Zeroes and Wildcats over Stalingrad

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

Just a dopey Sidethough, since 1C will slowly trickle in the Midway and Okinawa Aircraft, we will see almost all these Aircraft fly in our current Setup.

Who's looking forward Escorting Peshkas with Wildcats then?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Huh..?

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

Huh..?

Zeroes vs. Yak-1

[Finkeren]

Honestly I'm looking forward to trying the A6M2 vs. I-16 matchup. On paper the two aircraft have very similar performance (top speed, climb rate etc.) The Zero has a significanly lower wing loading and probably a smaller turn radius in addition to likely being more stable. The I-16 on the other hand has a better power/weight ratio, rolls twice as fast and can do insane flick rolls maneuvers. 

[Danziger]

We don't even know the planeset yet do we? You'll be able to fly them over any of the maps you have. If the ocean map isn't released first, I would think flying over the Black Sea in Kuban map would have to suffice.

[Riderocket]

Honestly I'm looking forward to trying the A6M2 vs. I-16 matchup. On paper the two aircraft have very similar performance (top speed, climb rate etc.) The Zero has a significanly lower wing loading and probably a smaller turn radius in addition to likely being more stable. The I-16 on the other hand has a better power/weight ratio, rolls twice as fast and can do insane flick rolls maneuvers.

Hmmm, I never knew that! is the zero really that slow? o.o

[Finkeren]

Zeroes vs. Yak-1

 

The Yak-1 is gonna murder the Zeke. Faster, better armament, slightly better climb rate, better roll rate, faster in a dive, better durability. 

Hmmm, I never knew that! is the zero really that slow? o.o

 

A6M2 model 11. Top speed between 530 and 535 km/h depending on the source. The I-16 type 24 is 5 - 10 km/h slower.

 

The only reason we think of the Zero as being not that slow is because we usually compare it to the Wildcat which was just as slow.

Edited November 16, 2016 by Finkeren

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

The Yak-1 is gonna murder the Zeke. Faster, better armament, slightly better climb rate, better roll rate, faster in a dive, better durability. 

 

A6M2 model 11. Top speed between 530 and 535 km/h depending on the source. The I-16 type 24 is 5 - 10 km/h slower.

 

The only reason we think of the Zero as being not that slow is because we usually compare it to the Wildcat which was just as slow.

Depending on Power Settings of Course. Do we know the Powersettings the Japanese tested at?

[Finkeren]

Depending on Power Settings of Course. Do we know the Powersettings the Japanese tested at?

 

Since we're talking absolute top speed, my guess is, that they tested at maximum rated power (which was 940hp for the Sakae 12 used in the A6M2, compare that to the 1180hp for the Klimov 105PF) The Sakae 12 had no MW boost. 

[Sokol1]

Zero X Tom's will be better. A "travel time" over Stalingrad due a failed "German Secret Weapon".  

 

Edited November 16, 2016 by Sokol1

[=WH=PangolinWranglin]

I want to see a server where it will be 2 nation vs. 2 nation over any map. I.e. Russia and Japan vs Germany and America, and randomize the teams every time the server restarts. All over a completely random map. 

Edited November 16, 2016 by =DF=spaceman1999

[Asgar]

I want to see a server where it will be 2 nation vs. 2 nation over any map. I.e. Russia and Japan vs Germany and America, and randomize the teams every time the server restarts. All over a completely random map. 

sure, no problem...Gaijin has somthing for your liking 

[Riderocket]

I want to see a server where it will be 2 nation vs. 2 nation over any map. I.e. Russia and Japan vs Germany and America, and randomize the teams every time the server restarts. All over a completely random map.

I think that sounds like fun

[SvAF/F19_Tomten]

Just imagine intense fighting in the skies above Stalingrad and suddenly... A Japanese carrier on the Volga!

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

Wouldn't it be Ger+Jap vs. Rus+USA? Wildcat and I-16 would also be interesting to see.

What Timeframe are we talking about with Okinawa and Midway?

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

A6M2 model 11. Top speed between 530 and 535 km/h depending on the source. The I-16 type 24 is 5 - 10 km/h slower.

 

That is quite an exaggeration Fink. No I-16 is 5-10 km/h slower, no I-16 even makes it over 500 km/h. As far as sources state top speed of those late production I-16s was 470 to 490 km/h at 4500 m. A6M2 at rated power makes at that altitude 539 km/h (335 mph). Even at worst conditions Zero is over 40 km/h faster.   

 

 

 

The only reason we think of the Zero as being not that slow is because we usually compare it to the Wildcat which was just as slow.

I dunno, even boosted I-16 at sea level is slower than F4F, at altitude Wildcat still holds speed advantage.  

[Finkeren]

What Timeframe are we talking about with Okinawa and Midway?

Two completely different time frames each at their own end of the war in the Pacific.

 

Midway is mid-1942, Okinawa is mid-1945.

[Finkeren]

 

That is quite an exaggeration Fink. No I-16 is 5-10 km/h slower, no I-16 even makes it over 500 km/h. As far as sources state top speed of those late production I-16s was 470 to 490 km/h at 4500 m. A6M2 at rated power makes at that altitude 539 km/h (335 mph). Even at worst conditions Zero is over 40 km/h faster.

I blame Wikipedia then. I just quickly lifted the numbers from there, as this wasn't exactly a deep FM discussion. They put the I-16 type 24 at 525 km/h.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Must have been that I-16 with some JATO !

 

 

 

The Yak-1 is gonna murder the Zeke. Faster, better armament, slightly better climb rate, better roll rate, faster in a dive, better durability. 

​Also, somehow missed that one. 

Depends on Yak, depends on Zeke. If we take what we have in game (so Series 69, forgetting 1b model) then fair comparison would be A6M3 model 32 which was introduced about a month earlier than Series 69. Yak-1 would definitely be a faster aircraft at low altitudes, I mean its engine was specifically designed to give maximum down low. But with altitude increase difference would start disappearing and eventually Yak-1 would be left behind. According to datasheet Yak-1 top climb rate is about 17 m/s, A6M3 can make even more and with altitude that climb advantage will only increase. Cant say anything about Yak-1 roll, since never saw a single document indicating how it should roll, but A6M3 has fairly good roll rate until higher speeds.

And armament is a matter of personal preference, two 20 mm and two 7.7 mm's vs one 20 mm and two 7.92s nose mounted.  

Edited November 16, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Honestly I'm looking forward to trying the A6M2 vs. I-16 matchup.

 

Sometimes in the IL-2 1946 server Skies of Valor there was a Japan vs China match up. Usually CW 21, I-153 and I-16 vs Zeros.  The I-153 turned better but the Zero could do some boom and zoom. With the I-16 at the deck there wasn't that much advantage and fighting the Japanese wasn't complicated, with the ShKAS high rate of fire it didn't take long to set the Zero on fire.

 

In those hot maps the Zeros had to fly with rads open and without wep... getting around 450 kph, very close to the I-16

 

 

Edited November 16, 2016 by SuperEtendard

[Finkeren]

Depends on Yak, depends on Zeke. If we take what we have in game (so Series 69, forgetting 1b model) then fair comparison would be A6M3 model 32 which was introduced about a month earlier than Series 69. Yak-1 would definitely be a faster aircraft at low altitudes, I mean its engine was specifically designed to give maximum down low. But with altitude increase difference would start disappearing and eventually Yak-1 would be left behind. According to datasheet Yak-1 top climb rate is about 17 m/s, A6M3 can make even more and with altitude that climb advantage will only increase. Cant say anything about Yak-1 roll, since never saw a single document indicating how it should roll, but A6M3 has fairly good roll rate until higher speeds.

And armament is a matter of personal preference, two 20 mm and two 7.7 mm's vs one 20 mm and two 7.92s nose mounted.

I'm not talking about the A6M3, I'm talking about the Zeke that will be in the Midway installment of this sim, which will be an A6M2.

 

About roll rate: The Yak, like all its stubby-winged cousins in the VVS was a strong roller. The Zero noticably was not, at least if this widely circulated chart is anything to go by:

 

 

As for armament: Yeah, it's sorta down to preference, but there's no denying, that wing mounted cannons tend to miss a lot more than engine mounted ones, and the Soviet weapons do have a huge advantage in rate of fire. Personally I'd take one ShVAK on the centerline over two wings-mounted Oerlikon knock-offs any day.

[Gambit21]

The Yak-1 is gonna murder the Zeke. Faster, better armament, slightly better climb rate, better roll rate, faster in a dive, better durability. 

 

That's a "theoretical" - only exists on paper and assumes perfectly flown aircraft.

In reality the Yak driver will try and knife-fight the Zeke in most cases and be eaten - just like it used to play out in the old sim where aircraft

that should have murdered me were instead vanquished. (I know the old Zeke was over-modeled as well)

Still, only ever had ONE P-38 flight correctly against me, and I couldn't touch him. He couldn't get me either...fun stalemate that fight.

Edited November 16, 2016 by Gambit21

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

The Yak, like all its stubby-winged cousins in the VVS was a strong roller. The Zero noticably was not, at least if this widely circulated chart is anything to go by:

That's not what I've read, dont see any specific reason for Yak or  LaGG to possess above exceptional roll rate in their wing and aileron designs. Zero did not possess good roll rate at high speeds, but to all my knowledge it wasn't bad at low speeds either.

The above chart has two flaws - first is that it shows the worst scenario for A6M2 and does not even provide stick forces, application of roll rate without proper stick forces is somewhat hard ... The point is that page before that chart is another one providing helix angle pb/2v (on which roll rates are based) however only for the one side. As with many other aircraft roll to one direction was noticeably better than for other direction (due to rotation of propeller into one direction), and this is the case above. 

 

 

 

Yeah, it's sorta down to preference, but there's no denying, that wing mounted cannons tend to miss a lot more than engine mounted ones, and the Soviet weapons do have a huge advantage in rate of fire. Personally I'd take one ShVAK on the centerline over two wings-mounted Oerlikon knock-offs any day.

Pilots tend to miss, guns only miss when pilots aim is off. As long as those knock-offs will properly ignite things I'm ok with them  But I'd not mind something better like Ho-5, then again, its going to happen with late war scenario. 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

There is a detailed sovuet combat trial with a comparison between the Yak1 and a captured Bf109F2 (mind you with damaged compressor). In terms of manouvrebility it said that the Yak had about equal to slightly superiour rollrate than the Bf109F (~ 90°/s) depending on speed. For vertical manouvreing the 109 was found better.

 

Zero vs Yak would surely be fun because even though the Yak is faster their main tactic is going slow and droping flaps.

[[TWB]80hd]

Definitely!! I can't wait!

 

Hopefully we'll get a Mediterranean theatre as well!

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Definitely!! I can't wait!

 

Hopefully we'll get a Mediterranean theatre as well!

I really hope that this gets picked up by community, there is nothing that could stop community from making Med map at this point. As I pointed out before, planeset with BoK will make it very capable scenario. And with ships some convoy operations will also become possible. Only thing lacking is map which can be dealt with as was shown in few instances in this game and TF shows with CloD. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Zero X Tom's will be better. A "travel time" over Stalingrad due a failed "German Secret Weapon".  

 

 

Yeah, the piggy F 14s had an easy time with those tarted up T6 Texans...

 

[BeastyBaiter]

Don't underestimate the A6M2 Mod 22 (Midway model), it was arguably the best fighter on the face of the planet in 1941. It had a very high climb rate, was relatively fast, had excellent range, good firepower and was superbly agile. The only reason the A6M isn't viewed as a god mode plane by most of us in the flight sim community is because it never really evolved over the course of the war like the Bf-109, Spit, Yak and many other types did. And so by the mid point, it was outclassed and the situation only got worse as time went on. I predict the F4F vs A6M match is going to be about as one sided as the P-40E vs Bf-109F4 is currently. Back on topic, it will happen and it will be hilarious, especially sailing carriers down the Volga.  

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

Don't underestimate the A6M2 Mod 22 (Midway model), it was arguably the best fighter on the face of the planet in 1941. It had a very high climb rate, was relatively fast, had excellent range, good firepower and was superbly agile. The only reason the A6M isn't viewed as a god mode plane by most of us in the flight sim community is because it never really evolved over the course of the war like the Bf-109, Spit, Yak and many other types did. And so by the mid point, it was outclassed and the situation only got worse as time went on. I predict the F4F vs A6M match is going to be about as one sided as the P-40E vs Bf-109F4 is currently. Back on topic, it will happen and it will be hilarious, especially sailing carriers down the Volga.

Wut? In climb it was outclassed by pretty much all german fighters, and equal to british and russian Aircraft and probably better than all American Fighters. Speed was dismally bad, especially in a dive, firepower was nothing special and agility doesn't matter if your enemy can BnZ you to death. It was outdated by 1938.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Right, comparing apples and oranges by ignorant. A6M2 is a carrier borne fighter, while 109 or Spitfire are land based machines and their designs reflect different philosophies and set of requirements. If Messerchmitt would have to satisfy range requirement or specific landing conditions like Horikoshi had to, I'm quite sure he would have to make some sacrifices. But not every machine can spend 12 hours in the air.

Nonetheless I dont think it was outclassed, at least if we compare it to the time it went into action (summer 1940) as aircraft had over 3000 feet per minute rate of climb and could reach 6000 meters in 7+ minutes, doesnt seem all that "outclassed" by German aircraft (however, they had advantage, that is true but its nothing surprising that 109 had more powerful engine with only slightly greater weight) and could compete with all other British, Soviet or American designs. 

Speed was satisfactory for that kind of aircraft, with maximum continuous around 275 knots (510 km/h) and maximum emergency about 300 knots (550 km/h), I challenge you to find another fighter design that that satisfies so many criteria and can make such speed out of 950 HP radial engine.

Firepower was in the same league as other aircraft of its time, nothing outstanding, nothing to be ashamed. And agility matters a lot if you cant land a single hit on your target.

 

 

 

It was outdated by 1938.

Try your luck next time.  

Edited November 18, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[Lusekofte]

I really hope that this gets picked up by community, there is nothing that could stop community from making Med map at this point. As I pointed out before, planeset with BoK will make it very capable scenario. And with ships some convoy operations will also become possible. Only thing lacking is map which can be dealt with as was shown in few instances in this game and TF shows with CloD. 

 

The med without Beufighter´s and Blenheims , but with the A 20 , meh...... plausible but I wish for a New Guinea map with Beufighter and C 47 first, then a Med mod

Edited November 18, 2016 by 216th_LuseKofte

[BlitzPig_EL]

Indeed Hiromachi, the Zero was a brilliant design.  One must remember that from 1940 till 1944 when the P51s got their behind the seat long range fuel tank,  the A6M was the longest ranged single seat fighter in the world.

 

Japanese aircraft designers, and manufacturers, get a lot of derision by Western enthusiasts for building "paper" planes, flying Zippos, etc... when in fact their designs were brilliantly done.  I'd like to see any of the Western companies do better with the Imperial Japanese Navy specs that Mitsubishi had to meet.

 

Must be carrier qualified.

 

Must have a 1200 mile range.

 

Must be cannon armed.

 

Must have supreme aerobatic capabilities.

 

Must have a high rate of climb.

 

Will be powered by a 900 bhp radial engine. (Initially)

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

Must be carrier qualified.   Must have a 1200 mile range.   Must be cannon armed.   Must have supreme aerobatic capabilities.   Must have a high rate of climb.   Will be powered by a 900 bhp radial engine. (Initially)

 

It was actually more than that, whole set of almost twenty items specified looked about the way ... "We want it to be dogfighter, escort fighter, interceptor and energy fighter ... ugh, just make it everything".

General purpose called for escort fighter with dogfighting performance superior to all competitiors, but also interceptor capable of destroying enemy attackers.

It had specified wing span of 12 meters or less, top speed in excess of 500 km/h at 4000 meters altitude, time to altitude of less than 3.5 minutes to 3000 meters, maximum endurance in the air of 1.2 to 1.5 hour at full power with internal fuel only and 1.5 to 2 hours using also external fuel tank. At economic cruising speed aircraft had to stay in the air 6 to 8 hours.

There were also requirements about take-off distance, take-off speed, armament, communications (full radio set and direction-finding equipment).

Power plant was not specified directly - Horikoshi was given a choice, he could either use Mitsubishi Zuisei 13 (875 HP at 3.6 km alt) or Mitsubishi Kinsei Model 46 (1,070 HP at 4.2 km alt), of which he chose the first one as based on his quick calculations the latter engine would require larger fuselage (drag increase) and would consume a lot more fuel, thus aircraft would have to be heavier carrying more fuel to satisfy range.

 

It's easy to consider something obsolete when one doesnt try to put it into any perspective.   

[Feathered_IV]

Zero X Tom's will be better. A "travel time" over Stalingrad due a failed "German Secret Weapon".  

 

 

That is the sort of historical matchup that DCS will have to offer.

[Falco_Peregrinus]

I always wondered: were all those Zero's flying characteristics tested with the full fuel load aboard a plane?
If yes, the results are just oustanding for an early war fighter (a carrier-born one!)

[Gambit21]

Wut? In climb it was outclassed by pretty much all german fighters, and equal to british and russian Aircraft and probably better than all American Fighters. Speed was dismally bad, especially in a dive, firepower was nothing special and agility doesn't matter if your enemy can BnZ you to death. It was outdated by 1938.

Ehh...no

[Gambit21]

I always wondered: were all those Zero's flying characteristics tested with the full fuel load aboard a plane?

If yes, the results are just oustanding for an early war fighter (a carrier-born one!)

It was the class of the skies for a while there in the PTO.

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

The Zero is a Riced up Biplane. It is far too fragile and light to hold itself against even a Bf109T. In speed and climb it was inferior to both 109E and Spit Mk.I. The European Fighters also had Armor and self sealing tanks. Manouverability is only of a secondary importance, and negligible if your opponents outperform you already.

It's only upshot was Range and Endurance.

 

Both the 109T and Spit Mk.I were better.

 

Against American Aircraft it did have many advantages though, due to the low performance of it's American Counterparts.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

The Zero is a Riced up Biplane.

 

Saying stuff like that you only show your ignorance.

 

 

 

Against American Aircraft it did have many advantages though, due to the low performance of it's American Counterparts.

Especially by dismissing the US aircraft designs in such a low manner.

 

 

 

It is far too fragile and light to hold itself against even a Bf109T. In speed and climb it was inferior to both 109E and Spit Mk.I. The European Fighters also had Armor and self sealing tanks. Manouverability is only of a secondary importance, and negligible if your opponents outperform you already. It's only upshot was Range and Endurance.

I'm not even sure what you mean by fragile and light. Structurally A6M2 was no worse than any contemporary design, airframe was capable of withstanding loads in excess of 12 G's (though no pilot would be able to) and its only weakness was in unprotected fuel tanks - mind you that in 1940, unlike you claim, Luftwaffe did not have protected fuel tank. 109 E fuel tank was only protected by laminated bulkhead, no self-sealing coating was provided. Eventually F and G models would be fitted with a tank made of an inner lining of rubberized fabric and layers of vulcanized rubber, with a total thickness about 15 mm. RAF had fuel tanks protected by a thing called "Linatex" which was a thin blanket of rubber and treated canvas which was only partially effective against rifle caliber machine guns. However both British and German fighters had indeed armor protection.

 

In terms of raw performance I dont even see the point in addressing your follies.

[VBF-12_Stele]

This is turning into the old apples vs oranges discussion. Two very different types of wars using very different planes and doctrines from their respective countries. You can't ignore the incredible range some of the Japanese planes had over other planes. It doesn't do any good if you have a great plane that can't reach its target. This was essential for covering a war that spanned almost half of the world.