", the weak engine did not allow to swing, and to sit on the deck and fly far you need a decent wing area. Front-line fighter from him were not going to do. And so competently designed car is quite modern for the 38th level. If they had, like Kurt Tank, then a two-row asterisk for 1500 horses - they would fix the plumes with armor and that's it. Would have its Focke-Wulf 190, if the wing trimmed.
      Roman could have counted the cab lantern as a plus, but no one in the 38th had such a good view from the cab.
  2. demiurg
    demiurg 14 July 2020 18: 24 New
    +2
    A machine without speed, without vertical maneuver, in which the speed of the barrel fell to almost zero with increasing speed.
    If the USSR attacked Poland in 38, the I-16 would be extolled in about the same way. But the I-16 had at least a vertical maneuver.
    1. sharp-lad
      sharp-lad 14 July 2020 22: 14 New
      +6
      I-16 was strong in horizontal maneuver. hi
      1. certero
        certero 14 July 2020 23: 22 New
        +5
        When the i-16 was in the top, he was strong in vertical maneuver
        1. Fitter65
          Fitter65 15 July 2020 14: 15 New
          +5
          Quote: certero
          When the i-16 was in the top, he was strong in vertical maneuver

          At least in Spain, the vertical maneuver on the I-16 was used very actively, this is very well written in the memoirs of some "Spaniards". Moreover, even with the appearance of the Bf-109B / C in the Spanish sky, the I-16 looked quite good, both horizontally and vertically ... Although this did not prevent the pilots of the Condor legion from overestimating the number of their victories by 3 times ...
  3. Region-25.rus
    Region-25.rus 14 July 2020 18: 34 New
    +2
    someone will break the template I think)))
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 July 2020 20: 13 New
      +9
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      someone will break the template

      Not at all. Skorohorov does not like Zero, this has long been known.

      But there is another opinion.
      Fighter "Zero" is extremely maneuverable and has an amazing rate of climb. It is so superior to the F2A-3 on the verticals that it seems pointless to try to make more than one approach to the target. [...] I believe that its rate of climb is at least 5000 ft / min [1524 m / min - in reality, about 942 m / min].
      Captain Kirk Armistide (Squadron Commander VRIO)

      Apparently, their fighters surpass ours in maneuverability in all respects, except, as in my case, the speed of diving - I was able to break away from one of them and break the distance at sea level.
      Captain W.K. Humberd

      Fighter 00, obviously, has a very sturdy construction that can withstand the same loads as our own aircraft. Japanese aircraft seem very vulnerable if you are lucky enough to catch them in sight.
      Lt. R.A. Corrie


      In general, it is surprising that at least one of our pilots was able to return alive. All the successes that the pilots of our fighters were able to achieve in the battle with the Japanese Zero fighters were not achieved due to the characteristics of the machines we fly, but as a result of the comparatively low accuracy of the Japanese shooting, the stupid mistakes made by several of their pilots, and also due to the superior precision firing and teamwork of our pilots. The only way to catch the Zero fighter in sight was to lure them into a turn in front of the F4F or shoot them at a time when they were too busy shooting at one of our cars. F4F aircraft are deplorably inferior in rate of climb, maneuverability and speed. The author had to fly on the F4F model, which did not yet have armor protection and protected gas tanks. Removing these vital defenses is not able to increase the performance of the F4F so much as to at least get closer to the characteristics of the Zero fighter. These serious shortcomings not only prevent our fighters from properly performing combat missions, but also have a clear and disturbing effect on the morale of the pilots of our carrier-based fighters. If we intend to keep our aircraft carriers afloat, then we must provide a fighter that surpasses the Japanese Zero, if not in maneuverability, then at least in rate of climb and speed.
      1. pro100y.belarus
        pro100y.belarus 15 July 2020 00: 37 New
        11
        Quote: Octopus
        Skorohorov does not like Zero, this has long been known.

        But he loves the French “Devatin” D.520 and brazenly shoves it into their pseudo ratings.
        Why then do we need articles from which frankly smacks of bias?
        Ask anyone who is interested in the history of World War II "what is the Zero? And he will answer - the legendary Japanese fighter. And if you ask - what is Devuatin? Most will answer - what is it?
      2. Region-25.rus
        Region-25.rus 15 July 2020 08: 41 New
        +6
        It is so superior to the F2A-3 in verticals.
        well ... of course, against Buffalo, he was super duper! Who would argue.))) What Roman is talking about (does he like Zero or not). Namely, that while Zero fought against all sorts of Buffalo and Harikkeynov, he did YES, he was on top. There was a saying among the Americans - "The commander who sends the pilot to Buffalo can delete him from the list of the living, even before the plane is taken off the runway."
    2. Fitter65
      Fitter65 15 July 2020 14: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      someone will break the template I think)))

      Yes, why?
  4. NF68
    NF68 14 July 2020 18: 35 New
    +5
    A6M "Zero" has the right to the title of the worst carrier-based fighter of World War II, since it did not at all correspond to the canons of the fighter of that time. Such a plane could only appear in Japan, with its frankly hateful code "Bushido."


    The Japanese would have had more powerful aircraft engines in the late 1930s — they could already have more modern fighters closer to the Ki-84. And so it was necessary to somehow cut out sacrificing armor, protection and durability.

    As soon as the Americans realized that it’s better to play with Zero according to their own rules, then things went better for the Americans. It took a while.
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 14 July 2020 19: 05 New
      0
      A Kinsai of 1500 horses, if my sclerosis is correct, appeared at the end of 1942. What did uh Racen designers expect?
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 14 July 2020 19: 43 New
        +7
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        A Kinsai of 1500 horses, if my sclerosis is correct, appeared at the end of 1942. What did uh Racen designers expect?

        So they first put Nakajima Homare-22 (NK9H).
        To meet the requirements, Jiro Horikoshi decided to put on the future aircraft the “future” engine - the eighteen-cylinder radial engine A-20, created at that time in Mitsubishi. The expected parameters of the A-20 engine could provide the aircraft with the necessary qualities. Starting engine power was 2100 hp. (1545 kW) at 2900 rpm, and at an altitude of 1 meters the power was 2000 hp. (1900 kW) at 1398 rpm. At an altitude of 2800 meters, the engine developed a power of 1 hp. (6000 kW). However, due to technological difficulties, the engine was expected no earlier than the spring of 1760. Therefore, in order not to slow down the work begun late, the Naval Aviation Headquarters in September 1295 instructed to install the Nakajima Homare-1943 (NK1942H) engine on the new aircraft. This engine developed at an altitude of 22 meters with a power of 9 hp. (6000 kW) ..

        Result?
        ... other requirements for the aircraft were not met. Since the Homare-22 engine at an altitude of 6400 meters developed only 1620 hp. (1192 kW), so the aircraft developed a top speed of 555-575 km / h, and gained altitude of 6000 meters in 10-11 minutes.
        © "War in the Air. A6M Zero. 2nd Edition: Augmented and Revised."
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 14 July 2020 19: 45 New
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So they first put Nakajima Homare-22 (NK9H).


          Was it shoved on the A6M?
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 14 July 2020 19: 52 New
            +2
            Quote: Cyril G ...
            Was it shoved on the A6M?

            Yes. You are right - it was already the M-50 Penny. Future A7M.

            With “Reisen” same embarrassing somehow happened:
            Anticipating the deterioration of aircraft performance, Sano requested the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics permission to install a new, more powerful Mitsubishi Kinsay-62 engine with 1369 hp. (1350 hp - 1007 kW). It was clear that having received a more powerful engine, the plane would regain all lost ground. But military permission was not given, since all of the Kinsey-62 engines available at that time were reserved for new modifications of the diving bomber Yokosuka D4Y3. Moreover, any design work to replace the aircraft engine was prohibited.

            As a result, they returned to this topic only in November 1944, when it was already too late.
            The unsatisfactory characteristics of the A6M5 and A6M6 aircraft, as well as the reduction in the production of Sakae engines by Nakajima, which transferred all capacities and raw materials to the production of more powerful Homare, led to the fact that the company struggled from the very beginning of the official permission to install the Mitsubishi Kinsey-62 engine (MK8P). The Kinsey-62 engine developed a power of 1521 hp. (1500 hp - 1163 kW). The same engine Elitaro Sano started replacing the engine. The work was launched in November 1944, with the participation of engineers Kazuaki Izumi and Shiro Kushiba. The glider A6M5s model 52s underwent a redesign, which received the new designation A6M8s model 54s. The constant raids of American aviation and a large amount of work led to the fact that the first prototype took off only in April 1945.
            1. Cyril G ...
              Cyril G ... 14 July 2020 19: 58 New
              +1
              It is clear that the personality factor worked, in the end they were left without fighters. Still, the A6M8 with an engine of 1500 horses looks quite adequate. Even if as an information security
      2. NF68
        NF68 15 July 2020 17: 32 New
        +1
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        A Kinsai of 1500 horses, if my sclerosis is correct, appeared at the end of 1942. What did uh Racen designers expect?


        The Japanese, like the Germans, still had a serious problem concerning high-octane gasoline and the quality of this gasoline. Both countries had too little oil, and synthetic gasoline was not only very expensive, but its octane rating among the Germans did not exceed 97 units even closer to the end of WWII, while the Japanese only had 92 units. It is difficult to compete with such gasolines with the Americans and the British.
  5. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 14 July 2020 18: 46 New
    +9
    There was such a fashion for the pilots of deck aviation, leaning out of the cockpit and visually control the landing glide path.

    This is not a fashion, but an urgent need: the pilot, when landing, needs to see the deck, the view of which is closed by the motor.
    If you do not take the battle in Pearl Harbor, then for the rest all the bravura reports are Japanese propaganda.

    Heh heh heh ... even with the P-X it wasn’t all so brave: one of the Zeros shot down there was R-36. smile
  6. svp67
    svp67 14 July 2020 18: 53 New
    +5
    It is strange that the Japanese collaborated so closely with the Germans and received from them many new models of military equipment and weapons, did not take the aircraft engines from them for their aircraft ...
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 14 July 2020 19: 01 New
      +9
      Quote: svp67
      It is strange that the Japanese collaborated so closely with the Germans and received from them many new models of military equipment and weapons, did not take the aircraft engines from them for their aircraft ...

      So they took it - DB-601. And safely ruined the series, ruining the production of Ki-61.
      1. Cyril G ...
        Cyril G ... 14 July 2020 19: 17 New
        +1
        They generally have not grown together with liquid cooling motors
    2. Usher
      Usher 14 July 2020 20: 14 New
      +4
      Mostly because of the mentality. Tough discipline. If something seems to the old general, so be it.
  7. Engineer
    Engineer 14 July 2020 18: 57 New
    18
    A6M "Zero" has the right to the title of the worst carrier-based fighter of World War II, since it did not at all correspond to the canons of the fighter of that time.

    When hype's desire outweighs common sense. And there was no knowledge initially laughing
    The worst carrier-based fighters and not only must be sought from the Britons. Fulmar, Sea Hurricane, Sifire, Firefly.
    The haters of Zero are reminiscent of the air battles over Darwin with the Australian Air Force in 1943. A6M3 vs Spitfire Mk5. Complete victory for the Japanese, although those had to act already from Timor
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 July 2020 20: 16 New
      +4
      Quote: Engineer
      The worst deck fighters and not only the British

      Well, someone does not like the Japanese, someone is the British, someone is the Americans)))
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 14 July 2020 20: 35 New
        +5
        What does dislike?
        Zero is better than any English deck. Plus the fifth Sleeps over Darwin was a bit on his own field.
        These are the facts
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 14 July 2020 20: 46 New
          +1
          Quote: Engineer
          Zero is better than any English deck

          )))
          1. Engineer
            Engineer 14 July 2020 20: 54 New
            +3
            This is in the trash heap to Wangard.
            Although handsome and strong, little devil. Love him
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 14 July 2020 20: 58 New
              +1
              Quote: Engineer
              Although handsome and strong, little devil. Love him

              The British did wisely, but late. By the way, this is not just about the deck.
              1. Engineer
                Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 01 New
                +3
                In any case, the fact is that they did not equal the lime deck to the Yap in that war. Torpedo bombers and dive bombers also apply.
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 14 July 2020 21: 13 New
                  +1
                  You are right, English deck aviation is so-so.
                  1. Engineer
                    Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 15 New
                    0
                    Alas and oh, dumb overseas relatives again showed them a master class as in many other things laughing
                    1. Octopus
                      Octopus 14 July 2020 21: 19 New
                      0
                      Quote: Engineer
                      Alas and oh, dumb overseas relatives again showed them a master class

                      You mean, pecked roasted cock? Zero's cousins ​​reviews above.
                      1. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 26 New
                        +2
                        Americans thinned Yap in 42nd. On the luggage of the start of the war. Super efforts were made only one day.
                        In any case, they won. While the shaves just ran away
                      2. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 21: 29 New
                        -8
                        Quote: Engineer
                        In any case, they won.

                        No need to stoop to the level of patriots who “took” Berlin.

                        Yes, I am not enthusiastic about the actions of the British in Asia in the 42nd, but the problems with carrier-based aircraft, between us, were a bit out of place.
                      3. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 30 New
                        +3
                        The Lord is with you. At least roughly estimate the loss balance. Why distort so
                      4. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 21: 36 New
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        At least roughly estimate the loss balance.

                        Balance of industrial potentials at least roughly estimate)))

                        And by the losses, look at the losses in all the territories that surrendered the ABDA under occupation. Even without China, only Southeast Asia.
                      5. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 47 New
                        +1
                        Why are Americans pushing back? There were no grounds for order 227 in the US
                        Even before the war they understood, there is no point in pushing back, we must first retreat.
                        Amers had a plan, it worked.
                        The Britons didn’t have a plan - everything was covered and their losses in the first stage were much harder
                        Then the Americans advance, the Britons cannot do this either on land or at sea until 1944
                        The balance of potentials plays a role primarily in the long run. The Americans realized it. This is despite the fact that the ratio of production between the Western and the Pacific Theater was 70:30 (I don’t know for years)
                        This is all so obvious and well known that I’m even embarrassed to write.
                      6. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 21: 56 New
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Amers had a plan, it worked.

                        Marshall in American courses?
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The British had no plan - everything was covered

                        Yes, there is a long story.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        This is all so obvious and well known that I’m even embarrassed to write.

                        OK, compare 30% of American potential with Japanese. For 39-42 years.))

                        What are we arguing about? I’m saying that victory is not proof that the victorious party did everything right. If you want to convince me that the Corsair is better than Sifaer, then I agree.
                      7. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 22: 06 New
                        +3
                        My thesis is that Americans like to blame mistakes. But despite errors they come and win.
                        The British war machine is seen by some as more effective in many aspects. But specifically against the Japanese, he showed complete impotence. Both on land and at sea. They did not have significant success at all until 1944. Australians in New Guinea did not offer - they were subordinate to amers.
                        The Americans on the inferior technique managed to drag the Guadalcanal and fought three stubborn aircraft carrier battles in addition to Midway. They can be proud of this rightfully.
                      8. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 22: 17 New
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        The British war machine is seen by some as more effective in many aspects. But specifically against the Japanese, he showed complete impotence

                        Yes.
                        There may be various details, in particular, I would have addressed a lot more complaints to the political leadership, but the result is described correctly.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        drag the guadalcanal

                        Correctly chose a place. The Japanese fought at the limit of their aircraft range, and the Americans over the airfield. The concept of a defensive perimeter was initially insane.
                        Quote: Engineer
                        gave three stubborn aircraft carrier battles besides Midway.

                        After that, left with two AB, it seems?
                      9. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 22: 20 New
                        +1
                        Choose the right place

                        How so, they are "fantastically stupid" (c)?
                        The Japanese fought at the limit of their aircraft range, and the Americans over the airfield.

                        Why didn't the Australians help Darwin?
                        After that, left with two AB, it seems?

                        Already discussed. In the Yapi I’m building one crane. At the same time, losses in airplanes and pilots in their results of three battles (without Midway) are heavier
                      10. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 22: 33 New
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        How so, they are "fantastically stupid" (c)?

                        But not every day (s).
                        Quote: Engineer
                        didn't the Australians help Darwin?

                        How did this help the Japanese over Darwin?
                        Quote: Engineer
                        Already discussed. In Yapov I am building one crane left.

                        Uh-huh.
                        The Japanese god helped the Americans, but they killed themselves with the same success as the Japanese, given Midway.
                      11. Engineer
                        Engineer 14 July 2020 22: 40 New
                        0
                        How did this help the Japanese over Darwin?

                        The loss balance is strongly in favor of Yap, unlike Guadalcanal.
                        The Japanese god helped the Americans, but they killed themselves with the same success as the Japanese, given Midway.

                        No comments, sorry.
                      12. Octopus
                        Octopus 14 July 2020 23: 01 New
                        0
                        Quote: Engineer
                        No comments, sorry.

                        By aircraft carriers to the Essexes.
                  2. Cristall
                    Cristall 15 July 2020 23: 17 New
                    -2
                    Quote: Engineer
                    Already discussed. In the Yapi I’m building one crane. At the same time, losses in airplanes and pilots in their results of three battles (without Midway) are heavier

                    even a 1-1 loss in large carrier ships meant that the United States would get a new one earlier than the Japanese. And that means more profitable.
                    Sure, even if 3 to two. Although risky.
                  3. gsev
                    gsev 16 July 2020 03: 21 New
                    0
                    Quote: Engineer
                    Why didn't the Australians help Darwin?

                    Before the war, the Japanese were able to prepare upscale pilots. For example, the Japanese methodology for selecting candidates for vision pilots and their preparation was interesting. It seems that the Japanese were seeking from their pilots the first half of the war with the United States the ability to see stars in the afternoon. Initially, the embargo on oil supplies from the USA and the Netherlands, and then the destruction of Japanese tankers by US submarines, reduced the number of flight hours for training pilots in Japan. After the death of the fighter elite of Japan at Midway, Japanese aircraft ceased to be so combat-ready. But before that, the Japanese successfully cleared the sky over Indonesia, Darwin, the east coast of India, Ceylon and Burma from allied aircraft. Then the Allies got more high-altitude fighters and they were able to impose the place and time of the battle on the Japanese.
                  4. Engineer
                    Engineer 16 July 2020 11: 04 New
                    0
                    The meaning was different. Darwin is the beginning and middle of 1943. By this time, the Americans had gained an advantage in the air. The Australians, as we see, no. Although there were decent airplanes and pilots (the same Clive "Killer" Caldwell was the commander of the wing in Darwin)
            2. Cristall
              Cristall 15 July 2020 23: 14 New
              -3
              Quote: Engineer
              But despite errors they come and win.

              and they have it in character (the heirs of the Protestants).
              To be mistaken, but to labor to work and do.
              In addition, behind them is a large country with great opportunities.
              In TO they had to show the best and worst traits of their character.
              The best outweighed.
              Strange article. It was as if the author had originally staked on Zero's deposition.
              Although as described here, the casket just opens. The novel simply does not like Zero / Japanese.
              Then it is clear where the bias comes from.
              But Zero had a difficult war. Maybe he started as a plane of excellence. Well, NI was better prepared and potential than China. Than the WB has in such a remote theater (plus the WB had enough affairs in Europe)
              And finally, America, which is much better in economics and human potential than I.I. and its allies.
              Then Zero needs to be extolled - he is the worst because he was able to win so much in the complex, because when the Americans learned by blood and then (by the way, like the Soviet ones, only at sea and therefore faster), the potential difference turned out to be obvious. The rival was equal in spirit and stamina. And he didn’t even want to die in honor of Roosevelt. He also sought to win and survive.
              Somehow, the author depreciated the plane - the personification of the Japanese industrial potential, its oil industry, resources, human potential and the availability of allies in the region ..
              If it were not for the stubbornness and potential of the Americans, the author would rapturously tell no worse than that Japanese propaganda about 99 and 2 ..
            3. Engineer
              Engineer 16 July 2020 11: 15 New
              +4
              Our argument with the Octopus is that some Protestants (Americans) were more Protestant than others (English). But for some reason stupid and incompetent are the first ones.
              And so everything is known.
              The beginning of 1942, the Japanese fleet is the strongest in the world.
              The end of 1942, the end of the tale.
              The novel simply does not like Zero / Japanese.

              Few articles of the novel are taken seriously. This has long been a platform for discussion in the comments. Well, plus especially corrosive comrades kick the author for mistakes and copy-paste.
              Zero does not need any protection. This is a Pacific fighter with a "Pacific" range. Any efficient aircraft that could fully resist him appeared on the front no earlier than 1943.
          2. nnm
            nnm 16 September 2020 19: 46 New
            0
            Quote: Engineer
            gave three stubborn carrier battles in addition to Midway. They can be proud of this by right

            Do not forget that the two strongest Japanese aircraft carriers did not participate due to the shortage of l / s. Namely, it was planned to link the battleships with them.
  8. mmaxx
    mmaxx 15 July 2020 06: 41 New
    +3
    We know these reviews. When you need to justify the defeat and knock out other good planes from your bosses, you need to shout louder: "Ours is worse! Do not give a better way, they will kill us all." The same cats completely began to cope with Zero, when they began to just fight tactically more literally. This is like ours with the Messers.
  • evgeniy.plotnikov.2019mail.ru
    evgeniy.plotnikov.2019mail.ru 15 July 2020 12: 31 New
    0
    Yes, there were some torpedo biplanes and pilots brave of the Lady of the Seas. Success - world-class!
    The Japanese very carefully studied in due time and used the knowledge gained to attack Hawaii.
    Truth is another theater
  • lucul
    lucul 14 July 2020 21: 34 New
    +3
    The haters of Zero are reminiscent of the air battles over Darwin with the Australian Air Force in 1943. A6M3 vs Spitfire Mk5. Complete victory for the Japanese, although those had to act already from Timor

    As the British themselves say - Spitfires initially wanted to use their signature “horse” for a short turn time. But as it turned out - Zero possessed an even larger wing (low specific wing load) than Spitfire, and therefore Spitfire easily turned over. As soon as the British pilots realized this, they stopped turning with Zero, and began to work in the aisles, having an advantage in speed. And immediately Zero from the king of the sky, turned into an easy target ....
    1. Engineer
      Engineer 14 July 2020 21: 51 New
      0
      He could not turn into an easy target. For Sleep Mk5 just as badly dived, had a worse review and not the fact that a large rate of climb. And this despite the fact that Zero is a deck
      1. lucul
        lucul 14 July 2020 21: 56 New
        +2
        For Sleep Mk5 just as badly dived, had a worse review and not the fact that a large rate of climb

        Spitfire 5 had a speed of 570 km / h, that is, the situation here is absolutely similar to the confrontation between I-16 and Me.109, I-16 was more maneuverable, and Me.109 faster - for whom the sky was left, we know. And in the same way, Sleep was faster than Zero. That’s the whole story.
        1. Engineer
          Engineer 14 July 2020 22: 15 New
          0
          Forget the speed of 570 km.
          In northern Australia, tropical modifications flew with poor aerodynamics due to filters. Because of condensate freezing, wing guns often failed
          And in general there was a lot of what is not written on Wikipedia)
          1. lucul
            lucul 14 July 2020 22: 20 New
            0
            Forget the speed of 570 km.
            In northern Australia, tropical modifications flew with poor aerodynamics due to filters.

            So he brought the data, taking into account the modification of TROP. The original Spitfire 5 had a speed of 605km / h, and the mass / power ratio was 2245kg per 1500 strong engine, against 1894kg and 1000l.s on the Zero.
  • kapitan92
    kapitan92 14 July 2020 18: 59 New
    +4
    Novel. hi
    The pilot received an 8-mm armored back! Just for the sake of comparison: the same armor plate was on the Polikarpov I-15 fighter in 1933.

    The first batch of fighters And 15, appeared in Spain in October 1936. There were no armored backs on them, however, as well as radio communications.
    "Chato", as they were called in Spain .. The nature of the combat damage indicated that most of the hits were from the back of the hemisphere. The absence of armored backs on the I-15 in the future could lead to unjustified losses. Squadron engineer Leonid Kalchenko He suggested installing armor plates on his own, removing the onboard battery to ensure the necessary alignment.
    In one of the Madrid plants, suitable steel sheets were cut with a thickness of 8 and 12 mm. The heaviest 12 mm armor plate weighed about 30 kg, which just corresponded to the weight of the battery being removed. When starting aircraft engines, now I had to use a ground power source or an auto starter. Although it caused some inconvenience, it was welcomed by the pilots who appreciated the innovation, considering the tracks of enemy bullets on the armored backs. hi
  • Eug
    Eug 14 July 2020 19: 01 New
    -1
    For some designers, the pursuit of "high weight culture" has become in many ways an end in itself ....
  • Kostya Lavinyukov
    Kostya Lavinyukov 14 July 2020 19: 04 New
    +4
    It is unclear the lack of armor back initially. Her weight would be approximately 100 kg in the limit. Not much for a three-ton aircraft.
    1. Alf
      Alf 14 July 2020 21: 57 New
      +1
      Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
      Her weight would be approximately 100 kg in the limit.

      A chicken by the grain ...
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 July 2020 08: 58 New
      0
      Quote: Kostya Lavinyukov
      It is unclear the lack of armor back initially. Her weight would be approximately 100 kg in the limit. Not much for a three-ton aircraft.

      Designers Brewster F2A Buffalo went along this curve path. smile And by successive improvements of the more or less normal fighter of the first modifications made him a sedentary duck.
  • Undecim
    Undecim 14 July 2020 19: 14 New
    +3
    The first image shows a replica owned by the California Air Museum. The only original parts are the landing gears.
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 14 July 2020 20: 04 New
      +3
      The second, in general, is a victim of Photoshop.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 14 July 2020 20: 40 New
        +5
        You won’t believe it, Anton, but this is a real photo taken by photographer Sean Edelstein at the California air show in April 2005.
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 14 July 2020 21: 00 New
          +2
          The extremity of the left wing of the Ziro is blurred. Introduced the error. Having already thought, I understood the causes of image distortion.
  • Usher
    Usher 14 July 2020 20: 06 New
    +2
    About the same story with Messer, but at least he was normal at the beginning, but all the juices were squeezed out of it, and a re-lightened design with a one-winged wing. Put the same point as above zero.
  • Pavel57
    Pavel57 14 July 2020 20: 34 New
    0
    And how many Zero shot down enemy aircraft?
  • Undecim
    Undecim 14 July 2020 20: 53 New
    +6
    A6M "Zero" has the right to the title of the worst carrier-based fighter of World War II, since it did not at all correspond to the canons of the fighter of that time. Such a plane could only appear in Japan, with its frankly hateful code "Bushido."
    This is the opinion of man. who in his life flew, at best, from the couch to the floor.
    As an alternative, I’ll give the opinion of a man flying 487 types of aircraft, outstanding, without any reservations, British pilot Eric Brown. When Britain declared war on Germany, Brown was in Germany. However, the authority of the pilot in the world was so high that the Germans simply sent him to Switzerland, although they perfectly knew who they were letting go. Here is his opinion of Mitsubishi Zero: ““ I don’t think I have ever flown a fighter that could match Zero’s maneuverability. He was the best fighter in the world until mid-1943. ”
    1. lucul
      lucul 14 July 2020 21: 39 New
      +2
      “I don’t think I have ever flown a fighter that could match Zero’s maneuverability

      The I-15 with the M-62 engine easily maneuvers Zero, but the linen sheathing did not allow reaching high speeds.
      And so, having a maximum speed of Zero, 150 km / h less than the rest of the fighters, by the end of the war he had simply turned into a whipping boy ...
      1. Alf
        Alf 14 July 2020 21: 58 New
        +2
        Quote: lucul
        And so, having a maximum speed of Zero, 150 km / h less than the rest of the fighters, by the end of the war he had simply turned into a whipping boy ...

        The bells rang already in the 43rd ..
        1. lucul
          lucul 14 July 2020 22: 09 New
          +1
          The bells rang already in the 43rd

          Yeah, the design, lightweight to the limit, simply did not allow the engine to be installed in 1500 hp, which became de facto, the norm by the end of the war, for all major countries ....
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 15 July 2020 00: 19 New
            0
            Installed what was. In general, the Japanese have a problem with motors, or rather, without motors, it was like in the USSR, if not worse.
            1. lucul
              lucul 15 July 2020 00: 25 New
              +2
              Installed what was. In general, the Japanese have a problem with motors, or rather, without motors, it was like in the USSR, if not worse.

              And this was a problem for everyone - to exceed the threshold of 1 hp. Both the French and Italians could not cope with it, and indeed the Yapis, too. The best came from the British, Amers and Germans. Our here are average people. I’m silent about the rest of the nations.
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 15 July 2020 09: 03 New
            +1
            Quote: lucul
            Yeah, the design, lightweight to the limit, simply did not allow the engine to be installed in 1500 hp, which became de facto, the norm by the end of the war, for all major countries ....

            The design just allowed. But the engines were not enough.
            ... military permission was not given, since all of the Kinsey-62 engines available at that time were reserved for new modifications of the Yokosuka diving bomber D4Y3. Moreover, any design work to replace the aircraft engine was prohibited.

            As a result, the Kinsay-62 engine was returned to the Zero installation only in November 1944. We received the A6M8s model 54s - but this was already April 1945.
            1. lucul
              lucul 15 July 2020 09: 33 New
              +2
              The design just allowed.

              Well, what did she allow there? They really did not try ....
              There on Me.109 G, they put the DB 605A motor, only 150 kg heavier than the previous DB 601E. So the plane did not hold the increased weight - when landing, if the plane was catching a "goat", then the landing gear entered the fuselage and the plane sat on its belly. As a result, the fuselage was strengthened and the landing gear themselves, which, in total with the engine, added 300 kg of excess weight.
              And here is a more powerful and heavy motor, but without strengthening the fuselage .... doubtful ....
              This is not LaGG-3, which was originally developed for the M-107 engine, and had a margin of safety, as a result of which it was possible to put the M-82 there.
              At Zero, everything was right up to weight.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 15 July 2020 15: 41 New
                0
                Quote: lucul
                Well, what did she allow there? They really did not try ....

                Well, we managed to remove the main characteristics ...
                The performance characteristics of the new aircraft were not bad. At an altitude of 6000 meters, the aircraft developed a speed of 308 knots (572 km / h), which was 48 knots (89 km / h) less than the Chance Vought F4U-1D Corsair. Climbing (the plane gained 6000 meters in 6 minutes and 50 seconds) was also acceptable. Test pilots flying around this car unanimously said that this is the best modification of the Zero.

                But they couldn’t put it in the series anymore.
    2. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 14 July 2020 22: 52 New
      +1
      Victor Nikolaevich, how many sorties does Eric Brown have?
      1. Engineer
        Engineer 14 July 2020 23: 01 New
        +2
        It seems like zero.
        Throughout the war he was a test.
        I nearly killed myself a couple of times. The most famous, when he revealed the secret of the death of the "barracudas" - they were thrown into an inverted peak under certain conditions. There was a female cameraman on that flight with him, taking the instrument readings on the camera.
        He also flew on our La-7.
        His memoirs are in my wish list. Until I get there.
      2. Undecim
        Undecim 14 July 2020 23: 10 New
        +1
        Anton, you have to look, because Brown was a pilot - a test pilot and his sorties were scattered "in time and space."
        During his flying career, he only took off 2407 times from the deck of an aircraft carrier. He survived 11 plane crashes. He flew for 31 years, from 1939 to 1970.
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 14 July 2020 23: 24 New
          +5
          Viktor Nikolaevich, the experience of Brown as a test pilot is not a priori, because test pilots do not fight, but only test the car at maximum loads
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 14 July 2020 23: 32 New
            +1
            Firstly, he has sorties, as well as downed planes, including such as the Fw 200 Condor. And then, you want to say that the author’s rating and Brown’s rating are the same?
            During the war, Brown, as a tester, was mainly engaged in flying around captured planes, German, Japanese, Italian, as a rule - without any documentation, finding out their strengths and weaknesses and issuing recommendations to combatant pilots.
            The British, obviously, had a different opinion about his ratings, since he is the most “awarded” British pilot.
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 14 July 2020 23: 48 New
              +2
              And then, you want to say that the author’s rating and Brown’s rating are the same?
              I want to say that you, in the case of this author, are somewhat biased (not unfounded). However, Brown did not have the opportunity to evaluate the “Zero” in a real battle.
              1. Undecim
                Undecim 14 July 2020 23: 59 New
                +1
                An interesting approach. And who had the opportunity to evaluate enemy fighters in a real battle against their own aircraft?
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 15 July 2020 07: 02 New
                  +2
                  Perhaps no one. A qualitative comparative analysis of a technique can be given by a person who has used this technique for its intended purpose. In the case of military aviation, this is a vanishingly small quantity.
                2. Octopus
                  Octopus 15 July 2020 09: 06 New
                  0
                  Fighting on captured vehicles was used by all parties. When the Germans appeared reagents for training battles, the Americans used English meteors. As a result of the battles, the structure was changed (a group was selected that went with an excess of 2-2,5 km in order to temporarily obtain additional speed due to diving).
                3. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 15 July 2020 09: 13 New
                  +4
                  Quote: Undecim
                  An interesting approach. And who had the opportunity to evaluate enemy fighters in a real battle against their own aircraft?

                  In real - is it with guns and machine guns instead of FKP? wink
                  Training fights with the Zero were held in the USA in the second half of 1942. Moreover, both naval and army men took part: F4F-4 Wildcat, F4U-1 Corsair, P-38F Lightning, P-40F The Warhock and the P-51 Mustang.
                  Based on the results of these battles, a report was compiled, recommendations were made on the conduct of the battle, and the main shortcomings of the Zero were identified, which were brought to the combat pilots.
                  All pilots sent to war zones where the Zero is expected to be instructed in the following:
                  1. Never attempt to engage in a dogfight with a Zero
                  2. Never attempt to maneuver with a Zero at speeds below three hundred (300) mph using a speedometer [483 km / h], unless you are behind it.
                  3. Never chase the Zero vertically at low speeds. (Those armed with aircraft at large angles may begin to stall, while the Zero will only reach the speed most favorable for maneuvering. Here it will be possible to complete the loop with access to the attack from the back quarter)

                  The most important features that should be taken into account when developing successful Zero counteraction tactics are its insufficient roll speed at high speeds and its engine failures in conditions of negative overloads [the result of using a float carburetor and, at the same time, an explanation of the “slide effect”].

                  Large ailerons provide the aircraft with high maneuverability at speeds of up to three hundred (300) miles per hour on the speedometer. At speeds above three hundred (300) miles per hour on the speedometer, it becomes almost impossible to change the direction of the turn.
                  The Zero pivot speed from right to left is much higher than from left to right.
                  An outstanding feature of the Zero is the high performance of its “candle” [zoom climb]. This "candle" is an almost vertical climb, which can last from one and a half thousand (1500) to two thousand (2000) feet [457-610 m], depending on the speed at the beginning of the maneuver. This should not be understood as an indicator of the climb rate of a given aircraft.
                  © midnike
                  1. Undecim
                    Undecim 15 July 2020 09: 56 New
                    0
                    In real - is it with guns and machine guns instead of FKP?
                    So.
    3. mmaxx
      mmaxx 15 July 2020 06: 51 New
      +1
      This is a general pre-war mistake - the priority of horizontal maneuverability. The Germans outplayed everyone and abandoned fighting in the horizon. This Englishman is one of the same. It is understandable. The pilot is always thrilled when the plane rotates well.
      And so ... Lightnings are irons, and they started to beat Zero with impunity only because they stopped playing with them in a maneuverable battle. Up / down and no Zero.
  • Revolver
    Revolver 14 July 2020 20: 59 New
    +6
    Instructions to the pilot of Wildcat what to do if Zero is on the tail
    Dive at full throttle and pray for enough height.
    1. Alf
      Alf 14 July 2020 22: 00 New
      +1
      Quote: Nagan
      Instructions to the pilot of Wildcat what to do if Zero is on the tail
      Dive at full throttle and pray for enough height.

      Or do the Tech Pattern.
      1. Revolver
        Revolver 15 July 2020 00: 14 New
        +1
        Quote: Alf
        Or do the Tech Pattern.

        Yes, if there is with anyone.
        1. Alf
          Alf 15 July 2020 18: 27 New
          +1
          Quote: Nagan
          Quote: Alf
          Or do the Tech Pattern.

          Yes, if there is with anyone.

          But piecewise, the Americans did not fly.
          1. Revolver
            Revolver 15 July 2020 18: 29 New
            0
            Quote: Alf
            Quote: Nagan
            Quote: Alf
            Or do the Tech Pattern.

            Yes, if there is with anyone.

            But piecewise, the Americans did not fly.

            But pretty quickly turned out to be piece in the process of battle.
  • lucul
    lucul 14 July 2020 21: 52 New
    +4
    Moreover, the “Zero” was not a feather. He weighed more than Messer, more I-16, as much as Kittyhawk and Hurricane. That is, the “feather” that will flutter, destroying everything around it, “Zero” was not.

    Here Skomorokhov is cunning - it was thanks to the small weight (1890 kg) that Zero had a good weight ratio for those years. This is his main advantage over the American fighters of the outbreak of war.
    So, A6M2 / R-40C / Yak-1.

    Wing span, m: 12,0 / 11,38 / 10,0
    Wing area, sq. m: 22,44 / 21,92 / 17,15
    Length, m: 9,05 / 9,68 / 8,48
    Maximum mass, kg: 2 757/3 424/2 995

    No need to compare the total mass)))
    It is necessary to compare the mass of the empty, and the empty Zero was 600 kg lighter than the Yak-1 and 1 ton of the R-40. Zero just carried more fuel on board, which tended to decrease over time)))
    1. Revolver
      Revolver 15 July 2020 00: 26 New
      +2
      When the Americans captured Zero, almost intact, somewhere on the islands near Alaska, and began to take it apart in order to take it out, they were very surprised. The Japanese wing could carry 2 people without tension. The wing of the American counterpart without lifting mechanisms was generally unbearable. The Japanese in the power pack stamped holes wherever they could find a place to reduce weight. Maybe the Japanese are not strong in the invention of breakthrough technologies, but they are unsurpassed masters to lick the existing structure to perfection.
      1. Cristall
        Cristall 15 July 2020 23: 26 New
        -2
        Quote: Nagan
        Americans captured virtually intact Zero

        The US military was given the opportunity to study the Zero in detail after rebuilding an almost intact aircraft that landed in Alaska. This aircraft is known as Akutan Zero. He made an emergency landing on the island of Akutan. Non-commissioned officer Tadayoshi Koga piloting him died during landing, hitting his head on the dashboard. Nonetheless, his plane was hijacked by an almost intact U.S. military in July 1942 and was the first Zero capable of being captured during the war. It was repaired and piloted by American test pilots.
        On June 4, 1942, at about 18:00 p.m., the A6M2b Zero 'fighter, led by Todayoshi Kogoy, was shot down over the island of Unalashka in the eastern part of the Aleutian Islands. Koga took his plane to the small island of Akutan and tried to land in the area of ​​a flat and long valley. However, the released chassis got stuck in a swamp, Zero scotched and rolled over, the pilot died. July 10, a crashed fighter was accidentally discovered by a flying boat Consolidated PBY-5A Catalina. On July 15, the fighter was loaded onto a barge, on August 1 delivered to Seattle, and from there to the San Diego airbase. Already on August 13 a report was prepared on the Japanese fighter, published in a special collection, September 4 supplemented by more accurate information. It was decided to restore the aircraft and conduct its flight tests, since the static characteristics were generally known after studying the downed Zero in Pearl Harbor. On September 20, the repainted and refurbished Zero took off. In addition to the usual test flights, a series of training battles were held against the Grumman F4F Wildcat, Chance Vought F4U Corsair, Lockheed P-38 Lightning, Curtiss P-40 Warhawk and North American P-51 Mustang. Thus, the Americans received comprehensive information about the Japanese fighter and learned to use its weaknesses. Recommendations were developed for combat pilots that prohibited combat at speeds of less than 450 km / h, maneuverable combat, pursuit in turns and in sets. The most winning tactics for dealing with Zero were short attacks with a steep dive and the subsequent climb up, as well as “scissors” or “Tach's braid”. It was recommended to use design flaws, such as insufficient roll speed at high speeds and a drop in engine power during negative overloads. In addition, adjustments were made to the Grumman F6F Hellcat project to more successfully counter the Japanese main fighter.

        The information gained from these trials helped American tactics devise ways to defeat Zero.
        The Akutan Zero is described as “an almost priceless trophy for the United States” and “probably one of the largest military trophies in the Pacific.” Japanese historian Masatake Okumiya stated that the allies' acquisition of Akutan Zero “was no less serious” than Japan’s defeat in the Battle of Midway, and that he “did much to expedite Japan’s final defeat”
        1. Cristall
          Cristall 20 July 2020 01: 01 New
          +2
          it was wrong that the team of minus providers of exclusively necessary nicknames does not enter these headings.
          They come in for their work.
          Maybe purposeful work to work out the minuses.
          If for facts (even for bare facts) they put three minuses purely for the sake of minuses, then the point is generally in these minuses? Don't like the facts?
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 14 July 2020 22: 18 New
    +3
    You know, it is easy to declare all the victories of enemy pilots, whether Germans, or Japanese or Italians, banal postscripts. It is easy to say that Wildcats supposedly shot Dofig Zero and that “democratic Americans will not do posts” .. It’s easy at the same time to say that Seafire and Spitfire are UD, and the Mustang “didn’t fly: until 1944.” It is easy to SAY, but then if you please, explain why you fought for 5 years. If all the victories of the Germans and Japanese and Italians are “registered”, why weren’t we in Berlin in 1943 and the Americans didn’t end the war in 1943? Maybe because Messers, Fokkers and Zero still was not UD? And did Hartman and Co. really bring down someone there (unfortunately)? Or maybe Rudel really didn’t always miss their bombs (unfortunately)? Maybe if you look at the performance characteristics, then it can be seen that Spitfair XIV did both the Yak-3 and La-5FN for all performance characteristics, for example? Maybe all the same, it is worth reading Saburo Sakai and not immediately declaring his victory as “postscript”? If the Germans and Japanese were so poorly armed, why did we and the Americans robbed from them right up to 1943? If anyone wants to argue SM. Kharkiv. If Spitfaer was so bad, why did German pilots demand Goering "planes like spitfire"? By the way, later, Soviet pilots demanded the plane "Same as F-15"
    Of course, I myself, like the author, did not sit at the controls of any of these aircraft, but I read memoirs of many pilots. Yes, Zero had flaws, so they all had. Spit, for example, had a limp range. And the Mustang, even with the Merlin, was not very maneuverable. But our planes and engines were not very strong and had no superchargers, and the culture of production was lame and the gasoline oil "culture" was lame. And ShVAK is a dubious prodigy. But the Americans didn’t seem to be able to immediately launch the release of the Merlin, EMNIP could later, but I could be wrong.
    Any weapon is a set of compromises. Zero generally winged all the decks in armament with his two 20mm. No more powerful engine. Range needed. Yes, made of what it was. Well, Duc, too, on the Yak-1 we had engines completely distant both from DB601 and, especially, Merlinov. (Well, how many times can you rape an unfortunate hispanic shizu? Actually criticizing Zero and comparing him with Yak 1 is ridiculous. From the series “the frying pan called the kettle black.” Both aircraft are on weak engines, with the most lightweight construction and without the command of herat. Zero the weapons are also more powerful and the range is larger and more nimble, and the radial engine is much more tenacious than water cooling ...
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 July 2020 22: 57 New
      +2
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      If the Germans and Japanese were so poorly armed, why did we and the Americans robbed from them right up to 1943?

      They were more than raked from the Germans in the 44th, and in the Pacific Ocean the turning point was in 2/2 of the 42nd.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Spitfair XIV did both the Yak-3 and La-5FN in all performance characteristics

      You can compare these five with the five, also significant.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Spit, for example, had a limp range.

      This is an air defense fighter, he does not need range.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      A mustang, even with merlin was not very maneuverable

      At its heights, vertical maneuver was enough for him, a horizontal maneuver at high altitudes was not used (and at small ones, if possible, too).
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      But our planes and engines were not very strong and had no superchargers, and the culture of production was lame and the gasoline oil "culture" was lame. Yes, and ShVAK - a dubious prodigy

      Yes.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      But the Americans didn’t seem to be able to immediately launch the release of the Merlin, EMNIP could later, but I could be wrong.

      They did not want to. The British humbled themselves there, gave the money in advance, the Americans also did not immediately take the money.

      Army Air Force did not want to know anything about engines. The Navy did not need soldiers, they relied on air-cooled engines.

      By the way. Mustang was not created under Merlin.

      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Actually criticizing Zero and comparing it with Yak 1 is ridiculous.

      Yes. Zero is a masterpiece, Yak is a low-tech machine, even by the standards of the USSR.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Both aircraft - on weak engines, with the most lightweight design

      And who told you that the design of the Yak-1 is as light as possible? The author cheated with this "maximum mass", the Zero payload is huge, unlike the Yak, the empty mass of Zero is 1,5 times less than the Yak.
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Zero also has more powerful weapons and a larger and more nimble range.

      That is to say the least.
      1. lucul
        lucul 15 July 2020 00: 31 New
        +2
        Yes. Zero - a masterpiece

        A masterpiece only in terms of range, and only because of the large wing, but the same wing, created a huge aerodynamic drag of the air, which made it impossible for the aircraft to reach high speeds with such a wing. In order to increase speed, it was necessary to reduce the wing, and therefore to cut the combat radius, and the yapps did not go for it - better range, to the detriment of speed, it was their choice.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 15 July 2020 00: 35 New
          +1
          Quote: lucul
          better longer range, higher speed

          Not only that. Zero really was a conceptually old machine, a tinker. The large wing gave good horizontal maneuverability and a low stall speed, as, for example, in sleep. But this is exactly what the designer was asked for.
          1. lucul
            lucul 15 July 2020 00: 45 New
            -3
            But this is exactly what the designer was asked for.

            I agree . But
            Zero really was a conceptually old machine, a tinker.

            That is, in fact - the yapps simply made a mistake with the concept of the fighter, which is why they lost the sky.
            Unlike the same Polikarpov, who in 1939 clearly saw the plane of the end of the war of 1945. With his I-185 with an M-71 engine in 2000 hp, he completely guessed the trends in aircraft construction, it was not his fault that in 1939, our 2000 hp engine was considered fiction, and did not force efforts to develop it.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 15 July 2020 00: 59 New
              +1
              Quote: lucul
              That is, in fact - the yapps simply made a mistake with the concept of the fighter, which is why they lost the sky.

              No, why. This is a common theme, I repeat, the same Sleep also had a large wing. The turning point in this sense was Fock and R-47.
              Quote: lucul
              With his I-185 with an M-71 engine in 2000 hp, he completely guessed the trends in aircraft manufacturing

              Ага.
              But this plane was not. Like the Yak-3-107
              Quote: lucul
              All the forces of the Soviet minders were thrown to fine-tune tank V-2

              What?
              Kuznetsov’s forces with Shakhurin were thrown to refine tank diesel?
              Quote: lucul
              If we invested our greater R&D in M-71 and VK-107, then they would have appeared two years earlier.

              Do the MiG-15 immediately in the 41st.
              1. KERMET
                KERMET 15 July 2020 11: 58 New
                0
                Ага.
                But this plane was not

                The plane was, here in the series it really wasn’t
    2. lucul
      lucul 15 July 2020 00: 20 New
      +3
      Maybe if you look at the performance characteristics, you can see that Spitfair XIV did both the Yak-3 and La-5FN for all performance characteristics,

      A Yak-3 with a VK-107 engine had characters identical to Spitfire 14, except for altitude, and if Yak was also refueled with gasoline with an octane rating of 150, which was poured onto Spitfire, then it would surpass it.
      La-7 also quite allowed to fight with Spit 14 at altitudes up to 6000m, the lag was, but not critical.
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 15 July 2020 00: 40 New
        0
        Quote: lucul
        The Yak-3 with the VK-107 engine had characters identical to Spitfire 14, except

        Except two.
        1. It was released by 2 pieces against about 1000 serial 14s. And not without reason.
        2. He flew a year later than the 14th went into the series.
        1. lucul
          lucul 15 July 2020 00: 50 New
          -2
          It was released by 2 pieces against about 1000 serial 14s. And not without reason.

          I do not argue - after all, all the forces of the Soviet minders were thrown to the refinement of the tank V-2, and all other engines on the residual principle. If we invested our greater R&D in M-71 and VK-107, then they would have appeared two years earlier.
      2. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 15 July 2020 02: 21 New
        +5
        Allowed to fight - a loose concept. Panthers were knocked out of the T-70, but this does not mean that the T-70 "allowed to fight" with the Panthers. The Australians at Buffalo fought against Zero "allowed to fight." The Americans against Panzer 4 on the M3 Lee sometimes even drove out "Let me fight." And further. There is such a thing as "SERIALITY". Here the British calmly made their magnificent Merlin. The Americans made their Double Vospa. In huge series. Moreover, without much loss of performance between the "experimental" and "serial" version. In Germany, it’s the same thing, but in the USSR, the problems are precisely with “serialization”. And you can talk to me about the M-71 and the genius Polikarpov. But the question is, “Could they launch the M-71 in a series?” Failed. Point. If you don’t have a motor and aluminum - that’s it, your aircraft will be behind. No matter how you are perverted, without duralumin and engines you won’t get ANYTHING. Even if there is a duralumin (the Italians had IT, but without the German engines, their Machchi and Fiat were not too good). The British calmly switched from the serial production of Merlin to the no less serial Griffin, but ours could not switch to M71. By the way, VK107 and VK106 could not boast of reliability or resource. Unlike Merlin, Griffon or even DB601. By aircraft engine, the USSR lagged behind the west and this lag was not overcome even in the 1980s. Compare the MIG23MLD engines with the engine of the same F16A. But what if Russia in 1916 produced ZERO air engines? And what if everything had to be done then, absolutely EVERYTHING should be built from ZERO, because the “bakers” could not even provide their country with rifles, not to mention artillery, and even more so air engines. That lagged behind. Austria-Hungary made aircraft engines, but the Russian Empire did not. So I had to catch up, again.

        What about the fact that you have “assembled” 10 engines in the fighters. Especially with survivability of 25 hours (VK107). This is not an engine for a fighter. Such a resource is not even enough to train one pilot. So the Yak-3 with VK107 is just such a "spherical horse". They are made, emnip 5. Smaller than P69 Aerocomet, and less than Gloucester Meteors. Damn, less than Dae Haviland Vampires. Yes, they began to make them in 1943 and they flew already in 1943. Well then, let’s compare "the assembled Yak with VK107 and the assembled De Haviland Vampire on his knees. You can compare it with the He162 Salamander, they were EMNIP 200+. There are no miracles if you have the same AS7 on LA-82 as on LA-5FN you should not expect any special miracles, and Spitfayer, and the nine and the fourteenth, will simply tear you. Well, yes, it is possible to sweat. Well, you can’t compare a plane / engine and production models assembled on its knees in piece form. The Italians made in 1940 two Kaproni fighter jets, and what, did it make Italy a “leader in jet aviation?” It’s important not only “in tests” and “technology trial” that it is important in the SERIES and what you can put on stream.
        1. Octopus
          Octopus 15 July 2020 03: 52 New
          -10
          By the seriality of Soviet engines you are right, this is a huge problem. But why did you suddenly decide to remember the bakers - decidedly incomprehensible. The army of the Republic of Ingushetia in the WWII is armed at the enemy level. Yields, but not fundamentally. The Second World War army is behind the generation in most positions. Much (rifleman, loom, art) - directly from the imperial times. At the same time, the Wehrmacht is not the Reichswehr at all.
          1. Alf
            Alf 15 July 2020 18: 32 New
            +1
            Quote: Octopus
            (shooter,

            Mauser 98K what year of development and release?
            And artillery, too, was far from all the newest.
            1. hohol95
              hohol95 15 July 2020 23: 16 New
              +1
              The Germans “cunning” and attributed the creation date of the WWI to new artillery pieces!
              88 mm anti-aircraft gun Flak 18.
              Its deliveries to the Wehrmacht anti-aircraft units, formed on the basis of seven Reichswehr motorized anti-aircraft batteries, began in 1933 under the designation “8,8 cm anti-aircraft gun 18”. The indication "18" in the name of the gun hinted at 1918 and was made with the aim of misinformation: in order to show that Germany adhered to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, which prohibited the development of anti-aircraft guns.
          2. Revolver
            Revolver 15 July 2020 18: 43 New
            +2
            Quote: Octopus
            The Second World War army is behind the generation in most positions. Much (rifleman, loom, art) - directly from the imperial times. At the same time, the Wehrmacht is not the Reichswehr at all.

            The main weapon of the Wehrmacht is Kar.98k, a bolt carbine based on the Mauser rifle of 1898. The main weapon of the personnel units of the Red Army on 1941-06-22 - SVT, self-loading. They switched to Mosin after the defeat of personnel units in the battles of the summer and autumn of 1941, when it was urgently necessary to arm a lot of untrained conscripts and long-forgotten reservists. SVT was neither suitable for urgency, nor for lack of education, nor for much.
            Stankach - yes. The Germans did without machine-gunners at all, with single machine guns, and neither the USSR nor the Anglo-Saxons had MG-42 equal until the end of the war, and in Russia even now, thanks to the starting cartridge of the tsarist era of development. But in the USSR there was a machine gun DShK, and the Germans did not have a heavy machine gun in the army at the beginning of the war.
            Art? So the Germans did their best to use the 1st World artillery, and not only their own, but also the French. And the captured Soviet divisions were so respected that they serially crossed them with the Pz.38 (t) chassis, and they got a very good Marder self-propelled gun. And the Germans practically had no anti-tank artillery in 1941. Their 38mm was only suitable against the BT and T-26 (well, those larger and larger than the rifle caliber pierced through), and with the T-34, and even more so KV, all they could do was inform the crew of their presence on the battlefield, such as a door knocker knock. 88 anti-aircraft guns were rolled out for direct fire not from a good life, all the more so because for this the army had to solve interdepartmental issues, anti-aircraft guns went through Goering’s department.
            1. Octopus
              Octopus 15 July 2020 19: 04 New
              +1
              Quote: Nagan
              Kar.98k, a bolt carbine based on the Mauser rifle of 1898

              Yes.
              Quote: Nagan
              SVT, self-loading.

              I could not. I do not consider weapons a weapon that soldiers could not use as success.
              Quote: Nagan
              Stankach - yes. The Germans did without machine gunners at all, with machine guns, and the MG-42 was equal neither in the USSR nor the Anglo-Saxons until the end of the war

              The idea of ​​a single machine gun is not obvious to everyone.
              Quote: Nagan
              and the Germans did not have a heavy machine gun in the army at the beginning of the war.

              ZB-60. DShK how many pieces per division?
              Quote: Nagan
              Art? So the Germans did their best to use the 1st World artillery

              Not at all. All main art is new.
              Quote: Nagan
              And the captured Soviet divisions respected so much,

              Are you kidding me? Is this 36 (r) your “Soviet division”?
              Quote: Nagan
              x 38mm was only suitable against BT and T-26

              And which tanks were the main in number in the Red Army?
              Quote: Nagan
              the army had to solve interdepartmental issues, anti-aircraft guns went through Goering’s department ..

              Does Rommel know?
              1. Revolver
                Revolver 15 July 2020 20: 14 New
                +1
                Quote: Octopus
                Are you kidding me? Is this 36 (r) your “Soviet division”?

                76 mm divisional gun of the 1936 model (F-22, GAU index - 52-P-363A)
                Quote: Octopus
                Does Rommel know?
                Rommel had both Bf.109 and Stucks, say that they did not go to Goering's department?
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 16 July 2020 08: 25 New
                  +3
                  Quote: Nagan
                  Rommel had both Bf. 109 and Stucks

                  In 40?
                  Quote: Nagan
                  76 mm divisional gun of the 1936 model (F-22, GAU index - 52-P-363A)

                  Lying is bad. 36 (p) has a slightly non-divisional shot, you know. And 36 (p) itself is not a divisional weapon. The Germans just brought artillery to dlyvizionnub in normal condition.

                  And where did the Germans get their trunks from - this is another question, and the question is to the Soviet side. How did they calculate the barrel so that you can safely replace the divisional cartridge case with an anti-aircraft barrel. It's not free, you know, for the price and weight of the gun.
              2. hohol95
                hohol95 15 July 2020 23: 19 New
                +2
                ZB-60. DShK how many pieces per division?

                And how many ZB-60 were in the units of the Wehrmacht or the Waffen SS?
                1. Octopus
                  Octopus 16 July 2020 06: 35 New
                  +1
                  Quote: hohol95
                  And how much was the ZB-60

                  )))
                  Near zero, it's exotic. Massive CCP - this is for the Americans.
                  And DShK in prewar the staff was a maximum of 9 pieces. As anti-aircraft.
                  1. hohol95
                    hohol95 16 July 2020 08: 16 New
                    +2
                    Near zero, it's exotic. Massive CCP - this is for the Americans.

                    Then why compare the ZB-60 and DShK?
                    Anti-aircraft DShK could work on ground targets.
                    1. Octopus
                      Octopus 16 July 2020 08: 21 New
                      +1
                      Quote: hohol95
                      Anti-aircraft DShK could work on ground targets.

                      Will not pass. Then count the German MZA, there are a lot of it.
                      Quote: hohol95
                      Then why compare the ZB-60 and DShK?

                      Then, that Nagan is trying to give the Soviet hole in place of the field MZA in the form of DShK for the advantage.

                      In WWII, only the Americans had industrial capabilities and means to make the CCP really massive.
                      1. hohol95
                        hohol95 16 July 2020 08: 27 New
                        0
                        Then, that Nagan is trying to give the Soviet hole in place of the field MZA in the form of DShK for the advantage.

                        That is the argument. Clear.
                        MZA was not enough, DShK was not enough.
                        The industry really was not American. hi
                      2. Octopus
                        Octopus 16 July 2020 09: 10 New
                        +1
                        Quote: hohol95
                        The industry really was not American.

                        The Americans in the state of the 43rd year have 6 KKP in battalion (3 company, 1 in the company of weapons, 2 in the staff company). In the RKKA rifle division, they are all 9 pieces in the anti-aircraft division.
      3. Alecsandr
        Alecsandr 15 July 2020 06: 57 New
        +1
        I fully support your assessment. I would add here the qualifications of our workers in aircraft factories. Often, the children worked half-starved.
      4. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 15 July 2020 09: 22 New
        +4
        Quote: Baron Pardus
        What about the fact that you have “assembled” 10 engines in the fighters. Especially with survivability of 25 hours (VK107). This is not an engine for a fighter.

        Well ... this is a step forward compared to the AS-82 with its candle life at 14 o’clock. smile
        Seriously, the resource VK-107 in the field was a variable and highly dependent on the skills of mechanics. In one of the giap they used strong sorcery, casting spells on the mechanics "factory team training"And"instruction manual". As a result, the VK-107 resource even exceeded factory figures.
      5. lucul
        lucul 15 July 2020 10: 02 New
        +6
        "Let me fight"
        .
        And there is .
        Miracles do not happen if you have the same ASH7 on LA-82 as on LA-5FN you should not expect any special miracles, and Spitfayer, and the nine and the fourteenth, will simply tear you up.

        You know that on the ground, the maximum speed on La-7 is as much as 100 km / h higher than that of Spitfire 9? )))
        By the way, the Al-82 is quite a good engine, without any snot, in the form of 150 octane gasoline and injection of a water-methanol mixture, it gave honest 1850 hp.
        The same Sleeps 14, without 150 gasoline - inferior to La-7, except for altitude. Pour 82 gasoline into Al-150 - and the motor would gain a second wind. By the way, Al-82 was put on our Mi-4 helicopter, together with a helicopter rotor it produced 8 tons of thrust.
        1. fighter angel
          fighter angel 15 July 2020 13: 18 New
          +3
          Lukul.
          All that is written above is absolutely correct. Plusanul.
          But I don’t understand, why are you arguing with these "Anglophiles"?
          Once again, trying to compare the hot with the salty.
          Spitfires of later series - all as one ALTITUDES! They are sharpened for battles above 5-6 km, respectively, and their flight characteristics, and the graphs of altitude and speed characteristics show the maximum values ​​at these altitudes. And the wing, by the way, with a laminar profile, also optimized for high-altitude flights.
          The Lavochkin and Yaki, namely the Yak-3, Yak-9U / M / P, La-5FN, La-7, are FRONT fighters, and are intended for air battles at extremely small, small and medium altitudes. Up to 4-6 km. At these altitudes they have maximum LTX. They work in the interests of Ilov and Peshek, and, ultimately, together with them, in our ordinary infantry / tank / artillery Vanya.

          If we compare one of ours with Spitfire, then the post-war La-9, La-11, as well as the all-metal three-gun Yak-9P-M-107, produced since 1946. Which, incidentally, showed themselves very well in the Korean War, despite its small number in the Korean sky, and the dominance of the Amerzians in it. They successfully beat the Mustangs, and the Marauders, and the B-29.
          The VK-107 engine, despite some moaning and “crying Yaroslavna” about 25 hours and a piece, supposedly release, was a fully functional unit with the appropriate level of service engineering and technical staff. The resource was raised to 100 hours in the spring and summer of 1944 of the year. The M-107 was produced and operated quite actively and in large quantities. In fact, nursed the "hundredth" and 100, and 115-125 hours. With proper maintenance. There are examples of this, and there are enough of them - 163 Red Banner IAP, 149 Red Banner IAP, 42 Guards.
          1. Alf
            Alf 15 July 2020 18: 35 New
            +3
            Quote: fighter angel
            Spitfires of later series - all as one ALTITUDES! They are sharpened for battles above 5-6 km, respectively, and their flight characteristics, and the graphs of altitude and speed characteristics show the maximum values ​​at these altitudes. And the wing, by the way, with a laminar profile,

            This is on what was a wing with a laminar profile? Perhaps the only 2MV fighter with a laminar wing-P-51 Mustang.
            1. fighter angel
              fighter angel 16 July 2020 09: 15 New
              +1
              Alf.
              I apologize.
              Indeed, bent over with a laminar wing.
              What a "Spitfire" to hell with a laminar wing, if its wing is already made at its ultimate strength, and at the same time it is loaded to the very "I do not want", plus the installation of weapons ...
              1. Alf
                Alf 16 July 2020 18: 40 New
                +2
                Quote: fighter angel
                I apologize.

                Yes, what problems, we are all people, I myself am wrong. hi
  • Octopus
    Octopus 15 July 2020 01: 06 New
    +2
    Quote: Baron Pardus
    they took workers with high professionalism, and the level of professionalism of workers at Packard was much lower

    This well-known story, unfortunately, is exactly half true. The second half is extremely flattering for Americans.
    You see, American merlins began to be produced in June of the 41st year, but not by Packard. It was the Ford plant in Manchester, the second largest producer (and first in 42-45 years) of Merlin in Britain. But in America, Ford refused to produce this engine - he tried to give the Air Force an engine of his own design, for which the British did not have to pay royalties. The engine, by the way, did not take off, Ford then remade it into a tank GAA Ford.

    And the British had to go to Packard, spend a lot of time and money on it. As a result, work on adapting the aircraft engine to automotive manufacturing processes was carried out twice in parallel, by different companies. Packard-Merlin began to be released a couple of months later than Ford.
    Quote: Baron Pardus
    Merlin was simply not made to be mass-produced by NOT highly trained workers.

    This thought is often repeated, but it is incorrect. In the 40s, only the USA had conveyor production, all the rest, including the British, had semi-handicraft production. Merlins, Bofors, Erlikons - all this had to be seriously remade in order to be produced on the conveyor, and not assembled by one specialist from beginning to end, as was done on PP.
    Quote: Baron Pardus
    On the first versions of the Mustang, EMNIP stood ALLISON

    Merlin appeared there in November 42nd, 2 years after the first flight, and then not in the series.
    Quote: Baron Pardus
    And I compare SHVAK with HISPANO. Well, ShVAK is more reliable

    ShVAK has a lot of disadvantages. Hispano, unfortunately, became famous for its fakaps for various reasons, but in principle, its reliability was quite at the level.
    Quote: Baron Pardus
    In Merlin it was NOT possible to shove a cannon, as it was possible in Klimovsky and Daimler Benz engines.

    Yes and no. In the Spanish-Suisse, the cannon stood in the collapse of the cylinders. In Merlin and Daimler, there was auxiliary equipment in the collapse; there couldn’t be guns.

    Therefore, the Germans turned over their V-shaped engines (both Daimler and Junkers) and put a gun from above, above the crankshaft, and not in the collapse of the cylinders. From the crankshaft they raised the gear with a gear and passed the barrel into the propeller’s propeller (the center of the propeller was higher than the crankshaft). Merlin or Griffon, too, could turn this way, but for a number of reasons they did not.
    1. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 15 July 2020 02: 27 New
      0
      Thank you so much for the information on the engines. I read that supposedly in Daimler Benz and Klimov / Hispano Suiz, it was possible to put the motor canon, but it was impossible to put in Merlin and Griffon. That, they say, the British recognized that the central location of the armament is much better, that "the weapon mounted in the nose costs two in the wings", and the center of gravity is reduced to the center of the structure and not spread over it, but they had no other choice since Merlin "not allowed to install a gun in the collapse of the motor." If you can share the literature with me, I will be very grateful.
      1. Octopus
        Octopus 15 July 2020 03: 39 New
        +1
        Hm. I see that misled you.
        In Messer, the barrel was passed between the cylinders of the reverse V

        In the background and Yak - similarly.

        The difference - on the German, the frame of the aircraft took the return, on the Spanish-Suise / VK - the engine.
        The circuit that I described, with a gun located above the crankshaft

        It was used on the American XP-77 that did not go into the series.
        Quote: Baron Pardus
        but in Merlin and Griffon you can’t

        Merlin and Griffon were made without taking into account the installation of the motor gun, the space between the cylinders was occupied by auxiliary equipment of the engine. Closer to the war, there were proposals to remake, but since the gliders were already made to the existing configuration, they did not change anything. Not broken - don't fix it.
        Quote: Baron Pardus
        but they didn’t have another choice since Merlin “didn’t allow to install a gun in the collapse of the motor”

        This is not a problem. In the collapse did not allow, and under the hood allowed, like La-7 or Foki. But left in the wing, decided not to complicate.
        Quote: Baron Pardus
        If you can share the literature with me, I will be very grateful.

        I’m not ready to give a selection of literature now.
  • elbrus76
    elbrus76 14 July 2020 22: 35 New
    +3
    The author called Zero a stick and paper plane, as he was called by the Americans and the British in 1941, until he met him in the air. But it was an all-metal plane! As light as possible to compensate for a weak motor, but metal. By the way, the Japanese managed to lighten it and due to metal plating. They picked up a duralumin alloy that was stronger than those that were usually used in aircraft construction, and therefore the skin sheets could be made thinner and lighter. Its disadvantage was that it was short-lived, especially over the sea. That is, it doesn’t matter, even if Zero was not shot down, after 2-3 years he lost strength and had to be written off. But the Japanese judged correctly: 99% of the planes will still be shot down, and those that do not go down will become obsolete, so why bother? I heard, and the Americans on Mustang saved a couple of hundred kilograms according to this scheme, is it not under the influence of Zero?
    1. Octopus
      Octopus 14 July 2020 22: 59 New
      +2
      Quote: elbrus76
      As light as possible to compensate for a weak motor, but metal.

      You will be surprised, but if you use magnesium-aluminum alloys during the construction of the airframe, then the airframe is much lighter and stronger than a steel frame with plywood sheathing.
      Quote: elbrus76
      Americans on Mustang saved a couple of hundred kilograms according to this scheme, is it not under the influence of Zero?

      Of course not. When they did the Mustang, nobody knew anything about Zero. Yes, and in common with these aircraft is quite small.
  • Sahalinets
    Sahalinets 15 July 2020 04: 36 New
    0
    Author, fix it - the guns on the Zero were type 99, the licensed version of Erlikon!
  • HaByxoDaBHocep
    HaByxoDaBHocep 15 July 2020 07: 06 New
    +1
    The author really dropped the Zero below the baseboard) I will say this, in the Zero real world I did not see or fly on it, but in the IL-2 flight simulator, where the flight characteristics of the aircraft are very close to the real ones, I shot down almost any plane on the Zero : Soviet, German, American, etc., but only if the enemy got involved in a “dog dump” with you and got into a horizontal turn, competent pilots on the “Germans” always fought on the vertical and got them to the “Zero” it was very difficult, sometimes its phenomenal ability to gain altitude almost helped like a helicopter, even at a speed of 110 when climbing it didn’t fall on the wing, but I can’t disagree with it, the Zero burns like a match and the death of the pilot was also a frequent occurrence, but at least in the game the plane was not very bad, although I liked the LA-7 more)
  • andrey-ivanov
    andrey-ivanov 15 July 2020 09: 39 New
    +4
    Skororokhov is once again trying to pull a canary on the globe, i.e. Zero on Corsair. No wonder the Japanese are so bad.
  • Vladimir Mashkov
    Vladimir Mashkov 15 July 2020 09: 56 New
    +1
    I agree, basically, with Roman who has correctly told about Zero. Except for one: it, of course, is not small-small, but not very large, which is clearly visible in some pictures (compare the sizes of the plane and the pilot).
  • Igor H
    Igor H 15 July 2020 10: 01 New
    +2
    Thank you. Interesting!
  • Oberleutnant
    Oberleutnant 15 July 2020 11: 16 New
    0
    Thank. Well described.
  • Romka47
    Romka47 15 July 2020 13: 12 New
    -1
    The article is good! Sharp but not add down.
  • Region-25.rus
    Region-25.rus 15 July 2020 14: 20 New
    +2
    Quote: Engineer
    Why are Americans pushing back? There were no grounds for order 227 in the US
    Even before the war they understood, there is no point in pushing back, we must first retreat.
    Amers had a plan, it worked.

    Of course, at first the Philippines surrendered almost without fighting, and then returned. but washed something! Well and most importantly, the logical order of the personnel. first thousands of prisoners. then thousands of corpses during the assault! Super!
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 15 July 2020 16: 12 New
      +1
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      Of course, at first the Philippines surrendered almost without fighting

      Just as planned. smile
      No, seriously - according to all pre-war plans, the Philippines had to survive on its own. The garrison was supposed to retreat to Bataan and block the Manila Bay, relying on warehouses located on the peninsula. And hold on to the approach of the fleet, which, according to the same plans, would begin to advance some year after the start of the war.
      Either incorrigible optimists were sitting in the American headquarters, or nobody just dared to write: the garrison of the Philippines with the beginning of the war is written off. smile
      An indirect confirmation of the second is that MacArthur literally had to gnaw out replenishment for his troops with battle (one division with a body kit). And all of them slowly crawled from the Metropolis. Despite the fact that halfway, in Pearl Harbor, there were two infantry divisions, which, however, no one dared to touch. The campaign, the fate of the Philippines was already decided - and no one wanted to lose the prepared parts in vain.
      The naval acted easier - they directly wrote in the plan that no reinforcements were planned for the Asian fleet after the outbreak of war.
      Quote: Region-25.rus
      Well and most importantly, the logical order of the personnel. first thousands of prisoners. then thousands of corpses during the assault! Super!

      Thank you for the storm MacArthur and the presidential election. If it weren’t for these two factors, the fleet would have simply blocked the Philippines and went on to jump around the islands to the Japanese Metropolis. But the lover of high caps and tubes, running away from the Philippines, blurted out that he would return - and others had to puff for him.
  • Skyscream
    Skyscream 15 July 2020 14: 53 New
    +1
    [quote = Baron Pardus] Let me fight - the concept is loose. Panthers were knocked out of the T-70, but this does not mean that the T-70 "allowed to fight" with the Panthers. The Australians at Buffalo fought against Zero "allowed to fight." The Americans against Panzer 4 on the M3 Lee sometimes even drove out "Let me fight."
    I apologize, but this is exactly the phrase that means "letting me fight." If the 45-heel took Panther in the forehead from a kilometer, it would be called - "confidently hit." For the rest, I completely agree with you that our Aviaprom, and the entire military-industrial complex for the backwardness of technology and the low level of production, is already bad, the reasons are clear and only authors who are near-by or provocateurs can parasitize on this topic.
  • Cristall
    Cristall 15 July 2020 23: 39 New
    -1
    brilliant comments.
    Thanks to the authors of the posts.
    Really interesting.
    From myself I would like to add
    The largest number of aircraft shot down among Japanese fighters was Hirooshi Nishizawa (西澤 広 義), attributed to 87 victories. Nishizawa shot down his first plane in the sky of New Guinea on the Mitsubishi A5M, but after a few days moved to Zero. Together with Saburo Sakai (Jap. 坂 п 三郎) and Toshio Otoi (Jap. 太 он 敏夫), he composed the famous "Brilliant Trio" of the Tainan Air Group. Nishizawa, in spite of poor health, had a fantastic sense of aerobatics and easily performed the most difficult maneuvers that allowed for successful attacks.
    Tetsuzo Iwamoto (岩 本 徹 三) began to fight back in China, where he chalked up the first downed I-15 bis and I-16. One of the first to master Zero, participated in the attack on Pearl Harbor with the aircraft carrier IJN Zuikaku. He later defended the sky in the Rabaul area, where he managed to shoot down two Douglas SBD Dauntless, dropping incendiary bombs on them. In total, he won 80 victories, at the end of the war he led the preparation of kamikaze, died in 1955. He was awarded the Japanese Military Order of the Golden Snake 5th grade. He was awarded the Japanese Military Order of the Golden Kite of the 5th grade.
    Saburo Sakai Won 60 victories, fought on various types of fighters, including Zero. Even in the years of study at the flight school, he was the best cadet, for which he was awarded a silver watch on behalf of Emperor Hirohito. On account of Sakai the first B-17 shot down during the war. He took part in air battles over Borneo, Guadalcanal, Rabaul. During one of the fights, a bullet hit Sakai’s head, which made him blind and partially paralyzed. Having flown in this state almost 5 hours before the airfield, Sakai was then treated for 5 months in the hospital. He managed to restore vision in one eye and get rid of paralysis. After treatment, he trained young pilots, and in 1944 he returned to the combat unit. He died on September 22, 2000 in Tokyo.
    Takeo Okumura (Japanese 奥 村 武雄) fought only on Zero and shot down 50 enemy planes. He achieved the greatest success in the sky over New Guinea, where he died on September 22, 1943 at the age of 23 years.
    Toshio Fromand spent his entire military career as part of the famous "Brilliant Trio", which included the more experienced Saburo Sakai and Hirooshi Nishizawa. He won the first victory on April 11, 1942, knocking down the American Curtiss P-40 Warhawk. October 21, 1942 was shot down over Guadalcanal and died. For half a year, the 23-year-old Ota shot down 34 enemy aircraft.
    The author of the article was too carried away by the deposition of the aircraft.
    1. Cristall
      Cristall 20 July 2020 01: 02 New
      +1
      again for the facts about the best pilots of the Zero-2 minus.
      The minus team is working.
  • Mooh
    Mooh 16 July 2020 03: 20 New
    +4
    A6M "Zero" is entitled to the title of the worst carrier-based fighter of World War II

    Tolley is the case of Devuatin and the Romanian affair with an outdated French engine and high-tech Polish engineering, they are also super-planes, they beat thousands of enemies and in the end naturally led France and Romania to the greatest triumph. Thanks to the French and Romanians who, in stubborn battles, broke the Luftwaffe ridge with their ingenious aircraft and well-motivated pilots.
  • Private SA
    Private SA 25 July 2020 03: 48 New
    0
    Quote: Nagan
    Or do the Tech Pattern.

    Yes, if there is with anyone.

    Yes for this link (two pairs were desirable).
  • Private SA
    Private SA 25 July 2020 04: 01 New
    0
    Quote: Cristall
    Saburo Sakai won 60 victories

    In the prefaces to his memoir "Samurai" it is said about 64. Confirmed
    his followers. And about the "devil" Nishizawa - he himself did not count how much he shot down.
    Sakai believed that it was around 100. There are colorful moments in his memoirs when
    Sakai in the mountains of New Guinea, taking off from Lae, P-39 maneuver just into the rocks on
    drove a collision, and how he has Iwo Jima from fifteen F-6Fs on
    tattered "Zero" dodged. Not getting a single hole.
    being with one seeing eye.
  • Meshchersky
    Meshchersky 11 August 2020 18: 04 New
    0
    Maybe the Zero is a mediocre plane. I will not argue with the respected author. But Hayao Miyazaki's The Wind Rises is dedicated to Jiro Horikoshi.
  • Murrr 27
    Murrr 27 15 August 2020 02: 03 New
    0
    Quote: Octopus
    By the seriality of Soviet engines you are right, this is a huge problem. But why did you suddenly decide to remember the bakers - decidedly incomprehensible. The army of the Republic of Ingushetia in the WWII is armed at the enemy level. Yields, but not fundamentally. The Second World War army is behind the generation in most positions. Much (rifleman, loom, art) - directly from the imperial times. At the same time, the Wehrmacht is not the Reichswehr at all.

    Ask how they were begging in the USA, Naglia and France all: BB, gunpowder, guns, shells, to make rifles, etc.
    1. Order in the tank forces. In the first chapter - how many shells are fired at the enemy. We concede to all.
    2. There is no exact name on this computer - "RI Industry in WWI" (Name from memory). If you make rails, then there will not be enough iron for guns ..... From the Donbass to St. Petersburg you can bring a horseradish coal - there is no piece of iron .... There is no piece of iron from Murman (they talked for 20 years) - everything was bought in the USA, rails, etc.
    The very foam - optics were made only by the Germans, on the basis of the Imperial Porcelain they are trying to brew optical glass - and the service of the EIV Court is trying to tear off more money for this ..... They beat these parasites a little and badly, there were still "sufferers of the Khrantsusskaya Bulka", July 14 I drank "Not to be the last", the second anniversary was, as the WORLD was cleared of the specialist in our soup Shit.
  • Simple
    Simple 29 August 2020 11: 01 New
    0
    Combat aircraft. Suicide plane



    Novel, title by. my not very correct.
    To put on one line the meaning of the expression "suicide" and "kamikaze" - request
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 24 September 2020 11: 40 New
    0
    Quote: fighter angel
    If we compare one of ours with Spitfire, then the post-war La-9, La-11, as well as the all-metal three-gun Yak-9P-M-107, produced since 1946. Which, incidentally, showed themselves very well in the Korean War, despite its small number in the Korean sky, and the dominance of the Amerzians in it. They successfully beat the Mustangs, and the Marauders, and the B-29.

    The Yak-9s also fought very successfully with the P-80 "Shooting Star" jet projectors in the Korean War.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 24 September 2020 11: 52 New
    0
    Quote: NF68
    The Japanese, like the Germans, still had a serious problem concerning high-octane gasoline and the quality of this gasoline. Both countries had too little oil, and synthetic gasoline was not only very expensive, but its octane rating among the Germans did not exceed 97 units even closer to the end of WWII, while the Japanese only had 92 units. It is difficult to compete with such gasolines with the Americans and the British.

    The Germans have standard aviation gasoline on which their engines are designed with an RH of 87. Of course, they did better.
    In addition, they were beaten and injected with a water-methanol mixture for a temporary increase in HR. As far as I know, high-octane gasoline is needed only during takeoff and very rarely in battle, when you have not noticed the enemy and you need to break away.
  • Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 24 September 2020 12: 00 New
    0
    The RI army in WWI is armed at the enemy level.

    Unfortunately, she lagged far behind the enemy and this lag was growing during the WWI. This is the opinion of the Russian general who wrote the book in the West in the 30s.
    In the Russian army, much fewer machine guns were hit, because Russia itself produced them 10 times less than Germany.
    Artillery over 76 mm and ammunition struck many times less.