Luftwaffe Zeros?

It should probably be remembered that the A6M was designed the way it was because of the limitations of the available engine, and the power limits of that engine. The Germans had better engines, and the ability to produce them in numbers that the Japanese could only dream of.

That said, the Germans really should have developed a better fighter sooner than the Fw190A, which if it had been around is your Battle of Britain war winner. Thankfully for the Allies it wasn't available until 1942

For that matter, even better drop tanks would have done wonders
Indeed. I wonder what Willy Messerschmitt would have developed had the spec for the Bf-109 been for a single engined fighter capable of flying from the German border to London and back with time for combat. For starters this German P-51 would have likely scuppered the Bf-110 concept.
 

Sir Chaos

Banned
I think they'd Germanize Zero to Null, and then tack "...Chance zu überleben" on the end.

I´m for "Nullnummer" (roughly, "dummy" or "proof of concept", colloquial for "total failure"), because any Luftwaffe pilot who flies that thing will tell you it has to go back to the drawing board.

But "Papierflieger" (paper plane) or "Papiertiger" (paper tiger, to allude to its Asian origins) is also likely.
 
For that matter, even better drop tanks would have done wonders
One of the problems is that with the technology of the time good drop tanks are really, really hard to build - the only people who ever built a good one in WW2 were the British who used IIRC compressed paper impregnated with phenolic resin: the German and American tank designs all had leakage problems.
 
One of the problems is that with the technology of the time good drop tanks are really, really hard to build - the only people who ever built a good one in WW2 were the British who used IIRC compressed paper impregnated with phenolic resin: the German and American tank designs all had leakage problems.
Thanks. I love learning new stuff. I suppose the British metal tanks all leaked. Funny thing. The Americans introduced the P-47 into the Pacific theater and forgot to ship any drop tanks. The crafty Aussies were approached, and whipped up some aluminum tanks lickety-split. I didn't know they leaked. One thing about paper tanks that I used to know was that they could only be used once, and if a mission was aborted after filling the tank or after take-off, they had to be discarded, as they were too fragile to risk landing. Anyway, as the prostitute said to the leper, thanks for the tip.
 
One of the problems is that with the technology of the time good drop tanks are really, really hard to build - the only people who ever built a good one in WW2 were the British who used IIRC compressed paper impregnated with phenolic resin: the German and American tank designs all had leakage problems.
Were the British ones truly drop tanks? Could they be released by the pilot?
 
I´m for "Nullnummer" (roughly, "dummy" or "proof of concept", colloquial for "total failure"), because any Luftwaffe pilot who flies that thing will tell you it has to go back to the drawing board.

Given the Luftwaffe's contempt for the Hurricane, I think you'd be right. Maybe Fliegendebambusdämpfer? Des Hirothitos Feurzeug? Or just simply Papierdrachen.
 
That's what I've read - I'm quite sure it's possible to make a completely leaktight aluminium tank (the main aircraft fuel tanks were after all made like that), but it isn't easy and there were as I understand it a lot of problems with aluminium drop tanks in WW2.

@Admiral Beez , the British tanks were widely used by both the British and US forces in WW2, most of the drop tanks used by Mustangs for instance were made of paper. It was actually against the rules to land with one still fitted (they really weren't very strong and deteriorated over the course of a mission), so they absolutely had to be capable of being dropped by the pilot. Airfields actually had a designated drop zone for when missions were scrubbed and the tanks had to be jettisoned, which apparently never blew up even when 4,000 gallons of aviation spirit were dropped on them in rapid succession from a great height.
 

Sir Chaos

Banned
Given the Luftwaffe's contempt for the Hurricane, I think you'd be right. Maybe Fliegendebambusdämpfer? Des Hirothitos Feurzeug? Or just simply Papierdrachen.

Hmm... German uses almost the same word for "dragon" and "kite", so maybe the Luftwaffe would "officially" nickname the Zero "Drache" (dragon) to flatter their allies, but "unofficially" nickname it "Drachen" (kite) for its flimsy construction.

Or "Fliegendes Zündholz" (flying matchstick).

Or "Origami", again for how flimsy it is.
 
Hmm... German uses almost the same word for "dragon" and "kite", so maybe the Luftwaffe would "officially" nickname the Zero "Drache" (dragon) to flatter their allies, but "unofficially" nickname it "Drachen" (kite) for its flimsy construction.

I like the idea of that. No non-native speaker of German really understands noun endings anyway, so the Japanese would be unlikely to lose face. The only real problem with that is that the Luftwaffe aircraft involved in the Battle of Britain didn't have names. There was no Messerschmitt Orkan or Dornier Aufsässig as such. It would probably be known by its official designation depending on which company got the contract to produce them.

Officially sanctioned names like Hornisse, Komet, Schwalbe, Greif, Würger, Blitz and (my personal favourite) Störtebeker didn't come along until later and weren't much used outside of Signal (the Luftwaffe's in house magazine). Thinking back to interviews I've seen with Hanna Reitsch and Adolf Gallande, they refer to the aircraft they flew as the 163 or 262. Come to think of it, Reitsch did refer to the Me321 as the Giant when speaking English. It would be interesting to know what she called it in German.

I think the most exotic name we could expect for the Zero in 1940 would be Mitsubischi Mi-100 or something similar.
 

Sir Chaos

Banned
I like the idea of that. No non-native speaker of German really understands noun endings anyway, so the Japanese would be unlikely to lose face. The only real problem with that is that the Luftwaffe aircraft involved in the Battle of Britain didn't have names. There was no Messerschmitt Orkan or Dornier Aufsässig as such. It would probably be known by its official designation depending on which company got the contract to produce them.

Japanese planes had names. The Germans might decide to "honor" their allies for their contribution by following their custom. Cue the Mi-40 "Drache". (40 after the year 1940, since the original is the Type 0 after the year 2600 of the Japanese calendar)
 
and Adolf Gallande, they refer to the aircraft they flew as the 163 or 262. Come to think of it, Reitsch did refer to the Me321 as the Giant when speaking English. It would be interesting to know what she called it in German.
She might have called it the Gigant, but it doesn't matter because it never came when she called. It had no engines. Dolfo went by the name Galland, with no e.
 
Were the British ones truly drop tanks? Could they be released by the pilot?

They have to be really - you don't really want to be carrying a big external tank full of highly volatile fuel vapour around with you when the neighbours are shooting at you...
 
They have to be really - you don't really want to be carrying a big external tank full of highly volatile fuel vapour around with you when the neighbours are shooting at you...
Hurricanes carried non-jettison wing tanks for a while.
 
Were the British ones truly drop tanks? Could they be released by the pilot?

Well, the Germans did have a metal drop tank on the He-51B
heinkel-he51.jpg

Not exactly huge, added about 100 miles to the range, and could be jettisoned in emergencies
 
I am wondering if the Luffwaffe would accept a Japanese fighter. I read that the Japanese became "honorary Aryans" but would Nazi ideology be accepting of a fighter made by Asians?
On the other hand would the Zero be seen as "a sign of Aryan-Japanese friendship". Once the Zero fails would Goering tell Hitler "well we didn't invent it".

It has already been said that the Zero would not be ready for the Battle of Britain. How would the German copy of the A6M do against the Russians in 1942?
 
It has already been said that the Zero would not be ready for the Battle of Britain. How would the German copy of the A6M do against the Russians in 1942?
How would the Zero's brittle and corrosion-prone duralumin skin survive in the Russian climate? This light-weight alloy, along with the omission of armour and self-sealing fuel tanks was an essential component of the Zero's design.

If the Germans replaced the duralumin, added armour and self-sealing tanks, their A6M-clone will have performance closer to the A6M2-N.

320px-A6M2-N_Rufe.jpg
 
How would the Zero's brittle and corrosion-prone duralumin skin survive in the Russian climate? This light-weight alloy, along with the omission of armour and self-sealing fuel tanks was an essential component of the Zero's design.

If the Germans replaced the duralumin, added armour and self-sealing tanks, their A6M-clone will have performance closer to the A6M2-N.

320px-A6M2-N_Rufe.jpg

That float is a wee bit more drag.

Upthread, I listed the M5c version, that had thicker skin and spars for durability. It had the engine from the M3, a bit more powerful than the M2 1,130hp vs 940

The M2-N was 270mph. the M5c with the armor and reenforcing was 348mph

And humid Pacific temps was far worse, given the Salt content.

You realize that it gets cold at altitude, IJN Pilots had fur lined flying suits for a reason.
 
It has already been said that the Zero would not be ready for the Battle of Britain. How would the German copy of the A6M do against the Russians in 1942?

Aircooled engines are easier to deal with, than oil for warmups. Kerosene heaters and ducting, blowing hot air thru the front.
scan0002.jpg
 
Top