Luftwaffe Zeros?

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?
Yep... And one could also add Radio's, armour plate, self sealing fuel tanks (which I seem to recall the Japanese eventually added or at least tried to add) etc... At some point though the resulting air craft isn't the same aircraft as the one the Japanese initially went to war in.

If changes to a life safety system such as pilot oxygen were needed I expect an early 1940's Luftwaffe would have wanted a fairly thorough and likely time consuming testing process. (Unless it was originally designed to have the capacity expanded and had been flight tested.)

Best regards
Blue cat
 
Last edited:
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.

Were they teetering?

Didn't the UK start the battle with more aircraft in reserve than the Luftwaffe and then outproduce Germany throughout virtually the whole war?
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Actually the BoB was too soon for the A6M to be of much use. The initial per-production run of aircraft did not arrive until July of 1940, with squadron production copies not reaching the field until early September (total production through Sept 30, 1940 was under 50 airframes), while the BoB was over by the end of October 1940.

The A6M was actually very much a flawed aircraft. It built its rep against aircraft that were already obsolescent, if not outright obsolete like the F2A, & I-15 (it is worth considering that the A6M actually had a negative exchange ratio vs. the F4F, as document by Lundstrom in his seminal The First Team, and no one ever mistook the Wildcat for an air superiority fighter). While it was an extraordinarily maneuverable aircraft, that was at low speed (at 200 mph it was "light as a feather" at 225 that went away), at higher speed it had considerable difficultly turning with even the P-40, much less the P-39, although it took USAAF pilots a while to figure out that it was a REALLY bad idea to get into a low speed turning fight with a Zero. It was also at its best as medium altitude, not the higher altitude favored in the BoB (this is also why the U.S. contemporary designs, including the P-39 and P-40 were of little help to the RAF, they were very good at 10-15K, much less so over 20k). The weakness of the A6M at altitude went well beyond just the limited oxygen supply (although increasing the supply by adding bottles or increasing the size of the existing supply bottles would add weight, something that quickly turns the Zero from nimble to, well, not). If the A6M's radio was not removed by the pilots (who preferred to lose the radio to save weight) and given even minimal defensive equipment it was a very ordinary aircraft since the added weight robbed range, speed and maneuverability. The aircraft, in its original form, was also severely undergunned, with two rifle caliber mg and two 20mm cannon with very small ammunition drums (60 rounds initially). This was later somewhat corrected, with the cannon ammo per gun increased to 100 (later 120) rounds and the replacement of first one, and then both 7.7mm machine guns with 13.2mm (.51 cal) guns in the Model 52 variants.

Facing the Spitfire, and even the Hurricane if handled correctly, the A6M would be remembered as what it was, an extremely maneuverable medium altitude fighter that had near zero survivability built into the design and an excellent place for good pilots to die.
 
IIRC by September they were running short of pilots.

I believe the RAF did have vast numbers of qualified pilots in desk jobs, as OTU instructors, sitting in 13 Group shooting down the occasional recce etc though.

I may be wrong (I don't have exact numbers to hand) but I'm fairly sure that although fairly short of pilots they were never close to actually not having enough to intercept raids in the south.

(How badly off for trained crews were the Luftwaffe by September 1940?)
 
Yep... And one could also add Radio's, armour plate, self sealing fuel tanks (which I seem to recall the Japanese eventually added or at least tried to add) etc... At some point though the resulting air craft isn't the same aircraft as the one the Japanese initially went to war in.

Pretty much the A6M5
A6M2 3,704lb empty; 5,313lb loaded
A6M5c 4,751lb empty; 6,945lb loaded

That got you 18.5 gallons more gas(117lbs), three Type 3 13mm machine guns (one in cowl, others outboard of wing 20mm) Those 20mm were now belt fed Type 99 with 125 rounds, and the wing was both stronger, and shorter for better roll and diving performance.

That extra weight dropped the speed down to 348mph and range to 1300 miles at 230mph, but the new two-speed supercharger improved the climb to 20k slightly over the M2
But the pilot now had armor plate, armor glass, self sealing tanks, and CO2 bottles for fires

I think a worthy tradeoff, still gives you long range fighter that still compares well to the MkII Spitfire
4,541lb empty; 6,172b loaded 354 mph and gets to 20,000 feet 7 seconds sooner

changes to a life safety system such as pilot oxygen were needed I expect an early 1940's Luftwaffe would have wanted a fairly thorough and likely time consuming testing process. (Unless it was originally designed to have the capacity expanded.)

Aircraft oxygen systems are already set for multiple bottles, more or larger isn't a problem, though will slightly adjust the CoG/trim
 
Well having access to a modified (and presumably more powerful) engine and being prepared to make changes to an oxygen system designed and installed by a manufacturer in a country on the other side of the world does simplify things somewhat :)

Change was the supercharger, 1130 vs 950hp. The higher HP Sakae with Water/Methanol boost wasn't ready for the M5c model.

Of all the things on an aircraft, the Oxygen tank manifold and regulator is one of the easier things to change.
 
Facing the Spitfire, and even the Hurricane if handled correctly, the A6M would be remembered as what it was, an extremely maneuverable medium altitude fighter that had near zero survivability built into the design and an excellent place for good pilots to die.

The RAF had a chance to see what that was, in the Hawk-75 A4 that were to have gone to France, but became Mohawk instead.
They didn't want a 'lightweight' fighter, even with the types excellent performance against 109s over France.

But in RAF testing, it was found far more maneuverable than the Spitfire, but slower.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Pretty much the A6M5
A6M2 3,704lb empty; 5,313lb loaded
A6M5c 4,751lb empty; 6,945lb loaded

That got you 18.5 gallons more gas(117lbs), three Type 3 13mm machine guns (one in cowl, others outboard of wing 20mm) Those 20mm were now belt fed Type 99 with 125 rounds, and the wing was both stronger, and shorter for better roll and diving performance.

That extra weight dropped the speed down to 348mph and range to 1300 miles at 230mph, but the new two-speed supercharger improved the climb to 20k slightly over the M2
But the pilot now had armor plate, armor glass, self sealing tanks, and CO2 bottles for fires

I think a worthy tradeoff, still gives you long range fighter that still compares well to the MkII Spitfire
4,541lb empty; 6,172b loaded 354 mph and gets to 20,000 feet 7 seconds sooner



Aircraft oxygen systems are already set for multiple bottles, more or larger isn't a problem, though will slightly adjust the CoG/trim
And by the time this aircraft is in production it will face the Spitfire Mk XIV and Tempest and get chopped to bits (or the P-51D, P-47D bubble tops, P-38L, all of which turned the A6M Model 52 into shredded aluminum garnish across the Pacific).
 
And by the time this aircraft is in production it will face the Spitfire Mk XIV and Tempest and get chopped to bits (or the P-51D, P-47D bubble tops, P-38L, all of which turned the A6M Model 52 into shredded aluminum garnish across the Pacific).

Figures listed to show what the basic airframe did with all the survivability added in, with a PoD like the Germans get the initial design specs of what the Zero would be in 1939, and built that way, one with the extra gear (M5c) and one without(M2)

There is no reason the Zero couldn't have been built similar to the long overdue M5c at the start, excepting the stuff that wasn't developed yet, like the belt fed 20mm.

other than the IJN worshiping the God of maneuverability above all others- that's the faith that needs to be crushed by USN pilots first before they would think of adding survivability into designs.

The Germans, they don't worship that Godthe way the Japanese did, and would want that stuff in.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Figures listed to show what the basic airframe did with all the survivability added in, with a PoD like the Germans get the initial design specs of what the Zero would be in 1939, and built that way, one with the extra gear (M5c) and one without(M2)

There is no reason the Zero couldn't have been built similar to the long overdue M5c at the start, excepting the stuff that wasn't developed yet, like the belt fed 20mm.

other than the IJN worshiping the God of maneuverability above all others- that's the faith that needs to be crushed by USN pilots first before they would think of adding survivability into designs.

The Germans, they don't worship that Godthe way the Japanese did, and would want that stuff in.
There is also no reason that the British couldn't put the Tempest into operation, except the engine wasn't ready yet, or go with a later Mark of the Spitfire (heck let's go all the way to the F.24). For that matter the the U.S. could simply start to provide the Lightning to the RAF with the full supercharger set-up, which is much more likely and reasonable than the A6M Model 52 being a thing at the start of the BoB. The only reason the Model 52, especially the later versions, even existed was becuse the Japanese were, for a varity of reasons, forced to continiue to play the same poker hand while their opponents continually were dealt additional aces. If one side gets to update by three-four years, the other should as well. Otherwise you wind up with the scenario where you are asking "WI the Luftwaffe had the Ta-152 at the time of BoB and the RAF was limited to the Goliath?"
 
Oh, its unlikely of course, being at least three PoDs, Nazis deciding that a lightweight fighter was desirable, then getting it started in time for 1940, and using the Zero as inspiration.

Just the M2 and M5c are good examples what could be done. There was no reason the Zero couldn't have had armor and Self-sealing tanks in 1940, other than the IJN being completely wedded to the idea of dogfighting as the be-all, end-all.
 
I'd say few radios, poor roll rate at speed, no armor or self sealing tanks were far worse.
Indeed. The fragile Zero was nearly a made-to-order target for RAF fighters armed with eight otherwise light mgs. The Bf-109 was stoutly armoured and hard to shoot down. Once the Spitfire and Hurricane pilots understood its limitations the Zero would have been shredded apart.

And if the Spits and Hurricanes are busy, imagine this 20mm armed monster roaring in from above at your Zero at 360 mph.

avwhirl_03.jpg


There was no reason the Zero couldn't have had armor and Self-sealing tanks in 1940, other than the IJN being completely wedded to the idea of dogfighting as the be-all, end-all.
No, they couldn't get a powerful enough engine, so needed to keep the weight down. The A6M2 (6,164 lbs, loaded) in service from 1940 to 1943 had a 940 hp engine. This is woefully underpowered for the BoB, where the Bf-109E (5,875 lbs loaded) and the Spitfire MkII (6,172 lbs loaded) have 1,200 hp, or 27% more power.

And forget about it into 1941, where Bf-109 and Spitfire are reaching over 1,600 hp, the 2,000 hp Typhoon cometh and the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 had a 1,677 hp BMW radial. Maybe the Japanese should have license built the BMW 801 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_801
 
Last edited:
No, they couldn't get a powerful enough engine, so needed to keep the weight down. The A6M2 (6,164 lbs, loaded) in service from 1940 to 1943 had a 940 hp engine. This is woefully underpowered for the BoB, where the Bf-109E (5,875 lbs loaded) and the Spitfire MkII (6,172 lbs loaded) have 1,200 hp, or 27% more power.

And forget about it into 1941, where Bf-109 and Spitfire are reaching over 1,600 hp, the 2,000 hp Typhoon cometh and the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 had a 1,677 hp BMW radial. Maybe the Japanese should have license built the BMW 801 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_801

M2 was 5,313lb loaded, and most of that that fuel. The M3 with 1130 HP first flew in July, 1941. They could have used the larger Ha-41 2288 c.i. radial, had the IJA and IJN been on better terms.
 
Again, there's no way to get any Mitsubishi Zeros in production to have any for Germany.

I'm just going with a PoD of Germans develop a Zero like fighter that could theoretically be ready for use by May, 1940
It wouldn't have the Sakae 21, but probably the BMW139, of similar power. I just used the M2 and M5c for what kind performance would be available for a light fighter that could cover all the British Isles.

This really hasn't been done before, that I recall seeing
 
Pretty much the A6M5
A6M2 3,704lb empty; 5,313lb loaded
A6M5c 4,751lb empty; 6,945lb loaded

That got you 18.5 gallons more gas(117lbs), three Type 3 13mm machine guns (one in cowl, others outboard of wing 20mm) Those 20mm were now belt fed Type 99 with 125 rounds, and the wing was both stronger, and shorter for better roll and diving performance.

That extra weight dropped the speed down to 348mph and range to 1300 miles at 230mph, but the new two-speed supercharger improved the climb to 20k slightly over the M2
But the pilot now had armor plate, armor glass, self sealing tanks, and CO2 bottles for fires

I think a worthy tradeoff, still gives you long range fighter that still compares well to the MkII Spitfire
4,541lb empty; 6,172b loaded 354 mph and gets to 20,000 feet 7 seconds sooner



Aircraft oxygen systems are already set for multiple bottles, more or larger isn't a problem, though will slightly adjust the CoG/trim


is it really fair to compare a 1943 zero to a 1940 spitfire??

edit: i see people have beaten me to it
 
Top