Luftwaffe Zeros?

Here's an interesting "What If" that was inspired by Saburo Sakai.

He stated that if the Germans had A6M2's during the Battle of Britain, the outcome might have been different.

The A6M saw it operational debut in September, 1940. Certainly in the right timeframe.

It had the range to rove all over the UK, and was certainly more maneuverable than the Spitfire or Hurricane, as was proven when the RAF fielded both aircraft in the early days of the Pacific.

British pilots early on didn't appreciate the Zero's performance, and got their heads handed to them until they paid heed to the guys that had been flying P-40's, and NOT dogfighting the Japanese. Based on an RAF squadron that had fought the Germans, and expected the Zero to be meat on the table. The table turned in a big way.

So think in terms of 1940. The Germans have a fighter that had the range to attack the RAF anywhere in the UK, stay with the bombers, pretty much the same firepower as the Me-109, not as fast or a high ceiling as the Spitfire.

How long would it take the RAF to figure out the hit and run tactics to fight the Zero, before they were decimated. They were already teetering by September 1940.
 
I am not expert in this area but I bet the ZERO would not have the reputation it has in OTL if it was up against first rate planes. It was long ranged and manouverable yes, but only because the Japanese cut out anything heavy, like armour, protected fuel tanks, structural reinforcement or big guns. Flown by German pilots over southern England (where all the targets were) the British would react as they did to OTL, only fight fighters when absolutely necessary and concentrate on the bombers.
I wonder if this would not go much worse for the Luftwaffe.
 
I am not expert in this area but I bet the ZERO would not have the reputation it has in OTL if it was up against first rate planes. It was long ranged and manouverable yes, but only because the Japanese cut out anything heavy, like armour, protected fuel tanks, structural reinforcement or big guns. Flown by German pilots over southern England (where all the targets were) the British would react as they did to OTL, only fight fighters when absolutely necessary and concentrate on the bombers.
I wonder if this would not go much worse for the Luftwaffe.

Also having been seen in close quarters in summer 1940, not so much of a surprise 18 months later. Japan would have a hell of a time of it.
 
Fighter Command, using GCI, was able to, and favoured, bouncing Luftwaffe aircraft from above. That tactic should work fine against Zeros - the trick is to not get involved in a dogfight afterwards.
The lack of armour presumably means greater losses, casualties and damage to machine-gun fire, so availability would suffer.
The Zero's range is useful if you want to escort raids to specific targets, but the Luftwaffe didn't really know what to target, so it's unlikely to be decisive.
 
The Zero was a good Carrier-based Fighter and like all Carrier planes, as previously mentioned, had to sacrifice a lot in order to save weight. The A6M would have faired incredibly poorly as a land-based fighter against purpose-built ones like the Hurricane and Spitfires.

Also, how and why would the Japanese even send A6M2s, their best design that caught US intelligence by surprise in '41, to the Germans in a fight that it wasn't designed for? It'd ruin the initial surprise for their already-planned War in the Pacific. The only reason I can think of, since Japan did buy Bf 109s (a grand total of six aircrafts) and a signly Fw 190, is that Germany buys a couple in order to study carrier fighter designs for CV Graf Zeppelin. Then again, I think the design for the Bf 109T variant for that purpose was ready anyways and the Japanese only got a very limited number of German planes for trials and testing purposes.

So, yeah. Very unlikely and a bad idea anyways.
 
The A6M saw it operational debut in September, 1940. Certainly in the right timeframe.
Certainly not in the right timeframe.
The German pilots liked radios, armor plate and self-sealing fuel tanks.
The Kawasaki Ki-61, also not in the right time frame, used the Bf-109 engine, and exhibited much superior performance without the short-comings of the Zero, leading one to postulate that the OTL Bf-109 could have been better.
Many of the top-scoring Luftwaffe aces had themselves been shot down many times. I don't think the same goes for Japanese aces.
 
German Zekes will have the range, speed & firepower but almost no armor to protect the pilot and the plane from cannon and mg fire from enemy aircraft and Flak...
 
I now this have been done over and over, but isn't the FW187 or even HE112B or HE100 more likely scenarios for the longer range, and all better fighters against their opponents?
 
I now this have been done over and over, but isn't the FW187 or even HE112B or HE100 more likely scenarios for the longer range, and all better fighters against their opponents?

Yes, all this has been done before, but the Zero has historically established superiority against Hurricanes and Spitfires in real life, although with pilots very proficient in type, against pilots maybe less proficient. The other German aircraft never had proven abilities beyond those we wish to lend to them by way of fantasy.
 
The Zero's range is useful if you want to escort raids to specific targets, but the Luftwaffe didn't really know what to target, so it's unlikely to be decisive.

With drop tanks, the Zero could cover all of the UK, with a maximum range of 1930 miles, 400 miles more than the Ju-88 or He-11

You could have Zeros loitering around UK airfields for a long time.
 
With drop tanks, the Zero could cover all of the UK
Doesn't the Zero require ridiculously lean setting to achieve the range and therefore very slow economical cruise speed that leaves it very vulnerable if that long range is over GB controlled land rather than empty Pacific?
 
Doesn't the Zero require ridiculously lean setting to achieve the range and therefore very slow economical cruise speed that leaves it very vulnerable if that long range is over GB controlled land rather than empty Pacific?
Excellent point. The Luftwaffe Zeroes would have to remain in combat cruise over GB controlled land, but revert to ridiculous lean setting over the empty North Sea.
 
The Zero's biggest weakness was its poor ammunition load.Zero pilots could find themselves deep in enemy territory and out of ammunition.That weakness cost the Japanese dearly at Midway.
 
Doesn't the Zero require ridiculously lean setting to achieve the range and therefore very slow economical cruise speed that leaves it very vulnerable if that long range is over GB controlled land rather than empty Pacific?

Cruise setting is cruise setting, all aircraft use cruise for determining max range, like the MkII Spitfire and 405 mile radius range, a bit over 800 ferry range. A6M2 without tanks cruised at 207.

MkIIs climbed at 168 to 12k, then 152 at 20k

The drop tanks on the Zero had more volume than all the internal fuel on the MkII
Using emergency war power to climb to the altitude of the Bogies, that takes a lot more than cruise setting as well, and the Pilot of the Zero can goto auto-rich on the carb and advance the throttle as soon as the incoming are spotted.
 
Last edited:
The Zero's biggest weakness was its poor ammunition load.Zero pilots could find themselves deep in enemy territory and out of ammunition.That weakness cost the Japanese dearly at Midway.

I'd say few radios, poor roll rate at speed, no armor or self sealing tanks were far worse.
 
The Zero's biggest weakness was its poor ammunition load.Zero pilots could find themselves deep in enemy territory and out of ammunition.That weakness cost the Japanese dearly at Midway.
The thing that cost the Japanese at Midway was the timely sacrifice of a large number of TBDs.
The Bf-109E-4 carried twice the mg ammo, at 1000 rpg, but the same 20mm 60 rpg. The Spit carried 300 rpg times 8, and the following SpitV carried 60 20mm rpg, and 4X 300 rpg for the mgs. I don't think that makes it such a big weakness, all things considered. Not as big as all the other weaknesses.
 

Towelie

Banned
Flying Zeros means that you will probably have a much higher kill rate in dogfights (although keep in mind, at the Zero's peak, it was being flown by some of the best trained pilots on Earth; when that advantage went away, the Zero suddenly wasn't so awe inspiring anymore). German pilots were good, but I don't know if they were at the level of early 1942 Japanese pilots.

But Zeros have almost no real protection other than speed. An aerial campaign over Britain means dealing with AA guns, which means dealing with attrition. And having Zeros over Britain all the time means having a lot of planes shot down, which will degrade pilot quality faster than the Germans can train new good pilots.

The British simply will avoid dogfights and go after bombers. The Zero isn't going to change much other than to make the British more wary of dogfighting, which OTL they didn't do a ton of anyways because dogfights led to higher losses that they could not afford.

Also, the manner of training that German pilots engaged in included radios. The Zero wasn't known for its amazing radio communication abilities. This would be a problem.
 

Errolwi

Monthly Donor
jsb said:
Doesn't the Zero require ridiculously lean setting to achieve the range and therefore very slow economical cruise speed that leaves it very vulnerable if that long range is over GB controlled land rather than empty Pacific?
Cruise setting is cruise setting, all aircraft use cruise for determining max range, like the MkII Spitfire and 405 mile radius range, a bit over 800 ferry range. A6M2 without tanks cruised at 207.
...

Except for those times when people like Lindbergh come up with settings and methods that provide much longer range than the manufacturer's recommended settings. Drastically improving ferry range, or the distance from the combat zone that you can base your fighters.
 
The Zero's biggest weakness was its poor ammunition load.Zero pilots could find themselves deep in enemy territory and out of ammunition.That weakness cost the Japanese dearly at Midway.
I also recall reading that the oxygen supplies (or limited quantities thereof) in the Zero were a weakness. I never tried to find a primary source for that comment but it seems to align with the other reported weaknesses. If this weakness was real and the RAF fighters stay at high altitudes before intercepting the Luftwaffe, that could present issues.
 
I also recall reading that the oxygen supplies (or limited quantities thereof) in the Zero were a weakness. I never tried to find a primary source for that comment but it seems to align with the other reported weaknesses. If this weakness was real and the RAF fighters stay at high altitudes before intercepting the Luftwaffe, that could present issues.
https://books.google.com/books?id=Z6WjCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA80

Looks like plenty of room to add more bottles, 10-15 pounds each. How much time you need above 15k?
 
Top