A6M3

[TwinBoom]

Any one know if this version dives better than the others with its clipped wings?

[Pigslilspaz]

Any one know if this version dives better than the others with its clipped wings?

has higher DNP speeds im sure

[TwinBoom]

i meant this to go into the airplanes forum
just wandering since i can out dive the other versions with their control surfaces getting non responsive above 350

[Wmaker]

Any one know if this version dives better than the others with its clipped wings?

Nope, it wont dive any 'better' what ever that maybe.

[Krusty]

Technically speaking, it might have slightly better response as you get into the higher speeds because your wings are shorter. Even though the same thing is happening with the same ailerons, the forces required to roll the wing are less.


Theoretically, you'll still lock up, but you'll have a bit more roll authority while locking up... If that makes sense?

[Knite]

Theoretically, you'll still lock up, but you'll have a bit more roll authority while locking up... If that makes sense?

So you're saying (as an example)

If at speed xxxx, the A6M5 ailerons only allowed 5 degree deflection, causing a roll of xx degrees per second...
the A6M3 would still only allow 5 degree deflection, but the roll rate would be yy degrees per second, which are higher than the A6M5's xx dps ?

[Krusty]

That's what I'm envisioning, logically.

Yes.

Just hypothetical, if that 5 degrees yielded 20 degress per second on the A6M2, it would get 25 or 30 degrees per second at the same speed in the Model 32. (making the numbers up here)

[PJ_Godzilla]

That's what I'm envisioning, logically.

Yes.

Just hypothetical, if that 5 degrees yielded 20 degress per second on the A6M2, it would get 25 or 30 degrees per second at the same speed in the Model 32. (making the numbers up here)

If the ailerons are of the same size and location, the reduced roll inertia of the clipped wing version should make the response to the same roll torque higher. I would agree if it is qualified thus. Same moment against reduced inertia implies greater response...

This from Wiki on changes... note the 420mph diving speed.

A6M3 Type 0 Model 32
 
A6M3 Model 32.In late 1941, Nakajima introduced the Sakae 21, which used a two-speed supercharger for better altitude performance, and increased power to 840 kW (1,130 hp). Plans were made to introduce the new engine into the Zero as soon as possible.

The new Sakae was slightly heavier and somewhat longer due to the larger supercharger, which moved the center of gravity too far forward on the existing airframe. To correct for this the engine mountings were cut down by 20 cm (8 in), moving the engine back towards the cockpit. This had the side effect of reducing the size of the main fuel tank (located to the rear of the engine) from 518 L (137 US gal) to 470 L (120 US gal).

The only other major changes were to the wings, which were simplified by removing the Model 21's folding tips. This changed the appearance enough to prompt the US to designate it with a new code name, Hap. This name was short-lived, as a protest from USAAF commander General Henry "Hap" Arnold forced a change to "Hamp". Soon after, it was realized that it was simply a new model of the "Zeke". The wings also included larger ammunition boxes, allowing for 100 rounds for each of the 20 mm cannon.

The wing changes had much greater effects on performance than expected. The smaller size led to better roll, and their lower drag allowed the diving speed to be increased to 670 km/h (420 mph). On the downside, maneuverability was reduced, and range suffered due to both decreased lift and the smaller fuel tank. Pilots complained about both. The shorter range proved a significant limitation during the Solomons campaign of 1942.

The first Model 32 deliveries began in April 1942, but it remained on the lines only for a short time, with a run of 343 being built.

 

[LLogann]

I've read that the wing design gave it marginal increase in dive performance as well as roll, but the decrease in turning ability caused it to lack favor from IJN pilots.

[Noir]

this is going to be a MA beast, spit16's beware.

[Guppy35]

this is going to be a MA beast, spit16's beware.

Probably time to start the call for the Spit XII then

[gyrene81]

this is going to be a MA beast, spit16's beware.

ya right...    should research it a bit

[SmokinLoon]

If the different in roll rate between a normal and beautiful Spitfire (IX) and that smurfy and over-modeled clipped wingy thing called a Spitfire (XVI) is any indication of things to come for the new zeke model, then the new A6m3 is going to be a beast to defeat in a 1v1 dogfight.  The new A6m5 that has a "graphics update" is great, to me even though there is no record of the flight model being updated it does seem to handle better (smoother) and not catch on fire as much.

   

[PJ_Godzilla]

If the different in roll rate between a normal and beautiful Spitfire (IX) and that smurfy and over-modeled clipped wingy thing called a Spitfire (XVI) is any indication of things to come for the new zeke model, then the new A6m3 is going to be a beast to defeat in a 1v1 dogfight.  The new A6m5 that has a "graphics update" is great, to me even though there is no record of the flight model being updated it does seem to handle better (smoother) and not catch on fire as much.

   

I actually flew an A6M5b home last night after losing a wing tank and a main... Look ma, no fire. I note the variant was equipped with fuel tank fire extinguishers. However, it seems like I've flown it and been ignited prior to the update (the old blue-green cockpit, right?).

I think Hamp will be pretty fierce 1v1 and will, on seeing on in the MA, probably just try to pass by at high speed, perhaps flinging a tater or a few 20 shells its way.

[oboe]

I have a question about this - if the rollrate is improved, why would they say maneuverability is decreased?   Isn't roll performance a component of the aircraft's manueverability?    That is, turning, climbing, diving, acceleration, rolling - its all part of manueverability isn't it?