So the H-1 racer had a 2,000 mile range, 3100 fpm climb and could shoot down any allied fighter in existance until 1943?

I love the H-1, gorgeous airplane, but it's not a fighter. To say that the Zero (or the FW190) had anything more than a superficial resemblance to it is unjustified. Might as well claim that any metal airplane with flush rivets is also a copy of the H1.

Here's a link y'all might dig:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKqLe...eature=related

Sounded nice.... couldn't actually see it once it took off though! haha. Looked dog ugly though :(

Ha! I guess it's not much of a video, definately has a "home movie" quality to it. But you really think the H1 is ugly? It's beautiful! I just gotta find a better video or pic or something to help you appreciate its awsomeness......;)

not every copied design has the exact same performance....:rolleyes:

it wouldn't have been the first fighter based on a racer design around that time, although countries tended to base the fighters on racers designed in their own country e.g. spits and macchis

Its a well known part of Japanese ingenuity to make the best use of derivative design...they do it better than anyone. Just ask any mx5 or lexus owner....
________
Vaporizer Review

Wasn't the H1, just one of Howard Hughes racers from the 30s that he crashed in or something? It was in LA in fact, that he crashed. Anyway, I don't think it could have been fitted to be a fighter, would have had to overhaul it, and such.

And Macchi was a racer before WW2, and than was told to start making fighters for Italy. They still do make some sea plane racers I think?

and trainers...

I'm not saying the racers were fitted as fighters, but racers largely influenced the fighters in a number of cases...
________
BMW VI HISTORY

I think virtually all of the great piston engined fighters were influenced by 1930's air racers, why not accuse them all of "pinching"? To claim that the Japanese simply "pinch" other designs is an extremely simplistic viewpoint and ignores a great engineering accomplishment. Very few modern aircraft can perform as well as the Zero on as little fuel. Give 'em a little credit why don't ya? :P

I've already used words like "ingenuity"...and alot of the zeros performance was due to it lacking pretty much any safety equipment or luxury items (like radios) which pilots/ground crew would strip out post build to keep the weight down.

If credit is due its the pilots that fought in them. Great plane but bit of a death trap...
________
BUY VAPOLUTION

I agree with you there, but we should also remember that the Zero only became a "death trap" after it had been in service for several years. Early in the war it was virtually unstoppable, and the allies never did produce a carrier based fighter that could match the Zeros range.

You also have not produced any evidence to indicate that the similarities between the Zero and the H1 were anything more than superficial. Clearly the Japanese were impressed by the H1. So was Kurt Tank. So what?

Ok, so maybe I'm getting a bit too defensive here. Point is I would LOVE to own a Zero as a peacetime toy. I would have to modify the cockpit some to get my 6'5" American sized body to fit, but what fun! And as efficient as the Zero was, I could even afford the gas bill :P

They do somewhat have the same characteristics as one another Long sleek body, and small. But you have to also realize, that most planes during certain decades look quite similar (kinda like cars of the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s etc.). I couldn't find anywhere on the net, that said Mitsubishi got their idea or design from the H1, or even that they looked at the H1 to make a fast plane. Though it does say Kurt Tank's FW design group did get somewhat inspired by the H1.