A6M Zeke or Zero Questions

[Carl Schwamberger]

1, Was there a possibility the design/prototype phase could have been mishandled & production delayed a year, until relative late in 1941. Say less than 500 built by Dec 1941 & only 50-100 accepted for service.

2. What are the other options for the IJN if in early 1941 the leaders recognize the A6M program has turned into a train wreck.

[aghart]

The sensible thing would be to avoid war until the Zero was available in sufficient numbers. I suspect though that the Tojo government would go ahead with the war despite Zero problems. One thing might change though, The need to sink the US carriers and take out the US surface fleet, and make Pearl Harbor unable to service a fleet, becomes even more important. So is a third strike at PH now carried out as a matter of course? Does it do serious damage to the PH infasructure, is Halseys carrier spotted and sunk?

It would have no effect on the attack on Malaya or the DEI

[Carl Schwamberger]

...
2. What are the other options for the IJN if in early 1941 the leaders recognize the A6M program has turned into a train wreck.

Its been suggested to me the Ki-43 "Oscar" could have been produced as a carrier plane instead. Any experts have information or opinions on that?

[T. A. Gardner]

The Ki 43 would have probably been too frail for the job. Also, the IJN was specifying 2 x 7.7 machineguns an 2 x 20mm cannon, unlike the IJAAF who were fine with just two 7.7 machineguns. The IJN also wasn't fixated on maneuverability like the AAF and had a high climb rate in their specification (to allow the plane to take off and intercept incoming raids adequately).

A Ki 44 with more wing might have worked, but not the Oscar.

[Carl Schwamberger]

All that is true. What I am searching for are alternatives to having a fleet still outfitted with A5M Claudes at the end of 1941 should the A6M project stall.

[T. A. Gardner]

I'd say the two most likely alternatives are the J2M and a Ki 44 derivative. Both were designs in progress and would meet the specification except in maneuverability, but that could be fixed by increasing the wing area and accepting a lower top speed which would still be sufficient to meet the spec.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Thx. I'll look at the development history for those.

[Carl Schwamberger]

The J2M started the design phase in 1939, so there was time for conversion & production, in theory. The downsides are: It was speed as point defense interceptor. No range for escorting on long overwater missions. It also had development problems with the engine & did not enter production until 1942, which is way to late for a goal of replacing the A5M in 1941.

The Ki 44 did not start the design phase until 1940 & preproduction test planes did not fly until September 1941. Again too late, & again this was speed as a point defense weapon with relatively low range.

[Markus Becker]

Re: Ki-43. It looks like that plane was barely in service at the start of the war.

[T. A. Gardner]

There were two Sentai equipped with the Ki 43 when the Pacific war started, the 59th and 64th. They had about 40 Ki 43 between them.

[Carl Schwamberger]

Unless some really obscure prototypes turn up its not looking good for the IJN in late 1941. Starting the Pacific war with mostly A5M4 on the carrier decks 7/8 December 41 sounds bad.

[Markus Becker]

A modernized A5M with a more powerful engine and (partially) retractable landing gear perhabs?

[Carl Schwamberger]

Engine maybe practical, tho engine development is the best case for delaying the A6M. The other might require redesign of the wing.

[uhu]

December 7th would still have occurred. With the oil embargo the Imperial Navy was six months away from having no oil.

[Takao]

Unless some really obscure prototypes turn up its not looking good for the IJN in late 1941. Starting the Pacific war with mostly A5M4 on the carrier decks 7/8 December 41 sounds bad.

There were no obscure prototype fighters at this time. The only two competing companies for the 12-Shi requirements were Mitsubishi and Nakajima - Nakajima spent some three months formulating a design, but could not meet all of the Navy's very high requirements. Then they met with ranking members of the IJN and asked in the Navy was willing to compromise on any of the requirements, to which the Navy responded with a firm negative answer. At this point, Nakajima gave up on the fighter design.

Engine maybe practical, tho engine development is the best case for delaying the A6M. The other might require redesign of the wing.

The engine is probably the worst case for delaying the A6M, As Mitsubishi had 3 to chose from; their own Zuisei 13 & Kinsei 46, as well as, Nakajima's Sakae 12. The Sakae was rejected outright, because it was not a Mitsubishi engine(although, it would power the third prototype and production models), and the Kinsei was rejected as being too heavy(despite a considerable boost in HP).

Another possibility would be that the Navy is forced to compromise on some of their specifications...It might not be as fast, or it might not be as maneuverable, or it might not have the fantastic range. The IJN would still have the Zero, but not the Zero we are familiar with. Still, it would be more than likely that the "new" Zero would still wipe the Pacific with the Allies, for 6 months anyway. Maybe more, maybe less. There is also the possibility that this "new" Zero would be better than the original, with a more robust airframe, for example.