Admiral Yamamoto's "What Might Have Been"

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Sorry for not being on but I've just got done working 18 of the last 24 hours.

It appears to me that we go with the established work from before the quote about the team.  Have I missed anything that changes this statement in the above posts? 

If mikemike is correct in his assessment, then with more focused design direction (and, probably, more resources given to Mitsubishi's design team) A7M can be put into production by early 1945/late 1944. That's the main change. (This does not mean it had much chance to actually push Zero out of production. The game adequately represents this by giving A7M its own small factory, instead of upgrading Zero factories to it.) His quote also directly confirms that Kinsei-Zero is indeed possible rather early (in all likelyhood not before 1943, though, as changing engines is a major undertaking - even if prototypes can be created rapidly, production lines take time to convert).

As a side note, you might want to schedule A6M9 on winter of 1944-1945, particularly if A7M is not pushed forward. It can feature slightly better durability, to represent an improved fire-extinguishing system and other minor tweaks, installed on A6M6 in RL; maybe an ability to carry a 250-kg bomb. Maybe very minor improvements in flight characteristics, reflecting the overall design polish.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: mikemike

Doesn't work.

I agree. A7M, to its RL detriment, was planned around the engine that itself was still in development, and apparently did not accept substitutes. Better to let Horikoshi have his way with it (we can say that thanks to hindsight, of course).

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: mikemike

ORIGINAL: bklooste

A7A0  44/2 as A7 but Kinsei 62 engine. Also replace the George .
A7A1 as historical but 1 month earlier.

Doesn't work. The Kinsei 62 has only 1560 HP, and the A7M was underpowered with the Homare which had 2000 HP (speed was the same as the A6M5). The Kasei with its 1800 HP might marginally work and would fit the timescale, but performance won't be thrilling. You'll probably be stuck with the A7M1 armament which was the same as that of the A6M8 (2x13.2 mm, 2x20 mm), and even then the thing will be slower than the A6M5 except in a dive.

EDIT: An alternate powerplant could be the Mitsubishi Ha-104 that powered the Ki-67 Peggy; that plane had its first flight on 12/27/1942, so the engine (with similar performance as the Homare) would be available early enough. Still not enough power, but ...
This is of course real life, AE has the Homare as the Ki-67 powerplant.

I dont think the Kasei or the Ha-104 are appropriate for a fighter there large diameter will significantly increase drag and hence performance ,note this is not the case for an interceptor like the J2 where the strong climb is more important.


re Homare

It was designed to output around 1800 hp (1340 kW), or 100 hp (75 kW)per cylinder. However, the tight design of the engine made it difficult to maintain quality in manufacturing, and unreliability in the field was a significant problem; actual output of early models at altitude was in the range of 1300 hp (970 kW),

Similar issues occured with the 22 Homare and was probably the reason the A7 never reached production.

Underpowered for 45 is not underpowered for 44/1. Im not saying it will be a 390+ mph plane but it will be significantly better than the 355 a zero can get. I dispute it will be similar or worse than the A6M5 as power to weight should be 30% better. It should also be better than the A6M8 62 , since that plane is heavily limited by the airframe eg power to weight was increased by 50% but max speed by about 12mph this just doesnt cover dives but turns also.

Consider this
Engines power to weight ( hp/lb) Speed
P-38E 2*1325 0.19 395
Corsaire F4U-1A 2250 0.17 426
COrsaire F4U-4 2450 0.20 446
A6M2 875 0.15 316
A6M5 M52 1130 0.20 350-358
A6M8 64 1560 0.26 350-355 We can see here we hit the limitation of the airframe.
A7 2000-2200 0.22 390-395
A7 with Kinsei 68 1580 0.18 ?

Note an A7 with the Kinsei has better power to weight than the Corsaire F4U-1A and almost a P38 so it is hardly underpowered and the limitation will be more dependent on the airframe, i think it would be good for 370-380 or so which is still usefull

It is very interesting that the Frank which also used the engine (and the historical A6M8) all ended up trialing the Kinsei 62 a 1941 engine even in 45. Obviously the 22 Homare had issues ( both production and in many planes) and it may be best to just leave it to the Frank and use the 62 in the model A7 and later upgrade it ot the MK9A.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: mikemike

Doesn't work.

I agree. A7M, to its RL detriment, was planned around the engine that itself was still in development, and apparently did not accept substitutes. Better to let Horikoshi have his way with it (we can say that thanks to hindsight, of course).

It did accept substitutes they changed it to the Ha-43 , both these engines were similar to the Kinsei in design ( though the Homare had a smaller radius) . The question is if after 43/1 90% of our fighter effort is in the A7M would they use an engine which wont be ready till 45 ?

A7M1 : Initial model powered by 1,491 kW (1,999 hp) Nakajima Homare 22 engine. Three built.
A7M2 : Revised version with 1,641 kW (2,201 hp) Mitsubishi Ha-43 engine. Five prototypes.

Note only 8 A7M were built , all prototypes .

I still think that both Homare 22 and Ha-43 having issues and the zero hitting the limit a Kinsei based planed would be built in 44. This could be any of a number of planes
eg
- George mod , while performance would be worse it wouldnt have production issues.
- Frank mod as a Navy plane with the Kinsei ? eg Ki-116 which was equipped with Mitsubishi 62(Ha-33), 1,120 kW (1,500 hp).
- A7 with Kinsei

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Sorry for not being on but I've just got done working 18 of the last 24 hours.

It appears to me that we go with the established work from before the quote about the team.  Have I missed anything that changes this statement in the above posts?  The level of techinical knowledge here is so impressive.  Reminds me of the debating groups I had in college grad school when we would be going over the reading and making our cases.  The Jiro Team quote set off a great set of posts that really serve to promote our discussion.  Seems to me it simply justifies the work we have been doing on the development lines.

Want to read the posts more closely and see if I missed anything.

Quite a few changes John esp after 42 , 42 is quite clear but its gets murky after that... Since in the zero line we are building the A6M8 a 45 plane with a 42 engine as the A6M4 at the start of 43. This raises a number of issues such as what all the research teams are doing instead of developing the A6M5a, b and c , M6 , M7 and M8. Futhermore since they realize the zero frame is at the end of the line about 10/42 what do they do ?

I disagree the Frank , George and A7M can be brought forward even 1 month since the engines just will not be available unless you can solve the Homares issues in which case EVERY plane would be brought forward massively i dont know much about this engine and whether it is reasonable to bring it forward. The George production line clearly show single units per month for a year being built due to difficulties getting each engine built. The Frank has this to a lesser extent.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: FatR

The game adequately represents this by giving A7M its own small factory, instead of upgrading Zero factories to it.) His quote also directly confirms that Kinsei-Zero is indeed possible rather early (in all likelyhood not before 1943, though, as changing engines is a major undertaking - even if prototypes can be created rapidly, production lines take time to convert).

I have put it in 1/43 , though i am assuming work was done even in 40-41 instead of the Jack ,trialing the Kensai and the Kinsei 54 ( say 1/42) and a upgrade to the Kinsei 62 similar to the DInah III whose historical date i match. Now a zero order would give priority to the engine ( compared to the Dinah) but instead of bringing the date into 42 we ramp up production and fine tune the air frame and hence i would assume a reasonable sized (10-20) free Kinesei62 factory in 1/43.

re the A7M im not really set on the historical A7M but the designers realise the frame is at the end in 42. Sure extra work will be done but the majority of the team would be on a new type and likely zero successor.

[John 3rd]

OK.  I want a FINAL set for the development lines of Zero.  This is beyond my paygrade so I'll accept what has been decided.
 
Once we have that then the actual development can begin.  I'll ask again if there is anyone who wants to actually help me with creating the Mod itself?  I've fooled around and have a decent grasp of stuff but I don't have buckets of time to spend flailing around putting everything together.  Volunteers?  Anyone??
 

[bklooste]

Question is still what would the Zero team do in 43, no work on A7 due to engine issues , little work on zeros , no work on Jack.
 
Anyone like the Frank with the Kinsei ( Ki-116) as a Navy plane from 44/1  , with a reliable engine and a navy plant should be service rating of 1. The Franks engine  produced 1,800hp (2000hp on paper)   and 1580 hp is not that much lower when you get an almost 15-20% weight saving  , say 385mph instead of 392 and +1 manuever. It would be land only so no better CV planes till the A7.
 
Its rather interesting that a large number of planes went back to a 1942 engine in late 44 or 1945 eg Frank , Zero A6M8 , George , D4Y5 Judy , Ki100 and 102 and im sure there were others.  There is no way this would be done if 2000hp+ plants could be produced in number and reliable.
 
Tachikawa Ki-116 Hayate
 






This was the final version of the Hayate that entered flight testing. It was the fourth Ki-84-I built by Mansyu Hikoki Seizo K.K., and was adated for 1 × Mitsubishi Ha-33 62 (Ha-112-II) driving a three-bladed propeller identical to those on the Ki-46-III 'Dinah'.
The new version proved very succesful, and resulted in a weight reduction of 1,000 lb (454 kg) empty weight. Final tests were being conducted when Japan finally surrendered after the two atomic bombs.
Number built: 1
 
 
 

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: bklooste

It did accept substitutes they changed it to the Ha-43 , both these engines were similar to the Kinsei in design ( though the Homare had a smaller radius) .

But with this engine it wasn't that far above A6M5c/A6M6 in performance. Speed was only 580 km/h (granted, this seems strangely small for such a powerful engine and aerodinamically clean airframe; also Shiden allegedly had only 580 km/h as well but was at least as fast as Hellcat in actual combat; but as the project was abandoned we can assume the improvements were not worth the difficulties).

As about issues with the Homare engine preventing the earlier availability of planes, Shiden/George normally becomes available with a size 8 plant (at the time when Japanese players probably crank out 800-1000 fighters per month - AE being AE, both sides have more planes and the air war is bloodier), which, in my book, decently reflects the sluggish production.

[FatR]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

OK.  I want a FINAL set for the development lines of Zero. 

We're unlikely to agree. As I said, you need to choose yourself. I can write a modified proposal, but other people in this tread probably won't agree.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: bklooste

It did accept substitutes they changed it to the Ha-43 , both these engines were similar to the Kinsei in design ( though the Homare had a smaller radius) .

But with this engine it wasn't that far above A6M5c/A6M6 in performance. Speed was only 580 km/h (granted, this seems strangely small for such a powerful engine and aerodinamically clean airframe; also Shiden allegedly had only 580 km/h as well but was at least as fast as Hellcat in actual combat; but as the project was abandoned we can assume the improvements were not worth the difficulties).

For the Ha-43 the standard in the A7M2 i have a speed of 630km . Where do you get the 580 figure from ? This must not be a 2200 hp engine .

With regard to the George and the slow speed , i think its handicapped by the game engine , the thing was while a wild cats speed would degrade through the turns and banks the George would loose very little it would also climb faster and had comparable dive speed. Just in a straight level flight the aerdynamics of the Wild cat would have much greater speed.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: FatR

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

OK.  I want a FINAL set for the development lines of Zero. 

We're unlikely to agree. As I said, you need to choose yourself. I can write a modified proposal, but other people in this tread probably won't agree.

Not sure what FatRs position is we agree on most things like the A7 everything up to mid 43 i thought. Maybe FatRs position is even though we get a A6M8 style plane in 1/43 not much changes my position is prob some more things will change as they realize the zero limits earlier though its hard to speculate what it is.

[FatR]

But just because I can:

The carrier fighter line (conservative, emphazis on mass production)
A6M2
->A6M5 (42/10, no changes)
->A6M5b (43/3, no changes)
->A6M8 (43/8, +1 hex to all ranges, max speed around 365, reflecting the overall design polish and improvements to the Kinsei engine, otherwise no changes)

Then there is a major point of divergence, depending on whether Navy basically just listens to Horikoshi in early 1943 and accepts his line of thought that a heavier fighter is absolutely necessary; decides that Zero cannot be effectively replaced in production by A7M and sticks with this decision until the deteriorating situation forces them to grasp at straws; or forces Mitshubishi to build a new fighter around another engine early on. The third scenario, assuming it can work, is covered by bklooste. In the second scenario A7M is available as in vanilla. A6M9 appears on 44/6. It features further small improvements across the board, except in range and gun armament. In the first scenario, assuming it can work, there are no further improvements to Zero, but A7M is advanced to about 45/1. (But you're still stuck with a very small A7M factory and need to spend a ton of everything to mass produce it.) Also, other planes that use MK9 can arrive earlier.


The land-based fighter line (faster adoption of designs conceptually different from A6M2):
A6M3 (42/2; has type 99-2 cannons, otherwise as in vanilla). All Jack kokutais use models from it, appropriate for their time of arrival. Land-based units can convert to them.
-> A6M3b (42/5, as described by bklooste in the post #218)
-> A6M4 (43/1; as described by bklooste in the post #218, except not carrier-capable and with 13.2 Navy MGs)))
-> A6M4i (43/7; 20mm cannons are replaced with 30mm)

Then there is the point of divergence based on the decision above. In the second scenario, there is probably a strong drive to develop heavy-armed Zeros, so A6M8i and A6M9i with 30mm armament and better high-altitude performance, but worse overall performance, smaller range and no ability to fly from carriers become available in time. In the first scenario, the factory just upgrades to A6M8, if the player allows.

George can be slightly accelerated in either scenario. In the first scenario N1K5-J becomes available at least half a year later

[JuanG]

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Once we have that then the actual development can begin.  I'll ask again if there is anyone who wants to actually help me with creating the Mod itself?  I've fooled around and have a decent grasp of stuff but I don't have buckets of time to spend flailing around putting everything together.  Volunteers?  Anyone??

John, I'd be willing to help you out where I can - you can get in touch by email or pm if needed.

To send scenarios the best method is just to send (possibly in .zip) all files from the /SCEN folder ending in whatever number you choose to use for your mod (so if you did #35, it would be everything ending in 035). Likewise installation is just the reverse of this. If needed you can also send single 'components' like the device file.

I agree that there have been some very interesting points regarding IJ aircraft development come up in this thread, some of which has influenced my work on my own scenarios.

[bklooste]

ORIGINAL: FatR

But just because I can:

The carrier fighter line (conservative, emphazis on mass production)
A6M2
->A6M5 (42/10, no changes)
->A6M5b (43/3, no changes)
->A6M8 (43/8, +1 hex to all ranges, max speed around 365, reflecting the overall design polish and improvements to the Kinsei engine, otherwise no changes)

Then there is a major point of divergence, depending on whether Navy basically just listens to Horikoshi in early 1943 and accepts his line of thought that a heavier fighter is absolutely necessary; decides that Zero cannot be effectively replaced in production by A7M and sticks with this decision until the deteriorating situation forces them to grasp at straws; or forces Mitshubishi to build a new fighter around another engine early on. The third scenario, assuming it can work, is covered by bklooste. In the second scenario A7M is available as in vanilla. A6M9 appears on 44/6. It features further small improvements across the board, except in range and gun armament. In the first scenario, assuming it can work, there are no further improvements to Zero, but A7M is advanced to about 45/1. (But you're still stuck with a very small A7M factory and need to spend a ton of everything to mass produce it.) Also, other planes that use MK9 can arrive earlier.

No disagreements..

Thus the question is to John and others what is the most likely
1. Accelerate A7M (I dont think this is viable due to the engine issues and the engine relationship mentioned the most attractive is the Kinsei and then the Mk9A not N. )
2. As historical ( but we need to find a job for the Zero div maybe bombers)
3. Build a new fighter ( prob just use the Frank with the Kinsei)

The land-based fighter line (faster adoption of designs conceptually different from A6M2):
A6M3 (42/2; has type 99-2 cannons, otherwise as in vanilla). All Jack kokutais use models from it, appropriate for their time of arrival. Land-based units can convert to them.
-> A6M3b (42/5, as described by bklooste in the post #218)
-> A6M4 (43/1; as described by bklooste in the post #218, except not carrier-capable and with 13.2 Navy MGs)))
-> A6M4i (43/7; 20mm cannons are replaced with 30mm)

Then there is the point of divergence based on the decision above. In the second scenario, there is probably a strong drive to develop heavy-armed Zeros, so A6M8i and A6M9i with 30mm armament and better high-altitude performance, but worse overall performance, smaller range and no ability to fly from carriers become available in time. In the first scenario, the factory just upgrades to A6M8, if the player allows.

George can be slightly accelerated in either scenario. In the first scenario N1K5-J becomes available at least half a year later

No real disagreements either you can make them carrier based if not carrier based i would bump performance a smidgen due to fixed wings , faster roll and lighter under carriage. I also pasted updated stats on this page.

[John 3rd]

For closure on the CV-Capable Line:

ORIGINAL: bklooste

ORIGINAL: FatR

But just because I can:

The carrier fighter line (conservative, emphazis on mass production)
A6M2
->A6M5 (42/10, no changes)
->A6M5b (43/3, no changes)
->A6M8 (43/8, +1 hex to all ranges, max speed around 365, reflecting the overall design polish and improvements to the Kinsei engine, otherwise no changes)

Then there is a major point of divergence, depending on whether Navy basically just listens to Horikoshi in early 1943 and accepts his line of thought that a heavier fighter is absolutely necessary; decides that Zero cannot be effectively replaced in production by A7M and sticks with this decision until the deteriorating situation forces them to grasp at straws; or forces Mitshubishi to build a new fighter around another engine early on. The third scenario, assuming it can work, is covered by bklooste. In the second scenario A7M is available as in vanilla. A6M9 appears on 44/6. It features further small improvements across the board, except in range and gun armament. In the first scenario, assuming it can work, there are no further improvements to Zero, but A7M is advanced to about 45/1. (But you're still stuck with a very small A7M factory and need to spend a ton of everything to mass produce it.) Also, other planes that use MK9 can arrive earlier.

No disagreements..

Thus the question is to John and others what is the most likely
1. Accelerate A7M (I dont think this is viable due to the engine issues and the engine relationship mentioned the most attractive is the Kinsei and then the Mk9A not N. )
2. As historical ( but we need to find a job for the Zero div maybe bombers)
3. Build a new fighter ( prob just use the Frank with the Kinsei)

The land-based fighter line (faster adoption of designs conceptually different from A6M2):
A6M3 (42/2; has type 99-2 cannons, otherwise as in vanilla). All Jack kokutais use models from it, appropriate for their time of arrival. Land-based units can convert to them.
-> A6M3b (42/5, as described by bklooste in the post #218)
-> A6M4 (43/1; as described by bklooste in the post #218, except not carrier-capable and with 13.2 Navy MGs)))
-> A6M4i (43/7; 20mm cannons are replaced with 30mm)

Then there is the point of divergence based on the decision above. In the second scenario, there is probably a strong drive to develop heavy-armed Zeros, so A6M8i and A6M9i with 30mm armament and better high-altitude performance, but worse overall performance, smaller range and no ability to fly from carriers become available in time. In the first scenario, the factory just upgrades to A6M8, if the player allows.

George can be slightly accelerated in either scenario. In the first scenario N1K5-J becomes available at least half a year later

No real disagreements either you can make them carrier based if not carrier based i would bump performance a smidgen due to fixed wings , faster roll and lighter under carriage. I also pasted updated stats on this page.

Allright--here are my thoughts:

CV-Based Zero
The carrier fighter line (conservative, emphazis on mass production)
A6M2
->A6M5 (42/10, no changes)
->A6M5b (43/3, no changes)
->A6M8 (43/8, +1 hex to all ranges, max speed around 365, reflecting the overall design polish and improvements to the Kinsei engine, otherwise no changes)

Due my worries regarding Editor work (untried lack-of-experience) I think we look at shifting to the A7M sometime in early 1945. I like having the small factory to have to expand. It only makes sense that if the Japanese banked all on the Zero, a new airframe being produced would reflect a tremendous amount of investment in new tools, production, and engineers/factory workers.

QUESTIONS HERE:
1. Do we simply set the factories to auto-upgrade along the M2--M5--M5b--M8 Line?
2. Do we set the 7M to enter service in Jan-Feb 1945 and allow for the PLAYER to invest more research to try and bring it in earlier? This is a possibility that could be accurately reflected within the game engine.
3. If we can agree to this then I would like the EXACT design tweaks/changes on one Post so it is right here in front of us. This can only happen if we are in agreement on the CV Line.

Edit: The next post was deleted by me for this Modification.

[John 3rd]

Cannot type.

Deleted...

[John 3rd]

For the Land-Based IJN Fighter Force, this is the last Post:
 
[blockquote]quote:



The land-based fighter line (faster adoption of designs conceptually different from A6M2):
A6M3 (42/2; has type 99-2 cannons, otherwise as in vanilla). All Jack kokutais use models from it, appropriate for their time of arrival. Land-based units can convert to them.
-> A6M3b (42/5, as described by bklooste in the post #218)
-> A6M4 (43/1; as described by bklooste in the post #218, except not carrier-capable and with 13.2 Navy MGs)))
-> A6M4i (43/7; 20mm cannons are replaced with 30mm)

Then there is the point of divergence based on the decision above. In the second scenario, there is probably a strong drive to develop heavy-armed Zeros, so A6M8i and A6M9i with 30mm armament and better high-altitude performance, but worse overall performance, smaller range and no ability to fly from carriers become available in time. In the first scenario, the factory just upgrades to A6M8, if the player allows.

George can be slightly accelerated in either scenario. In the first scenario N1K5-J becomes available at least half a year later
[/blockquote]


No real disagreements either you can make them carrier based if not carrier based i would bump performance a smidgen due to fixed wings , faster roll and lighter under carriage. I also pasted updated stats on this page.

This seems pretty fair to me.  We've seen stats from BK's work in this area and they seem to be pretty much agreed upon.  BK--Could we see them in ONE Posting again for any form of comments and, most importantly, FINAL tweaking? 
 
QUESTIONS:
1.  Which Factories will follow this upgrade path?  I assume it should be the M3 Factories...
2.  What is a reasonable timeframe for a slight advancement with Mister George?
3.  Lets settle on the final tweaking of the Stats from BK's work.

 

[John 3rd]

ORIGINAL: JuanG

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Once we have that then the actual development can begin.  I'll ask again if there is anyone who wants to actually help me with creating the Mod itself?  I've fooled around and have a decent grasp of stuff but I don't have buckets of time to spend flailing around putting everything together.  Volunteers?  Anyone??

John, I'd be willing to help you out where I can - you can get in touch by email or pm if needed.

To send scenarios the best method is just to send (possibly in .zip) all files from the /SCEN folder ending in whatever number you choose to use for your mod (so if you did #35, it would be everything ending in 035). Likewise installation is just the reverse of this. If needed you can also send single 'components' like the device file.

I agree that there have been some very interesting points regarding IJ aircraft development come up in this thread, some of which has influenced my work on my own scenarios.

Thank you Juan. You'll be hearing from me.

I aqm toying with the idea of keeping the Thread open and turn it into a 'How To' for learning the Editor. Does anyone think this idea has merit?

[Iron Duke]

Any info on using the editor has merit[;)]