Military Review

Deck aircraft in World War II: new aircraft. Part III

59
Deck fighters of Japan

From July 1942, the main serial modification of the Mitsubishi deck-based fighter Zero was the A6М3 model 32, which differed from the previous A6М2 mod. 21 installing a more powerful engine "Sakae-21" in 1130 horsepower. The plane received a non-folding wing with trimmed tips. The maximum speed of the fighter at an altitude of 6000 meters was 540 km per hour with a speed rating of 820 meters per minute. By replacing the power supply mechanism of guns, their ammunition was increased (from 60 to 100 projectiles per barrel).


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6М3 (model 32) "Zero" (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

According to its maneuverability and speed characteristics A6М3 mod. 32 is still superior to its main opponents: American fighter jets F4F-4 Wildcat, inferior to them in survivability and firepower (two 20-mm guns and two 7.7-mm machine guns against six 12.7-mm machine guns).

During the fighting for the island of Guadalcanal, Zero fighters had to operate from coastal airfields. To increase the flight range, we had to use suspended 45-liter tanks with fuel. The "Zero" А6М3 mod. 32 with their trimmed tips (with a decrease in the total area of ​​the wing) controllability has noticeably deteriorated. To eliminate this drawback, the wing was again returned to the rounded ends. The new modification received the name А6М3 mod. 22.


A6М3 fighter (model 22) "Zero" at an air show in California, USA, 5 in May 2015 (Photo by www.airliners.net)

In February 1943, the fighting in Guadalcanal ended with the defeat of the Japanese. By this time, the Americans had new aircraft: this is also the grounding Fighter X-PUMNX "Lighting" (with a maximum speed of 38 km per hour and weapons from one 628-mm gun and four 20-mm machine guns), and deck-based fighters "Grumman" F12.7F -6 “Hellcat” (with better top speed: 3 vs. 605 km per hour and climb: 540 against 990 meters per minute).


Air combat fighter fighter F6F-3 "Hellcat" and A6M3 "Zero". (Fig. Site goodfon.ru)

The American pilots leveled the only remaining advantage of the Zero in horizontal maneuverability by competent air combat using the tactic of “strike and exit”.

The adoption of the new Japanese carrier-based fighter, which would satisfy the new increased demands of the war in the air, was postponed for a number of reasons for an indefinite time. In these conditions, the only possibility remained before aircraft manufacturers: further improvement of the Zero fighter.

Not being able to install a new, more powerful engine on the Zero, the designers tried in every way to modernize the Sakae-21 available to them. Replacing the massive exhaust manifold common to all cylinders with separate for each pair of cylinders with lighter jet connections, it was possible to slightly increase the engine thrust and reduce its weight.


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6M5 (model 52A) "Zero". (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

A new modification of the fighter called A6М5 model 52. The maximum speed of the aircraft increased to 565 km per hour at an altitude of 6000 meters. Increased and the rate of climb to 857 meters per minute. The reinforced non-folding wing with new rounded-end tips provided a higher dive speed. Armament fighter left unchanged.


Fighter A6M5 (model 52) "Zero" (replica) at an air show in California, USA, May 2010. (Photo site www.warbirddepot.com)

The series production of the A6М5 model 52 was launched in the autumn of 1943. From December on the model 52А again strengthened the wing and increased the ammunition 20-mm guns to 125 shells on the barrel.


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6M5b (model 52В) "Zero". (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

In April, Mitsubishi launched the Zero A6М5 fighter model 52В with improved cockpit protection (frontal armored glass installed) and fire protection system (carbon dioxide cylinders). The right-hand 7.7-mm synchronous machine gun was replaced with a large-caliber 13.2-mm machine gun. Now you can mount additional fuel tanks under the wing with a larger capacity (150-l instead of 45-l). In the field workshops, if necessary, the ventral suspension assembly for the 330-l fuel tank was altered to be able to carry the 250-kg bombshell.



Mitsubishi fighter A6M5 “Zero” in the museum exposition in Tokyo, Japan, August 2014 (Photo by www.airliners.net)

All these improvements did not allow the Zero to keep up with the new US carrier-based fighters: the new versions of the Hellcat F6F-5 and the Corsair F4U were noticeably superior in their basic characteristics. The situation was aggravated by the decline in the quality of training and experience of Japanese pilots. The results of the air battles were, as a rule, not in favor of the Japanese side. In one of the air battles in December 1943 of the year 50 А6М5 “Zero” with 93 F6F-5 “Hellcats” Japanese losses amounted to 28 fighters. It affected both the qualitative and quantitative superiority of the enemy.


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6M5 (model 52) "Zero." (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

Attempts to improve the protection and enhance the armament of the Zero fighter were embodied in the new A6М5 model 52С. On the fighters, which were launched at the end of 1944, in a small batch, they improved the protection of the cockpit by installing an 55-mm bulletproof glass in the back of the flashlight and reserving the pilot’s seatback.


In flight, a pair of fighter A6M5 (model 52) "Zero". (Fig. Site www.hasegawausa.com)

The armament became more powerful and included two 20-mm cannons and three 13.2-mm machine guns (two were installed in the wing and one synchronously). 7.7-mm machine guns were abandoned completely, since they were useless in a battle with well-protected enemy fighters. Guides for eight 10-kg unmanaged air-to-air missiles were installed under the wings. The fighter was intended for action from coastal airfields against American bombers. The maximum speed of the fighter dropped to 540 km per hour. Flight range without PTB was 1520 km.


Fighter-interceptor А6М5с “Zero” with 10-kg NUR “air-to-air” under the wing (Fig. Goodfon.ru)

Carrier-based fighter-bomber A6M7 model 63 "Zero" was created on the basis of the previous modification A6M5s and was intended for operations with small aircraft carrier, converted from merchant ships on short flight equivalencies decks could not act dive bombers "Yokosuka» D4Y. The series production of A6М7 was launched in May 1945.


Mitsubishi fighter-bomber A6M7 (model 63) Zero (Fig. Wardrawings.be site)

The maximum speed of the fighter-bomber at an altitude of 6400 meters was 543 km per hour, and the climb rate of 833 meters per minute. Flight range with outboard fuel tanks was equal to 2960 km, and the practical ceiling was 11180 meters.


Fighter-bomber A6M7 "Zero" at the field airfield, 1945 g. (Photo site www.warbirdphotographs.com)

Small arms remained as in the modification A6M5 (model 52C). The ventral suspension unit has been reworked for the 250-kg bomb suspension. Under the wing, two 350-l fuel tanks could be suspended.

Deck aircraft in World War II: new aircraft. Part III

Fighter-bomber A6М7 "Zero" with outdoor suspensions (Fig. Site goodfon.ru)

The latest modification of the Zero fighter was the A6М8 model 64. The prototype made the first flight in April 1945 of the year. Thanks to the more powerful Xinum-1560 64 engine, the prototype developed a maximum speed of 573 km per hour at an altitude of 6000 m, but even such characteristics could not be compared with enemy fighter speeds: F644F-6 "Hellcat" and 5 km per hour F716U-4 Corsair.


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6M8 (model 64) "Zero". (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

The armament of the new Zero consisted of two 20-mm cannons and two 13.2-mm machine guns, which were installed in the wing. Synchronous weapons on the fighter was not due to the large size of the new engine. Under the fuselage 500-kg bombs could be suspended, and under the wings two 350-l fuel tanks.

Model 6 did not go into the A8M64 series. Production capacity aviation Japan's industries were already destroyed by allied aviation and an earthquake.

The Zero A6М5 and А6М7 fighters made their last combat sortie on the Allied airplanes on August 15 on the 1945 of the year. In this air fight, 17 Zero shot down four American Hellcats, losing 15 of their cars.


Mitsubishi A6М3 Zero and Grumman Martlet Mk.VI fighters (FM-2) imitate air combat at an air show in California, USA, 28 August 2005 (Photo by www.airliners.net)


Mitsubishi fighters А6М3 Zero and Grumman F6F-5 Hellcat at an air show in California, USA, 30 April 2005 (Photo by www.airliners.net)

Until the end of the war, the Zero remained the main carrier-based fighter of the Japanese Imperial fleet. In the skilled hands of experienced pilots, even despite its obsolescence, the Zero was a worthy adversary superior to it in terms of the main indicators of allied fighters.


Mitsubishi fighters A6М2 Zero (replica) and Chance-Vout F4U-4 Corsair in the sky of Texas, USA, October 15 2015 (Photo by www.airliners.net)


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A6М2 "Zero" in battle. (Pic. Forwallpaper.com site)

The deck fighter "Mitsubishi" A7M "Repu" was supposed to replace the outdated A6M "Zero" in 1943 year. Launched in the summer of 1942, the development of a new aircraft was greatly delayed. His first flight of the prototype "Repu" made in May 1944 year. It was a single-metal single-engine single-engine fighter with a low-folding folding wing.


Fighter "Mitsubishi" A7M2 "Repp" ("Sam"). (Fig. Site wardrawings.be)

A7M “Repu”, depending on the modifications of the prototypes, was equipped with 2000 engines with horsepower from A7М1 and 2200 from A7М2. Equipped with a 2200-strong motor and four-blade propeller A7М2 developed at a height of 8700 m maximum speed of 642 km per hour, and at an altitude of 6000 m 620 km per hour. The fighter climbed to 6000 meters in 6.1 minutes. The flight range without PTB of the new fighter was 1085 km, and the practical ceiling was 10900 meters. The plane showed on the tests good maneuverability, comparable to the "Zero".


Pre-series fighter "Mitsubishi" A7M2 "Repp". (Photo site www.igromania.ru)

To increase the survivability of the “Repu”, they installed protected fuel tanks, and the pilot’s cabin was equipped with a bulletproof windshield and an armored backrest of the pilot’s seat.


Fighter А7М2 "Repp" in flight. (Fig. Site www.blackbirdmodels.co.uk)

The A7М2 “Repu” series was planned to be equipped with either four 20-mm guns (model 22А), or two 20-mm guns and two 13.2-mm machine guns (model 22В). On the outside of the suspension, the fighter could carry two 250-kg bombs under the wings and an 750-liter outboard fuel tank under the fuselage.



The only serial fighter A7M2 "Repp" in the factory hangar, Japan, August-September 1945 (www.warbirds.jp)

Before the end of hostilities, only one serial A7М2 Repu fighter and six prototypes were released.





References:
1. Shant K., Bishop. Aircraft carriers. The most formidable aircraft carriers of the world and their planes: The Illustrated Encyclopedia / Trans. from English / - M .: Omega, 2006.
2. Beshanov V.V. Encyclopedia of aircraft carriers / Under the general editorship of AE Taras - Moscow: AST, Minsk: Harvest, 2002 - (Library of military stories).
3. Polmar N. Aircraft carriers: The 2 T.T.1 / Trans. from English A. Propulsion Patients. - M .: LLC Publishing AST, 2001. - (Military history library).
4. Patients A.G. Aircraft carriers. Illustrated Encyclopedia - M .: Yauza: Eksmo, 2013.
5. Kudishin I.V. Deck fighters of the Second World War - Moscow: Astrel Publishing House LLC: AST Publishing House LLC, 2001.
6. Haruk A.I. Fighters of the Second World War. The most complete encyclopedia - M .: Yauza: Eksmo, 2012.
7. Kotelnikov V.R. Spitfire. Best Allied fighter - Moscow: VERO Press: Yauza: Eksmo, 2010.
8. Haruk A.I. Attack aircraft of the Second World War - attack aircraft, bombers, torpedo bombers - M .: Yauza: EKSMO, 2012.
9. Haruk A.I. "Zero." The best fighter - M .: Collection: Yauza: Eksmo, 2010.
10. Ivanov S.V. Fairey "Firefly". War in the air (№145) - Beloretsk: ARS LLC, 2005.
11. Ivanov S.V. F8F "Bearcat". War in the air (№146) - Beloretsk: ARS LLC, 2005.
12. Ivanov S.V. F4U Corsair. War in the air (№109) - Beloretsk: ARS LLC, 2003.
13. Doroshkevich O. Airplanes of Japan of the Second World War - Minsk: Harvest, 2004.

Internet resources:
http://www.airwar.ru;
http://pro-samolet.ru;
http://wp.scn.ru;
http://www.aviastar.org;
http://wardrawings.be/WW2;
http://www.airpages.ru;
http://www.airaces.ru.


To be continued ...
Author:
59 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. bionik
    bionik 24 June 2016 06: 40
    +5
    Japanese A6M2 Zero fighters from the second wave of an airstrike at the American Pearl Harbor base take off from the deck of the Akagi aircraft carrier.

    The take-off of the first wave was carried out at 06-00 and totaled 183 aircraft. The planes of the second wave, consisting of 170 aircraft, rose from the Japanese aircraft carriers at 7 hours and 15 minutes. In the second wave there were 54 horizontal B5N2 Kate bombers, 78 diving Val D3A1 bombers and 35 A6M2 Zero fighters.
  2. Tsoy
    Tsoy 24 June 2016 06: 54
    +4
    The boom zoom was an effective way to combat zero, and after that, the appearance of superior decks in the USA. The cosiness of thinking and the backwardness in scientific fields did not allow Japan’s millarist to fight the US industrial power in the second half of the war in the Pacific.
    1. Argon
      Argon 24 June 2016 09: 04
      -3
      I categorically disagree. The only thing that Japan (like any island state-wu) lacked was resources. An analysis of the designs of the latest Japanese production aircraft and experimental designs shows that the situation in the sky could well return to the conditions of the beginning of the 42nd. Americans quite clearly imagined, in my opinion it was this particular circumstance that to a large extent incline them to the use of atomic weapons.
      1. Kenneth
        Kenneth 24 June 2016 09: 37
        +1
        What kind of analysis
        No shaking of the Japanese allowed them to compare with the industrial and scientific power of the United States. Even if he were bombarded with resources.
      2. yehat
        yehat 24 June 2016 09: 42
        +3
        Yes, what do you say, in the year 45, when the bombs were used, the Americans had an overwhelming advantage, all the large enterprises of Japan were under bombing. The Americans knew that the Japanese were seriously weakened and exhausted.
        the bombs were used because the attack on the islands itself would have turned out to be a lot of blood and a lengthy operation for the Americans, and the attempt to invite the USSR to help gave him additional influence
      3. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 24 June 2016 10: 14
        +7
        Quote: Argon
        I strongly disagree. The only thing that Japan (like any island state-wu) lacked was resources.

        To paraphrase Matroskin: They had resources. They did not have enough brains.
        If parallel programs for the development and production of IJA and IJN weapons are conducted, then no resources will be enough: the army is building aircraft carriers and submarines, the fleet is the base air defense fighter and tanks.
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 24 June 2016 11: 44
          +7
          I agree ... In general, the Japanese "graters" between the navy and the army were so serious that the people rushed at each other with weapons ... But in the end, everything was shoveled to the fullest ...
        2. yehat
          yehat 24 June 2016 17: 08
          -1
          The Japanese considered this system effective. Real competition stimulated development.
          1. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 24 June 2016 18: 19
            +3
            Quote: yehat
            The Japanese considered this system effective. Real competition stimulated development.

            Heh heh heh ... it looks like the sides switched roles in that war. The militarized totalitarian Japan organized production in the style of "let a hundred flowers bloom", simultaneously producing several machines for similar purposes. And the liberal-competitive USA introduced absolutely totalitarian orders in military production: before the competition, compete as much as you want. After the announcement of the results, the commission analyzes the capabilities of aircraft factories and distributes orders for the model that won the competition in an optimal way (moreover, the order is often given to several competitors that have just been cut at the competition). If you want to make money, make a "someone else's" car, there are no other options.
          2. Alf
            Alf 24 June 2016 19: 50
            +1
            Quote: yehat
            The Japanese considered this system effective. Real competition stimulated development.

            The result is obvious.
      4. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 24 June 2016 15: 32
        0
        Quote: Argon
        The only thing that Japan (like any island state-wu) lacked was resources. An analysis of the latest Japanese production aircraft and experimental designs shows that the situation in the sky could well return to the conditions of the beginning of the 42

        First - the example of England proves the opposite though.

        Second - I couldn’t. The imperial fleet was badly battered and sat in bases without fuel, the civil fleet was actually destroyed by American submarines, partly destroyers and long-range torpedo bombers.

        Third, if we talk about prototypes, the United States had much more significant things than Reppu made in the number of only a few pieces.
        1. Arikkhab
          Arikkhab 24 June 2016 22: 07
          +7
          I apologize to ask - what is the "example of England" expressed? Was England at war against America or a country with multiple superiority in resources (like Japan against the states)? no ... Germany had an overwhelming superiority? no ... the much-hyped "Battle of Britain" was barely won. all the war they sat on their islands and shoved Hitler to the east. Lend-lease from America went mainly where ... that's right, to the islands, since there were not enough resources (and this was when owning half of the world), but the transport fleet was actually destroyed by German submarines. Plus the "fifth column" on the islands ... And if it were not for the help of the Americans, it is not known how else the fate of the islanders would have developed.
          1. yehat
            yehat 27 June 2016 14: 08
            0
            after World War I, the British too relaxed and hoped for a fleet,
            and aviation, although it developed technologically, but numerically fell strongly
  3. inkass_98
    inkass_98 24 June 2016 07: 21
    +3
    Thanks, great series of articles.
    A parallel suggests itself: "Zero" and Me-109. Both began as aircraft that were excellent for their time and theater of operations, went through the entire war, but the modernization could no longer maintain the superiority of these aircraft and only led to their heaviness and reduced maneuverability. Plus, the problem of Japan was the engines, or rather their absence or the impossibility of installing a more powerful existing engine on the same "Zero".
    1. yehat
      yehat 24 June 2016 10: 01
      +5
      Then what can you say about the Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate fighter, which was better than any American in terms of performance characteristics and entered service in the 1944 year?
      by the way, he also had an excellent radius of action 1255 km
      engine star PD Ha-45-21 with a power of 1970 hp
      there was also a promising prototype in 41, the ki-64 with a twin engine
      the Japanese had difficulties, but the technological struggle was far from hopeless.
      moreover, this is far from all; the Japanese also had other, quite promising projects. Personally, I was very interested in the J7W Shinden project
      1. Verdun
        Verdun 24 June 2016 12: 12
        +4
        Quote: yehat
        moreover, this is far from all; the Japanese also had other, quite promising projects.

        It was the abundance of projects that killed the Japanese, even if many of them were successful. The design and production forces were scattered, the maintenance of the fleet of dissimilar machines became more complicated ... If the Eponians had concentrated on 2-3 models of fighters, it would have gone more fun. And then, and "Zero" and N1K1-N1R2-J Syden, and Ki-61 Hien, and Ki-83 Hayate, J2M Raiden, Ki-64, Ki-44, Ki-100 and almost the same number of twin-engine fighters. And that's not counting what was left in the development. There is nothing surprising in the fact that "Reppu" was late.
      2. Mikhail Matyugin
        Mikhail Matyugin 24 June 2016 15: 35
        +2
        Quote: yehat
        Then what can you say about the Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate fighter, which was better than any American in terms of performance characteristics and entered service in the 1944 year?

        But enlighten me like me, where are the outstanding successes of this "wondrous falcon of Japanese imperialism" in the struggle against the "American hawks of imperialism"?
        1. yehat
          yehat 24 June 2016 17: 06
          -1
          this button accordion has already been held in the topic of how the Americans defeated the Germans.
          I do not want to repeat. It was about the technological superiority of the United States in a narrow niche of armaments, I indicated information proving the opposite. DOT.
          if you want to check someone for knowledge of history - for God's sake. Only I do not want. Tired of writing 100 messages.
  4. RPG_
    RPG_ 24 June 2016 09: 25
    +4
    Germany also had problems with engines. Powerful engines of 2250 horses in Japan and Germany appeared too late. But Japan still did not have a good liquid cooling engine similar to Rolls Royce Merlinov and Daimler Bens DB 60xxx
    1. Verdun
      Verdun 24 June 2016 12: 26
      0
      Quote: RPG_
      But Japan still did not have a good liquid cooling engine similar to Rolls Royce Merlinov and Daimler Bens DB 60xxx

      The Japanese Na-140 water-cooling engine, mounted on the Ki-61 fighter, was, in fact, a licensed copy of the DB-601A from the Bf-109. Simply, in the conditions of the tropics, water cooling engines have shown themselves far from the best way.
  5. iouris
    iouris 24 June 2016 11: 29
    +2
    In the public mind in the United States, the results of World War II achieved in the Pacific Ocean are considered crucial for the country's prosperity, and the defeat of Germany is a secondary episode.
    1. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 24 June 2016 21: 57
      +4
      not sure. I have an American neighbor - he knows quite well about the second front and concentration camps, and the battle for Britain, but about the war in the Far East ... pearl harbor and the atomic bomb, plus a set of cliches from Hollywood production in the subject ... set. it’s bad that Yapi worked in China and Korea, I never heard about Detachment 731 (showed it on Wikipedia - I was very surprised - after all, from the experience of his trip to Japan, the Japanese are such nice people ...)
  6. Taoist
    Taoist 24 June 2016 11: 46
    +2
    The Japanese, with their inherent passion for "details", licked the structure ... And the Americans stupidly increased the power ... Everyone knows what happened in the end. "But the hares shobla p *** t lion" (c)
    1. Mikhail Matyugin
      Mikhail Matyugin 24 June 2016 15: 37
      +3
      Quote: Taoist
      The Japanese with their inherent passion for "details" licked the structure ... And the Americans stupidly increased the power.

      Knowing a little about the quality of Japanese aircraft in the last years of the war, I can say that their production culture fell godlessly. And the Yankees are all right - and manufacturability, and capacity, and production culture, and plenty of resources.
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 24 June 2016 16: 42
        0
        They have not culture, but opportunities have fallen sharply ... But I’m not talking about production but about design ...
  7. unknown
    unknown 24 June 2016 12: 05
    +1
    Quote: RPG_
    Germany also had problems with engines. Powerful engines of 2250 horses in Japan and Germany appeared too late. But Japan still did not have a good liquid cooling engine similar to Rolls Royce Merlinov and Daimler Bens DB 60xxx


    If Germany had problems with high-power aircraft engines, then what problems did the USSR have?
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 24 June 2016 12: 43
      +5
      Quote: ignoto
      If Germany had problems with high-power aircraft engines, then what problems did the USSR have?

      Huge.
      Almost all pre-war work on experimental engines was stopped after the outbreak of war - the front needed a shaft. In fact, only serial (at the beginning of the war) engines and their modernization remained for the Air Force.

      Until the end of the war, the mass heir engine for Soviet fighters was the forced heir to the engine Hispano-Suiza 12Y. Which in the latest modification VK-105PF-2 produced 1290 hp. takeoff. And only at the end of the war appeared VK-107A with its 1650 hp. But this engine had a resource of only 100 hours - and subject to strict adherence to all instructions. The only ones from 139 giap 303 Iads managed to provide as much as 115 hours. But with the usual quality of training of technical personnel and pilots of combat units, its resource was reduced fourfold.
      There were also AM-38F with its 1700 hp. take-off and AM-42 as much as 2000 hp take-off - but these were engines purely for low-altitude attack aircraft.

      With the VO engines in the war, the picture was similar. Before the war itself, it was with great difficulty that they were put into the M-82 series from the second attempt - and another 2 years continued to work with it ... to suffer: overheating, extremely short service life of candles, time limit for the take-off mode with the inevitable engine failure if the time is exceeded . The method of successive approximations in 1943 received the M-82FN with its 1850 hp. on take-off - and that’s all.
      1. Taoist
        Taoist 24 June 2016 14: 40
        +4
        The USSR had problems not so much with R&D as with the general culture of production. How many really promising engines were simply unable to bring to the series? Well and still, what should not be forgotten. All of our aircraft engines were initially made for low-octane gasoline (which sharply reduced the possibility of forcing. Well, the USSR did not have normal petrochemicals ... So the problem is complex.
      2. Alf
        Alf 24 June 2016 20: 01
        +5
        Quote: Alexey RA
        But this engine had a resource of only 100 hours - and subject to strict adherence to all instructions. The only ones from 139 giap 303 Iads managed to provide as much as 115 hours. But with the usual quality of training of technical personnel and pilots of combat units, its resource was reduced fourfold.

        DB-605 had the same resource.
        A couple of times I found the recollections of Luftwaffe pilots, where they said that the real resource of the 605th was 35 hours.
    2. Arikkhab
      Arikkhab 24 June 2016 21: 52
      0
      in the USSR? the average life of a fighter / attack aircraft was less than the resource of an aircraft engine ... at least at the beginning of the war
  8. Verdun
    Verdun 24 June 2016 12: 20
    +3
    American F4F-4 Wildcat fighters, inferior to them in survivability and firepower (two 20 mm guns and two 7.7 mm machine guns versus six 12.7 mm machine guns).
    About survivability - I agree, but about the power of weapons - not really. Although the American aircraft machine guns were quite powerful, in terms of their amazing ability, they were still inferior to the Japanese aircraft guns. And just do not talk about the mass of a second volley. You can throw a bag of 10 kg of peanuts in a second and don’t do much harm, or you can throw 10 kg of cast iron - and that’s enough. At the same time, a curious moment. The Japanese Type-99 aircraft gun was lighter than the American Browning M-2 machine gun - 23,2 kg versus 29 kg.
    1. Taoist
      Taoist 24 June 2016 12: 28
      +3
      So she had the appropriate ballistics ... The Japanese had a bad shot with a rifle, to be honest ... The Zero cannons worked well only in the hands of the aces, who knew how to aim and shoot in conditions of maneuverable air combat ... But the Americans went differently ways - they made a kind of "air shotgun" - slashed at the target and maybe it will fly in - it worked like that. Moreover, Japanese aircraft have a "licked" design, fragile, no protection ...
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 24 June 2016 13: 06
        +3
        Quote: Taoist
        The Zero cannons worked well only in the hands of the aces, who knew how to aim and shoot in a maneuverable air battle ... But the Americans took a different path - they made a kind of "air shotgun" - slashed at the target, maybe it will fly in - it worked. Moreover, Japanese aircraft have a "licked" design, fragile, no protection ...

        Duc ... the traditional confrontation between the two systems. wink

        One side - 100 graduates per year, seeing the stars in the sky during the day and holding fighters in the air for 12 hours. In their hands, and a fragile "zero" with its problems (low speed of the right turn, poor maneuverability at high speeds, stalling at negative overloads engine, small ammo cannon) - wunderwaffe.

        And on the other - the mass training of the middle peasants on the same average performance characteristics of machines. For them, something better is better, at high speed and with large BK - because they also shoot medium. The situation, however, is facilitated by the fact that these middle peasants do not need to target the vulnerabilities of enemy aircraft - their goals very sensitive to hits. But getting into them is extremely difficult.
        So, to hell with guns: we put a battery, 5 "products of John Mosesovich with ammo with 400-430 rounds per barrel. Purely according to the theory of probability, something will hit.

        EMNIP, guns on the theater of operations appeared at first only at night-lights - there the pilot class was also higher, and the goal was to be guaranteed to hit immediately, in the first stage, without a long battle.
        1. Taoist
          Taoist 24 June 2016 14: 04
          +1
          That's right ... really who, in that case, were the British guided by with their rifle-caliber batteries? However, I have already noted that the "British have their own pride" - now they also arranged "Brexit" ... ;-)
          1. Verdun
            Verdun 24 June 2016 17: 41
            +3
            Quote: Taoist
            Wow ... really, who did the British focus on with their rifle caliber batteries?

            The Hurricanes received under the lend-lease, with their soft revolving bullets, clearly did not suit the Soviet pilots. They urgently began to modernize them, cutting out one of the wing spars and installing cannons instead of machine guns. The literature describes a case when one of these modernized Hurricanes made a test flight (albeit with ammunition) and met with a pair of Bf-109s. From the Battle of Britain, the Germans had studied the English fighter well and knew that its bullets were not able to pierce the armored belly of the Messer. And out of habit, one of the German pilots defiantly turned his belly to the Hurricane ...)) Apparently, even "mom" did not have time to say.
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 24 June 2016 18: 37
            +2
            Quote: Taoist
            Wow ... really, who did the British focus on with their rifle caliber batteries?

            To the crooks from Parliament. smile
            Back in the early 30s, aviators proposed switching to 12,7 mm, arguing that the progress of aviation with the transition to more durable and less vulnerable all-metal machines. But they were refused for the reason that it would be better to wait a bit - and then immediately jump over 20 mm, bypassing the intermediate gauge 12,7. So, they say, it will cost less.
            So we saved up: the war is about to begin, but there is no normally working 20-mm cannon. And the islanders had to fence "combs" of 8-12 rifle-caliber machine guns and quad turrets.

            Moreover, during the war, they still had to put those same 12,7-mm from John Mosesovich on the "sleeps".
            Quote: Taoist
            However, I have already noted that the "British have their own pride"

            Oh yeah ... nobody beats Difiant and TOG II *. laughing
          3. Alf
            Alf 24 June 2016 20: 11
            0
            Quote: Taoist
            it is true to whom in this case, the British were oriented with their rifle caliber batteries?

            The result was a Type 404 or HS.404 gun. In 1938, the design was patented by Birkigt and launched into mass production in Geneva.
            It was originally planned to use the HS.404 as a motor gun. The gun was powered from a drum magazine with a capacity of 60 shells. However, this was a minus for fighter aircraft, since in a dogfight it was impossible to reload the store. In 1940, a tape power mechanism was developed.
            In connection with the rapid defeat of France in World War II, Britain became the main operator. The gun was adopted under the marking of Hispano Mk. I. When using a cannon with a drum magazine in fighter aircraft, the shortcomings of this type of power were revealed: small ammunition and warped cartridge in the magazine with active maneuvering. This necessitated the creation of a tape-powered gun - Hispano Mk. II.

            Hurricane was put on the conveyor in 1936.
            Spitfire in 1938.
            There were no air guns at that time. But in the 41st and 42nd years and Hurricanes and Spitfire switched to guns.
            1. Taoist
              Taoist 24 June 2016 20: 39
              +3
              What are you talking about? what didn’t exist in the year 38? The Britons may not have existed ...
              SHVAK (for reference) 1934 year of adoption ... W-37 (WIT) - 1937 year ...
              Hispanic suisse HS.7 and HS.9 from 1933 of the year in the series ... I already am silent about the ancestors of Erlikon ...
              Even the Britons still had air cannons back in the First World War ... (see the picture) But then for some reason they "jammed" ...
              1. Alf
                Alf 24 June 2016 22: 11
                0
                Quote: Taoist
                Hispanic suisse HS.7 and HS.9 since 1933 in the series ...

                Proof of ?
                Quote: Taoist
                Even the Britons still had air guns back in World War I ...

                Well, if THAT is called an automatic cannon, then yes.
                1. Taoist
                  Taoist 24 June 2016 23: 06
                  0
                  "What is your evidence" (c) Red heat ...

                  Scold with you. Learn the materiel ... you can start at least from here:
                  http://www.airwar.ru/enc/weapon/ag_data.html

                  And what "automatic cannon" means to you, I cannot even imagine ... The "new COW" cannon was a long-recoil cannon, the return spring of which was wrapped around the barrel. Ammunition was fed from a 5-round magazine. Small ammunition meant a limited practical rate of fire, although the technical rate of fire was 100-120 rounds / min."(C) for some reason it is not an automatic machine for you ...
                  I will probably disappoint you by saying that back in the 18 year in Germany there were air guns with the rate of fire at the 450 RPM and tape power ... http://www.airwar.ru/weapon/guns/sza.html
                  1. Alf
                    Alf 25 June 2016 14: 40
                    -1
                    Quote: Taoist
                    Scold with you. Learn the materiel ... you can start at least from here:

                    This is what you are teaching.
                    By the end of 1934, the designer probably finally buried attempts to limit himself to a deep modernization of the Swiss cannon and at the same time circumvent Erlikonov patents. In the HS.403 project, however, never embodied in metal, Birkier completely redesigned the system and proceeded to a series of rapid-fire aviation systems for all occasions.
                    In 1936, design work on the new series of air guns, designated as Hispano-Suiza Birkigt, was generally completed. Pre-production parties for military trials were released.
                    In 1941, when the production of the 20-mm Hispanic HS.404 guns gained momentum in the UK,

                    In the 36th gun was only created and tests had just begun. And only in the 41st in Britain put the gun on the series. I said that at the time of the creation of Hurricane and Spitfire, the British had no air guns.
                    Quote: Taoist
                    Since the "New COW" cannon was a long-recoil cannon, the return spring of which was wrapped around the barrel. The ammunition was fed from a 5-round magazine. Small ammunition meant a limited practical rate of fire. Although the technical rate of fire was 100-120 rounds / min. "

                    A gun mounted on an airplane and an aircraft gun are slightly different things.
                    1. Taoist
                      Taoist 25 June 2016 17: 10
                      +1
                      Ie guns spanish HS7 / 9 did not exist? And Devouin 500 apparently also did not exist?

                      “In November 1933, the French government decided to accept the Dewoitine fighter into service, and to build two variants in parallel - a machine gun like the D.500 and a cannon one like D.501. The serial D.500 took off from the factory airfield in Toulouse on November 29, 1934. But when flying around the fighters, they almost immediately encountered aileron flutter (shaking) of the ailerons. They got rid of it only by introducing weight balancing.

                      The combat units D.500 and D.501 got into only in July 1935. Then France was the only country in the world that had fighters with cannons in service. "(C)

                      Well, a pearl on the topic that "A cannon mounted on an airplane and an aircraft cannon are somewhat different things." (c) even commenting is funny ... We are not doing casuistry. If you are not quite in the subject, it is not a shame (it is impossible to know everything), it is a shame to persist in your delusions.
            2. Verdun
              Verdun 25 June 2016 19: 08
              0
              Quote: Alf
              There were no air guns at that time. But in the 41st and 42nd years and Hurricanes and Spitfire switched to guns.

              Cannon Hurricanes appeared in 42 and flew a little better than an ax.
        2. Verdun
          Verdun 24 June 2016 15: 08
          +1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          So, to hell with guns: we put a battery, 5 "products of John Mosesovich with ammo with 400-430 rounds per barrel. Purely according to the theory of probability, something will hit.

          Everything here is not so simple either. When installing weapons in the wings of his sighting requires angular information. Figuratively speaking, so that the queues of two spaced apart machine guns or cannons converge at a certain distance at one point. And in this case, go still teach the beginner to open fire at a distance of effective fire. And if the target is well protected - like, say, IL-2, which even automatic guns did not always take, then here is sadness at all ...
          1. vadim dok
            vadim dok 24 June 2016 16: 36
            +1
            The Americans had an analogue computer sight!
            1. Taoist
              Taoist 24 June 2016 16: 46
              +4
              Firstly, if the weapon is not aimed, no sight does not work, and secondly, ballistic computers should not be called "computer sights" - if only because in order for it to accurately calculate the lead point, all the corrections must be manually entered into it - and that in the end it will be faster the eye of a trained air soldier or a "miracle of hostile technology" is a very serious question.
            2. Alf
              Alf 24 June 2016 20: 12
              +1
              Quote: vadim dok
              The Americans had an analogue computer sight!

              Specify in which year he appeared?
          2. Taoist
            Taoist 24 June 2016 16: 50
            +1
            Not certainly in that way. The "aim point" for a wing weapon simply means the point of maximum fire density. This does not mean that when we open fire at a suboptimal distance, we will not get anywhere at all ... By the way, for IL 2 with its wooden tail, just the version of the "machine-gun saw" could be much more dangerous than an air cannon.
            And you need to shoot any weapon, regardless of its location ....
  9. Backfire
    Backfire 24 June 2016 13: 27
    0
    Great article, I look forward to continuing.
  10. Mikhail Matyugin
    Mikhail Matyugin 25 June 2016 12: 15
    +2
    In this 17 aerial battle, Zeros shot down four American Hellcat, while losing 15 of their vehicles.
    In general, the American pilots specifically stated throughout the war that it was enough to slash fire on a Japanese plane at least once - and it was immediately shot down. Catastrophically low survivability - while the Japanese, even firing from cannons and not heavy machine guns, had to make many hits to overwhelm the American. About the interception of heavy bombers, I generally am silent.
  11. Mushroom
    Mushroom 2 November 2016 19: 03
    0
    thanks, very interesting!!!