Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: B-17 on April 08, 2011, 03:16:25 PM

Title: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B-17 on April 08, 2011, 03:16:25 PM
Does anybody on here know the differences in performance/record/armament/whatever between the Sunderland and the Emily? I'm just wondering because I know that the two look similar, but other than that, what?
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Karnak on April 08, 2011, 03:33:12 PM
H8K2:
Maximum speed:
290 mph
Range: 4,440 mi
Service ceiling: 28,740 ft
Rate of climb: 1,600 ft/min
Armament: Five 20mm Type 99 Model I cannon (same as tail gun on G4M in AH) in bow, dorsal, and tail turrets, plus one each in two waist blisters; five 7.7mm Type 97 machine guns (same as 7.7mm guns on G4M in AH) in fuselage hatches, giving some fire coverage in all directions
Ordnance: Two 800kg torpedoes or eight 250kg bombs or two 1,500kg bombs.

Special Note: Due to it being Japanese people may expect fragility, but the H8K2 had a fully protected fuel system, armor for the engines and crew positions.  It was, by far, the toughest Japanese aircraft.


Sunderland Mk III:
Maximum speed:
212 mph
Range: 3,000 mi
Service ceiling: 15,000ft ft
Rate of climb:790 ft/min
Armament: One .303 Vickers GO machine gun in nose turret (optional second gun in nose turret, two .303 Browning machine guns in dorsal turret, four .303 Browning machine guns in tail turret, four fixed .303 Browning machine guns firing ahead, one .50 Browning machine gun in each waist position
Ordnance: Assorted weapons to total weight of 5,000lbs housed in hull and cranked out under wings prior to attack
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B-17 on April 08, 2011, 03:40:56 PM
H8K2:
Armament: Five 20mm Type 99 Model I cannon (same as tail gun on G4M in AH) in bow, dorsal, and tail turrets, plus one each in two waist blisters; five 7.7mm Type 97 machine guns (same as 7.7mm guns on G4M in AH) in fuselage hatches, giving some fire coverage in all directions

they had 5x20mm? and thank you :)
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Karnak on April 08, 2011, 03:50:50 PM
I have a bunch of photos and such I can send you if you like.
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/album/watermark.php?file=6879)
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B3YT on April 12, 2011, 03:06:32 AM
later sunderlands had 4 browning .50 in the tail turret and twin .50 in the Dorsal and nose turret . 20mm cannon were also added plus a move to wasp engines in the MKIV
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Noir on April 12, 2011, 03:22:55 AM
the difference in characteristics is staggering! It does looks like the H8K is WAY superior.
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: bozon on April 12, 2011, 09:59:12 AM
Sunderland Mk III:
Maximum speed:
212 mph
It is not only a flying boat, it also flies like a boat...
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Karnak on April 12, 2011, 01:28:15 PM
It is not only a flying boat, it also flies like a boat...
Hey, that is something like 30mph faster that the oft requested PBY Catalina.
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Ack-Ack on April 12, 2011, 02:08:08 PM
Hey, that is something like 30mph faster that the oft requested PBY Catalina.


From the story I posted about the air duels between Japanese and US patrol planes.
Quote
Lt. Hitsuji survived the war to become the last Japanese pilot to fly the H8K2 when he flew the big boat to Yokohama and where it was handed over to the US occupational forces. He was escorted by a PBY, but had to fly in zigzag pattern to keep from overtaking the PBY.

Another interesting side note...the increased defensive firepower on the H8K2 was a direct result of the "patrol plane air war" against US patrol planes and bombers.

ack-ack
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B3YT on April 12, 2011, 05:48:15 PM
Oh just found out the 1944 sunderland MkV had 16 .50cal  in it's turrets and  waste gun points and the forward fixed guns moved over to 4 X 20mm . 
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Angus on April 13, 2011, 04:46:27 AM
Holy cow!
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: bozon on April 13, 2011, 01:39:34 PM
Oh just found out the 1944 sunderland MkV had 16 .50cal  in it's turrets and  waste gun points and the forward fixed guns moved over to 4 X 20mm . 
OK, so it was a slow flying flak boat...
Talk about a death star.
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B3YT on April 14, 2011, 04:40:48 PM
wasn't called the flying porcupine for nothing.

My grand father worked at RAF Pembroke after Serving in the DAF with 6 Squadron.   He said cleaning the tail gunners window was done by dangling off the tail  with rope tied around your ankles
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B-17 on April 14, 2011, 07:36:00 PM
makes sense...pretty high off the ground (if thats where you were...)
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B3YT on April 15, 2011, 02:08:44 AM
The MkIV was  quite well armed Twin .50 in the nose turret , twin 20mm cannon in dorsel 4 .50cal in tail . 2 .50 in waste and extra   2 fixed in the nose . add that to the 4 in the tail gun . :O  details here

http://www.aviastar.org/gallery/sunderland.html (http://www.aviastar.org/gallery/sunderland.html)

 :cheers:
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Karnak on April 15, 2011, 03:55:54 AM

From the story I posted about the air duels between Japanese and US patrol planes.
Another interesting side note...the increased defensive firepower on the H8K2 was a direct result of the "patrol plane air war" against US patrol planes and bombers.

ack-ack
Yup, and it was the Sunderland that was 30mph faster than the PBY.  The H8K2 was about 80mph faster than the Sunderland.

_____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ ___________________


The later Sunderlands got a lot better on firepower, but they still lagged a long way behind the H8K on performance.  That was an interesting note about the Sunderland's engines.  Contrasts markedly with the claims some people make about engine management being required on these aircraft and the engine self destructing if you ran it on MIL or WEP for very long.

Be fun to have both of them though.


I think it is kind of funny that the H8K2 may be the best Axis "heavy bomber" that could be added.
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B-17 on April 15, 2011, 12:53:42 PM
That was an interesting note about the Sunderland's engines.  Contrasts markedly with the claims some people make about engine management being required on these aircraft and the engine self destructing if you ran it on MIL or WEP for very long.

if the sunderland was (however) loosely based on the Boeing 314 Clipper, would they not be able to access the engines in-flight/ on the water if they needed maintenance?

I think it is kind of funny that the H8K2 may be the best Axis "heavy bomber" that could be added.

i think its funny too :lol
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: Karnak on April 15, 2011, 02:29:37 PM
if the sunderland was (however) loosely based on the Boeing 314 Clipper, would they not be able to access the engines in-flight/ on the water if they needed maintenance?
According to the "must press keys to keep the engine from exploding" guys, it shouldn't matter other than being able to ditch better.  The engine lifespan, according to these guys, should frequently be measured in minutes if run at MIL and not cruising power.  The description should not be "reduced engine lifespan".
Title: Re: Sunderland vs. H8K2 Emily
Post by: B3YT on April 18, 2011, 06:29:23 AM
I don't think it was based on the clipper. The wings are very different , the short Sunderland was based more on the Empire flying boats operated by B.O.C.A and Imperial aways to  fly to the far east and Africa  .