*Outmaneuvers your plane*

*Outmaneuvers your plane*

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    most aircraft shot down have no idea they are in a fight.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Describes my dates instead
      Please stay on topic.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      reddit meme and even if there's a kernel of truth to it, it certainly doesn't apply to fighters

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >noooooo air combat was a big neverending furball with friend or foe markers on all the planes just like warthunder and ace combat told meeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        The only reddit here is you

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      most aircraft shot down have no idea they are in flight

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Only if you were on the wrong side of Erich Hartmann's plane

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    > *tanks all of your machinegun fire and flies away*

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      22 nips on the side of my plane
      22 nips on the side
      shoot one down, pass him around
      23 nips on the side of my plane.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Delete this post. It is very offensive.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          When they passed him around everyone used his butthole like it was a cheap imported Japanese wiener sleeve

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        We know the Vietnam kill counts are complete bs, imagine how much bullshitting there was in WW2 in hopes of getting a medal.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          They had to have a witness, in some cases it was multiple witnesses.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >assmad yellow manlet
          >verification not required.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          all the higher-ups knew a lot of bullshit was involved, not necessarily because personnel wanted medals, glory and rewards, but also that warfare is a chaotic and volatile environ, combined with the fog of war, leads to outrageous misinterpretations and misreadings of situations. take a look

          https://i.imgur.com/vZftE6J.png

          [...]
          >The pilots lied about their numbers
          yes, even the leadership at the time knew this and accounted for it by halving or thirding claimed numbers. this didn't just apply to pilots, it applies to all claims.

          next question?

          , in the action off Cape Esperence (oct 1942) one Japanese CA (Furutaka) and DD (Fubuki) were sunk, those tallies on the USS Boise claim 6 ships; two Mogami CA's (none were present), a CL and three DD's.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >two Mogami CA's (none were present)
            Always kills me when this happens. Makes for funny historical records.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >take a look

            https://i.imgur.com/vZftE6J.png

            [...]
            >The pilots lied about their numbers
            yes, even the leadership at the time knew this and accounted for it by halving or thirding claimed numbers. this didn't just apply to pilots, it applies to all claims.

            next question?, in the action off Cape Esperence (oct 1942) one Japanese CA (Furutaka) and DD (Fubuki) were sunk, those tallies on the USS Boise claim 6 ships; two Mogami CA's (none were present), a CL and three DD's.
            Reminds me of how the IJN kept "sinking" the Enterprise like 7 times, and kept mistaking fleet oilers for carriers (and then missing)

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Reminds me of how the IJN kept "sinking" the Enterprise like 7 times
              this is a great example, especially in Midway when pilots reported a CV sunk to Nagumo & the staff, then the 2nd strike reported another new CV sunk, Nagumo and his staff saw through it pretty quickly that it was the same CV instead of two.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >imagine how much bullshitting there was in WW2

          considering how many complete newbies japan was stuffing into zeros im really not surprised americans got so many kills late in the pacific campaign. air combat is basically just MMO PVP, if you have no experience you are just going to die.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Japan made the mistake of keeping its best ace pilots in combat until they were eventually shot down instead of rotating them into instructor roles at their flight schools. It would then take the best pilots from those flight schools and send them on suicide missions. The military junta that controlled Japan at that time fundamentally saw the lives of Japanese citizens as disposable for the greater cause of maintaining the empire, even though most young pilots sent on kamikaze missions weren't fanatics for the Emperor at all.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >mistake
              They didn't have a real choice, skilled pilots were in short supply even before the war, they had to pull instructors from the schools to fill out the Pearl Harbor raid crews. From then on it was harder to justify pulling the skilled pilots out of combat because doing so would lead to a massive plunge in overall frontline pilot quality. The hope and prayer was that those old guard pilots could hold the line long enough for a peace to break out.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                nah they made some terrible conscious decisions to keep airmen, even surplus ones that should've been sent home to reconstitute their groups, at the front line. take the pilot cadres from the best carriers after they were sunk in Midway, contrary to popular belief only less than a quarter of them perished during the action. the IJN dispersed them at various places in the pacific, mostly Rabaul, because they didn't want them to go home and spill the beans about the disaster. this also happened to the vast majority of personnel involved in the action around Midway, including crews of the carriers in question. the IJNAS and IJAAF had a lot of surplus and potential to rotate some airmen to the rear to train newer airmen. this is only a microcosm of the problem anyway, the few expert airmen who were rotated to the rear noted that junior pilots often outranked veterans and had a conceited and arrogant attitude that made it hard to pass down the knowledge.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It wouldn't have helped, since there was no fuel to train their new pilots further. Furthermore there was usually no time or place for proper conversion training. Any advanced fighters or multi-engine bombers would eat much more fuel than the early trainers they had.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The Mustang is such a pretty plane.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/NnCJM4D.jpeg

      22 nips on the side of my plane
      22 nips on the side
      shoot one down, pass him around
      23 nips on the side of my plane.

      Nowadays it'd be a roping yellow wojak.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Vaffanculo.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *explodes because I gave it an angry glare*

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Thread theme

    ?si=EDCuuTOlxYRynOOo

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >outmaneuvers, outclimbs and outruns your plane
    how is the A6M more popular than this thing?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      too late, too little.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Zero is a simple and easy to remember name, also with its range "it was everywhere", it could be here too ,woosh.
      Homare was an almost complete failure that doomed many airframes, it never performed as planned and the engine life seems to be mediocre because it's a tiny engine with continuous WEP.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >engine life seems to be mediocre
        >seems to be
        nice sources
        >with continuous WEP
        Cry about it 5 minute WEPlet.

        But yes Homare was a mess thanks to wise Nakajima still relying on old type carburetor. They finally started production of a new model with carburetor similar to US radials, but that was in spring or summer 1945.
        With the earlier 1800hp Homares Ki-84 and N1K1-J were just underpowered.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because it existed for longer then 20 mins

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Man, late war Japanese fighters like the Frank were so pretty. Although. The bubble canopy on late war fighters and basically ALL of the last piston engine fighters are peak aesthetic.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      By the time these were in service in numbers, Japan’s best flyers had been bbqd

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >shit pilots
      >planes made like dog shit and never came close to meeting performance numbers
      >made no meaningful impact
      It's a wonder why.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It was still slower than corsair and Bearcat.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >and Bearcat.
        Which wasn't used in WW2. If you want to bring in the Bearcat, then compare it to the Shinden, Ki-94-II or Reppu.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The Bearcat actually existed though

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The Bearcat actually existed though
            >J7W
            First flight 8/3/45
            >Ki-94-II
            First flight was scheduled like 1 month after the war
            >A7M
            First flight 5/6/44

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              And the Bearcat was in service in May 1945, with a thousand total built. How many of the Jap wunderplanes existed?

              >J7W
              2
              >KI-94-II
              2
              >A7M
              A whole 9

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Not in that riced-up T-6 you ain't.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Proceeds to get attrit'ed so hard you run through your entire veteran and elite pilots because it goes up like a Christmas tree from stray gunfire because of its paper thin armor and fragile fuel tanks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Through 1942 to early 1943, USN and IJN fighter losses were pretty close. The IJN's inability to replace pilots with newly trained ones wasn't due to any failing of the A6M, but a worse pilot training pipeline that was overly harsh prewar and unable to expand to the same extent as the US after war began. Which is to be expected given Japan had almost half the population and less industrialized economy than the US. The A6M was long in the tooth by mid-1943 and not having a replacement by then was also a failure of the IJN, but the pilot attrition up to that point was in line with what the US experienced and can't be held against the aircraft itself.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    -ACK

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >requires a two on one advantage to work

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It works as long as you have two planes and the enemy follows you like an overaggressive moron. Could have 5 of them chasing you.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Shouldn't be a problem unless you fight a country with so much heavy industry they can spare shipyards to make ice cream ships.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        works the same with 2v2

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >getting into a fair fight
        ngmi

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >moron charges at your team in a game, kill him instantly
        >"woooow it took four of you to kill me"

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this name was "Thach" and the move he invented is called the "Weave". go figure.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        For the longest time I thought it was "Thatch weave," for exactly that reason. Wasn't until I saw his name spelled out that I realized my error.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          He called it the 'beam defense position' himself. The catchy name was thought up afterwards, as a pun on his name.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Thach called it the Beam Defense maneuver”.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >This terrifies the Zero

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      My favorite thing about the Corsair is that the USN decided it wasn't raping japs hard enough, so funded an improved version with the R4360 24 cylinder engine along with tweaks to perform better at low altitude. It was better, but the Bearcat was just as good and still used the R2800.

      Also, the last ever combat between piston engine airplanes was a Honduran Corsair downing a Mustang and two opposing Corsairs, so that's neat.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Love this video. Love me Corsair. Simple as.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's a big plane.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            F4U

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >got royally BTFO in its first run against Zeros in Guadalcanal
      >was bad enough that it got grounded and the allies ceased daylight aerial operations for weeks
      this piece of shit was only good for CAS. against real competition and real pilots it was cannon fodder.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Ok Tojo, go home.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >piece of shit
        >11:1 kill ratio
        >lowest attrition rate of any fighter plane in the Pacific
        >only good for CAS
        >2,140 air combat victories against 189 losses
        K bud

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >>11:1 kill ratio
          Jarvis, divide this number by 3 then filter out the aerial fodder after mid-1943
          >effective ratio is actually between 1 and 1.5:1

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >nooooooo it doesn't count
            It counts.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nice cope weeb.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You'd have a point if the Corsair's operational history began and ended in the course of a month, you moronic zipperhead.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *dives*

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    didn't out maneuver those tow nukes did it????

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >*Outmaneuvers your plane*

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Animu was a mistake

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Leave the poor weeb Texan alone, it's trying its best.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Is that what this is? I knew it wasn't a real Zeke, the wings looked off.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's a T-6 Texan painted like a japanese plane for airshows/movies.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *Looks cool*

    Really, that is all I have, though some of these caused a flight of P-38s to shit themselves.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Forgor pic.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Feel free to cope to your heart's content.

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, I'm sure that T-6 Texan that was painted up to look like a Zero for a movie probably could.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      are modern propeller planes more agile though or are they just faster.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >modern propeller planes
        >faster
        There are a couple of turboprops that are faster, but by and large, warbirds are faster than modern prop planes.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    People love to shit on Zero forget that when it was first introduced, it's the best carrier plane in the world.
    But for me? I prefer inline-engine fighters. Never like radial.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Damn that's a pretty plane

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      They don't forget, they just don't care. They just want their school yard game of grabass and shit talking. Actually knowing shit, forming a coherent opinion, stating it... that's like school stuff.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What is the purpose of the wire connected to the tail?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        VHF Radio antenna

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I always thought it was for preventing the tail from ripping off kek

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Antenna for the radio. You'll see similar setups on lots of ww2 planes.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Antenna for the IJN's Type 96 Ku Radio (Medium wave and short wave).

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >inline
      that's inverted V you stupid frick

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It doesn't matter if you put the inline upside or down, moron, it's an inline.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          like i said, it's a v engine, not inline
          dumb frick doesn't know when to stop

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            In aviation terms, 'inline' means straights and V's you fricking mongoloid.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If it was so good how come Hurricanes buried it deeper than GIs in Tokyo Twats?

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *Fricks your face*

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >*hypnotizing you*

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >ooooooo you like dogfighting boys, don't you?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        gay

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    > gets shot with a BB gun
    > bursts into flames

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >heh. nothin personal, tojo

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Wait, i just remembered Pearl Harbor. Actually it is personal

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was good at the start of the war, but it and the Oscar didn't really receive upgrades like western allied or German planes did. By 1944 it was getting easily dabbed on by spitfire Vs, VIIs, Hellcats and corsairs.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The Oscar was extensively upgraded and re-engined (later Ki-43s, production and later prototypes Ki-44). Only the IJN was moronic.

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Outruns your plane
    >19:1 K/D

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >he's moronic enough to take wartime claims, especially WW2 ones, at face value

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Prove the number wrong homosexual

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Prove a negative
          I bet you think carrots make your eyesight better, propagandized homosexual

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            By providing better numbers, dumbass.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            But they do

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The luftwaffe was barely even still an entity by the time that thing came to Europe, not to mention its common knowledge how much the allies outnumbered the Germans in the sky by that time too. Total bullshit numbers sorry moron

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Oy vey that’s anti-Semitic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I don't give a shit if it's a normie opinion, the Mustang was objectively the best fighter of the war.

      Could it ground attack as well as a jug? No. Could it maneuver like a spit? No. But it was designed in a fraction of the time and could do literally any role competently and do it thousands of miles away, was still better than the majority of planes it would face, this while being a 1/3rd of the unit price of the jug. It was designed to enable the strategic bombing campaign, which it did, and then went further by actually wrestling air superiority over Germany from the Luftwaffe by combat air patrol. I've noticed this hipster tendency to say the jug was better or did more for the war effort but that's horseshit.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        > the Mustang was objectively the best fighter of the war.
        No. It was perhaps the most useful fighter of the war, but objectively it was pretty mid.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Are you the same type of autistic that says the tiger was a better tank than the Sherman because you think that wars are won by 1v1 deathmatches instead of mass production?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            not whoever that is but yeah the Tiger is objectively a superior tank and the one I'd rather be in than the mutt tommy cooker.
            >mass production
            largely ambiguous and subjective metric that has as much to do with industrial wealth, geographical location, production methods etc, perhaps even more than the product itself.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Midwit take. The Sherman was optimized and standardized for mass production in automobile factories by design, and able to be shipped anywhere in the world easily and function reliability. The Tiger was not. It did not achieve overall power parity with the Sherman not only because Germany didn't have the resources but because it was a wholly inferior design in terms of reliability, ease of maintenance, complexity, and cost. It would have been unsuitable even with America's resources. Same principle applies for the Mustang. Many planes could do individual roles better, but no plane could do as many roles as well as it did, or match its performance in the escort role. This for a cheap, mass-producable design conceived in 150 days during wartime.

              >the one I'd rather be in than the mutt tommy cooker.

              No, it's the one you'd rather be in in a 1v1 in war thunder. Stop coping. You wouldn't want to be inside any tank on the losing side of a war outnumbered 10 to 1 by Shermans. Autistic, overly complicated maintenance hogs lose wars. Proven designs that are cheap and easy to produce win them. Overall strategic impact is the ultimate test of which weapon is the "best". Simple as.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >was perhaps the most useful fighter of the war

          Yes, therefore the best fighter of the war.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            By that metric it were P-40s and Wildcats that stopped the japs and let you babble in English now.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              this but unironically. The pre-war aircraft designs like the P-39, P-40, F4F and P47 etc played a major role through 1942 and in the P47's case through to the end of the war.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >F4F
                FM Wildcat stayed on CVEs until the end.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >it were P-40s and Wildcats that stopped the japs

              Yes, two vastly underrated planes that have been vindicated by their combat records in WW2. But the Mustang was both in the upper tier of individual performance in aerial combat, AND had a larger strategic impact because it was cheap and easy to produce. And no other fighter could deliver its level of performance in the long range escort role. A jug with drop tanks or a P-38 isn't going to cut it against the Luftwaffe over their home turf. The Mustang did, and contributed to allied air superiority over Europe more than any other individual design.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes, two vastly underrated planes that have been vindicated by their combat records in WW2
                they both got brutally mogged. the wildcat was underperforming really hard until Guadalcanal where it was aided by EW and coast watchers allowing squadrons to take off and prep with altitude advantage against Rabaul-based attackers. Having early warning was basically the only combat condition in which Wildcats could achieve parity, let alone air superiority.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Pick nits you are. You must be yellow.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You need to read the First Team books by Lundstrom.
                You probably won't because you enjoy wallowing in stupidity.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Id add Guadalcanal by R.B. Frank and Toll's trilogy to that reading list

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >You need to read propaganda from the 70's that relied exclusively on allied sources and took primary accounts at face value
                I actually already did. Here's my breakdown of the wildcat's perf against the Zero up to Guadalcanal. Omitted here is one encounter between Zuiho CAP Zeroes and a surface attack group escorted by Wildcats in which two wildcats were shot down and two Zeroes were shot down while attacking a formation of torpedo bombers.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                NAYRT but I believe the Midway AAR's focus on out-manoeuvring the Zero is attributable to the relative inexperience of US carrier pilots then.
                What Buckmaster reported are slashing hit and run attacks which late-WW2 review considered to be the most effective method of "dogfighting", ie, not actually dogfighting. Speed and climb rate is what should have been emphasised, not turn rate.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >NAYRT but I believe the Midway AAR's focus on out-manoeuvring the Zero is attributable to the relative inexperience of US carrier pilots then.
                In Midway, task force 17 was involved. This was the most experienced carrier group in the US Navy at the time, and many of the pilots participated in the Coral sea and the raids before those.

                >the rest ditched due to the sinking of the Enterprise

                That's not right. The Hornet sank in that battle, not Big E.

                1984 is the '70s.
                And USS Enterprise sank.

                typing mistake.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You might have missed the point.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >the rest ditched due to the sinking of the Enterprise

                That's not right. The Hornet sank in that battle, not Big E.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I really don't understand how an anon could be so proud of his analysis and cap it with that kind of a mistake.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Clearly a plane autist and not a ship autist.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                1984 is the '70s.
                And USS Enterprise sank.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No (great) offense but there's a few things I'd object to in that assessment. The theme of highlighting any factor which could mitigate Zero performance while ignoring similar factors for the Wildcats also seems disingenuous.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                And yet Wildcats managed to achieve a slightly better than 1:1 kill ratio against Zeros during 1942, when JNAF pilot skills were at their peak. 129:111 or something like that.

                Source: "Wildcat vs Zero" Osprey book.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's not because they were better plains! Tell the truth about the fricking superiority of the Zeros! The Americans just had better tactics and superior numbers in dogfights!

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                > The Americans just had better tactics
                If it can be overcome with simple tactics, it’s not a superior aircraft is it?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's pure fighter to fighter ratio?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >And yet Wildcats managed to achieve a slightly better than 1:1 kill ratio against Zeros during 1942
                Wrong. See

                https://i.imgur.com/uoMgTso.jpeg

                >You need to read propaganda from the 70's that relied exclusively on allied sources and took primary accounts at face value
                I actually already did. Here's my breakdown of the wildcat's perf against the Zero up to Guadalcanal. Omitted here is one encounter between Zuiho CAP Zeroes and a surface attack group escorted by Wildcats in which two wildcats were shot down and two Zeroes were shot down while attacking a formation of torpedo bombers.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                > A jug with drop tanks or a P-38 isn't going to cut it against the Luftwaffe over their home turf.
                For the record, the first allied fighters over Berlin were P-38s of the 55FG on 3 March,1944. They were doing it before it was cool and when it was difficult.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >the first allied fighters over Berlin were
                night fighter Mosquitos supporting RAF raids

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Well, they weren't exactly being used as fighter escorts forcing their way through.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the RAF didn't exactly have to do large scale fighter sweeps since they weren't bombing in daytime
                WW2 nightfighting was a lot like modern aerial combat, or at least 80s aerial combat; pinging for targets on radar, finding a blip, guessing if it was friend or foe, chasing it down, identifying it with eyeball and killing it

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >the first allied fighters over Berlin were P-38s of the 55FG on 3 March,1944
                allied bombers were doing runs on Berlin since 1940, Timmy.

                Bombers aren't fighters.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >night fighter Mosquitos

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >the first allied fighters over Berlin were P-38s of the 55FG on 3 March,1944
                allied bombers were doing runs on Berlin since 1940, Timmy.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Okay.
                Bombers are not fighters

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                P47 did long range just fine when drop tanks arrived. Greg has an entire YT on the subject.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Greg Boyington was the best fighter ace! I watched Black Sheep Squadron. They always won.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Right up until the Germans figured out they could bounce them in France, forcing the fighters to ditch their gas and fight, and then return to England because they couldn't make the round trip without the tanks.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Same applied to the P-51s.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              yes

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Jugs blunted the Luftwaffe before the Mustang showed up.
        P47s were also superior at altitude, fudd.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          A jug would get eaten alive by a mustang in a dogfight, while costing three times as much to build. It was inferior in maneuverability and kinematic performance and was a worse air superiority fighter by every metric. It was superior at CAS and would have been a better plane for Korea. That's about it.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nonetheless the Mustang was late to the party, and the P47 and Spitfire was what really killed off the elite Luftwaffe pilots. Mustangs ate the remains.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Facts mean little to you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the dumbass yanks didn't fly into the eclipse
      You could have had it all.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    YWNBARZ

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Actually quite excellent at the start of the war, the maneuverability was a meme, but the climb, fast cruise speed, and long range made it great.

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >*kills your admiral
    magic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm generally not a fan of WW2 American fighters, but I love the P-38 for the nerdiest reason possible.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        NES port was so shitty. Arcade version is great.

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >"Get your butt up here, Mav. I've got 3 Jap Zeroes on my tail!!

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Over 7000 americans died in kamikaze attacks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Wow is that footage real?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        That's GTA Chinatown wars dumbass

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What is this even from? Seems to have a production value. In the actual war, the Marines loved it when the nips charged. Made them easy targets. The swords were good souvenirs for the family back home with the whole 'ashtray out of a Jap's skull' thing got no-no'd. That and claiming those little nip flags. Actually, part of reconciliation has seen a number of these flags returned to kin/the villages where the dead squint came from. Pretty interesting.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Battlefield V.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I pretty much doubt the loved it when a guy with a sword came that close.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Marines loved it when the nips charged
        Yeah
        They loved it so much that sometimes people abandoned their position only because piles grew too high
        Same story can be heard from eastern front and finnish front
        It is almost like some humans have kill limit

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Actually, part of reconciliation has seen a number of these flags returned to kin/the villages where the dead squint came from.
        Yes because those "good luck flags" were actually personalized farewell presents from the parents, siblings, wives, children, friends, etc. of Japanese draftees rather than battle flags as they were assumed to be by the Americans.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Wouldn't blame any Marine that wanted to keep theirs, but I do think it's a nice gesture to return them. Not my place to decide.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >quick, rush that jap! he can't kill all of us!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >GRORIUS NIPPON STEEL DIE AMERUCAN PIGGUU

  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    > The pilots lied about their numbers!!!
    That’s true though. Pilots always lie. Either intentionally in order to get the glory, or unintentionally because they thought they killed something that actually limped back to base.

    Certainly not by a factor of ten though.

  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >While on a lengthy mission from the Halmahera base in the Moluccas to northern Mindoro (south of Bataan), West spotted a Nakajima Oscar above and behind him, closing slowly. Fuel was getting tight but West and his wingman went for him. West did the unthinkable; he slowed way down in the climb, dropped full landing flaps and turned into the Oscar while climbing steeply. Having ultimate confidence in his P-38L, at something less than 100 mph, he went to full power to hang the Lightning on its props as the surprised Oscar pilot broke to the right and upward.
    As West phrased it, "I left the flaps down, and stuck the nose at a spot I though he might be at pretty soon ... Sure enough, he rolled it out at the top of an Immelmann. Neither of us is doing 65 mph, and that old L hung on the props and didn't even shudder." West blazed away with all guns, and the frail Oscar began to shed skin like a molting snake.

  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *outmaneuvers your plane*

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine experiencing aileron inversion below VNE, or requiring more force/g on the stick than a mustang at any real speed.

  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >The pilots lied about their numbers
    yes, even the leadership at the time knew this and accounted for it by halving or thirding claimed numbers. this didn't just apply to pilots, it applies to all claims.

    next question?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How do you account for the missing 5000 Zeros that never showed up on airfields or in scrap yards that seemingly "disappeared into the ocean"

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        do you derive pleasure from behaving like a moronic homosexual?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >The pilots say they shot down 6000 zeros
          >The naval gunner say they shot down 1000 zeroes
          >The bombers say they shot down 5000 zeroes
          >We cut these numbers in half to 6000 shot down
          >We expect to find 4000 production line zeroes in Japan according to Japanese production numbers of 10,000 numbers
          >Uhm actually theres like 250 spread across fields and maintenance yards throughout Japan
          Crazy how that works

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            if that's how it works in your head, then so be it. usually it's the other way around, though
            >Japanese record shows 10 planes were scrambled and 8 returned
            >Allied pilots claimed 50 kills

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              So where are the 8000 zeroes that returned?
              Destruction and Production numbers add up in they official records

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Destruction and Production numbers add up in they official records
                >official records
                Why don't we bring up those Japanese claims where they "probably" shot down five times B-29s as they really did? In any military document they count as "official records". At the end 99% of B-29s were scrapped anyway, so they might have been close.

                By modern day standards even Americans had horrible loss rate to accidents and mechanical failures. In comparison Japanese with many times less flight hours, always lacking spare parts and overburneded groundcrews were simply a lost case.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I like Air Group 88's scoreboard the most.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Oyoda
          A relative of Oyodo?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I think it is supposed to be Ooyodo. Quick check of Wikipedia reveals she was sunk at Kure in '45, which is also what happened to Haruna. The page on the strikes there note both ships were damaged on the 24th of July, and sank after a second round of attacks on the 28th.

  34. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    that's a t-6, dummy

  35. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Even the Spitfire was destroying the Zero.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Not when it mattered.

  36. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    whittu piggu go home

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >survives a 1 vs 3 dogfight against zeros because it can make higher-G turns for a tighter loop and structually take damage on repeated head-on passes

      >takes out the third zero with a wingtip collision

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Dauntless secretly the best fighter in the US early-war arsenal?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nah it was a boat but that pilot in particular had balls of steel and the endurance and will to live; doing high-G turns for a long time and repeated head-ons with the zeros because the tight inside turn and forcing the Zeroes into head-on engagements was the only way to survive; unfortunately those maneuvers made it so the back gunner was never able to do anything. Just had to hope he didn't get hit directly and wait until the zeros made a mistake so he could pop them. The last Zero came too close during the head on and the Dauntless' wingtip popped open the Zero's wing and so he had to dishonorabry bug out.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            > the Dauntless' wingtip popped open the Zero's wing
            GLORIOUS AMERICAN IRON
            PLANE WING DULL LIKE AX
            FOLDED APPROXIMATELY ONCE

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous
          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >The last Zero came too close during the head on and the Dauntless' wingtip popped open the Zero's wing
            how much do you wanna bet that this never happened

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    An AI test pilot has successfully flown a jet fighter in dogfights against human opponents. It's the latest development for DARPA's Air Combat Evaluation program, which is trying to develop aerospace AI agents that can be trusted to perform safely.

    Human test pilots have a bit of a reputation thanks to popular culture—from The Right Stuff to Top Gun: Maverick, the profession has been portrayed as a place for loose cannons with a desire to go fast and break the rules. The reality is pretty far from that these days, especially where DARPA is concerned.

    The agency instead wants a machine-learning agent that can safely fly a real aircraft autonomously, with no violations of training rules. After all, neural networks have their own reputation—at this point well-earned—for finding ways to exploit situations that hadn't occurred to humans. And the consequences when controlling a real jet fighter can be a lot more severe than just testing in silico.

    In this case, the jet fighter is called the X-62A Variable Stability In-Flight Simulator Test Aircraft, or VISTA. It began life as an F-16D (Block 30) two-seater, which spent most of its 32-year career working at the US Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB.

    Over the years, the plane, previously designated the NF-16D, has been modified to simulate the flight characteristics of other aircraft while in flight. "It has given almost a thousand students and staff members the opportunity to practice testing aircraft with dangerously poor flying qualities and to execute risk-reduction flight test programs for advanced technologies," said William Gray, chief test pilot of VISTA and the USAF Test Pilot School.

    That made it a natural candidate for DARPA's ACE program, and in 2021, the process of modifying the aircraft began once again as it became the X-62A.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The USAF and DARPA started conducting X-62A test flights under AI control in December 2022, logging 17 hours by the time we first learned of the program in early 2023. Although DARPA's AI agent flew the X-62A, there was always a pair of human pilots onboard to monitor the test flight and, if necessary, take control. But in those early tests, the X-62A flew against simulated adversaries.

      By September 2023, the program had completed 21 test flights, including the first-ever AI versus human aerial engagement within visual range, flying against a human-piloted F-16. During that time, DARPA says the team made over 100,000 lines of flight-critical software changes, which it called "an unprecedented rate of development."

      That's certainly an achievement, but just focusing on the dogfight is a mistake, according to Gray. "That misses the point. Dogfighting was the problem to solve so we could start testing autonomous artificial intelligence systems in the air, but every lesson we're learning applies to every task we can give to an autonomous system," he said.

      https://arstechnica.com/cars/2024/04/darpas-ai-test-pilot-successfully-flew-a-dogfight-against-a-human/

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Doesnt lay out the dog fight scenario
        Into the trash it goes

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Which is better, Zero or Hayabusa?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Zero, obviously. Ki-43 was deeply flawed and a double-edged sword for pilots who didn't know how to tame it. It also had a vastly inferior powerplant and armament. Still was good for what it did but the A6M was an engineering masterpiece so there's no comparison.

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >outmaneuvers
    English isn't a real language.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >He moved
      >He moved further
      >Huh?

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Gets transported to be a dog to a pink-haired tsundere
    Yeah, okay.

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Out-climbs, out-dives, and out-speeds your plane

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >plane several years newer is better
      whoa

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        A few

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I really wish the Bearcat had made it into WWII combat. Would be interesting to see how it performed against the Japanese planes.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Would be interesting to see how it performed against the Japanese planes.

      >Zeroes blown out by Hellcat
      >Bearcat on paper is faster, climbs better, and nimbler than the Hellcat while also packing a full cannon armament
      >Wikipedia claims that pilots compared the Bearcat's performance to early jet fighters

      That would be interesting food for thought, especially if the imperial japanese forces managed to scrape together a few Kikkas.

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    For me?
    Its the ki-61

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    such a pretty plane, the zero has always been one of my favorite aircraft

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Looks perfect for shooting lawnmower drones

  46. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *is better than anything's in your path*

  47. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >outclimbs your shitty rice burners

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >misses by miles at altitude due to literal divine wind

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >attacks at high altitude during the day bristling with defensive guns
      >minimal effect on target and 10% losses per sortie
      >attacks at low altitude at night with all guns removed in favor of more bombs
      >extremely effective and only lose 4% maximum per sortie
      >crewmen still maintain the high altitude flights were safer
      I guess the golden rule as a commander is to always ignore the grunts mewling.

  48. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >flies higher and faster

  49. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why in the frick would chinks shill for Imperial Japan lmao. They're still eternally assblasted over Nanking.

  50. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    why do zero threads always boil down to muh k/d comparisons from late war superprops that outclass it in every way? no shit America won and built better planes later but it needs to be remembered and appreciated that the zero firmly impressed and caught America off guard with its range and performance and was the best fighter in theater till 1942

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because the Zero took a real nosedive in performance compared to other pre war designs like the Spitfire and BF-109 that remained competitive to the very end.

      That being said in 1940 the Zero MOGGED every single carrier plane in existance.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        what a really dumb analogy that oversimplifies a lot of things.

        first of all and most importantly, the cadre of pilots in the luftwaffe didn't take a nosedive unlike the IJN, where the vast majority of pilots by 1944 were still wet behind the ears by the time they were deployed. in turn, the Luftwaffe pilots that had to be contended with were often a very experienced elite that had thousands of sorties in the eastern front. The Zero, just like the planes you mentioned, continued to be capable in the newer variants, when placed in the right hands. the few remaining experienced pilots who weren't worn through the attrition still continued to fly them effectively even against Hellcats. Saburo Sakai had a famous dogfight with more than two dozen hellcats over Iwo Jima and managed to escape with his plane completely unscathed.

        second of all, as mentioned above, the Zero didn't remain frozen through the war, it continued development. newer variants were in technical spec really capable and really strong. In some aspects, like range and weight to firepower, it was never eclipsed for the entirety of WW2.

        Finally, the Zero was a carrier based fighter unlike those land based fighters you're comparing. the Hellcat would be roflstomped by 109's or 190's any day of the week. the Zero on the other hand was capable against land-based fighters until the middle of the war. This asymmetric dynamic also had a lot of implications on the continued development and serviceability of the Zero; there were barely any Japanese carriers towards the end of the war, and less and less reason to do more R&D or production on it unlike in Germany and England where the spit and 109 continued to be the main workhorse. Those planes weren't miracle machines that had an edge on the Zero (ironically, the Zero is widely considered to have been a miracle machine, you can't find a more bang for buck fighter in the entirety of the war), but because there was no reason to replace them.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          3/10

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Spitfire Vs would've raped Zeroes
          >until the middle of the war
          yeah so a few months after Japan joined then
          >In some aspects, like range and weight to firepower
          which is a turbo niche that nobody really needed

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >which is a turbo niche that nobody really needed
            >Long range while maintaining firepower is niche for a carrier fighter
            You are legitimately moronic

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              At the expense of being made of paper and being unable to communicate because lolnoradios? Yes

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >At the expense of being made of paper and being unable to communicate because lolnoradios? Yes
                >Every single Zero built is an A6M2 and they never made any changes to it past 1940
                Ok moron

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >for a carrier fighter
              this is the niche I was talking about, frickwit
              Japan went all-in on sooperdooper longrange flimsy carrier fighters when an intermediate-range fighter with better protection would have been much better

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Japan went all-in on sooperdooper longrange flimsy carrier fighters
                Which literally made it one of the best carrier fighters of the early war and allowed for raids like Pearl Harbor, the Philippines and Darwin to be so successful.
                >intermediate-range fighter with better protection would have been much better
                >Hurr durr the Zero never changed after 1940
                Google the A6M5 moron. As the war progressed and needs pivoted, Japan started armoring and putting self sealing fuel tanks on the Zero.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >allowed for raids like Pearl Harbor, the Philippines and Darwin to be so successful.
                because the operational range of Zero fighters were the critical success factor for Pearl, it would have been totally defeated if not for that amirite
                >Japan started armoring and putting self sealing fuel tanks on the Zero.
                and I'm sure it didn't affect operational range one bit
                and the Zero totally didn't need them before

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >and I'm sure it didn't affect operational range one bit
                You should look it up, it looks like armor plates and self sealing fuel tanks were only going to be installed in the A6M5c of which 93 were built and self sealing fuel tanks might not have been used.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                you moronic armchair shitstorians contribute nothing to discussion with your hot takes. please take it to PrepHole or some other midwit imageboard.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Turns it into potential for discussion instead of a circle jerk. Seems like you're only capable of calling that anon a moron.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >yeah so a few months after Japan joined then
            if you're going to be moronic, announce so at the top of your post so I don't waste time reading anything.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >waahh wahhh weeaboo wahh
              the death ride of the Kido Butai lasted only six months

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >which is a turbo niche that nobody really needed
            maybe not in the video games you play, but operational range is definitely not a 'turbo niche', it is one of the most powerful and potentially battle determining factors in warfare, especially in carrier based aircraft. longer range means longer strike range, and an overhead in which an enemy with shorter ranged carrier craft will not be able to retaliate. it was also absolutely needed and a necessity in the geography of the pacific. the entire guadalcanal campaign wouldn't have been a possibility for the Japanese if their aircraft didn't possess insane range. less mumbling about shit you're clueless in and more reading up on it, monkey.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >gives up armour for muh long range
              >loses
              >N-N-N-NO UR THE MONKEY RANGE IS IMPORTANT MKAY JAPAN WOULDA WON I-I-IF
              ror
              rmao

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              This is actually a fair point. It's not until like mid-43 or perhaps even '44 that you stop reading about aircraft from Truk or Rabaul harrassing every Allied movement in the Pacific.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Question.
              Was there ever a battle or operation where the Zero’s range actually made a difference in the outcome?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Pearl Harbor.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Pearl Harbor, Indian Ocean and Santa Cruz. Not that this bears any kind of direct correlation to the proposition, and can easily change depending on your criteria of victory. Is being able to strike beyond the enemy's range a win? in that case many Japanese aircraft (not just the Zero) had many victories.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Depends on how much range you give up?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The longer range of Japanese carrier fighters was a constant issue for the USN because that gave the IJN a large window to attack USN carriers without fear of reprisal if they were spotted early enough. This did play a large factor in several of the major carrier battles, but was largely negated by inferior communication on the IJN's part and generally much better recon for the USN.

                But it eventually did come down to whether the tradeoff in range was acceptable for the vulnerability to damage every plane had. As the war went on, it became clear survivability was becoming more important than range when Zeroes started going down in droves and the K:D ratios started to flip.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >generally much better recon for the USN
                Don't forget, as in the case of Midway, either luck or Providence, depending on your preferred belief system.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why didn't the kamis help Japan?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why didn't God help the US win in Vietnam? From an atheistic perspective, the answer is easy: it's all made up. From the Christian perspective, it's equally easy, the kamis aren't real, false gods for a heathen people and it was God's will the US should prevail and teach the heathens a lesson. To answer Vietnam from that perspective, the US grew fat on its success, like ancient Israel before it, forgot who deserved the credit for that success, and had to be humbled.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Midway was intelligence:
                https://warontherocks.com/2016/06/the-battle-of-midway-the-complete-intelligence-story/
                btw, I would bet that the American command did know about planned Pearl Harbor attack but the constant problem of both British and American intelligence was that they had to be extremely careful to not spill the beans and raise suspicions about how much intelligence data they really gather. In case of Pearl Harbor they likely decided to just minimize losses for that purpose, but it is sensitive (and morally vague) enough that an open admission is unlikely. You may read "The Spies Who Never Were" for detailed account of an enormous success of ww2 British intelligence.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I believe you are clinically moronic

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Check you psychiatrist about your believes.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >American command did know about planned Pearl Harbor attack
                There's a difference between strategic and operational intelligence. The Americans certainly knew that Japan was meditating war, since November if not October there were ongoing diplomatic talks to try and avert war. However this isn't operationally useful; unlike Midway, it was not possible to determine where the Japanese would strike and crucially, when.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >unlike Midway, it was not possible to determine where the Japanese would strike and crucially, when.
                sure thing it wasn't

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >America just let half it's navy get sunk because, uh, they wanted to keep their intelligence efforts secret
                >crippling the entire japanese carrier fleet on day zero 3,000 miles from home wouldn't have been the most incredible start to the war imaginable

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Do you mean that the US should have just _attacked_ Japanese navy?
                Give up fricktard, I already had to teach you that Midway wasn't a "luck or Providence" and I gave you the source which further explains that SUCCESFULLY COMMANDING A FRICKING WAR includes making morally vague decisions. Have you even heard about "hold your ground no matter what"? Frick off idiot.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I am not the same person you were talking to about Midway. "Morally vague" and "spread your butthole open for Kido Butai at Pearl" are not the same thing. If the US knew about the attack, then 'Midway' should have happened on Dec 7th off Hawaii.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >eventually
                Midway was only six months after Pearl

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The longer range of Japanese carrier fighters was a constant issue for the USN because that gave the IJN a large window to attack USN carriers without fear of reprisal if they were spotted early enough.
                Wouldn't that be more of a function of the range of the torpedo and dive bombers.

                >generally much better recon for the USN
                Don't forget, as in the case of Midway, either luck or Providence, depending on your preferred belief system.

                Depends on your threshold for calling something lucky. More both sides bungling and the inherent difficulties of what they were doing.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Wouldn't that be more of a function of the range of the torpedo and dive bombers.
                Japanese fighter bombers typically had more range than their equivalents as well, for mostly the same reasons.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Its going back to

                >for a carrier fighter
                this is the niche I was talking about, frickwit
                Japan went all-in on sooperdooper longrange flimsy carrier fighters when an intermediate-range fighter with better protection would have been much better

                If all three were used together which aircraft would likely set the limit on the range and would this range change much if a more intermediate fighter was used. Though this may require a more concrete idea of what anon was thinking an intermediate fighter would be.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You are moronic. With that aside, the Japanese doctrine was based around offense. exerting air superiority over larger distances is a key factor in offense. escorting other aircraft is also just a subset of what the fighter would do. carrier ops are also a primary design direction but not the only one. the fighter would be employed as the main fighter for the navy air service. it would be dispatched to all air groups and the majority would be operating from the ground. providing escort or air superiority over longer ranges here is vital in the geography of the pacific. in the escort role the fighter would not only escort carrier borne aircraft, it would also provide air cover for vessels and for twin engine bombers that had extreme range. finally, adding self-sealing fuel tanks isn't just reducing the range, it's increasing the weight, reducing climb, reducing maneuverability, it went entirely against the design specs and philosophy they were going for. The Zero had superior speed, climb rate and maneuverability. it already had a lot of offensive defense. Adding self-sealing fuel tanks would also have almost definitely damned the Zero into being dwarfed by the combination carrier attack bombers it was meant to operate with, by the way.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                To add to anon's point about self-sealing fuel tanks, they were bleeding edge new technology that still had kinks in 1939-41. Whether a plane could even use them depending on whether the wing was thick enough to fit them without unacceptably crippling the fuel load. F4Fs we're being retrofitted with self-sealing tanks in the field in 1942, and only F4F-4s were coming out of the factory with them. There's also the problem where fuel could cause the rubber bladder of the fuel tank to break down, allowing small rubber particles to enter the engine and cripple it. It took time for the combatant nations to solve these issues, and the really the only uncompromised designs that had self-sealing tanks were mid-late war ones that both had the greater power of newer engines and had wings and fuselages designed with the extra space necessary from the start. A 1937-38 design wasn't going to have that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it went entirely against the design specs and philosophy they were going for
                we know
                we're disputing that the design philosophy provided an actionable advantage
                > The Zero had superior speed, climb rate and maneuverability
                at the expense of protection and firepower, which is how theoretically inferior opponents managed to beat it - Hurricanes, P40s, and F4Fs. Dissimilar air combat is about playing on the strengths and weaknesses of each aircraft type.

                If the Zero had traded a little bit of its range and manoeuvrability for protection, it might have done better at being a fighter. Offensive fighter sweeps, if any were carried out, didn't alter the outcome of any major battles Zeroes were involved in.
                >bbbbut Pearl
                The fleet was blasted to pieces either way, Zero or no Zero.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you think the P40, Hurricane and F4F 'beat' the Zero when every single allied WW2 pilot thought otherwise?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >we're disputing that the design philosophy provided an actionable advantage
                Being able to escort your bombers for the duration of their mission is generally considered an actionable advantage.

                >at the expense of protection
                Protection for nearly every plane of the era consisted of a thin steel backplate for the pilot's chair and a small bullet proof front windscreen. It's marginal and doesn't help at all against deflection shots.

                >and firepower
                The A6M had two 20mm cannons. Not as good as the Hispanos, but a 20mm HE shell is a 20mm HE shell. It's going to frick a plane up.

                >If the Zero had traded a little bit of its range and manoeuvrability for protection, it might have done better at being a fighter.
                These aren't sliders on a statboard that you can adjust willy nilly. Self-sealing fuel tanks and armor plate are physical pieces of kit that have to fit somewhere, and the engine has to be able to haul that additional weight. Not to mention the follow-on effects. You cut the A6M 's range, now the G4M squadrons are unescorted and get cut to pieces a la the Lexington attack in Feb '42.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >is generally considered
                yes, most advantages on paper are, but in operational practice, did it matter?
                were the Zeroes able to stop CAP fighters from disrupting the attack?
                conversely, on strike missions where the Zeroes were absent, did the attack fail?
                >It's marginal
                Except it wasn't
                >and doesn't help at all against deflection shots.
                You mean "high deflection" shots, and not all shots were
                >The A6M had two 20mm cannons. Not as good as the Hispanos
                it seems they had very bad synchronisation problems
                it was also an option to mount more machine guns and make up for firepower with volume
                >You cut the A6M 's range, now the G4M squadrons are unescorted and get cut to pieces a la the Lexington attack in Feb '42.
                Or, as the US Navy's carriers did, you simply move closer to the target.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Or, as the US Navy's carriers did, you simply move closer to the target.
                Land based bombers look up the Lexington off Bougainville and laugh at that anon.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >did it matter?
                Yes anon, if you had read literally any literature on the matter you'd know this.

                >on strike missions where the Zeroes were absent, did the attack fail?
                I mentioned one frickwit, Lexington on 2/20/43. Unescorted G4M attack gave Butch O'Hare his medal of honor.

                >Except it wasn't
                It was. These are two very small target areas that only protect the pilot, and even then only in two engagement directions. There's a lot of places a plane can take a disabling or destructive hit other than the pilot.

                >it seems they had very bad synchronisation problems
                What? You really have 0 idea what you're talking about about. The main issues with the 20mm were a lower muzzle velocity and low ammo count. Ammo count was a tradeoff that the UK and Germany also made for the Spitfire and 109 respectively.

                >Or, as the US Navy's carriers did, you simply move closer to the target.
                Bad idea for the IJN. Being closer to the target means they're in range of the target longer, and unlike the US their shipyards do not have the ability to make good capital ship losses.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >2/20/43
                Damn a G4M flew all the way to the Caribbean to attack the Lexington on its shakedown?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Meant 2/20/42

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Doesn't matter, I will now ignore all your arguments because you made a minor mistake. I have won.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >but in operational practice, did it matter?
                Does being able to conduct an entire military campaign without CV's matter? if so, yes.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >carrier ops are also a primary design direction but not the only one
                It's the main one being discussed. Using a separate ground based design for long range escort is also a possibility.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >the entire guadalcanal campaign wouldn't have been a possibility for the Japanese if their aircraft didn't possess insane range
              >giving up combat ability for range allows you to lose further from home
              implessive

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >the Hellcat would be roflstomped by 109's or 190's any day of the week
          This particular analysis seems to disagree, with the USN fighters comparing favorably

          ?si=cMQsl2k-8vOPRZdw

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >best fighter in theater till 1942
      the story of Imperial Japanese glory can be measured in months

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      American pilots in the AVG were shitting all over Oscars (basically IJA clones of Zeroes) in P40s. The biggest issue was American commanders not taking the AVG’s warning seriously and as a result never training their pilots to fly against Japanese fighters.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Hurricanes as well. The USN's problem with Zeroes was literally skill issue

  51. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >OutmanAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKK-

  52. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >tfw Toho Studios actually built a full-scale replica of Shinden to use as a prop in Godzilla Minus One

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Welp, guess I officially need to watch this movie now.

  53. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    you're*

  54. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I think a major complicating issue with determining the worth of the Zero's range is that it's subject to so many other factors.

    Sure, a Zero can leave Rabul, fly to Henderson field to dogfight the Cactus Air Force then fly back to Rabul, something no Allied fighter at the time could. But that also means having a pilot fly formation in a plane with no autopilot, an uncomfortable seat that for some reason only comes halfway up your back and poor radios for hours until getting into combat, whereupon a single rifle caliber round striking a fuel tank equals doom. Yes, a Zero could launch at a carrier from a different time zone, but by the time he gets there the carrier is probably a hundred miles elsewhere and you have no way of reliably communicating. How much of the Zero's range could have been sacrificed for some other benefit?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You also have to account for mechanical problems.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Also less rescued aircrews. If its a question of what is the best option for how to modify it to achieve their objectives within their means, it doesn't really matter much they're fricked either way. There's some room to wonder about what kind of design or design combinations would yield the greatest efficacy, but it'd probably end up with an answer they never could have implemented.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nice hot take but elementary stuff like this is accounted for with the help of the arcane inventions called nav charts and radios (seldom used for this).
      >it is uncomfortable for the pilot
      comfort is superfluous in warfare. getting the job done uncomfortably is better than being unable to do it entirely. If I was going to launch an offensive on Midway or Hawaii, I would rather have aircraft that can make Wake Island part of the game even on the tactical level even though it is nearly 1000 kilometers away from Midway atoll.

      On the other hand, I've read about entire squadrons of US planes crashing in the sea because they failed to locate their carriers, even with tactless frequent radio messaging and zed baker homing devices.

      This discussion is dumb and filled with brainlet whatifisms anyway, because the entirety of the Japanese doctrine was built around offensive capability, and honestly just a swift skim in google earth over south Asia, the Philippines and the Pacific should give one a clear understanding why that happened, even if you didn't read the history on the Japanese blitz in 1942 and how air superiority from bases in Taiwan and south China sea eliminated ABDA presence in the Java sea & Indian Ocean.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >This discussion is dumb and filled with brainlet whatifisms anyway,
        The irony

  55. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >defends midway while being adorable in your path

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >suffers 65% attrition in one engagement
      I don't think you can call that "defending," anon, more like "dying gloriously."

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        President heika banzai!

  56. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >outmaneuvers your outmaneuver of a different outmaneuver

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      paintings of modern wars always look comically bad to me, because it's artists trying to depict the drama of pre-modern/early modern warfare in an era where it doesn't happen.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What did that artist smoke before painting this shit?

  57. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    > gets shot with a BB gun
    > bursts into flames

  58. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I judge planes based solely on their looks

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I judge planes on how drunk i can get on the coolant fluids.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Based fellow Fulcrum enjoyer. Sukhoi will never be the real Russian fighter producer.

  59. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Outmaneuver this, gay.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Cool. That's like saying USS. Constitution is a shit ship because she couldn't win a gun duel with Nagato.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *