Romanian Military History Forum - Part of Romanian Army in the Second World War Website



Pages: (2) [1] 2   ( Go to first unread post ) Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> The best fighter with propeller and piston engine
Florin
Posted: September 25, 2004 10:17 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



I compared the technical characteristics of the best known fighters of World War II (considering those with propeller and piston engine) and I concluded that the last creation of the Japanese engineers outclassed all.

Even considering that this plane was built in only 2 pieces, and just performed a 45 minutes test flight on August 3, 1945, I consider it as the best fighter with propeller manufactured in World War II.

The plane carried four 30 mm canons in nose and had swept wings, showing some influence from the design of Me-262. However, as you can see from photos, its shape as the only canard plane of WWII makes it a complete independent design.

I see its speed (max. 750 km/h) was beaten just by Dornier Do. 335A-1 (the plane with 2 co-axial engines - max. 763 km/h) and Focke Wulf Ta 152H-1 (year 1945, max. 759 km/h). But neither of the 2 German planes carried 4 canons of 30 mm each.

I have a folder about this plane, and I forgot the source of the photo.
Something close can be also found on: http://www.russian.ee/~star/pictures/japan/kyushu_j7w.gif

This post has been edited by Florin on September 26, 2004 06:33 am

Attached Image
Attached Image
PM
Top
Florin
Posted: September 25, 2004 10:26 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



The name of the plane is Kyushu J7W Shinden.

Photo from: http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/pic...=0&pte_id=11323

This post has been edited by Florin on September 26, 2004 06:31 am

Attached Image
Attached Image
PM
Top
Victor
Posted: September 26, 2004 04:27 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4336
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



The armamament isn't that important. The four 20 mm guns on the Ta-152 were also very effective and had a higher rate of fire I presume, making it effective both against bombers and figthers. The Shinden was never tested in a dogfight unlike the Ta-152, so there is no way to know how it would have fared against other fighters.

Also, please post the source of the photos.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Der Maresal
Posted: September 26, 2004 04:34 am
Quote Post


Sublocotenent
Group Icon

Group: Banned
Posts: 422
Member No.: 21
Joined: June 24, 2003



What were the results of the Ta-152 in combat ? How did it perform?

I belive the best prop plane of World War II, is the Fw-190D-9 "Dora", it had unbeatable performance in all fields, it was strong in every domain, and able to do well at very high altitude. I was also used alot, and if they had more fuel in those crucial last months, it would have achieved even more then it already did.


The Japanese design is original, I've never seen this plane before. I think it would have been very good, thinking that most fighters of Japan were really good and successfull planes. ie; A6M5 Zero, Ki-84, some of the best planes of ww2.

This post has been edited by Der Maresal on September 26, 2004 04:39 am
PMMSN
Top
Der Maresal
Posted: September 26, 2004 04:45 am
Quote Post


Sublocotenent
Group Icon

Group: Banned
Posts: 422
Member No.: 21
Joined: June 24, 2003



QUOTE
The Kyushu J7W Shinden (Magnificent Lightning), was one of only two canard aircraft to be built and fly during WWII (the other was the XP-55 Ascender). The reason for the rear engined pusher layout was that it was fully intended to replace the reciprocating engine with a turbojet when one became available. In order to test the airframe layout, three all wood MXY6 gliders were built. These started trials in mid1943. To test powered flight, a small four cylinder engine was installed on one of these gliders. The results were satisfactory.

Kyushu was chosen to build the plane as they were relatively unburdened with war work and had the required space. Work started in June of 1944 and the first prototype was completed in ten months. The nose had four 30mm cannon and the pilot sat just forward of the swept wings. The propeller shaft was fitted with an exploding bolt so that the propeller could be jettisoned in case the pilot needed to bail out. The six bladed prop was attached to a 2,100 hp Mitsubishi MK9D 18 cylinder radial engine that was buried in the rear fuselage. Even prior to its first flight, the plane was ordered into production. The end of the war stymied any further development.

First flight was not until 3 August, mostly due to the unavailability of some small items, and problems with engine overheating. Three short flights were made before war's end, totaling 45 minutes. During those flights, problem areas were discovered, the worst being a strong torque pull and some engine vibrations. A second plane was completed but not flown.

Apparently at least one type survived and is in the Smithsonian collection awaiting restoration.
PMMSN
Top
Florin
Posted: September 26, 2004 06:39 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (Der Maresal @ Sep 25 2004, 11:45 PM)
Apparently at least one type survived and is in the Smithsonian collection awaiting restoration.

In the photo I attached, you can see that the people in the right, and one in the middle, are Americans.
So this photo was done after the end of the war.

This post has been edited by Florin on September 26, 2004 06:40 am
PM
Top
Florin
Posted: September 26, 2004 06:44 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (Der Maresal @ Sep 25 2004, 11:45 PM)
The reason for the rear engined pusher layout was that it was fully intended to replace the reciprocating engine with a turbojet when one became available.

The canard shape has certain advantages over the classic type of frame. It is more efficient. Of course, it also has its own specific problems, but the advantages are much greater.
PM
Top
Florin
Posted: September 26, 2004 06:57 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (Victor @ Sep 25 2004, 11:27 PM)
......The Shinden was never tested in a dogfight unlike the Ta-152, so there is no way to know how it would have fared against other fighters.


The Shinden was supposed to counter the threat of the B-29.

It is interesting that both sides had aces in their sleeves, in the case of the American landing in Japan intended for the Fall / Autumn of 1945.

Japan was preparing a tactical jet bomber, inspired from Me-262, and a jet fighter, inspired from Me-163.

The United States built about 1500 of copies of the German cruise missile V-1. The Americans intended to launch their V-1's from ships, and to pulverize this way the defenses of the shores chosen for landing.
PM
Top
Victor
Posted: September 26, 2004 08:07 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4336
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



But the B-29s were escorted and if the escort happened to be a P-51H, which was faster than a Shinden, then things might not be so pink.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
C-2
Posted: September 26, 2004 07:10 pm
Quote Post


General Medic
Group Icon

Group: Hosts
Posts: 2453
Member No.: 19
Joined: June 23, 2003



No one of the Japanese planes had any armour :o
And in a dog fight or ground attack ,thats BAD :( :(
PMUsers Website
Top
Florin
Posted: September 26, 2004 07:56 pm
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



QUOTE (C-2 @ Sep 26 2004, 02:10 PM)
No one of the Japanese planes had any armour :o
And in a dog fight or ground attack ,thats BAD :(  :(

I am not surprised about accounts claiming that as soon a Zero was touched, exploded like a grenade.
Because: It's 1050 HP Nakajina motor needed 65 liters of kerosen per 100 km (quite an economical motor, as many accept today).
The range of a "Zero" was 3200 km, and "range", according to my understanding, means also to be able to turn back. So to fly 6400 km, the "Zero" had in the beginning 4160 liters of kerosen. Quite a flying bomb!

But I have to remind you that Kyushu J7W Shinden and other Japanese planes made in 1945 were designed for a completely different war. Their only task was to defend the homeland, so they had short ranges, thus less fuel carried. But I agree, the absence of armor is the same big problem even when you have less fuel.
I knew about this problem in the Japanese planes of 1940...1943, but I have no idea about the design of Kyushu J7W Shinden. But I can give an insight of the cockpit.
Sorry, I don't know the source, because I made the download more than one year ago. :roll:

Attached Image
Attached Image
PM
Top
PanzerKing
Posted: September 27, 2004 04:08 pm
Quote Post


Sergent major
*

Group: Members
Posts: 216
Member No.: 29
Joined: July 07, 2003



I have a video game called "Wing Arms" for the Sega Saturn that let's you fly 7 allied and axis aircraft from WWII.

The Shinden is one of the planes and it is a real beast! It's the fastest of the game and can take out a plane with a quick one second burst of fire...not bad!

Fun game, who's knows if it's realistic or not.
PMUsers WebsiteMSN
Top
Florin
Posted: September 28, 2004 03:34 am
Quote Post


General de corp de armata
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1870
Member No.: 17
Joined: June 22, 2003



PanzerKing,

I am glad at least one soul is on my side.

However, as you said, "Fun game, who's knows if it's realistic or not."

C-2 had a good point mentioning the lack of armor of the Japanese planes (and we have no clue if this one is an exception) and Victor had a good point mentioning that the P-51H was a formidable opponent for any Axis plane with propeller and piston engine.
The part I do not agree from Victor remark was his quote: "The armament isn't that important. The four 20 mm guns on the Ta-152 were also very effective and had a higher rate of fire I presume." If 4 canons of 20 mm are effective, to follow his point, 4 canons of 30 mm are by far more effective. ;) :)

This post has been edited by Florin on September 28, 2004 03:35 am
PM
Top
Victor
Posted: September 28, 2004 04:24 am
Quote Post


Admin
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 4336
Member No.: 3
Joined: February 11, 2003



Well, you missed my point. A 30 mm cannon has a slower rate of fire and far less ammo. For an unexperienced pilot (like the most of teh Japanese pilots were at that time) I would go with the higher rate of fire and more ammo, as he may have troubles hitting a target. Take teh P-39 for example. It had a 37 mm cannon, which could pulverize any Axis aircraft, yet this did not hapen so often.
PMEmail PosterUsers Website
Top
Iamandi
Posted: September 28, 2004 07:19 am
Quote Post


General de divizie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1386
Member No.: 319
Joined: August 04, 2004





Good poin Victor! I want to say same things... and another things:


- J7V was a bad plane. Advanced one, bad an worst baby. In that time it was no time and materials and space (american planes) for development and up-grades;
- if Shinden was projected with some influence, influences was from japanese derivative from Me-262 (i forgot the name, but i have a lot of offline info in my home HDD) - and this plane (reactive one) have direct influence from "262" - if you compare pics or drawings, you may see diference - was some;
- a plane like "263" (is hard to retain japanesse names!) it haves a little chances to chance some things;


When i first saw the Shinden pics and data (in Modelism, issue with romanian TAB and Tornado plane, no?) i had a question: "If Japan have <power> to born this thing, why they don't try it more in beginning". Latter, i read about german U-Boats with blue prints, materials, and even 20 m.m. guns, supplyng Japan...

Iama

PS - For years, was my "best" plane! Impressive fire power and speed, super-good loock! ;)
PMUsers WebsiteYahoo
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options Pages: (2) [1] 2  Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 






[ Script Execution time: 0.0263 ]   [ 14 queries used ]   [ GZIP Enabled ]