Zero - specific questions

I've also seen Type LO, referring to the Japan-built Lockheed Electra.
That was so usual, in fact, that I don't know its kitai number.

Again, what is `Type'?

I see that it is officially known as Kawasaki Ki-56.

Ogawa refers to it as the "Army/Civil Lockheed 14GW3 Super Electra
Transport Plane."

Now, there's a mouthful for the pilot coming in on one engine and a
prayer: "Army/Civil Lockheed 14GW3 Super Electra Transport Plane
declaring an emergency."

The "Type LO" designation appears in the semi-official history of the
air war in Burma, 1941-42.

Incidentally, Ogawa's description of the Douglas DC2/3 is the Navy
Type Zero Transport Plane -- or L2D2 / L2D3. So there's a Japanese
source that uses the Navy short designations as well as the army kitai
numbers.

****************

To revert to the Ki-44 Shoki, I see that it is indeed the Army Type 2
Fighter, so it was officially adopted in 1942 even though it was in
service the previous year.

The improved model is known as the Army Type 2-2 Otsu Fighter, or the
Ki-44-II Otsu.

Ogawa's enclopedia is neat (for a monolingual Yankee) because every
heading is also Englished.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Cub Driver writes:

I see that it is officially known as Kawasaki Ki-56.

Ogawa refers to it as the "Army/Civil Lockheed 14GW3 Super Electra
Transport Plane."

The "Type LO" designation appears in the semi-official history of the
air war in Burma, 1941-42.

Incidentally, Ogawa's description of the Douglas DC2/3 is the Navy
Type Zero Transport Plane -- or L2D2 / L2D3. So there's a Japanese
source that uses the Navy short designations as well as the army kitai
numbers.

Thanks, although I am still confused what `Type' is translated
from. Since regarding the Type 44 it was `ki-44', I cannot imagine LO
having any Japanese suffix or prefix. Maybe they call it LO
transport-aircraft or something like that?

To revert to the Ki-44 Shoki, I see that it is indeed the Army Type 2
Fighter, so it was officially adopted in 1942 even though it was in
service the previous year.

Yes, this is a strange point, to add to all the other strange things
regarding JAAF aviation :-)

The improved model is known as the Army Type 2-2 Otsu Fighter, or the
Ki-44-II Otsu.

In english it makes more sense to translate Otsu as `b', since it is
not a name but an ordinal numeral/letter.

Ogawa's enclopedia is neat (for a monolingual Yankee) because every
heading is also Englished.

Very interesting, I have not seen this encyclopaedia here in Japan, do
you know when it was published/printed?

Regarding aircraft desginations, you know in Japanese there are all
manner of ways of writing `Mark', or `Model': -gata, -go are two of
these. `Shiki' is reserved for the year designation of the aircraft
and generally translated as `Type'. The `model' designations changed
too, over time.

I have in front of me the Mechanism of Military Aircraft No.16
(Kojinsha, by the `Maru' magazine editorial staff), on the Claude and
Pete. The Japanese subtitle says (all in Japanese characters)
"9-6-kan-sen / rei-kan", while the English subtitle is "Type 96
Carrier Fighter / Type 0 Observation Seaplane"

Inside, despite 155 pages, the A5M label appears only once in a
chapter subtitle in brackets in the English translation, and in the
descriptions of the various marks on pages 112-115 in the subheadings
in brackets after the Japanese mark name.

This is how they go, for the Claude:

96-shiki 1-go kanjosentoki kai (A5M1a) [`kai' means `improved']
96-shiki 1-go kanjosentoki (A5M1)
96-shiki 2-go 1-gata kanjosentoki (A5M2a)
96-shiki 2-go 2-gata kanjosentoki (A5M2b)
96-shiki 4-go kanjosentoki (A5M4)
2-shiki renshuyo-sentoki (A5M4-K) [type 2 trainer (for) fighter]

Regarding the Pete, The F1M label is also only used in the two pages
of drawings of different marks, and another two pages of color
profiles, in the same way as described for the Claude (in brackets
after the Japanese designation).

So we have:

Mitsubishi 10-shi kansokuki (F1M1) [experimental type 10 observation
plane, `shi' from `shisaku' meaning experimental. This is the
prototype]

0-shiki kansokuki 11-gata (F1M2)

2-bladed, 3-bladed props, new canopy and other changes were made
without a change to the designation, as far as this book goes. But in
places they affix `shoki' (early version) or `koki' (late version) to
the above designation, where late seems to mean 3-bladed and new
canopy.

Lastly, the trainer version:

(informally) 0-shiki renshuyo-kansokuki (F1M2-K)

==

To conclude, Japanese seem to use `0k' (my writing of the 2 characters
`rei' and `kan' [for `kansokuki']), whereas in English it is shorter
to use Pete, or F1M. The Claude or A5M is written in Japanese as
`96ks' (4 characters 9,6,`kan'[for 'kanjo']`sen' for `sentoki']). The
peculiarities of a kanji-based written language make such designations
natural, whereas quite unthinkable in English!

Best regards,
Gernot
--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Cub Driver wrote:


No, Nakajima Ki-44. The Japanese name is Shoki, I think meaning
Dragon.

My book translates it as "Demon".

But, being completely illiterate in Japanese, I'd certainly not claim
my translator is necessarily better than yours.


Cheers and all,

No, Nakajima Ki-44. The Japanese name is Shoki, I think meaning
Dragon.

My book translates it as "Demon".

Yes, Bill, I think that's correct. Sorry!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Very interesting, I have not seen this encyclopaedia here in Japan, do
you know when it was published/printed?

Ogawa, Toshihiko. iNihon hikoki daizukan/i (Encyclopedia of

Japanese Aircraft). Tokyo: Kodansha, 1980.

Drawings and thumbnail sketches of just about every aircraft in
service, including such one-offs as the Taylor J-2 Cub

Regarding aircraft desginations, you know in Japanese there are all
manner of ways of writing `Mark', or `Model': -gata, -go are two of
these. `Shiki' is reserved for the year designation of the aircraft
and generally translated as `Type'. The `model' designations changed
too, over time.

Alas, my (Japanese) translator is long gone, so I can't go back and
find out what "Type 44" (for Ki-44) or "Type LO" was translated from.
But I suspect it must have been "gata" -- since "shiki" evidently
means something very specific, and "go" was well known to me in
operations such as "ichi-go" and "ketsu-go".



all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

To conclude, Japanese seem to use `0k' (my writing of the 2 characters
`rei' and `kan' [for `kansokuki']), whereas in English it is shorter
to use Pete, or F1M. The Claude or A5M is written in Japanese as
`96ks' (4 characters 9,6,`kan'[for 'kanjo']`sen' for `sentoki']). The
peculiarities of a kanji-based written language make such designations
natural, whereas quite unthinkable in English!

There are a few writers who use these terms in English. John Lundstrom
does it to a certain extent, and a while ago there was a book about
the Midway attacks (or was it Wake Island?) that did it to excess. I
remember complaining about it in a review.

Yes, here it is: Robert Cressman: A Magnificent Fight: The Battle for
Wake Island --

************

The defense of Wake is an old story, but Cressman uses
Japanese accounts to freshen and inform the telling. He can get
carried away with nomenclature (writing "a ishotai/i of three
ikansen/i" when "a flight of three Zeros" would be easier and
no less accurate) but in battle after battle he identifies the
pilots in opposing aircraft, and confirms or denies 54-year-old
victory claims.

************

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com

Bill Shatzer writes:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Cub Driver wrote:


No, Nakajima Ki-44. The Japanese name is Shoki, I think meaning
Dragon.

`’¾á’ñÄ' in Japanese (if you have Japanese character support in
Emacs...)

http://www.scollabo.com/history/index.html gives a history of Shoki, a
demon queller (not a dragon or a demon itself), popular in Japan since
the mythology came over from China.....where else!

Since coming to Japan I have forgotten the English spelling and
pronounciation of Chinese places, not to mention that there have been
official changes to the romanized spellings, so I will stick to the
Japanese pronounciation and take the romanization from that!

The 6th emperor of the Tang dynasty, Genso, had a dream while he was
ill with a fever. In this dream two minor demons appeared and stole
the flute and perfume bag of his beloved, Yokihi. He cried out for
someone to help, and in response to his cries a fearsome figure
appeared, a huge bearded man with a cleft helmet, leather boots and a
thonged belt. He strode up and promptly ate the two demons. The
emperor looked at the terrifying figure and asked for his credentials
:-) To which replied the man, that he was Shoki, from Shunan mountain
(in Seian province [maybe Xian in english?]). He had failed to pass
one of the difficult exams (kakyo) to be a mandarin, and determined to
die due to the embarassment. However, hearing the emperor's heart
rending cries for help, he had come.

The emperor awoke from his dream, and found his fever also
miraculously gone. In gratitude he pronounced Shoki the protector from
demons and diseases. For this Shoki is still revered in Chine, Japan,
also in Korea and Vietnam where the story spread to.

Unfortunately the story of Genso and Yokihi does not end happily. Due
to his love for her, the emperor elevated her family to the position
of mandarins (needless to say, they did not pass any tests!). This
caused widespread unhappiness, leading to the Anshi no ran (Anshi
civil war) lasting from 755-763. Genso and Yohiki attempted to flee
the capital, but were apprehended and killed....

Probably someone with more knowledge on Chinese history (i.e. not
zero!) can correct my explanation.

My book translates it as "Demon".

See above.

But, being completely illiterate in Japanese, I'd certainly not claim
my translator is necessarily better than yours.

:-) I am semi-literate in Japanese and would still not claim such a
thing.
--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

Cub Driver writes:

Very interesting, I have not seen this encyclopaedia here in Japan, do
you know when it was published/printed?

Ogawa, Toshihiko. iNihon hikoki daizukan/i (Encyclopedia of

Japanese Aircraft). Tokyo: Kodansha, 1980.

Drawings and thumbnail sketches of just about every aircraft in
service, including such one-offs as the Taylor J-2 Cub

Gee! I will see if this is available in Kinokuniya or Maruzen in
Osaka. Sounds like a very handy pocket reference instead of piles of
books, each on a specific plane. I often need to look up just simple
things, especially when I am at work an playing on usenet :-)

Alas, my (Japanese) translator is long gone, so I can't go back and
find out what "Type 44" (for Ki-44) or "Type LO" was translated from.

Ah, skip that one then....

But I suspect it must have been "gata" -- since "shiki" evidently
means something very specific, and "go" was well known to me in
operations such as "ichi-go" and "ketsu-go".

Bwa-ha-haaa! Sorry...! Sure there are operations, which take hte same
character `go' (I assume you mean Ten-cihi-go, though I don't know
what operation ketsu-go is, care to enlighte me?). But as different
characters and different meanings with same romanization we have:

ichigo: strawberry :-)

ketsugo: determination

--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

Cub Driver writes:

To conclude, Japanese seem to use `0k' (my writing of the 2 characters

There are a few writers who use these terms in English. John Lundstrom
does it to a certain extent, and a while ago there was a book about
the Midway attacks (or was it Wake Island?) that did it to excess. I
remember complaining about it in a review.

Yes, here it is: Robert Cressman: A Magnificent Fight: The Battle for

Great of him to write such a work, historically useful. As for using
romanization to write japanese words, _big_ problem :-)
(strawberry...!) I agree with you to use an english word (Zero) or
equivalent code (A6M). Unless you put Japanese characters into the
book, and how that will really please people :-)
--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:12:45 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
wrote:

ketsu-go

That was the defense of Kyushu and perhaps Honshu from the foreign
devils in 1945-1946.

www.warbirdforum.com/invasion.htm


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put CUB in subject line)

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com