Spitfire vs Zero article ...

Lone Wolf · Jun 12, 2007

Found in Wiki - I found it interesting ...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Spitfire_versus_Zero.jpg

Particularly what he said re flimsiness.

redcoat · Jun 13, 2007

This is a post by the US poster 'robert' on the History Channel forum, concerning the battles between the Spitfire and Zero,

As for the Spitfire and the Zero, a lot of disinformation has been put out over the years. The Spitfire's record against the Zero is clouded in misconceptions and distortions, and the negative stereotypes that have surrounded it are supported only by the inconsistent performance of the Spitfire Mk.Vs (fitted with Volkes filters) of No. 1 Wing that opposed the A6M3s during the Darwin raids of 1943.

To start with, much of the myth of the Zero's superiority over the Spitfire is based on erroneous Japanese identification. Typical of this is Jiro Horikoshi's Eagles of Mitsubishi: The Story of the Zero Fighter (generally an excellent book, BTW). Horikoshi's account of the fighting over Ceylon in 1942 states, "...in the skies over Colombo, thirty-six Zeros fought against scores of Hurricanes and Spitfires and downed seventeen Spitfires and twenty-one Hurricanes with a loss of just one Zero."

The problem with this is that there were no Spitfires there at all. In the second edition of the book, the publishers added a correction that read, "After publication of the English edition of this book in 1981, we were alerted to a factual error in the description of the air battles during the Indian Ocean campaign. On page 131, we describe the Zero fighting against the Supermarine Spitfire over Colombo in 1942. Apparently Japanese pilots confused the Fairey Fulmar for the Spitfire, since the Fulmar, which somewhat resembled the Spitfire, participated in this battle; the Spitfire was not operational in the Pacific until 1943."

Unfortunately, the damage to the Spitfire's reputation had been done.

The Spitfire's first action against the Zero came in 1943, when two RAF and one RAAF Spitfire Mk.V squadrons were assigned to the defense of Darwin, in Australia. These battles between the Spitfire Mk.V and A6M3 over North Australia in are also clouded by misconceptions. The Spitfire Mk.V certainly did have a tough time dealing with the A6M, partially because of poor tactics, but also because the A6M3 was, at the time, an equal match for the Spitfire Mk.V, which was obsolescent in Europe and had already been replaced there by the Mk.IX. But the Spitfire's performance against the Zero wasn't anywhere near as bad as is commonly suggested. Here's an excerpt from Famous Fighter Squadrons of the RAF, Volume One, by Francis K. Mason:

"On 2 May [1943], a radar station on Bathurst Island located an enemy force 160 miles from Darwin, whose controller then ordered all three squadrons into the air. Led by Caldwell, the wing assembled 33 Spitfires but failed to gain a height advantage until the raiders were over Darwin. No. 54 [Squadron, RAF] was again directed against the fighter escort while the Australian squadrons closed with the retiring bombers. Squadron Leader Gibbs led the RAF Spitfires in an almost vertical dive on the 'Zekes' and saw his first target burst into flames. Taken by surprise, the Japanese fighters broke formation and the sky was filled with diving and turning aircraft. Flying Officer Farries (in BR 239) accounted for a second 'Zeke' but, in turn, was shot down and took to his rubber dinghy. He was rescued after 5-1/2 hours by a Supermarine Walrus amphibian.

"The Australian squadrons were simultaneously attacking the bombers which were defended by even more enemy fighters. Thus, when the action was broken off due to fuel shortage, enemy losses totalled eight destroyed, four probables, and eight damaged. Five Spitfires had gone down and three of their pilots were in dinghies awaiting rescue. Sixteen minutes after the attack began, Caldwell recalled his scattered fighters and headed for home, now a long way off. Though within the normal capacity of Spitfires, the chase had resulted in abnormal consumption of fuel and an extreme adverse wind did nothing to help. Five aircraft ran out of fuel and force landed, one in the sea, and three more suffered engine failure causing a fatal crash. This brought the total number lost during the day to eight, with six more force-landed and awaiting recovery.

"At this point, an astonishing series of events left the squadron baffled. General MacArthur - who had been appointed Supreme Commander in the South-West Pacific after his defeat in the Philippines - had been criticized for the optimistic communiqués issuing from his headquarters. Presumably because no U.S. forces were involved and Darwin was remote from his main preoccupations, a communiqué was issued to redress the balance, It announced baldly that Spitfires defending Darwin had engaged a Japanese bomber force and suffered heavy casualties. The squadrons involved were staggered, newspapers throughout the world reported that Spitfires were 'outclassed', and RAAF headquarters was enraged.

"An amending press release mentioned 'bad weather' as contributing to the losses, another obvious untruth, and the men of the Spitfire squadrons suspected that it was a plot to boost the morale of the U.S. fighter squadrons in New Guinea who were having to cope with Japanese fighters while flying obsolescent Bell p-39s (Airacobras) and P-40s, neither of which were a match for the 'Zeke'.

"The Japanese reacted predictably, claiming 21 Spitfires shot down without loss to themselves!"

Unfortunately, this distortion has been perpetuated to this day - for example, when AeroMaster Decals released their Eagles of the Rising Sun set of decals for model aircraft in 1995, they repeated the fiction that Zeros had destroyed 21 Spitfires for no loss on their instruction sheet.

The Darwin air raids were the only time that Spitfire Mk.Vs and A6Ms met head to head, but the Mk.V did very well against other Japanese fighters. For example, in January 1944, Burma-based Spitfires Mk.Vs destroyed 20 Ki-43s for the loss of four Spitfires. Bryan Philpott's RAF Combat Units SEAC 1941-45 gives the Spitfire's kill ratio in the CBI as 8-1 in favor of the Spit.

Once the Spitfire Mk.VIII was introduced into the region in early 1944, the game was up for the Japanese fighters. As Chaz Bowyer in Supermarine Spitfire notes of the first CBI Spitfire kill in November 1943, "It was the start of the long road back to Allied air superiority over Burma; an ascendancy directly attributable to the impact of Spitfires on the aerial war. If the Mark Vc was only marginally better than its best opponents, the arrival of the Mark VIIIs by March 1944, which by then equipped a total of eight squadrons, offered an unqualified advantage in all sections of the performance envelope."

The Official History eloquently states, "...the advent of the Spitfire squadrons brought promise of victory as the arrival of the swallow that of summer."

Back to the Spitfire against the Zero. Although the later model Spitfires never had a chance to meet the later model Zeros, we do have a way of being able to judge them. The Seafire Mk.III did have a chance to fight against the Zero, and from its record against the A6M, we can get a clear idea of how they would have fared against each other. David Brown's The Seafire: The Spitfire That Went to Sea looks in detail at the Seafire's combat career. Versus the A6M, the Seafire had a kill ratio of 16-1, which pretty much contradicts any assertion that the Spitfire never mastered the Zero. The later Spitfires/Seafires could basically eat it for lunch.

Eric Brown, in Duels in the Sky, sizes up the outcome of a hypothetical fight between the Spitfire Mk.XIV and the A6M5 with the following:

"The Zeke would find itself facing a fighter par excellence, with no weakness to exploit and huge advantages in performance, view, and firepower. Even its legendary maneuverability would be matched for once. The Zeke would be overwhelmed swiftly and surely by a fighter outclassing it in virtually every department."
Click to expand...

Lone Wolf · Jun 13, 2007

Very interesting - thanks.

Log in or Sign up

Spitfire vs Zero article ...

Lone Wolf New Member

redcoat Ace

Lone Wolf New Member

Share This Page

About US

Useful Links