impossible

[edward allen]

The golden rule when flying US planes against Japanese planes:

DO NOT TURN WITH THEM.

Climb well above them, then make a diving pass at them. Don't turn too much during the pass. If you don't kill them (zoom) climb up again and go for another pass. Keep in mind that you're much faster in dives and level flight. The P-38 also climbes pretty fast, but I still wouldn't try to outclimb a zero.
You can turn with them just fine above 200mph. But you only want to turn while you can pull lead. Once the Zero pulls ahead of your piper then you want to break off and shallow power climb out. The P-38 out climbs the Zero with ease btw. It also out dives it with ease. Its obvious its much faster.




Flying Online As =HaVoK=

[nic727]

Thank you for the tips. I'm killed everytimes against a Japanese airplane.

[edward allen]

this post is not intended to be a tip but to the statement above implying that a p38 can
"turn" with a zero above 200mph. I find this hard to believe that a zero could turn with a zero at any speed. Any films of this.

[majorfailure]

The P-38 also climbes pretty fast, but I still wouldn't try to outclimb a zero.
Depends on how its done, at best climb speed you will probably be meat on a platter in a short time. But if you climb fast then you will outclimb and outrun the Zero at the same time.

You can turn with them just fine above 200mph. But you only want to turn while you can pull lead.

Zeroes are nimble little buggers in the lower speed region, but at higher speeds they lose maneuverability a lot.
What is even worse than the high speed turn of the Zero is their high speed aileron response - and the P40/P39/F4F/F4U have good to excellent roll rates all along. And you can always use your roll rate to follow them turning, google "lag displacement roll"

Besides that, Ki-43 should turn as well as Zero, and nearly any biplane in this sim, too.

[IceFire]

This sounds like a comment from a P-38 pilot in World War II. The most interesting statement I read about Zero pilots was that they had great confidence (the veteran ones) at lower speeds managing very extremely tight turns...however, even veteran pilots felt that the Zero was not a competent turn fighter at higher speeds. The stick forces and maybe even the seat of the pants feel of the aircraft at that speed caused many of them to turn less than the maximum for the aircraft at that speed.

Compare and contrast to the P-38 which, although it has its flaws, was a solid airframe and pilots often felt confident in being able to turn the plane with no fears of overstressing the airframe. This is seat of the pants feel rather than true ultimate abilities of each.

So its possible and even likely that pilots flying the Zero at high speed felt more restricted in their turn rates than P-38 pilots and that closes the gap on how fast each could turn. Also keeping in mind were probably talking about a break turn... 90 degrees turn at most before breaking off. P-38 pilots were trained and most knew well enough not to engage in an actual turning battle.

[edward allen]

maybe the p38 driver is using the planes instantaneous turn rate for a quick snap-shot
although the thread sounds like its sustained turn rate. By the way does anyone know where I can find an energy-manoeverabilty diagram for the p38. Its out there somewhere but i dont know where.

[IceFire]

Often the way things are written they sound like a sustained turn but they are using short turns and snap shots only... I probably feels a lot longer in the heat of the moment :)

[Woke Up Dead]

maybe the p38 driver is using the planes instantaneous turn rate for a quick snap-shot
although the thread sounds like its sustained turn rate. By the way does anyone know where I can find an energy-manoeverabilty diagram for the p38. Its out there somewhere but i dont know where.

I think you're looking for the "IL-2 Compare" tool. It hasn't been updated for 4.12, but there aren't a lot of differences between 4.11 and 4.12.

Here's the thing about the "you can out-turn slow planes at fast speeds" argument: in theory it's true but in practice it doesn't matter. Yes, the P-38 can out-turn the Zero at 300 mph, but how are you going to force the Zero to go 300 mph? The Zero pilot will simply slow down to 250 mph, take the inside track, and get a shooting angle on you.

Imagine a record spinning on a turn-table: the P-38 is on the outer edge of the record going real fast, the Zero is somewhere closer to the middle going a lot slower, but they're both turning at the same rate and it's the Zero that's inside and can get the angle for a shot when it wants.

Or better yet: I can out-turn any fighter plane in history when I'm riding my bicycle. No matter how fast that F-16 turns, I'll always get my sights on him, the best he can hope for is a head-on. But if he uses his speed to sneak up on me from behind, or his climb rate to attack from above when I don't have enough energy to pop a wheelie at him, then me and my bicycle are in trouble.

[MaxGunz]

this post is not intended to be a tip but to the statement above implying that a p38 can
"turn" with a zero above 200mph. I find this hard to believe that a zero could turn with a zero at any speed. Any films of this.

Still on the web are AVG member Erik Shilling's archived posts. He mostly tells of P-40 vs Japanese planes including where they were limited.

Two of his often given answers are speed and roll rate.

Not everything he states is absolutely true but I take the general tactics and reasoning to be sound and worth trying, they did me a lot of good in various air combat games matching tactics to performance, even Red Baron.

http://yarchive.net/mil/avg_tactics.html

http://yarchive.net/mil/p40.html

Search the name for more.


>If you look at the wing plan form of the Zero, you will notice
>that the ailerons are HUGE and cover a substantial portion of the
>wing. With no assist of any kind and being fabric to boot, is it
>any wonder that the ailerons became immovable at high speed?
snip

I'll try a very simple and crude explaination of the Zero's
problem, although I'm sure some may disagree.

in each illustration the control is on an airplane which is
traveling from right to left as seen by the reader.

This represents the Zero's aileron design.
<-------- The horizontal V represents the hinge line, and as it
can be seen, this one would require a lot of strength to move the
control, especially at high speeds.

This is more indictive of the P-40's
--<------ Here it can easily be seen that it takes less force to
move the control since its area is smaller, and the air striking
the area forward of the hinge helps move the control.

----<---- In this case, once the control is deflected, the air
will be so effective on the front of the control, it will cause
control snatch, and the pilot will have to use a great deal of
force to prevent it from going full lock. Not Good.

--------< Antiservo needed, such as can be seen on some aircraft
with flying elevator controls.

Erik Shilling


>If the P-40B was so brilliant, how come the Zeros and Oscars shot them
>out of the sky in the Pacific and SE Asia war zones in 1941/2?

Answer:
I will answer this question with an analogy. If I give you a high
powered rifle and tell you it is a club, and you foolishly use it as a
club, and I give another person a 45 cal. pistol, and he knows how to
use it. Who do you think will be the victor.

The same applies to fighters.

If you don't use your equipment properly, you are going to lose the
fight. The Americans unfortunately had been taught the antiquated
dogfighting technic that had been used in WW I, and wasn't successful
against the Zero.

The answer to your question. In the early stages of the war the allied
pilots were not using their equipment correctly. (For your
information, the Allies never built an airplane that could turn inside
the Zero below 200 mph.) So how do you think we eventually outfought
them at every engagement. CHANGE OF TACTICS

In 1943, when the P-38 was first used in the Pacific, the Zero pilots
were shooting them down in large numbers. (See Subro Sakai's book
Zero.)

Isn't this amazing when you consider that the P-38's top speed was 100
mph faster than the Zero, and pilots were still trying to dogfight the
Zero.

Chennault had written a manual on fighter tactics, which discouraged
dogfighting as outdated. The military brass disagreed with Chennault,
and as a result Chennault was given an early retirement from the Army
Air Corps. Unfortunately the American military took Chennault for a
Fool. The same as the court martial board had taken Billy Mitchell as
a fool, when he claimed that bombers could sink any battle ship afloat.
Even though he proved it by sinking a German WW I battleship he was
court martialed.


To show a couple examples of attacking enemy fighters: If you attack head on, which the enemy was reluctant to do, because our guns outranged the fighters, they would normally pull up. (If he started turning away, he would already be at a disadvantage.) You started firing at Max range, and then dive away, under these conditions we didn't turn and tangle with a Jap fighters.

Attacking the enemy from a 3 to 6 o'clock position.

Why roll rate was important, is that one must remember that all maneuvers, except for a loop, started with a roll. The slower the roll rate the longer it took before the turn began.

1. If he turned away, he set you up on his six. A most undesirable position for him, because he would be a dead duck.

2. The enemy invariably turned toward you which was normal and anticipated. With his slower roll rate, you could beat him into the turn, get a deflection shot at him, and when you slowed down to where he started gaining on you in the circle, you rolled and dove away before you were in his sights. If you haven't tried it don't knock it.

This is where roll rate came into the picture. As far as Japanese fighters were concerned, their inferior roll rate was at all speeds. Above 240, it would take the Zero 3 second before he attained bank angle for max turn. (And the airplane doesn't start turning until bank angle is established.)

Since you could see him starting to bank, which you would have anticipated, you could easily bank more quickly and establish max bank angle within 1 second, and pull whatever "Gs" necessary to establish lead.

At this speed, and with your lead already established, you could maintain lead for some time before speed bled off to where the Zero could turn inside, you got the hell out. (Don't forget same speed and same "G" equal same radius of turn. Above 220 IAS the radius of the circle was determined by pilots ability to withstand "Gs." You could turn with the Zero as long as the speed was above 220 IAS.

If his reaction was only to pull. At these speed the "G" factor still applies, beside the Zero could not take 6 "Gs," and the P-40 could pull over 9 "Gs." Most fighter pilots could "momentarily" withstand 9 "G's" or more without blacking out.

If the situation was reversed and the Zero was attacking you. Your roll rate would save your ass by allowing you to roll to max turning bank, use 6 "Gs" or more, then continue rolling to inverted and dive. Rolling 180 degrees to dive would take less than 2 seconds, the Zero took 6. The Zero would never get a shot. He couldn't get lead, and by the time he was inverted you would already be out of range, gaining speed much more rapidly than the Zero.

As can be seen from the above illustration, that in the beginning roll rate was the primary factor in starting any maneuver except the loop. After bank angle was established then speed was the primary factor. To escape from a zero, roll rate again became the primary factor then speed.

Anyone who disagrees with the above has never been in combat, and as far as I know, few books if any bring this out.