Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Fw-190 vs A6M2 Zero


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 JimboHarrigan2010

JimboHarrigan2010

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 12 August 2011 - 09:01 PM

I know this duel never happened but who would win?

#2 brndirt1

brndirt1

    Saddle Tramp

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,709 posts

Posted 12 August 2011 - 09:07 PM

The F-W should (in my opinion) with comparable pilots win; it was faster in straight level flight, more robust, more heavily armed, and the Zeke could only excel in one area outside of low speed maneuverability and climbing rate, it's range. It might be able to out turn the 190 using one-direction torque steer, and run-away to fight another day.

Just my opinion of course.
Happy Trails,
Clint.

#3 Gebirgsjaeger

Gebirgsjaeger

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,321 posts

Posted 13 August 2011 - 07:49 AM

I go with your opinion, Clint!
Regards, Ulrich

Horrido!

"We're surrounded. That simplifies our problem!" LtGen. Chesty Puller.

#4 TiredOldSoldier

TiredOldSoldier

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,755 posts

Posted 13 August 2011 - 08:53 AM

The Fw190 hands down, it can outrun outdive and outshoot the Zero, IIRC the long nosed ones could even outclimb it, and it will not disintegrate at it's opponent's first burst.
However good the Japanese designers were you can only do that much with 1000 Hp, the Germans had nearly twice that power to play around with and that means more of everything (unfortunately also fuel consumpuion), a fairer comparison would be the similarly powered early 109s. BTW at least pick the A6M5, more or less a contemporary of the FW190A4 not the M2.

Edited by TiredOldSoldier, 13 August 2011 - 09:01 AM.
typos

Truth is the first victim of conflict

#5 Chi-Ri

Chi-Ri

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 13 August 2011 - 11:36 AM

Well, IMO, FW-190 can, to a certain degree, be compared with F6F - some characteristics are quite close (like power/mass ratio), some differ not very significantly (the greatest difference IIRC was in wing loading). And we all know the results of F6F vs. A6M fights. So, I'll also bet on FW-190 (of course, if A6M is not piloted by someone like Sakai Saburo or Iwamoto Tetsuzo :)).

Regards,
There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all Hell.
William Tecumseh Sherman

#6 syscom3

syscom3

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts

Posted 14 August 2011 - 03:45 PM

I'd compare the -190 more to the Corsair.

But lets keep one thing firmly in mind; the Zero was more of an armed advanced trainer that was quickly obsolescent by the end of 1942.

You dont get into a turning fight with the Zero and keep your speed up; then you're going to shoot it down.
  • CAC likes this

#7 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 02:03 PM

That would not be a duel but an execution!

Technically the Fw-190 is superior in any aspect that counts and tactically the LW had adopted energy tactics(hit&run) and the finger-four formation before 1939. Even "green" German pilots would hardly enter a dogfight. Unless the Shrikes get ambushed the Zeros loose and loose big.

#8 JimboHarrigan2010

JimboHarrigan2010

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 08:52 PM

as many a allied bomber streams found out with the 190.

#9 brndirt1

brndirt1

    Saddle Tramp

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,709 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 10:07 PM

as many a allied bomber streams found out with the 190.


Of course the "Butcher Bird" against the heavy bombers was never the question now was it.
Happy Trails,
Clint.

#10 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 17 August 2011 - 04:09 AM

Be carefuk guys remember some considered the Spitfire V be quite superior to the Zero and look what happened over Darwin. I realise there might have been more to it but the setting can matter alot too.

#11 CAC

CAC

    Ace of Spades

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,229 posts

Posted 17 August 2011 - 06:28 AM

Be carefuk guys remember some considered the Spitfire V be quite superior to the Zero and look what happened over Darwin. I realise there might have been more to it but the setting can matter alot too.


I think thats a little unfair on the Spit...Those Darwin Spits were tired birds...plenty of glycol left in the engine making it run hot, then seize...An unfair comparison to be sure.
I try to be the man my dog thinks i am...

#12 Chi-Ri

Chi-Ri

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 17 August 2011 - 06:49 AM

But lets keep one thing firmly in mind; the Zero was more of an armed advanced trainer

I would rather say armed advanced aerobatics plane. ;)

Regards,
There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all Hell.
William Tecumseh Sherman

#13 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 17 August 2011 - 07:04 AM

I think thats a little unfair on the Spit...Those Darwin Spits were tired birds...plenty of glycol left in the engine making it run hot, then seize...An unfair comparison to be sure.


May I ask where that info comes from??? Just wondering never heard of their engines siezing up.

Edited by ickysdad, 17 August 2011 - 07:12 AM.


#14 CAC

CAC

    Ace of Spades

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,229 posts

Posted 17 August 2011 - 10:25 PM

May I ask where that info comes from??? Just wondering never heard of their engines siezing up.


Hey,
Just about any literature regarding The Spits in Darwin...Unlike the P-40s which came brand new out of the box, the Spit Vs were second (sometimes third hand from training units) hand from the European theatre...Britain had to upgrade their spits to keep up with the FW-190s...and we (Australia) needed fighters badly...so they (eventually) sent the Vs to us. More Vs seized than were actually shot down...if those blades suddenly stopped turning at altitude, the pilot was able to glide back to Darwin and land usually on a stretch of beach...or out in the scrub.
I try to be the man my dog thinks i am...

#15 Takao

Takao

    Ace

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,095 posts

Posted 18 August 2011 - 12:40 AM

Sounds to me that what CAC is describing is the failure of the Spitfire's CSU(Constant Speed Unit), and not that the engine had "seized up".

Some stats for CSU failures can be found here: Appendix 7 - Spitfire CSU failures | Darwin Spitfires, the real battle for Australia -

and a good description of the problem was posted by "Merlin", not to mention a very good thread discussing the Spitfire vs. Zero, can be found here: Spitfires vs Zeros; the Darwin debacle - Page 6 - The Great Planes and warbirds Community

#16 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 18 August 2011 - 01:35 AM

Sounds to me that what CAC is describing is the failure of the Spitfire's CSU(Constant Speed Unit), and not that the engine had "seized up".

Some stats for CSU failures can be found here: Appendix 7 - Spitfire CSU failures | Darwin Spitfires, the real battle for Australia -

and a good description of the problem was posted by "Merlin", not to mention a very good thread discussing the Spitfire vs. Zero, can be found here: Spitfires vs Zeros; the Darwin debacle - Page 6 - The Great Planes and warbirds Community


You post ever there??? What name do you go by????/ Anyways myself I feel like it was more that the 202nd Kentai was a very,very crack outfit more then anything. In other words I feel the Japanese pilots involved had something to do with it not saying the RAAF pilots weren't good just they were up against a crack unit furthermore it seems that campaign showed that all the good IJN pilots weren't gone by early-mid 1943 not by a long shot.

#17 CAC

CAC

    Ace of Spades

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,229 posts

Posted 18 August 2011 - 01:54 AM

You post ever there??? What name do you go by????/ Anyways myself I feel like it was more that the 202nd Kentai was a very,very crack outfit more then anything. In other words I feel the Japanese pilots involved had something to do with it not saying the RAAF pilots weren't good just they were up against a crack unit furthermore it seems that campaign showed that all the good IJN pilots weren't gone by early-mid 1943 not by a long shot.


Interesting...If you are right then the pilots didnt realise that themselves...they reckoned it seized! And plenty of good spit pilots in Darwin...Mr Clive "KILLER" Caldwell was one of them. The CO whos name escapes me at the moment was also i highly decorated pilot who went on to fly in Korea.
Dick Creswell.

Edited by CAC, 18 August 2011 - 02:28 AM.

I try to be the man my dog thinks i am...

#18 ickysdad

ickysdad

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 18 August 2011 - 03:08 AM

I posted an article by Richard Dunn in the same thread on the same forum that Takao linked to.Spitfires vs Zeros; the Darwin debacle - Page 7 - The Great Planes and warbirds Community

#19 CAC

CAC

    Ace of Spades

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,229 posts

Posted 18 August 2011 - 03:38 AM

I posted an article by Richard Dunn in the same thread on the same forum that Takao linked to.Spitfires vs Zeros; the Darwin debacle - Page 7 - The Great Planes and warbirds Community



Thanks for the post mate....Interesting reading....and some new info for me!
I try to be the man my dog thinks i am...

#20 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts

Posted 19 August 2011 - 05:32 PM

Hey,
Just about any literature regarding The Spits in Darwin...Unlike the P-40s which came brand new out of the box, the Spit Vs were second (sometimes third hand from training units) hand from the European theatre.


Just unbelievable! They did it again. First they dumped Buffaloes on the Far East. When the Far East fell apart they send used Hurricanes from the Med as reinforcements and finally used Spitfires. No wonder the Australians were "unimpressed" by the effort the motherland made to defend them.

#21 Gromit801

Gromit801

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts

Posted 19 August 2011 - 10:47 PM

One variable, are the pilots aware of the other aircraft's performance levels. If a 190 pilot attacks an A6M with the same lack of knowledge US and Commonwealth pilots did in the early stages of the war, chances are the Fw would get pasted. When a pilot doesn't know any better, they tend to want to stay and get into a furball, which in this case would be fatal for the 190 pilot.
"I love deadlines. I love the 'Whooshing' noise they make when they go by." - Doug Adams

#22 JimboHarrigan2010

JimboHarrigan2010

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 82 posts

Posted 20 August 2011 - 05:28 PM

One variable, are the pilots aware of the other aircraft's performance levels. If a 190 pilot attacks an A6M with the same lack of knowledge US and Commonwealth pilots did in the early stages of the war, chances are the Fw would get pasted. When a pilot doesn't know any better, they tend to want to stay and get into a furball, which in this case would be fatal for the 190 pilot.

One of the things allied pilots were told, never dogfight with a zero. On manuverability and speed I'd go for a zero, but on the other hand I'd say a Butcher Bird because of it's superior firepower and ruggedness. But either way both fighters with veteran pilots are just as lethal.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users