A6M2 Climb Rate in AH

[C_R_Caldwell]

I gave  the A6M2 a spin offline as soon as I installed 1.10 and was suprised at how poor of a climber she is. I don't have any data for the real A6M2, so I can only trust that Pyro has good sources, but I was under the impression that the A6M2 was a stellar climber - certainly the best climber of the early war years. I've seen figures quoted of over 4,500 fpm peak and anecdotes from Allied combat pilots regarding its ability to just keep on climbing when other a/c would have cranked into a spin (I know all Zekes could hang on their props).

The AH A6M5b actually outclimbs the new A6M2 with ease.Heck, even the F4F-4 and P-40E can keep up with it, and the FM2 easily outclimbs it. What's the story? Was the A6M2's real climb rate that much lower than has been written in countless books? Did its ability to hang on its prop just give the false impression of superior climb? If it's the case it wouldn't suprise me as we all know how many of these publications simply plagiarise older works, and eventually fiction becomes fact (ie. the 109K-4 used 2 x MG 151/15s instead of MG 131s,  the 190A-8 used MW 50 etc).

So, does anyone out there have any hard historical data on the A6M2's climb rate?

[Wotan]

let me guess you didnt read the aircraft and vehicle forum where theres a thread that covers this.

Which btw is where this post belongs

[RRAM]

Originally posted by C_R_Caldwell

The AH A6M5b actually outclimbs the new A6M2 with ease.Heck, even the F4F-4 and P-40E can keep up with it, and the FM2 easily outclimbs it. What's the story?  

The story is that the A6M2 had a 950hp engine in a 5,313 lbs plane. Powerloading is roughly 5.6lb/hp


The A6M5 had a 1350hp engine in a 5,920 lbs plane. Powerloading is about 4.4 lb/hp, in a much refined plane (IMO, the best of the Zekes) with better aerodynamics, waste gases used for thrust, etc.


So even with the relatively worse wingloading in the M5 version, the MUCH better powerloading of the later aircraft made it a much better climber and accelerator than the early war M2. And in AH ,the A6M5 is indeed a respectable accelerator at sea level.


Remember that many of the fame the early zero won was surrounded by its mith of invencibility. When an A6M2 was captured and tested in comparison tests with american planes, even when it showed to be a good performer, it was no world beater at all. Even a P39D could outclimb it up to 15.000 feet, and the P39D was pure watermelon .


I think the climbrate may be a tad low, thing of 150fpm at SL, but that is my own impression. In any case is nothing as drastic as you seem to claim


BTW this should be discussed in the Aircraft forum

[ra]

The early Zeke earned it's deadly reputation early in the war because:

1) Allied intelligence didn't know the Japs had such a modern plane, so it was an unpleasant surprise
2) It's long range made the Allies think there were huge numbers of them throughout the Pacific.
3) The tactical and numeric advantage was with the Japanese in the first months of the war
4) It was flown by some of the best pilots in the world

The Zero was a marvel of engineering, but as a combat plane it was not suitable for WWII.  It was a symbol of the enemy, like the Stuka.

ra

[C_R_Caldwell]

Originally posted by Wotan
let me guess you didnt read the aircraft and vehicle forum where theres a thread that covers this.

Which btw is where this post belongs

Gee, let me guess... you are RIGHT! The fact that a couple of days ago I posted for the 1st time in many months (I've hardly ever posted on this BB anyway) might have something to do with the fact that I missed the thread you referred to. But hey, when there are helpful guys like you, who spend half their lives playing AH and the other half trawling through the AH BB here to politely put me straight as to what sort of post belongs where, it just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside  ...