Japanese Carrier Planes

Gary Grigsby's strategic level wargame covering the entire War in the Pacific from 1941 to 1945 or beyond.

Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

Post Reply
User avatar
okami
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 2:08 pm

Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by okami »

Did any of the late war A6M7/8 or A7M2 ever get stationed on carriers?
"Square peg, round hole? No problem. Malet please.
User avatar
FeurerKrieg
Posts: 3400
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 8:43 pm
Location: Denver, CO

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by FeurerKrieg »

I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.
Image
Upper portion used with permission of www.subart.net, copyright John Meeks
User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by DuckofTindalos »

ORIGINAL: okami

Did any of the late war A6M7/8 or A7M2 ever get stationed on carriers?

No.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7848
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by Q-Ball »

I think FK is right though, a6/8 and A7 were developed with the idea of using them on carriers, so to me they should be CV Capable. The fact that they weren't is entirely due to the IJN not having operational CV's in 1945.

User avatar
DuckofTindalos
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by DuckofTindalos »

This is true, but also not the original question.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by Shark7 »

Wasn't the J9Y Kikka being designed for carrier operations as well?
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7848
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by Q-Ball »

I don't think the J9Y was intended to be CV capable. I know the me262 had a very low accelation rate, requiring a very long runway to take off. I can't imagine the Japanese somehow solved that problem.
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by Mynok »


Perhaps they fitted it with a snorkel...... [:'(]
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
borner
Posts: 1485
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:15 pm
Location: Houston TX

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by borner »

 I do not think Japan had any carriers they still considered "operational", as in the airgroups not having been transfered to land bases by this time
 
 
User avatar
msieving1
Posts: 528
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:24 am
Location: Missouri

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by msieving1 »

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.

In the Japanese Navy aircraft designation system, A indicated a carrier based fighter, and J indicated a land based fighter. N indicated a floatplane fighter. If an aircraft was converted to a different role, the letter for the new type was added at the end, after a hyphen. So:

A6M2: carrier based fighter
A6M2-N: carrier based fighter converted to floatplane fighter
J2M: land based fighter
N1K1-J: floatplane fighter converted to land based fighter.
-- Mark Sieving
User avatar
okami
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed May 23, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by okami »

ORIGINAL: msieving1

ORIGINAL: Feurer Krieg

I don't think so, but from what I've read, the A series fighters were similar enough in design that they could have operated from carriers with some minor modifications. (Tailhooks etc). But I'm not an expert.

Also, as far as I know, the other navy fighters like the J2M definitely could not operate from carriers.

In the Japanese Navy aircraft designation system, A indicated a carrier based fighter, and J indicated a land based fighter. N indicated a floatplane fighter. If an aircraft was converted to a different role, the letter for the new type was added at the end, after a hyphen. So:

A6M2: carrier based fighter
A6M2-N: carrier based fighter converted to floatplane fighter
J2M: land based fighter
N1K1-J: floatplane fighter converted to land based fighter.
Then according to this the A6M7/8 and A7M2 which are carrier capable should be ok to place on carriers?
"Square peg, round hole? No problem. Malet please.
User avatar
Q-Ball
Posts: 7848
Joined: Tue Jun 25, 2002 4:43 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by Q-Ball »

I don't think it would be gamey at all to place A7 or A6M8 on CVs.  Organic CV units can't upgrade to them, but using LB Daitai in that role I think is kosher.

Using J2M or George on CV would remain, in my mind, very gamey and verboten
User avatar
scott64
Posts: 4019
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:34 pm
Location: Colorado
Contact:

RE: Japanese Carrier Planes

Post by scott64 »

A carrier plane is a carrier plane. Maybe the same argument could be said whether or not to put corsairs on carriers. If the sides were switched and we did not have those carrier planes. [:)]
Lucky for you, tonight it's just me


Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/
Post Reply

Return to “War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945”