Was A6M2 really this sluggish?

[Karnak]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
But again this is thread about A6M2 being sluggish to manouver at low speeds, especially roll.

Why does everyone want to ignore that by talking about other topics or manouverability at higher speeds...

I have a theory about that, but it would be rude to actually say it.

[Angus]

Nice point from Oldman:
"I've not noticed this, grunherz, but I'll pay closer attention tonite. Otherwise, I've never seen ANY plane that can dogfight with the a6m2 (hurri I comes closest). !

This was the case when the RAF fough on in Burma.
They had slippertank equipped 12 Gunned Hurricane Mk II's
Lots of stuff and armour and in the air they were no match for the Japanese planes, be it A6m, Oscar or Nate (?)

Anyway, some field mods were made, slipper tanks off, guns off and god knows what else.
Good old Hurry with the engine of the MkII lightened up like this (down to 4 guns actually in some cases) was a good match for the Jap planes, it was faster, climbed very well or better,turned on par and 303's were quite enough in that theater....

[storch]

Originally posted by Angus
Nice point from Oldman:
"I've not noticed this, grunherz, but I'll pay closer attention tonite. Otherwise, I've never seen ANY plane that can dogfight with the a6m2 (hurri I comes closest). !

This was the case when the RAF fough on in Burma.
They had slippertank equipped 12 Gunned Hurricane Mk II's
Lots of stuff and armour and in the air they were no match for the Japanese planes, be it A6m, Oscar or Nate (?)

Anyway, some field mods were made, slipper tanks off, guns off and god knows what else.
Good old Hurry with the engine of the MkII lightened up like this (down to 4 guns actually in some cases) was a good match for the Jap planes, it was faster, climbed very well or better,turned on par and 303's were quite enough in that theater....

Interesting Angus.  I have never heard of this.  Could you direct me to where I might read up on this?

[HoHun]

Hi Angus,

>Good old Hurry with the engine of the MkII lightened up like this (down to 4 guns actually in some cases) was a good match for the Jap planes, it was faster, climbed very well or better,turned on par and 303's were quite enough in that theater....

Well, from what I've read, the 12-gun-setup was reduced to an 8-gun-setup on a regular basis, and the Hurricane II had some good strengths compared to the A6M. I don't think turning was one of them, though.

At Singapore, the key to success in the Hurricanes was the Japanese predictability. The Hurricanes would climb to 32000 ft (courtesy of the Merlin XX) and then dive through the Japanese formations firing all the way, continuing the dive until just above treetop level and running away.

Though the firing passes weren't particularly effective that way, the pilots reasoned that they were doing a lot more harm to the Japanese that way than vice-versa. The Japanese, by technical inferiority of the A6M and perhaps also by lack of tactical flexibility, never found an answer to the Hurricane attacks.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Squire]

Try rolling a "manueverable" Spitfire I at the same speeds and ask the same question. Compare it to the A6M2. I did.

It has a slow roll rate as well, why? large wings with that much lift with large ailerons of that type produced better sustained turners but not great rollers.

Many of the earlier fighters had lackluster roll rates compared to later types, this isnt news.

I have a theory as to why nobody has asked it about the Spitfire I, I but it would be rude to actually say it...lol.

[Crumpp]

190s did have combat flaps

According to the Flugzeug-Handbuch they could be deployed at 500kph and below.   Right now HTC has them autoretracting at the speed the handbuch warns the pilot NOT to retract the landing gear or the take off flaps at or below due to sinking.

Of the 3 FW-190 pilots I have interviewed ALL of them used flaps in the turn.  

Here is an excerpt about using the flaps in an FW-190A2:

The Japanese, by technical inferiority of the A6M and perhaps also by lack of tactical flexibility,

As a gross generalization based on history and living for 4 years in Japan, the Japanese are extremely inflexible when it comes to "thinking outside the box".  Just try and get away with not filling in EVERY block on any Japanese form not matter how useless the information.  As long as the block was filled in with something, they were happy.

Good example is when Japanese Airfield's in the Phillipines were captured.  The Japanese had experienced an acute shortage of aircraft during the campaign.  Yet the US Army found almost 1000 fighters laying around the fields.  They were all down for maintenance, most with minor problems.  The Japanese never instituted any kind of scavaging program so hundreds of fighters were taken out of the fight.

Crumpp

[Angus]

Heard about stuff like this before Crumpp.
Don't generalize tooo much though, - the Japanese also showed excellent tactics vs the rather stiff British army system in their advance in 1941/42......................etc

Anyway, Storch, the stuff I posted was from memory. An excellent book is "Hurricanes over Burma". I can post the ISBN if you like, or dig in closer. Many interesting features in that book.
(That is mostly where it was from, pilots modding Hurricanes)
I belive "Bloody Shambles" is a better book of that theater of the war, however it's quite expensive, or was the last time I looked.

Getting into the roll business, I belive our Spit I's and 109E's are pretty accurate. The A6M2 is probably too good in AH in my opinion.
The Spit I had fabric ailerons. They would stretch and bulge under great stress.  I am not sure what hampered the 109E, but it got cured by a different (and gunless) wing.
The A6M had metal ailerons from the start however, but they were very big (enabling very good roll at slow speed?) and bent from stress.

Well, anyway, very nice thread

[stantond]

Hi,

Not to ditract from this conversation by talking about data... but the A6M2 and A6M5 both roll in > 5 sec in AH2.  That roll rate is higher than alot of fighters.  Plane speed does not seem to make a significant difference with a similar roll rate seen at 175, 200, and 225 IAS.

Hence, I must agree with your statement regarding the sluggish roll rate.  However, I will not make any general claim regarding axis vs allied planes.  Carry on.


Malta

p.s. amazing what a stop watch and a little patience will yield.

[Crumpp]

the rather stiff British army system in their advance in 1941/42......................etc

And that is why the Japanese won early on.  That and the Western unwillingness to enter the Jungle.

Keep in mind though it is a gross generalization. As you say, can't go to far with it.

Crumpp