Japanese Army Navy

Well, it was BuAer that decided, of course. But BuAer's first engine
for the Zero was the Mitsubishi Zuisei 13. It had so many problems
that after the first two prototypes the Nakajima Sakae 12 was
substituted for it. The decision was made on May 1, 1939, according to
MIkesh's book on the Zero. The first flight had been a month earlier.

So only the first two Zeros were A6M Model 11. The first number stands
for the engine, so the third prototype and the production models were
A6M Model 21. (As is so often the case with Japanese aircraft, you can
baffle folks even further by calling them A6M1 and A6M2.)

These prototypes went into service with the Japanese navy. Can you
imagine that happening today?

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 22:02:29 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote:

Cub Driver wrote:

The Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa 'oscar' was very similar in shape, and also used
the same engines

In fairness to the army plane, the Hayabusa came first. The army
turned it down because of its perceived weaknesses in dogfighting.

Then the Zero was having trouble meeting specifications. So Mitsubishi
ditched its engine and borrowed the one Nakajima had developed for the
Hayabusa, and which of course was available since the Ki-43 wasn't
going into production.

Dan, I recall reading an account by IIRR Horikoshi, who said that it was strongly
implied to them by the navy that they should use the Nakajima engine, if they
wanted to see the a/c put in production. Mitsubishi was planning to use their
own (slightly less powerful, but IIRR lighter) engine in the a/c, but the
Japanese had a military-industrial-political complex too. It didn't have
anything to do with a lack of performance according to him. I'll try and find
the book and refresh my memory.

Guy

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub