Pinned post for Q&A :) Justin has written a small annotated bibliography to go along with this video: Before I start, I must again thank QAZ, Trent Telenko, and Military Aviation History for their assistance with this video. Trent provided a great deal of information on aircraft radios, HF static, and American early warning systems on Guadalcanal. Military Aviation History double-checked my non-Japanese aircraft information. QAZ backed up my poor Japanese language skills and provided me with additional source material that is not otherwise available in English. Please note this annotated bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, not even close. Rather, I have chosen to highlight a few works that together serve as a good introduction to the Zero. Unfortunately, there isn't a single book I can point to that is THE reference on the Zero. Instead there are a multitude of works, each with strengths and weaknesses. Dunn, Richard L. Exploding Fuel Tanks: Saga of Technology that Changed the Course of the Pacific Air War. 2011. This is the only history of the Pacific War focused on aircraft protection. It is eye-opening to say the least, given the amount of gross oversimplification and mythmaking around the subject. Dunn, Richard L. ZERO-SEN Model 21 Performance: Unraveling Conflicting Data. www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/zeroperformance/zero_performance.htm. Accessed February 2, 2020. This is a great article that discusses some of the conflicting data around the A6M2 (Model 21)’s top speed. At the very least, it conclusively throws out several low-end figures, such as that in Mikesh’s book. As an aside, J-aircraft and its forum are an excellent resource generally. Francillon, René J. Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. 2nd ed. London: Putnam Aeronautical Books, 1979. This is still the best single-volume reference book on Japanese aircraft of the Pacific War in English. However, it is now quite old and not without its fair share of errors. The Zero chapter still serves as a good introduction to the aircraft. Goodwin, Mike and Peter Starkings. Japanese Aero-Engines, 1910-1945. MMP Books, 2017. This is the best single-volume reference on Japanese aero-engines available in English. Naturally, there is a great deal of information related to the engines that powered the various models of the Zero. Horikoshi, Jiro. Eagles of Mitsubishi: The Story of the Zero Fighter. Trans. Shojiro Shindo and Harold N. Wantiez. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981. This book was written by the lead designer of the Zero and is an absolute must-read. It provides a lot of insight into the design of the Zero in particular, but very little on tactics or operations. Lundstrom, John B. The First Team: Pacific Naval Air Combat from Pearl Harbor to Midway. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1990. This book is a masterpiece. One of the best air power and naval histories ever written. Even over three decades later, The First Team’s central focus (naval air combat) is unsurpassed. Lundstrom’s attention to detail, knowledge of aviation, and use of Japanese as well as English sources set it apart. It is without a doubt one of the best books to read to gain a real understanding of how the Zero fought, and how its opponents fought back. Lundstrom, John B. The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign: Naval Fighter Combat from August to November 1942. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2005. The second volume of Lundstrom’s The First Team series. All of my praise carries over to this work. This picks up in the aftermath of the Battle of Midway, when the air and naval war in the Pacific enters what in my view is the most interesting period: the period of balance (roughly July 1942 through December 1943). Mikesh, Robert C. Zero: Combat & Development History of Japan’s Legendary Mitsubishi A6M Zero Fighter. Motorbooks International, 1994. I have seen parts of this book and it looks excellent. However, I haven’t read it cover-to-cover yet as it is out-of-print and I only recently ordered a used copy. Mikesh was one of the best historians of Imperial Japanese aviation writing in English. Millman, Nicholas. Aircraft of the Aces 137: A6M Zero-Sen Aces, 1940-42. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2019. Nicholas Millman is an excellent historian of Imperial Japanese aviation and his brand-new and brief introduction to the first two years of the Zero’s service is handy. Peattie, Mark R. Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-1941. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2001. Mark Peattie’s excellent history of the development of Japanese naval aviation is a must-read. I harped on a lot about context in my video, and this book provides a good amount of it. If I have to state a criticism, his grasp of the finer points of aviation technology is weak in parts. This book is at its best when dealing with the broader points rather than technical minutiae. Ruffato, Luca and Michael J. Claringbould. Eagles of the Southern Sky: The Tainan Air Group in WWII. 1 vol. Ed. Lawrence Hickey and others. Tainan Research & Publishing, 2012. This is the most detailed history of a Japanese fighter unit currently available in English, making extensive use of both Japanese and English sources. Sakai, Saburo, Martin Caidin and Fred Saito. Samurai! Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1991. While there is a plethora of first-hand accounts from Japanese fighter pilots in Japanese, there is shockingly little available in English. That makes Sakai’s memoir a must-read for those looking for a pilot’s-eye view. However, as with any memoir, one must not accept everything within at face value. Sakai, as with all fighter pilots, overclaimed significantly (which makes it into his memoir) and many dates and critical details are factually incorrect. The hand of Caidin also must be noted, as he was heavily involved in the writing of Samurai! There are some events that appear to have been added by Caidin for this English language work that are entirely fictional. Tagaya, Osamu. Imperial Japanese Naval Aviator, 1937-45. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2003. Tagaya is one of the best historians of Imperial Japanese aviation writing in English. This book is an excellent summary of Japanese Navy aircrew training.
King, Dan. The Last Zero Fighter. Firsthand accounts from interviews conducted in Japan with five WWII Japanese Naval aviators. All are veterans of the pivotal battles of the Pacific War including; USS Panay, Nanking, Pearl Harbor, Wake Island, Rabaul, Port Darwin, Indian Ocean Raid, Ceylon, Midway, Guadalcanal, Marshall Islands, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Kamikaze in the Philippines, the home defense and the dropping of the atomic bomb. The book is 348 pages includes 78 photos (many from the veterans' own albums), 9 original maps and illustrations. Includes an introduction to the Japanese pilot training system for both officers and enlisted men. Each pilot is followed from the time he joined the navy until war's end. They explain in their own words; why they joined the navy, what they thought about the war, about the aircraft they flew, how they felt about their friends and their former adversaries. The interviews were conducted firsthand in their own language by KING who is a linguist and Pacific War historian who spent 10 years living in Japan. www.amazon.com/dp/B008LO3VIU/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Drachinifel One of the greatest videos I’ve seen on this bird! I know you are a ship guy, but as an aviation nut this has been fascinating! I’m a big Military Aviation History guy, and hearing all of this is great! I am curious, as you fought and discussed many myths regarding the Zero, the exclusion of the controversy that the Zero was actually designed by Chance Vought. I won’t go into detail about his claims, but I wonder what your guest has to say on the matter. (I presume he is the mindset that Mitsubishi was more then capable of designing them with his praise, and I agree)
"5 Minute Guide to Warships"-= 2&1/2hrs on an airplane. Dammit. At this point you could do 16 hours on Turkish Fighter Blimps and I'd just shrug and reschedule my cardiac bypass...
A few years ago, I bought my first car. A Mitsubishi. I didn't have much money, so I was glad the dealership worked with my. I was so excited I went to see my grandfather. I said, "Grandpa, I got a Mitsubishi, zero down!" He looked at me and said, "When I was your age, I also got a Mitsubishi Zero down."
"Would it kill you to buy American?".- Walt from Grand Torino.
4 роки тому+27
@@CSSVirginia For a lot of the world the answer to that question is "Yes", while drug gangs armed from American gun stores terrorise their neighbourhoods. For cars the same applies. Much lower level of technology, higher prices because more goes to shareholders and CEO, much worse car safety standards based on "Just add more metal y'know". For the past 30 years, the only thing that has ever propelled the American car industry forward is by buying European technology (like the purchase of Saab) or EU safety standards being beefed up so they are forced to adapt to be allowed to continue to sell. Right now Ford is in hot water because they tried to equip the Fiesta with 3 cylinders and a turbo rather than 4 cylinders. Something which Ford has no experience doing even though it's 30 year old technology. Their turbos burn down as a result. And the level of stupidity required to still put plate shock springs in trucks because it's cheap, while it loses a lot of grip, is hard to even explain.
@ It's a joke from a movie dude. In the movie Grand Torino this old dude, who worked at GM forever, says that when he sees his kids drive up in a Toyota. Full disclosure, I own a Toyota myself!
I am being reminded of Hardcore History, the latest blitz episode (intended to be short 1 hour affairs on first release) was only 4 hours long, compared to his usual multi part epics (each part, 4 hours long!)
2:43 What aircraft did the A6M actually take over from and what aircraft was it actually contemporary to? 6:58 Tangent on Over-claiming 11:00 The Zero in context with its contemporaries. 18:16 What lessons did the Japanese Navy take into account when designing it? 21:44 Requirements as rewritten based on experience in China 27:31 Validity of the notion that the Zero has sub-optimal design choices due to limitations in the Japanese industry 32:13 What is the Zero actually called? 40:36 How did the A6M2 compare to the opponents it faced? 49:55 The claim that Japanese pilots preferred tail-chasing dogfights and tactics discussion 1:08:26 Japanese Tactical Formations till 1943 1:14:25 Validity to criticisms of the Zero 1:19:01 Armament 1:24:28 "Fragile Structure" 1:33:00 Origins to the Zero's vulnerability and history of aircraft protection features 1:41:51 Radio Reliability Issues 1:52:40 Zero vs Land Based fighters 2:03:35 At what point when was the Zero surpassed? Zero replacement design. 2:09:06 How much did the loss of Kido Butai's skilled pilot corp alter the perception of the Zero as the war progressed? 2:23:00 Where does the Zero sit accurately in the context of the Pacific War?
How is it that the longer Drach's videos are, the better they are?! This history of the Zero was so absolutely captivating that I watched it straight through, pausing only once to pour a mug of ale for sustenance. Kudos to Justin for superb research, and to Drach for keeping the focus on track. This video fills in key details of the gradual decline of Japanese combat effectiveness over the course of the war. Brilliant, and superbly done!
Luke: But you said this was a five minute guide! Drachi-wan-Kenobi: I have harnessed the power of the Force to multiply the length of the five minute guide by over thirty, thus creating an over 2 and half hour five minute guide. So you see I was right, from a certain point of view... Seriously though, loving the longer videos. They must take a long time to research and edit!
@@justinpyke1756 so your aim was about as true as that of ww2 Italian battleships :p. But for real, awesome information, as someone working in aviation, there's a lot of topics in here that really intrigue me :)
Fun Fact: the Zero and the Seafire fought in what was likely the last dogfight of WW2. On August 15, Zeros from the 302nd Kokutai engaged Seafires from HMS Indefatigable. In short, a carrier fighter-turned-land-based-air-defense fighter engaged a land-based-air-defense-fighter-turned-carrier fighter. Something of a final irony before the war ended.
@GbbJunkie 4-8 Zeros shot down with others damaged (sources vary), for the loss of one Seafire flown by S/Lt(A) ‘Freddie’ Hockley RNVR, whose radio was unserviceable and therefore had no warning when the Zeros bounced them (the rest of the flight saw them coming in and were able to evade). Hockley was unharmed however, and successfully bailed out over Japan, where he was taken prisoner. Sadly this is where facts cease to be 'fun'. Japan officially surrendered, thus ending the war, just hours after the battle. But Hockley's captors were ordered to "Finish with him in the mountains tonight". He was executed some nine hours after the formal surrender.
stories like this really help reinforce the fact that without "the bombs" Japan would have been very unlikely to unconditionally surrender... some claim the second was unnecessary and used for more payback and or testing, but there was very little change in Japans military actions after the first bomb... nobody is shedding blood at the negotiating table, so time isn't important... until you see a city disappearing from a single bomb wasn't a fluke, nor a misrepresentation of events. I have sympathy for the thousands of innocent lives lost in a fraction of a second, but many times that number of civilians would've starved, burned, or been shelled during a full invasion, the American bombs didn't kill those citizens, thier leaders and politicians did... as per most deaths suffered during nearly any war 🤷♂️🙁
@@VersusARCH Well really they were purposefully left "in recognized power" so bands of Japanese soldiers and citizens would not start guerilla warfare or form pockets of resistance, defying the Emperor, basically the Americans controlled that decision for the purposes of easier occupation, not because the Japanese Emperor or government demanded, or negotiated for it... Pretty sharp strategic decisions that required *lots* of prodding from advisors that understood Japanese culture, and explained the possible repercussions... luckily Allied leadership listened 👍
@@VersusARCH The Japanese _did_ unconditionally surrender. They ended up being able to keep the Imperial family, but that was not a condition, that was just because the United States allowed it for pragmatic reasons. The capitulation was done without any restraints, and if the United States had decided to depose the emperor, the Japanese could not have done anything about it. _13. "We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now _*_the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces,_*_ and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."_ - From the Potsdam Declaration _"...We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that _*_Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration_*_ ...”_ - From the Jewel Voice Broadcast
My uncle was a naval pilot flying off the Uss Franklin He would tell us kids how the Zero Fighter was the best he ever fought against with highly talented pilots flying them. He himslf only shot down one Zero durring his time on that Carrier.
@@randbarrett8706My dad is an avid UA-cam commenter, and he was born in ‘50, and his daddy was born in ‘06. My grandfather was born 117 years ago, and I’m only 28. Ww2 was practically yesterday in the span of man.
There was a running joke back in the early days of WW2: "What's a P-400?" "It's a P-40 with a zero on its tail." Of course there was a P-400, which most everyone had never heard of before. Great video! How could someone not be impressed by the quality of videos on this channel? This other fellow was great. How I'd love to have him over for dinner to ask all my good and bad questions. A7M/M2 Reppu was a sweet bird. Imagine if there's a concourse survivor somewhere, sitting in a cave on some remote Japanese island, how much would that plane be worth! You start it up and it sounds like a Lexus...some wealthy eccentric nut might pay $300M for it.
6 out of 5 stars: The best video on the subject of the Zero I've ever seen. I have built up a large collection of books and other resources on Japanese aviation history over 50 years, and I even met my wife (a Japanese-to-English translator) through my interest in the topic. I knew John Lundstrom personally back in the 1990s when he was employed at the Milwaukee Public Museum -- his work is topnotch. You have achieved the same high standard in this video discussion. As a hobby I have been handicapping air combat data for wargaming and simulation purposes for years now and can confirm your assertion that the operational and strategic (as well as human and cultural) factors are more significant than the easily-quantified tactical factors. The ever-elusive "truth" of these matters is so much more detailed, nuanced and fascinating than the popular oversimplifications in most books, video games and internet pages. Thank you!
Yeah. He certainly has some written a good bit on that era. www.amazon.com/s?k=John+Lundstrom&ref=nb_sb_noss Couldn't find a biography of him other than something short on the Naval Institute site along with a couple of articles he did. www.usni.org/people/john-lundstrom Found this lecture he did on Coral Sea: ua-cam.com/video/_cbtFBZxTqE/v-deo.html .
I do agree, I never learn so much data from the zero. The problem of the radio is quite similar to the french tanks in 40. Excellent but a nightmare to organize in front of ennemy.
Jon-Paul Filkins not to us old-farts who grew up listening to AM radio. At night I could listen to the American Forces radio broadcast from southern Germany and I lived in north-east England.
Washington DC attempted to send a warning message to Pearl Harbor on the morning of December 7, but radio interference caused the military to send the warning by Western Union telegraph instead.
WW2 was one of the first wars that had to seriously contend with anomalies in the RF spectrum. With such major advances in radio direction-finding, the birth of electronic intelligence, radar on a widespread scale, cryptography/cryptology as serious technical disciplines, and the exponential spread of radio equipment to increasingly lower levels. It's an aspect of the war that probably deserves a lot more attention than it has previously received.
The US gave a civilian airline captain a B-17 full of technicians and test equipment and a free hand to go anywhere he wanted between Alaska and the Panama Canal zone to find solutions for the issues caused by atmospherics and the precipitation static that builds up from the friction of the aircraft moving through the atmosphere. He wrote a book about it but I can't recall the title at the moment. Radio interference from ignition systems was a thing right up until the 1970s, "Radio ready" ignition systems were actually a dealer-installed option on the cheapest cars.
One of my Great Grandfathers was part of the Team the recovered the Down Zero in the Illushion Islands off the coast of Alaska, was said that he made a ring from one some washers that came off the landing gear, sadly though wasnt able to find them among my Grandfathers things after he passed away
The Japanese Army and the Japanese Navy got along as well as our present day Democrats and Republicans, or perhaps not that well. The Army regarded the Navy much as our Marines regard the Navy: it is a taxi service. The purpose of the Navy was to transport the Army to the fight and transport supplies as needed. The Army was rather happy about Midway since it gave those squids a comeuppance! The Army had its own fighters and even submarines! The Navy had their Marines.
@@frankduncan5685 The IJA even had their own tiny aircraft carriers. The IJN even went as far as lying to the army, saying that they won at Midway and didn’t come clean until later. Love your comment about the two political parties.
The fall of the A6M as a top-of-the-line fighter is solely because of the breathtaking speed at which aviation advanced in the thirties and forties. The Navy's F3F fighter entering service in 1936 was a biplane... and twelve years later the Navy was bringing in the F9F Panther, their first JET fighter.
And because they had WAY less resources and battle experience with a truly modern enemy (they bullied the far outdated Soviet vehicles in China so not the most up-to-date things fought against the Empire of Japan)
@Baron Von Grijffenbourg l was not high l was drunk (lrish/Scottish) do l sound a Jamaican? Meatball? What have u met him? He'd shag you, well l probably would too,l ain't 2 fussy,his cranial capacity is 11 tadpoles, l've done neurosurgeons logistics so l know about that kinda shit and UFOS and ghosts, field psychologist..l analysed fields..seriously, l made national press,these lazy fuckwits printed any bs l fed them..doubt me..ok.But it's fucking true ya cunt Pepperdog181@gmail.com 🚜🐶
The best historical analysis of anything I've ever heard or read. By far. Like.. Holy shit. I am most in awe of the coverage and emphasis on the fact that context can make all the difference and can't be overlooked in such areas(such as this and war coverage in general). Total eye opener Tl;Dr: best historical analysis of anything ever
The long length of this video meant I kept putting off viewing it. Having watched it in one sitting, I have to say it’s one of the most interesting, informative and enjoyable vids on a warplane I’ve ever watched. Thanks to Drach and Justin for a fascinating discussion and here’s hoping for more like it.
One thought about Justin's point about the distance that the Japanese Naval Air Arm could project power from Rabaul to Guadalcanal - that was one the order of the same distance that the Argentinian Air Force found so daunting for their strikes around the Falklands Islands - thirty years later, and with things like airborne refueling possible. An amazing feat, as he says!
I believe if air refueling was possible in WWII bye Germany standard we would have had (Great Britain) collapsed it would be an different world in which we live in to day!.
"The Typhoon was a raging dumpster fire..." I like this guy. Good presentation. I learned some things and I know a LOT about the Pacific air war. Very worthwhile presentation, have sent links to some of my contemporaries.
@@razor1uk610 He did say it was bad specifically "for the first year of its entry into service" so I'm guessing that means the tail problems were eventually sorted.
@@roborovskihamster5425 It also had issues with the engine, and gases filtering into the cockpit, forcing the pilot to wear the oxygen mask at all times if I recall correctly... "Raging dumpster fire" perfectly sums up the Typhoon when initially deployed.
1:44:13 The target fixation probably also occurred from surprise. The Zeros had been able to dispatch the threats quickly every time up to that point. Thatch's division and the torp bombers were a first time exception. Awesome video. Please continue this type of work.
@@VersusARCH High-level horizontal American bombers also missed. It was the dive bombers and torpedo planes that were effective. The British didn't have dive bombers and their torpedo planes were even more outdated than the American torpedo planes. At Midway, it was the Dauntless dive bombers that tore the heart out of Kido Butai.
3.1 million views as of Nov. 2022 on a video that’s over 2 hours long! I love it when one of Drach’s videos goes “viral” so a larger audience can see the quality of his content
All future claims that Seymour was a competent flag officer will henceforth incur permanent reassignment to the Japanese Aeroengine Designation Department! There will be no second chances!
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114 being on the Kamchatka isn't that bad, its the other ships nearby that suffer. so "I'd rather be assigned to a ship in the 2nd Pacific Squadron, even one being repaired by Kamchatka..."
Great video. As a retired F-4 aviator, the discussion of the Zero was fascinating. BTW, this was about ships, the aircraft is the long range artillery of a ship. It is like doing a study on types of large caliber guns on Battle Ships. Which, might make a great video too.
51:00 -- RE: "The Dichotomy" -- There's another way of saying this. ENERGY FIGHTING is on a Spectrum, and there's two main polar strategies. The Zero was *also* an energy fighter, but its energy was in the ACCELERATION curve, not in the MASS curve.
Ah... The mixing of physics and military terms... A physicist would claim that energy and acceleration were two different things. If the zero's advantage lies in acceleration, it is a force fighter (fast acquisition of energy, low max energy). If the p-47's advantage is just having a huge amount of potential and kinetic energy, it is an energy fighter.
Zero was a horizontal turn fighter, and so was the P47 if you actually read combat reports... The video points they started the war using the zero wrong in dive and zoom, as early War everyone assumed turn fighting dead, hence all those useless twin heavy fighters...
@@wrathofatlantis2316 I didn't want to write a huge comment about why I made a distinction between Polar strategies, but to follow up a little that's why I identified 2 of them. It's not the two ends of the same axis, it's 2 different axes and you're got the nail on the head when it comes to Mass and Acceleration. The Zero had a wider range of angles where the two axes intersect.
Pilots did not use energy term in WWII because more thrust in the nose reduced ability to curve (see my videos on this): This is obvious when in horizontal turning combat good pilots cut throttle, and the least power always won... Horizontal turning multiple 360s was dominant because WWII guns were weak, this disappeared to allow “energy fighting” when instant kill rockets became available... the only WWII alternative to sustained slow speed turn fighting was hit and run, which needed power, speed and a good climb rate: Aces with good eyes could dive with off-angle hits, but it was dicey and only practical for exceptional pilots. Most WWII kills were done with much less than 30 degrees of deflection, which means following around in a turn for a long time. Zero should have been quite dominant throughout WWII, but had terrible slow-firing wing guns and mismatched very weak nose guns that completely ruined its potential: Only the last ones with extra guns were improved. FW-190A was also a superb slow speed turn fighter but much better armed and thus very dominant. Examples of high speed hit and run fighters are P-51, P-38, Me-109 and especially Spitfire: High climb rate but moderate turn. P-47, Zero, Oscar, FW-190 are all slow speed turn fighters. Radial engine seemed the big factor but also climb rate, usually poorer climb on radials... Again see my videos which debunk much of the massive misunderstandings of nose-driven prop fighting.
Getting a notification about this video while reading the excellent "Shattered Sword" (as for recommendation in US vs JN damage control special) really made my day. Thanks for both Drach!
31:00 Self sealing fuel tanks and armor. It is true that the zero didn't have them until later, but we must remember that many combat aircraft of the time didn't have them. Early B-17s, P-40s, etc. didn't get them until after the production runs had gone through a few variants. So to with some of the European aircraft.
Same for the Brits. Fuck having a burning fuel tank in front of me, with the slipstream going my way . . . . . high octane juice at that. Such Brave Young men.
@@miquelescribanoivars5049 I believe the Germans were so short of rubber that many 109s were built without it deep into the war. The 109 was a horrible aircraft and was responsible for killing far more German pilots than Allied aircraft. Plus the airframe was simply obsolete by the time the later variants received massive engine upgrades which warped the frame and skin of the aircraft. This shortage of rubber was an issue for the Japanese as well. The Japanese also detested defense armor as a concept.
Last time I was this early, the USS Constitution was still pounding the HMS Macedonian into fire wood. But fantastic video Drach, thank you sir. One interesting observation I'd like to make. The Japanese had no way to get the Zero from the factory except by using ox teams. No railroads, airports were directly connected to the Mitsubishi factory. As its often been said, the big things the Japanese could do fantastically. But the little things often tripped them up.
@@RemoteViewr1 the Japanese ended up struggling to find enough oxen and they struggled to feed them as well. And the ones they had were overworked. Pretty crazy they were reliant on such primitive methods.
@@admiraltiberius1989 They were not the only ones, 80% of the German Army even in 1945 relied on horses for their logistics. All the Infantry Divisions, most of the Artillery, etc etc. It was only the Panzer, Panzergrenadier and motorised divisions that were fully mechanised. When you compare them to the British (fully motorised and mechanised before the war) and the Americans the differences are pretty stark....
I grew up as an old head reading about WW1 & WW2 aircraft (father was a Spitfire pilot in the RAAF) so I had a large library at my disposal. Later I focused on WW2 Werhmacht Armour & what I have read, I've always taken these books as factual until these last few years. Military German UA-camrs have destroyed multiple "myths" that were my facts previously & now, thanks to your in depth video my previously held views are now questionable again. Thank you for my continuous Military eduction of over 50yrs.
Love the comment Drach made near the end about this being 'one of, if not the, longest videos on the channel... it's barely halfway to the longest one this week!
Drach, thanks for asking the juicy questions. Justin, thank you for explaining everything so well, especially in giving us context. Also, a special thanks for staying humble even though you were in your element. You come across as a great communicator of history. I hope you two will collaborate again.
Thank you! I always make sure to keep in mind what I don't know so that what I do know doesn't go to my head. That is the only way one can keep learning! Heck, I have learned more about the Zero since recording this with Drach and that was only two months ago.
I still have the thick paperback I bought as a schoolboy by Jiro Horikoshi and Martin Caidin. Entitled 'Zero' it detailed its history and employment in the various conflicts from 'The Incident' to the Kamikazes.
The long range was a double-edged sword. Japanese pilots, typically overworked and poorly supported enlisted men, were often exhausted and punch-drunk by the time they simply reached their long-range targets. Pile-on repeated missions day after day and their leadership had a blind habit of pushing their pilots until they simply died (particularly during the grinding Guadalcanal campaign). The IJN never considered the ramifications of a long war, and failed to manage pilots and crews as precious strategic assets. Rather, their obtuse group-think and abusive military treated everyone as casually expendable. Of course, that experience really pissed off the general population, leading to societal mistrust of the military until only very recently.
Germany had the same problem. In 1943 the RAF & US AAF training programs hit full stride. In the west the Allies were sending triple the number of pilots & other aircrew into combat over the Mediterranean & NW Europe as the Germans & Italians could. Tactical victories by the Axis air forces became meaningless as German aircrew died faster than they could be trained. Sending half trained 19 year olds on repeated daily sorties only got the killed faster. By mid 1943 Rookie Luftwaffe pilots were not even completing the reduced training regime of 170 hours. The RAF had increased its circular to some 340 hours and the US AAF to 300 hours. Both were able to give the new comers additional training when they reached the combat Groups. The Luftwaffe group commanders were so desperately short pilots they had to send the kids straight into battle.
@@conservativemike3768 John Ellis in his analysis of the results of Allied & Axis industrial production as applied to the battles sum up his view in the title 'Brute Force'.
@@LesSharp A big part of the issue was that the IJN was having pilot issues from day zero. For the Pearl Harbor raid they were already pulling instructors out of flight schools to fill out the Shokaku and Zuikaku's airgroups.
OK. I am a very late comer to first view of this video but it was tremendous! It took me two sittings to get through it all, I must admit. Justin's research, as was stated in the conclusion, is so critical to correcting common errors concerning broad statements on a variety of dimensions of the A6M and the Pacific war. It reaffirms in me the nobility of the position of historian. Thank you for not editing this video down to a few sound bites but having enough confidence in the your audience that you stuck to telling the whole (or nearly!) story. Three Cheers for History!
The weight savings I find the best is while the P-40 fuselage and main wings were separate complete structures which were then bolted together. The Honorable Zero's fuselage was not structurally complete until riveted onto the wing. This makes the plane take up more space when being shipped and made it more difficult to cannibalize two chopped up planes into a single flyable plane.
Willi’s 109 had faster wing change: 4 bolts. Also the gear forces met at same junction, attached to the fuselage structure. Great trestle for wing swap outs, but track Far too narrow. Correct me if I am wrong, but I have heard from an ex hitler youth Boy immigrant that roughly one third of all built airframes in service were ground looped at one time in their short lives. Lucky the krauts could make near 33 000 of the things.
Not true, it was no harder to handle, just less forgiving: it needed the tailwheel locked on take off and soft grass or dirt on landing, other than that easier to fly than most of them, and could take a 6.5 ‘ pilot, and the flat pane canopy had excellent visibility in flight, with no reflections... Everything you hear about its problems is mostly garbage. It was short range, that’s it.
The P400 was an export model of the P39 intended for UK but taken over by the USAAF. They used them in the South Pacific until better alternatives became available.
available. None feet. 000,01 above operate to bottles oxygen export needed they But them. had they field Henderson On P-400. the was 93- the of versionExport
Yikes the P-400 was the export version of the P-39. It used an export version oxygen system that was not available on Henderson Field. So high altitude was not possible.
This is absolutely masterful. I’m a former USAF pilot and listened intently to every word, and I thank you both. My uncle was a Corsair crew chief in the Pacific (F4U-1A/D) and had nothing but good things to say about the Corsair. He’s the one who got me interested in aviation and related the pilots loved the Corsair (other than it being particularly difficult to taxi given the long nose); they were likewise keenly aware of the strengths and weaknesses of various Japanese designs including the Zero. They held most of the Japanese pilots in high regard, though noted the deterioration of skills as the war progressed. From my background, what you said about whoever started the fight higher normally won, though energy state was not taught then as such. The desire to initiate a flight from higher (and faster if possible) is still prevalent, and the desire to avoid dogfights if possible was desirable for all the reasons you stated. I think it’s clear the Zero was a very good aircraft at the beginning of the war, and was flown by combat experienced pilots. As allied designs progressed (F6F/F4U in particular) and US pilots became more experienced, the Zero was not only outclassed, the new pilots weren’t up to the task. I appreciate your discussion of this, which tends to mask the capabilities of the underlying aircraft. I do have one question that I don’t understand: it was mentioned the ailerons were shrunk (2:27:17) and that provided better roll rate. How? Did they get more deflection or move further outboard, as otherwise I find this extremely counterintuitive. Again, great show: I learned tons and appreciate both your hard work to bring this to us! Happy New Year! [Edited for typo.]
I fall asleep to this video constantly. You two simply have soothing voices and information that I don't have to think hard about because it's presented so clearly that it makes sense
A superb video. Well researched by the presenters and a really important contribution to the assessment of the Mitsubishi Zero and IJN air arm. More please!
A privilege to sit down and listen to people that know their subjects inside out and convey it with so much enthusiasm. I have learnt so much and have had to rethink and ditch so many of what I now now are commonly held and wrong beliefs. Top work!
...For a second I wondered if I slipped into another reality where Drachinifel and his famous reviews of World War aircraft and his "Taxiway" Q&A session exist.
I think There are a few things that often get confused when talking about the imagined or real fragility of the Zero vs its contemporaries. (and I get much of this from having grown up around many of the Grumman and Republic Engineers that designed some of those planes). The Zero was an extremely advanced aircraft for it's time. It was one of the first to be fully utilizing more ultralight aluminum designs. This made it extremely strong and more than able to withstand any G forces or maneuvering stresses. But it meant that it was utilizing the stronger aluminum skin as a critical component of it's load bearing. They used the stronger skin to reduce the needs for some internal bracing. This made for a lighter more agile fighter with much greater range. But damage to the outer skin or load bearing surfaces would much more quickly erode the planes structural stability than it would on a corresponding Grumman. Whereas the Grumman designs (and lets be fair when we are talking about at least the US planes going head to head against the Zero we are talking mostly about the Grumman's) Well not just Grumman, Lets call it the Long Island Plane Engineering Community during this period. Which included in very tight coordination and an awful lot of neighborhood brain storming, was Grumman, Fairchild and Republic, Sperry (Makers of the Norden Bombsight) etc. So both the Grumman and the Republic Designs tended to be more over engineered to be strong and solid not just when fully intact, but to adsorb a tremendous amount of damage and still keep flying. Much of the critical structural strength was inside. If you still had one wing, a piece of tail, and 3 or 4 cylinders still working in you engine you could fly that Wildcat home. Saburo Sakai's description of his somewhat Legendary fight with Pug Southerland over Guadalcanal left a really lasting impression on him. It was his first encounter with the Grumman's. The F4F-4's I believe. Sakai was stunned. He had dumped every round of ammunition he had into the Wildcat, and it showed. The F4F was a flying trash heap. But it was still flying. Riddled stem to stern with holes, but no fires and the pilot waving at him. Finally the engine began to sputter so the Pilot took his time, collected himself, and bailed out over friendly forces. Living to return in a new plane the next day. The people that designed the Wildcat, Hellcat, Avenger and later the A-6 Intruder and F-14 Tomcat were also friends neighbors and relatives of the ones that designed the P-47 Thunderbolt and as their masterpiece the A-10 Warthog. A common design goal shared by this close knit community of aviation Engineers was the plane should still be flying with 1/3 of it missing. The ability of the American planes particularly the "Grumman's" to just soak up bullets and damage like a sponge and still keep flying and fighting somewhat unnerved the Zero pilots. The Zero wasn't however poorly designed or weak. In fact all aircraft manufacturers eventually started using the same weight saving tricks used on the Zero. Things like letting the outer skin carry most of the load and stress. The B-29 is a great example.
In ANY semi-monocoque airframe the skin takes almost all the load. The frames and the stringers just help the skin keep its shape, and offer a way for alternate load paths, through the skin, if the skin is damaged. Ever see a Wildcat with some of the skin removed? The frames and stringers are almost a joke they are so tiny. Further, behind the cockpit, there is almost nothing worth shooting a bullet at. Its all air except for the occasional cable. Grumman was one of the first to use thicker gauge skin on its fighters. Better skin quality and aerodynamics. The G-loads the Zero was designed for was comparable to American aircraft. The airplane itself was a bit too flexible and accounted for maneuvering problems at high speed. Zeros broke their wings. Spitfires broke their wings, to the point where there was thought of putting a G-meter in the cockpit. (bad for morale, though). And the thin wings were too flexible and had problems like the Zero at high speeds. P-51s broke their wings.
A few years ago, I saw video of an interview with a US Naval WWII pilot. He said they used to dive a bit, then go into a turn to lure Zeros into turn fights. If the Zero pilot took the bait, they'd go to full throttle. If the Zero tried to follow in anything over a 6G turn, at any decent speed, it would lose a wing. That matches up with the tests done on the "Akutan Zero," which showed the ends of the wings would start to warp at about 6Gs.
@@chuckyxii10 With the Zero's diving limitations I thought part of it was not simply a "do not exceed xy speed while diving" limitation as it was it's broad high lift wings simply did not want to dive real well. They would keep trying to pull you up and out of the dive. And the faster the zero went, the more trouble it's control surfaces had trying to force the nose down. It's worth noting that many of the issues you describe with the Zero were also experienced by the Legendary British Spitfire in the Hot Humid and Salty Pacific Theater. While one of the all time greatest planes of the War it just did not like the tropics. It's broad wide wing did not like the new air conditions. It's otherwise remarkable Merlin Engine and it's Superchargers just loathed the climate. It's one of the reasons British Pacific forces ended up flying a good number of Wildcats (Martlets) Hellcats and Corsairs. Most of the early war planes had a very specific environmental envelope where they were at there best. There were very few that could move from the cold dry and wintery war of Europe to the hot wet and salt drenched South Pacific and still behave the same and vice versus. The only two that I can think of were the American P-51 Mustang which did passably well in the Pacific. And the P-47 Thunderbolt that just didn't care where it was. It would beat the air into submission anywhere on the planet. Well okay and then there is the P-38, which is probably best described as a cantankerous bastard no matter where you flew it.
@@chuckyxii10 The Zero had the benefit of a fairly bog simple air cooled engine. While the Merlin may have been one of the single greatest examples of engineering perfection of the war, it really was not fond of the tropics.
You got quite some things wrong about the dogfight between Southerland and Sakai. 1. He did not dump all his ammunition he had into the enemy fighter. He shot several hundred *7.7mm bullets* into the enemy plane. Along with *some* cannon ammunition. 2. "The pilot waving at him" implies that he was just fine. He wasn't, he was wounded, despite the Grumman's armour by the way. 3. The engine didn't "finally begin to stutter", Sakai re engaged the 20mm cannons and with a quick burst at the engine (some sources say it was the left wing root, but I'm going with Sakai's description), the Grumman caught fire and the pilot bailed out. According to Sakai, the pilot hung limply in his parachute. So while surviving, he was badly wounded. He also didn't bail out in friendly lines, but along enemy lines PBS: "He[Southerland] parachuted into the jungle, deep in the heart of enemy territory. Bleeding and exhausted, he struggled through the brush, finally finding some local boys who were willing to risk their own lives to help him escape. With their assistance, he managed to elude the Japanese ground forces and meet up with his American Navy rescuers." Given his wounds, and the journey to allied lines, it is also questionable whether he returned the next day.
Well done! This has genuinely contributed to the state of knowledge for the average military history enthusiast. No repitition of common notions but an in depth collation of up to date research that Id never before heard after years of cursory interest in this aircraft.
I had a particularly slow day at work, and as a university student working in the school cafeteria, I had some time to listen to this video in it’s entirety. I am so glad I did. This is why I love this channel. I love the long, clear and descriptive discussions that occur, and it is really fun to observe other historians discuss topics such as this in detail, and with accuracy to not only the understanding of war itself in the understanding of how tech played the role in it. Far too often, I have seen people talk about how tech inside wars, and how blank being better than blank means that blank should’ve one, and how they don’t get the picture. His channel does a good job in getting rid of those myths, and bringing a sense of maturity to the military history field that I feel is pretty lacking in a lot of areas. Thank you for the content, and keep it up
As a kid I built a Revell model kit of a Zero and loved the look of it, that sleek shape and the dark green and grey paint scheme. Always liked this airplane.
I had a foam 2d glider with a propeller as a small kid it was a zero. When i was a bit older and was into modelling (about 8 or 9) i went to the hobby shop to get a model to make of a zero. Unfortunatly the hobby shop owner was an asshole and told me exactly how stupid of a kid i was to want a japanese plane. (One of those morons who thought japan wanted to take over australia and make us all speak japanese) On the upside he gave me a free revell model of a hellcat or wildcat. I cant remember. I put it together and never painted it. 16 years later i went to pick it up and the super glue i had used let go and it dissasembled itself. Lol
Same here, built a model as a kid and loved the simple, elegant design. Saw a real one at the Yamato museum, near Kure, and was astounded by the stunning beauty of the aircraft.
One of the best documentaries I have ever heard! So many interesting details, rational resolutions of some common myths, perfect. The relative comparison of characteristics/values is really good, in the end it is more informative then numerical values (which are often of questionable accuracy and/or without conditions)
Nice. But the quality of technical information available on the A6M may not come up to Greg's standard, since he likes to work from flight manuals which may not exist for the Zero (and almost certainly not in English).
How come UA-cam has better programming than TV and radio! And a thousand thanks for well-organized podcast discussions without rambling and constant giggling.
That HF radio problem from local magnetic conditions. Damn I never thought about it but it makes so much sense considering HF radio characteristics. That is certainly the most eye opening thing of this video to me. Certainly one of many things that explains the Japaneses struggles in the Solomon's along with effective Allied early warning responses. And details like how the Model system worked and other things. Compared to other documentaries all 2.5 hours were informative, with actual examples and anecdotes actually fitting in and serving to explain what information was provided. Everything in context and not overblown or ignored. This was a real joy to watch and listen to. Fantastic work Drach and Justin.
That's only 2-3 hours south of Bremerton, where they have the Kitty Hawk, Turner-Joy (Museum ship), and several other interesting pieces of naval history.
I avoided this particular video on your channel for a very long time because of how long it was and because I felt, from reading various WW2 history texts over the years, that I already kinda knew what the conclusions were going to be. Man... I was very wrong. There was an immense amount of unique information that I had never heard before. From the radios and their problems with them and the bizarre atmospheric factors at play (that was wild) to the misconceptions about self-sealing fuel tanks and how that isn't like a 1/0 toggle and how complex that issue could really be. To some basic popular misconceptions about what tactics the Zero pilots were taught to use and how a little mishandling of them (pulling up in front of the enemy you just boomed-and-zoomed too quickly) could create an opening to be killed by their opponent. It's amazing how fast that 2+ hours flew by, I was hooked. Excellent content. A must-watch by anyone who really wants to know the granular story about IJN carrier aviation in WW2 and not just a few talking points commonly spouted that are frequently wrong or at least only half-right.
I literally just finished installing a window listening to this. And was completely educated and entertained the entire time!! Buy the video... not the window.
I have operated military HF radio in Viet Nam, in the area of 'Zero's radio trouble' in 1968. That was not a low sunspot (bad HF radio) year. I still had intermittent trouble because other radio operators were not trained to deal with changing radio propagation. 1941 was on the way down and 42 /43 was bad. There is noise there, esp in the New Guinea area and latitude as marked in your chart about 1:51 in video, from thunderstorms much of the year. I was riding on an aircraft that got hit by lightening there. There is a difference between IJN bomber and fighter aircraft for radio, quite a bit and the same as for our side. Fighters of necessity must use voice radio whereas in the period (and even for me at time in 68), the lead bomber could have a radiotelegraphy operator (as I believe was the case for 'Tora Tora Tora' or equivalent thereof Dec 1941 Hawaii ergo Nagumo at fleet knows of success Pearl Harbor right away). The bomber...and it's antenna, is larger. AM voice radios, especially mistuned voice radios, are terrible and full of 'interruptions' (spark plug noise) as I have heard WW2 German pilots describe (and say the jet was great that way, no interruptions). I also had plenty of spark plug noise in vehicles at the time. Altogether, radiotelegraphy would be 10 to 50 times better for their gear than AM (and now it is over 100 times better but only radio amateurs like me use it). 10x better is 3X better range, 50X better is 7X times the range. There is no hope for a fighter pilot of the time to adapt to changing radio propagation. If you fly 600 miles from the carrier, you fly in and out of 'dead zones' unless you change frequency every 30 minutes or so. No way (now, it is automatic and/or relay and/or satellite).
I came across this while recovering from a bilateral fusion. Within the first 20 min of trying to suffer through this, I rolled out of bed got up and walked laps in the hospital until i exhausted myself. All the while shaking and writhing in agony. Then as my phsical pain nearly equaled my auditory assault from trying to discern this documentary not to mention my only other choice was literally dying, I gave it another watch. Thankfully I stuck through it because it finally became an excellent show and I learned quite a bit. Thank you for almost killing me and then saving.
Very good video! The newest idea (to me) was that the greatest problem with the Zero was the radio! That is certainly not something I've heard said anywhere else, but I have heard the Soviet's claim that American radios were one of the best items of lend-lease, so perhaps the failings of many nations radios is something that's not as well appreciated as it should be.
This was absolutely fascinating. I thought I new quite a bit about the Zero. Boy, was I wrong lol. Loved the info, and was glued to my headphones from beginning to end. That info on why the IJN struggled so badly in communication makes so much more sense to me now. What an incredible stroke of bad luck for an otherwise exceptional plane (for its day).
@@justinpyke1756 Oh, no worries. Most any time talk turns to engines for any service, let alone Japan's, and my eyes just kind of gloss over. It's one of those things like math where I know it's a really important subject, but I just can't bring myself to focus. "The Spitfire had, depending on the mark, Rolls-Royce Merlin or Griffon engines" is about as technical as I can get there, haha. Thanks for this though. I love seeing conventions and myths sort of brought back into line with reality, and Japanese military equipment (as well as German) have a lot of such mystiques about them that really need to be examined and put into practical context. (I'm a definite aviation nut myself. I was working on my own masters in military history, but ended up getting very ill and education had to be side-lined and just have never gotten back around to it, alas).
@@justinpyke1756 The designation system is in all honesty pretty logical, when it gets explained. Which it often doesn't. I want to thank you for clarifying the model designation part!
This was one of the best episodes you've done and there are plenty of quality material that you've shown us. The service you and other online historical channels provide is utterly amazing!
That bit about the radio communication in the Southern Pacific was really interesting. It just shows that when implementing new technology, you run into new problems that you've never had to face before. Previously, battles were started or canceled because of the local weather. Japanese couldn't use radios because of the Sun's weather.
A great video, your aviation expert shed a lot of light on the iconic Zero, which is worthy of a long discussion. Your guest knows aviation which a great combination with your naval knowledge and this video great.
This video is just about right in length, given I am on Pandemic Stay-at-Home! Tbh, it is more of a podcast with pictures than a video, but it is just fine with me. Proper analysis rather than "fanboy" ravings - this is what keeps me on this channel.
Yeah, Greg's aircraft is my favorite channel for ww2 aircraft by far! His amount of technical detail and background information is right up my alley! I thought I new alot about ww2 aircraft but he has made me a scholar! I watch his videos over and over again. I don't know if it's the way he presents the information or what it is that makes me love his videos but I have learned things I never seen or read anywhere else. I especially love his 8 part series about the P47 Thunderbolt. It's my new favorite aircraft now because I finally learned the truth they tried to cover up!
So generally I relisten to the video every 6 months or so since it’s such a wonderful wealth of knowledge and information. Thank you for both of the wonderful zero videos
Wonderful video. Honest, unbiased, detailed analysis. Very welcome when compared to those terrible American "documentaries" I've suffered through on the subject. Fascinating stuff, excited for the next one.
Ed Hartley as an American growing up watching those documentaries it makes me sad to learn just how off base they were on so much of what they covered 😢
..the 'Hell' of Japanese engine designations; (usually two names/designations per model, up to three for each, army, navy, manufacturer, or more!), oh and then the allied name...
Keith Schick well unless you’re born knowing everything about everything it is certainly possible to watch those shows then learn later of the issues with them. It’s called... learning, and there’s nothing stupid about that.
This video was awesome! I've been a fan of the Zero ever since I was a kid, and this video expanded my knowledge of my favorite plane by leaps and bounds compared to what I have read in specification books for decades, and that's knowing most of the information that was already mentioned in this video. The numbering convention and design history and philosophy was the best part of the video. Thanks so much for this video!
So many comparisons bean count capabilities and end up in 1v1 assessments when in truth it usually was a systematic comparison of aircraft capabilities, aircrew training and experience combined with logistics. Truly enjoyed your analysis!
1:20 The 7.7 mm Machine gun Type 97 was a copy of Vickers E type not the British FN Browning type as fitted to the Spitfire, although both are short recoil they are two very different weapons - the "difference" is that Vickers Guns were amenable to synchronization which the Zero had on the cowl firing through the propeller, the Browning (all Brownings) was difficult to synchronize and that was a major problem in the fitting of 13.2mm Browning clone HO 103, either the single or completely replacing the 7.7mm Type 89 (army), made use of Ho 103 Brownings sub optimal, due to synchronization problems.
Excellent. I didn't catch the name of your guest speaker, but I'm deeply impressed not only with his knowledge of the A6M Zero and its variants, but also by the various other Allied and Axis fighter aircraft mentioned during is presentation. Extremely well done by both of you! Thank you very, very much! I will listen to this a second time within the next week or two.
1:42:00 Thank you so much for addressing the radios and particularly in the context of Midway. I was keen to hear which you might have to say on that very point. You are a scholar and a gentleman.
This one has been on my list for a long time to watch. Never thought I had the time. Now I'm 1.5 hours in on a Wednesday night/morning. Don't judge my amount of life. Praise my willingness to learn!
“Japan might’ve been the only country in WWII to have an HE shell for a rifle-caliber MG”. Not true, the Soviets had them too, although they were referred to as “Immediate Action Incendiary” ammunition, and their main purpose was to produce a bright flash that indicated one was hitting their target. Simo “The White Death” Haiya was shot in the face with an HE round by a Soviet counter-sniper in the Winter War (yes, they were so scared of this guy that they sent guys with explosive rounds intended for machine guns out specifically to kill him). He lived (and might’ve killed the poor guy that shot him), though it fucked up his jaw. As for the engine on the Zero, actually one of the major problems was a completely different plane: the D4Y dive bomber. It originally had a copy of the DB 601 engine in it, but this engine had so many problems in the D4Y that it needed a new engine. Unfortunately, Mitsubishi’s Kinsei engine, the first choice for a new engine for the Zero (and its planned successor, the A7M), was the engine that the IJNAS decided to earmark for what would become the D4Y3, and it wasn’t until the final year of the war when the powers that be finally threw up their hands and let Mitsubishi stick this new engine in what was to be designated the A6M8 (which was supposed to be a fighter-bomber/dive bomber variant intended to replace the D4Y, D3A, and other types still in service), but by then, the war was effectively over.
@@wrathofatlantis2316 If you'd watch the damned video, dogfighting was NOT SOP for IJN pilots, Boom and Zoom was. Dogfighting became more and more of a necessity as Allied planes improved whereas the Zero was still stuck with Sakae variants for propulsion. Of course it really should've been replaced in 1943, 1944 at the latest.
@@chooseyouhandle I watched the "damn" video, which is excellent, and if you had, you would have noticed the american pilot describing the Japanese's obsessive hit and run tactics was CRITICIZING them as wasting their aircraft... They later learned this was in fact a low effectiveness tactic without a lot of speed, centralized guns, and unrealistically good gunnery... Turn fighting was always going to be king with all props, for reasons I explain here: ua-cam.com/video/gSWWm_Ceqbw/v-deo.html Hit and run was the default assumption at the start of WWII, which is why they produced all these useless twin engine day fighters... Turn fighting became the rule later in the war, as the vertical high speed dive and zoom tactics turned out to be possible, but hard to use due to low gun hit rate at high angle and fast closure. Hit and run had its use against slower climbing opponents that turned better than you... The Zero needed armour and firepower, NOT speed, for turn fighting. You can easily counter speed and hit and run by either going head to head or turning, which is why the Zero got an armoured windscreen BEFORE it got back armour (A6M5b before A6M5c), which should be a clue... See my videos if you want to learn what WWII air fighting was REALLY like, not the current useless theories...: ua-cam.com/video/lCBOxbaxXBE/v-deo.html
A side note, Japanese aircraft manufacturers are still in business today (although except Mitsubishi, they are no longer making aircraft anymore). Mitsubishi and Kawasaki are pretty obvious, Nakajima is now known as Subaru, and Aichi were integrated into Nissan.
@@muhammadnursyahmi9440 Mitsubishi was also split apart in the post-war occupation. Only Mitsubishi Heavy Industries still builds Aircraft, the Mitsubishi Automotive company (which is the one that people are most familiar with) has nothing to do with aircraft manufacturing or shipbuilding.
Wow! Thanks, it took me 3 days to listen to the end, but I'm glad I did. This level of detail is what makes your channel so great. In the vein of French pre-Dreadnoughts, I dare you to do a video on those exemplars of carrier warfare, the Skua and the Roc!
Have been listening to your guest on other videos as well as other posters and catching up quite a bit on understanding this somewhat mysterious Second Sino-Japanese chapter of the war. Always fascinated by it because it has been so overlooked and under reported or simplified in it's history. Justin is a great source on this, particularly the Aerial factors. His sources are up to date and seemingly thorough. Always worth a listen for gleaning historical knowledge when he is featured as a guest.
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Justin has written a small annotated bibliography to go along with this video:
Before I start, I must again thank QAZ, Trent Telenko, and Military Aviation History for their assistance with this video. Trent provided a great deal of information on aircraft radios, HF static, and American early warning systems on Guadalcanal. Military Aviation History double-checked my non-Japanese aircraft information. QAZ backed up my poor Japanese language skills and provided me with additional source material that is not otherwise available in English.
Please note this annotated bibliography is not meant to be exhaustive, not even close. Rather, I have chosen to highlight a few works that together serve as a good introduction to the Zero. Unfortunately, there isn't a single book I can point to that is THE reference on the Zero. Instead there are a multitude of works, each with strengths and weaknesses.
Dunn, Richard L. Exploding Fuel Tanks: Saga of Technology that Changed the Course of the Pacific Air War. 2011. This is the only history of the Pacific War focused on aircraft protection. It is eye-opening to say the least, given the amount of gross oversimplification and mythmaking around the subject.
Dunn, Richard L. ZERO-SEN Model 21 Performance: Unraveling Conflicting Data. www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/zeroperformance/zero_performance.htm. Accessed February 2, 2020. This is a great article that discusses some of the conflicting data around the A6M2 (Model 21)’s top speed. At the very least, it conclusively throws out several low-end figures, such as that in Mikesh’s book. As an aside, J-aircraft and its forum are an excellent resource generally.
Francillon, René J. Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. 2nd ed. London: Putnam Aeronautical Books, 1979. This is still the best single-volume reference book on Japanese aircraft of the Pacific War in English. However, it is now quite old and not without its fair share of errors. The Zero chapter still serves as a good introduction to the aircraft.
Goodwin, Mike and Peter Starkings. Japanese Aero-Engines, 1910-1945. MMP Books, 2017. This is the best single-volume reference on Japanese aero-engines available in English. Naturally, there is a great deal of information related to the engines that powered the various models of the Zero.
Horikoshi, Jiro. Eagles of Mitsubishi: The Story of the Zero Fighter. Trans. Shojiro Shindo and Harold N. Wantiez. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1981. This book was written by the lead designer of the Zero and is an absolute must-read. It provides a lot of insight into the design of the Zero in particular, but very little on tactics or operations.
Lundstrom, John B. The First Team: Pacific Naval Air Combat from Pearl Harbor to Midway. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1990. This book is a masterpiece. One of the best air power and naval histories ever written. Even over three decades later, The First Team’s central focus (naval air combat) is unsurpassed. Lundstrom’s attention to detail, knowledge of aviation, and use of Japanese as well as English sources set it apart. It is without a doubt one of the best books to read to gain a real understanding of how the Zero fought, and how its opponents fought back.
Lundstrom, John B. The First Team and the Guadalcanal Campaign: Naval Fighter Combat from August to November 1942. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2005. The second volume of Lundstrom’s The First Team series. All of my praise carries over to this work. This picks up in the aftermath of the Battle of Midway, when the air and naval war in the Pacific enters what in my view is the most interesting period: the period of balance (roughly July 1942 through December 1943).
Mikesh, Robert C. Zero: Combat & Development History of Japan’s Legendary Mitsubishi A6M Zero Fighter. Motorbooks International, 1994. I have seen parts of this book and it looks excellent. However, I haven’t read it cover-to-cover yet as it is out-of-print and I only recently ordered a used copy. Mikesh was one of the best historians of Imperial Japanese aviation writing in English.
Millman, Nicholas. Aircraft of the Aces 137: A6M Zero-Sen Aces, 1940-42. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2019. Nicholas Millman is an excellent historian of Imperial Japanese aviation and his brand-new and brief introduction to the first two years of the Zero’s service is handy.
Peattie, Mark R. Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-1941. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2001. Mark Peattie’s excellent history of the development of Japanese naval aviation is a must-read. I harped on a lot about context in my video, and this book provides a good amount of it. If I have to state a criticism, his grasp of the finer points of aviation technology is weak in parts. This book is at its best when dealing with the broader points rather than technical minutiae.
Ruffato, Luca and Michael J. Claringbould. Eagles of the Southern Sky: The Tainan Air Group in WWII. 1 vol. Ed. Lawrence Hickey and others. Tainan Research & Publishing, 2012. This is the most detailed history of a Japanese fighter unit currently available in English, making extensive use of both Japanese and English sources.
Sakai, Saburo, Martin Caidin and Fred Saito. Samurai! Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 1991. While there is a plethora of first-hand accounts from Japanese fighter pilots in Japanese, there is shockingly little available in English. That makes Sakai’s memoir a must-read for those looking for a pilot’s-eye view. However, as with any memoir, one must not accept everything within at face value. Sakai, as with all fighter pilots, overclaimed significantly (which makes it into his memoir) and many dates and critical details are factually incorrect. The hand of Caidin also must be noted, as he was heavily involved in the writing of Samurai! There are some events that appear to have been added by Caidin for this English language work that are entirely fictional.
Tagaya, Osamu. Imperial Japanese Naval Aviator, 1937-45. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2003. Tagaya is one of the best historians of Imperial Japanese aviation writing in English. This book is an excellent summary of Japanese Navy aircrew training.
@@madkoala2130 It s animated movie - anime, don t skip that part.
Did Zero pilots intentionally feign damage by creating the exhaust smoke effect?
@@lizardb8694 So? Different cultures express in different formats other than live action films. Doesnt detract from the story.
King, Dan. The Last Zero Fighter.
Firsthand accounts from interviews conducted in Japan with five WWII Japanese Naval aviators. All are veterans of the pivotal battles of the Pacific War including; USS Panay, Nanking, Pearl Harbor, Wake Island, Rabaul, Port Darwin, Indian Ocean Raid, Ceylon, Midway, Guadalcanal, Marshall Islands, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Kamikaze in the Philippines, the home defense and the dropping of the atomic bomb.
The book is 348 pages includes 78 photos (many from the veterans' own albums), 9 original maps and illustrations.
Includes an introduction to the Japanese pilot training system for both officers and enlisted men.
Each pilot is followed from the time he joined the navy until war's end. They explain in their own words; why they joined the navy, what they thought about the war, about the aircraft they flew, how they felt about their friends and their former adversaries.
The interviews were conducted firsthand in their own language by KING who is a linguist and Pacific War historian who spent 10 years living in Japan.
www.amazon.com/dp/B008LO3VIU/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Drachinifel One of the greatest videos I’ve seen on this bird! I know you are a ship guy, but as an aviation nut this has been fascinating! I’m a big Military Aviation History guy, and hearing all of this is great! I am curious, as you fought and discussed many myths regarding the Zero, the exclusion of the controversy that the Zero was actually designed by Chance Vought. I won’t go into detail about his claims, but I wonder what your guest has to say on the matter. (I presume he is the mindset that Mitsubishi was more then capable of designing them with his praise, and I agree)
"5 Minute Guide to Warships"-= 2&1/2hrs on an airplane. Dammit. At this point you could do 16 hours on Turkish Fighter Blimps and I'd just shrug and reschedule my cardiac bypass...
Turkish fighter blimps?
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114 you making popcorn cause I am lol I'm interested in this particular field should this be suggested to drac
I've never heard of these but now I want to hear drach teach us all about them.
Wait. What?
What side of table are you on with that bypass?
A few years ago, I bought my first car. A Mitsubishi. I didn't have much money, so I was glad the dealership worked with my. I was so excited I went to see my grandfather. I said, "Grandpa, I got a Mitsubishi, zero down!"
He looked at me and said, "When I was your age, I also got a Mitsubishi Zero down."
That was a damn good comeback, unlike that Zero.
The greatest generation,
Had the greatest wit !
My Father was 1st Marine division WWII.
And I sure do miss his wit and wisdom.
"Would it kill you to buy American?".- Walt from Grand Torino.
@@CSSVirginia
For a lot of the world the answer to that question is "Yes", while drug gangs armed from American gun stores terrorise their neighbourhoods.
For cars the same applies. Much lower level of technology, higher prices because more goes to shareholders and CEO, much worse car safety standards based on "Just add more metal y'know". For the past 30 years, the only thing that has ever propelled the American car industry forward is by buying European technology (like the purchase of Saab) or EU safety standards being beefed up so they are forced to adapt to be allowed to continue to sell.
Right now Ford is in hot water because they tried to equip the Fiesta with 3 cylinders and a turbo rather than 4 cylinders. Something which Ford has no experience doing even though it's 30 year old technology. Their turbos burn down as a result. And the level of stupidity required to still put plate shock springs in trucks because it's cheap, while it loses a lot of grip, is hard to even explain.
@ It's a joke from a movie dude. In the movie Grand Torino this old dude, who worked at GM forever, says that when he sees his kids drive up in a Toyota. Full disclosure, I own a Toyota myself!
2018 Drach: "These videos might start going slightly longer than 5 minutes."
2020 Drach: "Hold my beer"
Dude, he's a Brit. Proper quote is "Hold my pint."
@@dropdead234 Touche, mon ami.
I am being reminded of Hardcore History, the latest blitz episode (intended to be short 1 hour affairs on first release) was only 4 hours long, compared to his usual multi part epics (each part, 4 hours long!)
Truly we are blessed
Surely "hold my rum".
2:43 What aircraft did the A6M actually take over from and what aircraft was it actually contemporary to?
6:58 Tangent on Over-claiming
11:00 The Zero in context with its contemporaries.
18:16 What lessons did the Japanese Navy take into account when designing it?
21:44 Requirements as rewritten based on experience in China
27:31 Validity of the notion that the Zero has sub-optimal design choices due to limitations in the Japanese industry
32:13 What is the Zero actually called?
40:36 How did the A6M2 compare to the opponents it faced?
49:55 The claim that Japanese pilots preferred tail-chasing dogfights and tactics discussion
1:08:26 Japanese Tactical Formations till 1943
1:14:25 Validity to criticisms of the Zero
1:19:01 Armament
1:24:28 "Fragile Structure"
1:33:00 Origins to the Zero's vulnerability and history of aircraft protection features
1:41:51 Radio Reliability Issues
1:52:40 Zero vs Land Based fighters
2:03:35 At what point when was the Zero surpassed? Zero replacement design.
2:09:06 How much did the loss of Kido Butai's skilled pilot corp alter the perception of the Zero as the war progressed?
2:23:00 Where does the Zero sit accurately in the context of the Pacific War?
Thank you, this is very helpful!
@@mckseal Thanks, spent some time watching and noting the topic and question transitions.
may the gods be with you
You, sir, are doing God's work. Thank you
Comment for engagement and better ranking.
How is it that the longer Drach's videos are, the better they are?! This history of the Zero was so absolutely captivating that I watched it straight through, pausing only once to pour a mug of ale for sustenance. Kudos to Justin for superb research, and to Drach for keeping the focus on track. This video fills in key details of the gradual decline of Japanese combat effectiveness over the course of the war. Brilliant, and superbly done!
Luke: But you said this was a five minute guide!
Drachi-wan-Kenobi: I have harnessed the power of the Force to multiply the length of the five minute guide by over thirty, thus creating an over 2 and half hour five minute guide. So you see I was right, from a certain point of view...
Seriously though, loving the longer videos. They must take a long time to research and edit!
We were originally aiming for a 30 minute video at most. :D
@@justinpyke1756 so your aim was about as true as that of ww2 Italian battleships :p. But for real, awesome information, as someone working in aviation, there's a lot of topics in here that really intrigue me :)
Set the playback speed to 2, and enjoy!
"I have altered the length, pray I do not alter it further."
i actually read that in whiney mark hamills voice and the late alec guinness voice
Blimey this video lasted longer than the Russian fleet at the battle of Tsushima!
Classic....
Are those flying torpedoes?
At least the video will be over by Christmas!
This just in: Kamchatka just reported a squadron of Japanese torpedo boats off their starboard bow.
@@richardm3023 In the English Channel again?
Fun Fact: the Zero and the Seafire fought in what was likely the last dogfight of WW2. On August 15, Zeros from the 302nd Kokutai engaged Seafires from HMS Indefatigable. In short, a carrier fighter-turned-land-based-air-defense fighter engaged a land-based-air-defense-fighter-turned-carrier fighter. Something of a final irony before the war ended.
@GbbJunkie 4-8 Zeros shot down with others damaged (sources vary), for the loss of one Seafire flown by S/Lt(A) ‘Freddie’ Hockley RNVR, whose radio was unserviceable and therefore had no warning when the Zeros bounced them (the rest of the flight saw them coming in and were able to evade).
Hockley was unharmed however, and successfully bailed out over Japan, where he was taken prisoner. Sadly this is where facts cease to be 'fun'.
Japan officially surrendered, thus ending the war, just hours after the battle. But Hockley's captors were ordered to "Finish with him in the mountains tonight". He was executed some nine hours after the formal surrender.
stories like this really help reinforce the fact that without "the bombs" Japan would have been very unlikely to unconditionally surrender... some claim the second was unnecessary and used for more payback and or testing, but there was very little change in Japans military actions after the first bomb... nobody is shedding blood at the negotiating table, so time isn't important... until you see a city disappearing from a single bomb wasn't a fluke, nor a misrepresentation of events. I have sympathy for the thousands of innocent lives lost in a fraction of a second, but many times that number of civilians would've starved, burned, or been shelled during a full invasion, the American bombs didn't kill those citizens, thier leaders and politicians did... as per most deaths suffered during nearly any war 🤷♂️🙁
@@berryreading4809 Japan did not surrender unconditionally. There was the condition of maintaining the emperor and the imperial family.
@@VersusARCH Well really they were purposefully left "in recognized power" so bands of Japanese soldiers and citizens would not start guerilla warfare or form pockets of resistance, defying the Emperor, basically the Americans controlled that decision for the purposes of easier occupation, not because the Japanese Emperor or government demanded, or negotiated for it... Pretty sharp strategic decisions that required *lots* of prodding from advisors that understood Japanese culture, and explained the possible repercussions... luckily Allied leadership listened 👍
@@VersusARCH The Japanese _did_ unconditionally surrender. They ended up being able to keep the Imperial family, but that was not a condition, that was just because the United States allowed it for pragmatic reasons. The capitulation was done without any restraints, and if the United States had decided to depose the emperor, the Japanese could not have done anything about it.
_13. "We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now _*_the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces,_*_ and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction."_
- From the Potsdam Declaration
_"...We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that _*_Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration_*_ ...”_
- From the Jewel Voice Broadcast
My uncle was a naval pilot flying off the Uss Franklin He would tell us kids how the Zero Fighter was the best he ever fought against with highly talented pilots flying them. He himslf only shot down one Zero durring his time on that Carrier.
What year were you born in?
@@randbarrett8706My dad is an avid UA-cam commenter, and he was born in ‘50, and his daddy was born in ‘06. My grandfather was born 117 years ago, and I’m only 28. Ww2 was practically yesterday in the span of man.
Who else did he fight against?
There was a running joke back in the early days of WW2:
"What's a P-400?"
"It's a P-40 with a zero on its tail."
Of course there was a P-400, which most everyone had never heard of before. Great video! How could someone not be impressed by the quality of videos on this channel? This other fellow was great. How I'd love to have him over for dinner to ask all my good and bad questions.
A7M/M2 Reppu was a sweet bird. Imagine if there's a concourse survivor somewhere, sitting in a cave on some remote Japanese island, how much would that plane be worth! You start it up and it sounds like a Lexus...some wealthy eccentric nut might pay $300M for it.
9 months ago you posted this. Just reminding you that nobody commented I guess but I meant this to be nice.
@@TheCrapOnYourStrapOn6 months ago you replied this. Just reminding you that nobody replied I guess I meant this to be nice.
@@scavulous6336 it’s funnier when I say it. Get good cuh
6 out of 5 stars: The best video on the subject of the Zero I've ever seen. I have built up a large collection of books and other resources on Japanese aviation history over 50 years, and I even met my wife (a Japanese-to-English translator) through my interest in the topic. I knew John Lundstrom personally back in the 1990s when he was employed at the Milwaukee Public Museum -- his work is topnotch. You have achieved the same high standard in this video discussion.
As a hobby I have been handicapping air combat data for wargaming and simulation purposes for years now and can confirm your assertion that the operational and strategic (as well as human and cultural) factors are more significant than the easily-quantified tactical factors. The ever-elusive "truth" of these matters is so much more detailed, nuanced and fascinating than the popular oversimplifications in most books, video games and internet pages. Thank you!
Thank you good sir! And John Lundstrom is indeed a remarkable historian.
Yeah. He certainly has some written a good bit on that era.
www.amazon.com/s?k=John+Lundstrom&ref=nb_sb_noss
Couldn't find a biography of him other than something short on the Naval Institute site along with a couple of articles he did.
www.usni.org/people/john-lundstrom
Found this lecture he did on Coral Sea:
ua-cam.com/video/_cbtFBZxTqE/v-deo.html
.
I prefer to overclaim the number of stars by a factor of 12.
I do agree, I never learn so much data from the zero. The problem of the radio is quite similar to the french tanks in 40. Excellent but a nightmare to organize in front of ennemy.
Man a man like you is the kind of historian I’d strive to be
On this episode Dratch discovers cruel and unusual punishment via Japanese fighter designations.
Y
The atmospherics etc effecting radios was rather eye opening.
Indeed! When Trent was explaining it to me I found it quite fascinating.
Jon-Paul Filkins not to us old-farts who grew up listening to AM radio. At night I could listen to the American Forces radio broadcast from southern Germany and I lived in north-east England.
Washington DC attempted to send a warning message to Pearl Harbor on the morning of December 7, but radio interference caused the military to send the warning by Western Union telegraph instead.
WW2 was one of the first wars that had to seriously contend with anomalies in the RF spectrum. With such major advances in radio direction-finding, the birth of electronic intelligence, radar on a widespread scale, cryptography/cryptology as serious technical disciplines, and the exponential spread of radio equipment to increasingly lower levels.
It's an aspect of the war that probably deserves a lot more attention than it has previously received.
The US gave a civilian airline captain a B-17 full of technicians and test equipment and a free hand to go anywhere he wanted between Alaska and the Panama Canal zone to find solutions for the issues caused by atmospherics and the precipitation static that builds up from the friction of the aircraft moving through the atmosphere. He wrote a book about it but I can't recall the title at the moment. Radio interference from ignition systems was a thing right up until the 1970s, "Radio ready" ignition systems were actually a dealer-installed option on the cheapest cars.
One of my Great Grandfathers was part of the Team the recovered the Down Zero in the Illushion Islands off the coast of Alaska, was said that he made a ring from one some washers that came off the landing gear, sadly though wasnt able to find them among my Grandfathers things after he passed away
It really sounds like the Japanese Army and Navy would both have much better planes if they'd talked to each other.
There are so many problems that the Imperial Japanese military could have solved if the branches talked to each other that it's absurd
The Japanese Army and the Japanese Navy got along as well as our present day Democrats and Republicans, or perhaps not that well. The Army regarded the Navy much as our Marines regard the Navy: it is a taxi service. The purpose of the Navy was to transport the Army to the fight and transport supplies as needed. The Army was rather happy about Midway since it gave those squids a comeuppance! The Army had its own fighters and even submarines! The Navy had their Marines.
Yea, like talking themselves out of starting a war they couldn't win
@@frankduncan5685 The IJA even had their own tiny aircraft carriers. The IJN even went as far as lying to the army, saying that they won at Midway and didn’t come clean until later. Love your comment about the two political parties.
The disputes between the IJA and the IJN appear to be a return to the clannish ways of feudal Japan.
Ah, my favorite IJN warship: The A6M Zero
I mean, there was a floatplane variant called the Nakajima A6M2-N so you could say that there was a version that floated on water.
By the end of the war, a lot of them had joined the IJN sub force.
By the end of the war, a lot of them had joined the IJN sub force.
@@redshirt5126 If you think about it then floats + guns = warship
@@BattleManiac7 but it flies so... Warship plane?
The fall of the A6M as a top-of-the-line fighter is solely because of the breathtaking speed at which aviation advanced in the thirties and forties. The Navy's F3F fighter entering service in 1936 was a biplane... and twelve years later the Navy was bringing in the F9F Panther, their first JET fighter.
And because they had WAY less resources and battle experience with a truly modern enemy (they bullied the far outdated Soviet vehicles in China so not the most up-to-date things fought against the Empire of Japan)
I have 3 goldfish in a large tank. One of them is white with one red spot on his head, so I named him, Tetsuzo Iwamoto.
I called my rottweiller Norbert(means north bright,then discovered BAVARIA IS south,fuck it,too late ) Bertie ,!
Pepperdog181@gmail.com
@Baron Von Grijffenbourg l was not high l was drunk (lrish/Scottish) do l sound a Jamaican? Meatball? What have u met him? He'd shag you, well l probably would too,l ain't 2 fussy,his cranial capacity is 11 tadpoles, l've done neurosurgeons logistics so l know about that kinda shit and UFOS and ghosts, field psychologist..l analysed fields..seriously, l made national press,these lazy fuckwits printed any bs l fed them..doubt me..ok.But it's fucking true ya cunt
Pepperdog181@gmail.com 🚜🐶
The best historical analysis of anything I've ever heard or read. By far.
Like.. Holy shit.
I am most in awe of the coverage and emphasis on the fact that context can make all the difference and can't be overlooked in such areas(such as this and war coverage in general).
Total eye opener
Tl;Dr: best historical analysis of anything ever
You would love University, you should go.
@@LosBerkos I did. Biotechnology and applied chemistry 😁👌
@@LosBerkos ....indoctrinated much?
The long length of this video meant I kept putting off viewing it. Having watched it in one sitting, I have to say it’s one of the most interesting, informative and enjoyable vids on a warplane I’ve ever watched. Thanks to Drach and Justin for a fascinating discussion and here’s hoping for more like it.
My thoughts exactly
One thought about Justin's point about the distance that the Japanese Naval Air Arm could project power from Rabaul to Guadalcanal - that was one the order of the same distance that the Argentinian Air Force found so daunting for their strikes around the Falklands Islands - thirty years later, and with things like airborne refueling possible. An amazing feat, as he says!
I believe if air refueling was possible in WWII bye Germany standard we would have had (Great Britain) collapsed it would be an different world in which we live in to day!.
oh wow thank you I was looking for a comment of that nature .. that's incredible
I see a 5 Minute Guide (more or less) for 2 and a half hours.. and the Day is saved! Thank you, @Drachinifel for your excellent work.
"The Typhoon was a raging dumpster fire..." I like this guy. Good presentation.
I learned some things and I know a LOT about the Pacific air war. Very worthwhile presentation, have sent links to some of my contemporaries.
Well having your tail just fall off might be considered not ideal for an aircraft.
@@durhamdavesbg ..wasn't it more the earliiest versions that had the tail problems..
@@razor1uk610 He did say it was bad specifically "for the first year of its entry into service" so I'm guessing that means the tail problems were eventually sorted.
As 2 are being rebuilt to fly, I'm hoping it wasn't that bad!
@@roborovskihamster5425 It also had issues with the engine, and gases filtering into the cockpit, forcing the pilot to wear the oxygen mask at all times if I recall correctly... "Raging dumpster fire" perfectly sums up the Typhoon when initially deployed.
1:44:13 The target fixation probably also occurred from surprise. The Zeros had been able to dispatch the threats quickly every time up to that point. Thatch's division and the torp bombers were a first time exception.
Awesome video. Please continue this type of work.
There were some scary moments in the Indjan Ocean,
@@dennisweidner288 Yup, a Blennheim squadron managed to attack Kido Butai, but missed.
@@VersusARCH High-level horizontal American bombers also missed. It was the dive bombers and torpedo planes that were effective. The British didn't have dive bombers and their torpedo planes were even more outdated than the American torpedo planes. At Midway, it was the Dauntless dive bombers that tore the heart out of Kido Butai.
3.1 million views as of Nov. 2022 on a video that’s over 2 hours long! I love it when one of Drach’s videos goes “viral” so a larger audience can see the quality of his content
All future claims that Seymour was a competent flag officer will henceforth incur permanent reassignment to the Japanese Aeroengine Designation Department! There will be no second chances!
Any possibility of one week assignment to Jingles' saltmines once a year as a vacation?
@@theleva7 No...he's still needed as Flag Officer (Brighton Marina)
I'd rather be assigned to the Kamchatka sir.
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114 being on the Kamchatka isn't that bad, its the other ships nearby that suffer. so "I'd rather be assigned to a ship in the 2nd Pacific Squadron, even one being repaired by Kamchatka..."
@@EmperorNefarious1 Your clearly delusional. Off to the infirmary with you.
Great video. As a retired F-4 aviator, the discussion of the Zero was fascinating. BTW, this was about ships, the aircraft is the long range artillery of a ship. It is like doing a study on types of large caliber guns on Battle Ships. Which, might make a great video too.
51:00 -- RE: "The Dichotomy" -- There's another way of saying this. ENERGY FIGHTING is on a Spectrum, and there's two main polar strategies. The Zero was *also* an energy fighter, but its energy was in the ACCELERATION curve, not in the MASS curve.
Ah... The mixing of physics and military terms... A physicist would claim that energy and acceleration were two different things. If the zero's advantage lies in acceleration, it is a force fighter (fast acquisition of energy, low max energy). If the p-47's advantage is just having a huge amount of potential and kinetic energy, it is an energy fighter.
@@hypothalapotamus5293 Colloquially to the military, Boom and Zoomer (Pure) if used only for fighter role.
Zero was a horizontal turn fighter, and so was the P47 if you actually read combat reports... The video points they started the war using the zero wrong in dive and zoom, as early War everyone assumed turn fighting dead, hence all those useless twin heavy fighters...
@@wrathofatlantis2316 I didn't want to write a huge comment about why I made a distinction between Polar strategies, but to follow up a little that's why I identified 2 of them. It's not the two ends of the same axis, it's 2 different axes and you're got the nail on the head when it comes to Mass and Acceleration. The Zero had a wider range of angles where the two axes intersect.
Pilots did not use energy term in WWII because more thrust in the nose reduced ability to curve (see my videos on this): This is obvious when in horizontal turning combat good pilots cut throttle, and the least power always won... Horizontal turning multiple 360s was dominant because WWII guns were weak, this disappeared to allow “energy fighting” when instant kill rockets became available... the only WWII alternative to sustained slow speed turn fighting was hit and run, which needed power, speed and a good climb rate: Aces with good eyes could dive with off-angle hits, but it was dicey and only practical for exceptional pilots. Most WWII kills were done with much less than 30 degrees of deflection, which means following around in a turn for a long time. Zero should have been quite dominant throughout WWII, but had terrible slow-firing wing guns and mismatched very weak nose guns that completely ruined its potential: Only the last ones with extra guns were improved. FW-190A was also a superb slow speed turn fighter but much better armed and thus very dominant. Examples of high speed hit and run fighters are P-51, P-38, Me-109 and especially Spitfire: High climb rate but moderate turn. P-47, Zero, Oscar, FW-190 are all slow speed turn fighters. Radial engine seemed the big factor but also climb rate, usually poorer climb on radials... Again see my videos which debunk much of the massive misunderstandings of nose-driven prop fighting.
This is the best info I have ever seen on the A6M. A full lecture with no dead air. I'm glad you uploaded the whole thing.
"Army Zero's" were misidentified Ki-43's, they have a very similar profile. Pilots called them "Army Zero's" for that reason.
Getting a notification about this video while reading the excellent "Shattered Sword" (as for recommendation in US vs JN damage control special) really made my day. Thanks for both Drach!
Hi Krzysiek - I can introduce you to Anthony Tully if you’d like...
31:00 Self sealing fuel tanks and armor. It is true that the zero didn't have them until later, but we must remember that many combat aircraft of the time didn't have them. Early B-17s, P-40s, etc. didn't get them until after the production runs had gone through a few variants. So to with some of the European aircraft.
Same for the Brits. Fuck having a burning fuel tank in front of me, with the slipstream going my way . . . . . high octane juice at that. Such Brave Young men.
Germans didn't have armored and self-sealing tanks on their BF-109's until very late in 1939.
@@miquelescribanoivars5049 I believe the Germans were so short of rubber that many 109s were built without it deep into the war. The 109 was a horrible aircraft and was responsible for killing far more German pilots than Allied aircraft. Plus the airframe was simply obsolete by the time the later variants received massive engine upgrades which warped the frame and skin of the aircraft. This shortage of rubber was an issue for the Japanese as well. The Japanese also detested defense armor as a concept.
Last time I was this early, the USS Constitution was still pounding the HMS Macedonian into fire wood.
But fantastic video Drach, thank you sir.
One interesting observation I'd like to make. The Japanese had no way to get the Zero from the factory except by using ox teams. No railroads, airports were directly connected to the Mitsubishi factory. As its often been said, the big things the Japanese could do fantastically. But the little things often tripped them up.
Last time I was this early the USS Constitution was still an acorn.
@@Thirdbase9 Dude....I just spit water on that one, that was fantastic.
I absolutely had no idea. Wow! Thanks for posting.
@@RemoteViewr1 the Japanese ended up struggling to find enough oxen and they struggled to feed them as well. And the ones they had were overworked.
Pretty crazy they were reliant on such primitive methods.
@@admiraltiberius1989 They were not the only ones, 80% of the German Army even in 1945 relied on horses for their logistics. All the Infantry Divisions, most of the Artillery, etc etc. It was only the Panzer, Panzergrenadier and motorised divisions that were fully mechanised. When you compare them to the British (fully motorised and mechanised before the war) and the Americans the differences are pretty stark....
In the Nakajima plane factory they had curtains separating the factory floor devising the Army from the Navy lines.
I grew up as an old head reading about WW1 & WW2 aircraft (father was a Spitfire pilot in the RAAF) so I had a large library at my disposal. Later I focused on WW2 Werhmacht Armour & what I have read, I've always taken these books as factual until these last few years. Military German UA-camrs have destroyed multiple "myths" that were my facts previously & now, thanks to your in depth video my previously held views are now questionable again. Thank you for my continuous Military eduction of over 50yrs.
My Grandfather was a Curtiss Jenny’s and Newport 17 and 21 pilot.
Love the comment Drach made near the end about this being 'one of, if not the, longest videos on the channel... it's barely halfway to the longest one this week!
My dad shot down 7 with his F6F Hellcat. After 1943 the problem was the Japanese ran out of anyone who was trained well enough .
I doubt many were taught how to land after late 44.
Drach, thanks for asking the juicy questions. Justin, thank you for explaining everything so well, especially in giving us context. Also, a special thanks for staying humble even though you were in your element. You come across as a great communicator of history. I hope you two will collaborate again.
Thank you! I always make sure to keep in mind what I don't know so that what I do know doesn't go to my head. That is the only way one can keep learning! Heck, I have learned more about the Zero since recording this with Drach and that was only two months ago.
I still have the thick paperback I bought as a schoolboy by Jiro Horikoshi and Martin Caidin. Entitled 'Zero' it detailed its history and employment in the various conflicts from 'The Incident' to the Kamikazes.
That's definitely a classic! The Horikoshi and Sakai sections are basically edited excerpts from Samurai! and Eagles of Mitsubishi.
Brother I've lost track of how many times I've read that book.
The long range was a double-edged sword. Japanese pilots, typically overworked and poorly supported enlisted men, were often exhausted and punch-drunk by the time they simply reached their long-range targets. Pile-on repeated missions day after day and their leadership had a blind habit of pushing their pilots until they simply died (particularly during the grinding Guadalcanal campaign). The IJN never considered the ramifications of a long war, and failed to manage pilots and crews as precious strategic assets. Rather, their obtuse group-think and abusive military treated everyone as casually expendable. Of course, that experience really pissed off the general population, leading to societal mistrust of the military until only very recently.
Serious mistake not rotating them off the front line to help train young, upcoming student pilots. Most of them took their hard-earned xp with them.
Germany had the same problem. In 1943 the RAF & US AAF training programs hit full stride. In the west the Allies were sending triple the number of pilots & other aircrew into combat over the Mediterranean & NW Europe as the Germans & Italians could. Tactical victories by the Axis air forces became meaningless as German aircrew died faster than they could be trained. Sending half trained 19 year olds on repeated daily sorties only got the killed faster. By mid 1943 Rookie Luftwaffe pilots were not even completing the reduced training regime of 170 hours. The RAF had increased its circular to some 340 hours and the US AAF to 300 hours. Both were able to give the new comers additional training when they reached the combat Groups. The Luftwaffe group commanders were so desperately short pilots they had to send the kids straight into battle.
@@Carlschwamberger1 / In short, we had our shit together… more or less.
@@conservativemike3768 John Ellis in his analysis of the results of Allied & Axis industrial production as applied to the battles sum up his view in the title 'Brute Force'.
@@LesSharp A big part of the issue was that the IJN was having pilot issues from day zero. For the Pearl Harbor raid they were already pulling instructors out of flight schools to fill out the Shokaku and Zuikaku's airgroups.
OK. I am a very late comer to first view of this video but it was tremendous! It took me two sittings to get through it all, I must admit. Justin's research, as was stated in the conclusion, is so critical to correcting common errors concerning broad statements on a variety of dimensions of the A6M and the Pacific war. It reaffirms in me the nobility of the position of historian. Thank you for not editing this video down to a few sound bites but having enough confidence in the your audience that you stuck to telling the whole (or nearly!) story. Three Cheers for History!
I'm rewatching now. If you see this, welcome aboard!
The weight savings I find the best is while the P-40 fuselage and main wings were separate complete structures which were then bolted together. The Honorable Zero's fuselage was not structurally complete until riveted onto the wing. This makes the plane take up more space when being shipped and made it more difficult to cannibalize two chopped up planes into a single flyable plane.
Willi’s 109 had faster wing change: 4 bolts. Also the gear forces met at same junction, attached to the fuselage structure. Great trestle for wing swap outs, but track Far too narrow. Correct me if I am wrong, but I have heard from an ex hitler youth Boy immigrant that roughly one third of all built airframes in service were ground looped at one time in their short lives. Lucky the krauts could make near 33 000 of the things.
_'ground looped'?_ I'd google it but i'm sure i'd just get a bunch of crap about electrical installations *_: (_*
Not true, it was no harder to handle, just less forgiving: it needed the tailwheel locked on take off and soft grass or dirt on landing, other than that easier to fly than most of them, and could take a 6.5 ‘ pilot, and the flat pane canopy had excellent visibility in flight, with no reflections... Everything you hear about its problems is mostly garbage. It was short range, that’s it.
One of my favorite quotes (no immediate idea from where/whom), even if not at all accurate: a P400 is a P40 with a Zero on it's tail...
The P400 was an export model of the P39 intended for UK but taken over by the USAAF. They used them in the South Pacific until better alternatives became available.
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114 Correct, which is why I said "not at all accurate"...
available. None feet. 000,01 above operate to bottles oxygen export needed they But them. had they field Henderson On P-400. the was 93- the of versionExport
Yikes the P-400 was the export version of the P-39. It used an export version oxygen system that was not available on Henderson Field. So high altitude was not possible.
@@waltermachnicz5490 Not that it's single stage, single speed supercharger allowed the P-400 to be any good at high altitude
this channel is the gold standard of naval warfare channels
I may not remember how to spell drachinifel, but 5 minute ship will always get me back to you.
This is absolutely masterful. I’m a former USAF pilot and listened intently to every word, and I thank you both.
My uncle was a Corsair crew chief in the Pacific (F4U-1A/D) and had nothing but good things to say about the Corsair. He’s the one who got me interested in aviation and related the pilots loved the Corsair (other than it being particularly difficult to taxi given the long nose); they were likewise keenly aware of the strengths and weaknesses of various Japanese designs including the Zero. They held most of the Japanese pilots in high regard, though noted the deterioration of skills as the war progressed.
From my background, what you said about whoever started the fight higher normally won, though energy state was not taught then as such. The desire to initiate a flight from higher (and faster if possible) is still prevalent, and the desire to avoid dogfights if possible was desirable for all the reasons you stated.
I think it’s clear the Zero was a very good aircraft at the beginning of the war, and was flown by combat experienced pilots. As allied designs progressed (F6F/F4U in particular) and US pilots became more experienced, the Zero was not only outclassed, the new pilots weren’t up to the task. I appreciate your discussion of this, which tends to mask the capabilities of the underlying aircraft.
I do have one question that I don’t understand: it was mentioned the ailerons were shrunk (2:27:17) and that provided better roll rate. How? Did they get more deflection or move further outboard, as otherwise I find this extremely counterintuitive.
Again, great show: I learned tons and appreciate both your hard work to bring this to us!
Happy New Year!
[Edited for typo.]
Drach,
I sat down and watched this in one session ! amazing, this is some of your best work. thanks also to your exports!
2.5 hours and no midroll ads. Mad respect.
I fall asleep to this video constantly. You two simply have soothing voices and information that I don't have to think hard about because it's presented so clearly that it makes sense
A superb video. Well researched by the presenters and a really important contribution to the assessment of the Mitsubishi Zero and IJN air arm. More please!
I got a cobi A6M5 set and decided to listen to this while I put it together. A perfect amount of time and a wonderful experience.
Ah yes one of the great pleasures of life: a two and a half hour video on a single specific vehicle and its variations.
A privilege to sit down and listen to people that know their subjects inside out and convey it with so much enthusiasm. I have learnt so much and have had to rethink and ditch so many of what I now now are commonly held and wrong beliefs. Top work!
I enjoy history but I've never seen real stills with knowledgeable voiceover. WITHOUT CRAP MUSIC and effects. Thank you.
...For a second I wondered if I slipped into another reality where Drachinifel and his famous reviews of World War aircraft and his "Taxiway" Q&A session exist.
Honestly: I'd be down with that.
Welcome to "The Hanger"... this one might be slightly longer than usual...
I think There are a few things that often get confused when talking about the imagined or real fragility of the Zero vs its contemporaries. (and I get much of this from having grown up around many of the Grumman and Republic Engineers that designed some of those planes). The Zero was an extremely advanced aircraft for it's time. It was one of the first to be fully utilizing more ultralight aluminum designs. This made it extremely strong and more than able to withstand any G forces or maneuvering stresses. But it meant that it was utilizing the stronger aluminum skin as a critical component of it's load bearing. They used the stronger skin to reduce the needs for some internal bracing. This made for a lighter more agile fighter with much greater range. But damage to the outer skin or load bearing surfaces would much more quickly erode the planes structural stability than it would on a corresponding Grumman. Whereas the Grumman designs (and lets be fair when we are talking about at least the US planes going head to head against the Zero we are talking mostly about the Grumman's) Well not just Grumman, Lets call it the Long Island Plane Engineering Community during this period. Which included in very tight coordination and an awful lot of neighborhood brain storming, was Grumman, Fairchild and Republic, Sperry (Makers of the Norden Bombsight) etc. So both the Grumman and the Republic Designs tended to be more over engineered to be strong and solid not just when fully intact, but to adsorb a tremendous amount of damage and still keep flying. Much of the critical structural strength was inside. If you still had one wing, a piece of tail, and 3 or 4 cylinders still working in you engine you could fly that Wildcat home. Saburo Sakai's description of his somewhat Legendary fight with Pug Southerland over Guadalcanal left a really lasting impression on him. It was his first encounter with the Grumman's. The F4F-4's I believe. Sakai was stunned. He had dumped every round of ammunition he had into the Wildcat, and it showed. The F4F was a flying trash heap. But it was still flying. Riddled stem to stern with holes, but no fires and the pilot waving at him. Finally the engine began to sputter so the Pilot took his time, collected himself, and bailed out over friendly forces. Living to return in a new plane the next day. The people that designed the Wildcat, Hellcat, Avenger and later the A-6 Intruder and F-14 Tomcat were also friends neighbors and relatives of the ones that designed the P-47 Thunderbolt and as their masterpiece the A-10 Warthog. A common design goal shared by this close knit community of aviation Engineers was the plane should still be flying with 1/3 of it missing. The ability of the American planes particularly the "Grumman's" to just soak up bullets and damage like a sponge and still keep flying and fighting somewhat unnerved the Zero pilots.
The Zero wasn't however poorly designed or weak. In fact all aircraft manufacturers eventually started using the same weight saving tricks used on the Zero. Things like letting the outer skin carry most of the load and stress. The B-29 is a great example.
In ANY semi-monocoque airframe the skin takes almost all the load. The frames and the stringers just help the skin keep its shape, and offer a way for alternate load paths, through the skin, if the skin is damaged.
Ever see a Wildcat with some of the skin removed? The frames and stringers are almost a joke they are so tiny.
Further, behind the cockpit, there is almost nothing worth shooting a bullet at. Its all air except for the occasional cable.
Grumman was one of the first to use thicker gauge skin on its fighters. Better skin quality and aerodynamics.
The G-loads the Zero was designed for was comparable to American aircraft. The airplane itself was a bit too flexible and accounted for maneuvering problems at high speed.
Zeros broke their wings.
Spitfires broke their wings, to the point where there was thought of putting a G-meter in the cockpit. (bad for morale, though). And the thin wings were too flexible and had problems like the Zero at high speeds.
P-51s broke their wings.
A few years ago, I saw video of an interview with a US Naval WWII pilot. He said they used to dive a bit, then go into a turn to lure Zeros into turn fights. If the Zero pilot took the bait, they'd go to full throttle. If the Zero tried to follow in anything over a 6G turn, at any decent speed, it would lose a wing. That matches up with the tests done on the "Akutan Zero," which showed the ends of the wings would start to warp at about 6Gs.
@@chuckyxii10 With the Zero's diving limitations I thought part of it was not simply a "do not exceed xy speed while diving" limitation as it was it's broad high lift wings simply did not want to dive real well. They would keep trying to pull you up and out of the dive. And the faster the zero went, the more trouble it's control surfaces had trying to force the nose down.
It's worth noting that many of the issues you describe with the Zero were also experienced by the Legendary British Spitfire in the Hot Humid and Salty Pacific Theater. While one of the all time greatest planes of the War it just did not like the tropics. It's broad wide wing did not like the new air conditions. It's otherwise remarkable Merlin Engine and it's Superchargers just loathed the climate. It's one of the reasons British Pacific forces ended up flying a good number of Wildcats (Martlets) Hellcats and Corsairs.
Most of the early war planes had a very specific environmental envelope where they were at there best. There were very few that could move from the cold dry and wintery war of Europe to the hot wet and salt drenched South Pacific and still behave the same and vice versus. The only two that I can think of were the American P-51 Mustang which did passably well in the Pacific. And the P-47 Thunderbolt that just didn't care where it was. It would beat the air into submission anywhere on the planet. Well okay and then there is the P-38, which is probably best described as a cantankerous bastard no matter where you flew it.
@@chuckyxii10 The Zero had the benefit of a fairly bog simple air cooled engine. While the Merlin may have been one of the single greatest examples of engineering perfection of the war, it really was not fond of the tropics.
You got quite some things wrong about the dogfight between Southerland and Sakai.
1. He did not dump all his ammunition he had into the enemy fighter. He shot several hundred *7.7mm bullets* into the enemy plane. Along with *some* cannon ammunition.
2. "The pilot waving at him" implies that he was just fine. He wasn't, he was wounded, despite the Grumman's armour by the way.
3. The engine didn't "finally begin to stutter", Sakai re engaged the 20mm cannons and with a quick burst at the engine (some sources say it was the left wing root, but I'm going with Sakai's description), the Grumman caught fire and the pilot bailed out.
According to Sakai, the pilot hung limply in his parachute. So while surviving, he was badly wounded. He also didn't bail out in friendly lines, but along enemy lines
PBS:
"He[Southerland] parachuted into the jungle, deep in the heart of enemy territory. Bleeding and exhausted, he struggled through the brush, finally finding some local boys who were willing to risk their own lives to help him escape. With their assistance, he managed to elude the Japanese ground forces and meet up with his American Navy rescuers."
Given his wounds, and the journey to allied lines, it is also questionable whether he returned the next day.
Well done! This has genuinely contributed to the state of knowledge for the average military history enthusiast.
No repitition of common notions but an in depth collation of up to date research that Id never before heard after years of cursory interest in this aircraft.
The more we learn, the more we realize that's so much more to be learned....
I had a particularly slow day at work, and as a university student working in the school cafeteria, I had some time to listen to this video in it’s entirety. I am so glad I did. This is why I love this channel. I love the long, clear and descriptive discussions that occur, and it is really fun to observe other historians discuss topics such as this in detail, and with accuracy to not only the understanding of war itself in the understanding of how tech played the role in it. Far too often, I have seen people talk about how tech inside wars, and how blank being better than blank means that blank should’ve one, and how they don’t get the picture. His channel does a good job in getting rid of those myths, and bringing a sense of maturity to the military history field that I feel is pretty lacking in a lot of areas. Thank you for the content, and keep it up
As a kid I built a Revell model kit of a Zero and loved the look of it, that sleek shape and the dark green and grey paint scheme. Always liked this airplane.
I had a foam 2d glider with a propeller as a small kid it was a zero. When i was a bit older and was into modelling (about 8 or 9) i went to the hobby shop to get a model to make of a zero. Unfortunatly the hobby shop owner was an asshole and told me exactly how stupid of a kid i was to want a japanese plane. (One of those morons who thought japan wanted to take over australia and make us all speak japanese)
On the upside he gave me a free revell model of a hellcat or wildcat. I cant remember. I put it together and never painted it. 16 years later i went to pick it up and the super glue i had used let go and it dissasembled itself. Lol
@@Colt45hatchback wasn’t Tarzan blue was it?
@@AnthonyTolhurst-dw1nc the grumman? No all white. I never painted it
Same here, built a model as a kid and loved the simple, elegant design. Saw a real one at the Yamato museum, near Kure, and was astounded by the stunning beauty of the aircraft.
@@Colt45hatchback I remember those foam 2D gliders, I think I had a Zero as well. Fuck that hobby shop owner.
One of the best documentaries I have ever heard! So many interesting details, rational resolutions of some common myths, perfect. The relative comparison of characteristics/values is really good, in the end it is more informative then numerical values (which are often of questionable accuracy and/or without conditions)
"Greetings this is Greg" -Just kidding.
This
I assumed it was when I saw a two hour+ video about a WW2 fighter. I was quite surprised when I saw it was Drachinifel
Hahaha
Indeed
That would also be an awesome collab!
Nice. But the quality of technical information available on the A6M may not come up to Greg's standard, since he likes to work from flight manuals which may not exist for the Zero (and almost certainly not in English).
How come UA-cam has better programming than TV and radio!
And a thousand thanks for well-organized podcast discussions without rambling and constant giggling.
Justin is such a great guest to listen to. I really hope he makes another appearance on this channel!
Great point about the electromagnetic interference, that certainly warrants further investigation!
Definitely! I'm certainly not the man to do it, but it is a very interesting line of investigation from Trent Telenko.
That HF radio problem from local magnetic conditions. Damn I never thought about it but it makes so much sense considering HF radio characteristics. That is certainly the most eye opening thing of this video to me. Certainly one of many things that explains the Japaneses struggles in the Solomon's along with effective Allied early warning responses. And details like how the Model system worked and other things.
Compared to other documentaries all 2.5 hours were informative, with actual examples and anecdotes actually fitting in and serving to explain what information was provided. Everything in context and not overblown or ignored. This was a real joy to watch and listen to.
Fantastic work Drach and Justin.
For anyone who is interested: There is a flyable "Zero" replica in the aircraft museum in Olympia Washington, near the Olympia airport.
That's only 2-3 hours south of Bremerton, where they have the Kitty Hawk, Turner-Joy (Museum ship), and several other interesting pieces of naval history.
And a real one at Planes of Fame in Chino California.
I avoided this particular video on your channel for a very long time because of how long it was and because I felt, from reading various WW2 history texts over the years, that I already kinda knew what the conclusions were going to be. Man... I was very wrong. There was an immense amount of unique information that I had never heard before. From the radios and their problems with them and the bizarre atmospheric factors at play (that was wild) to the misconceptions about self-sealing fuel tanks and how that isn't like a 1/0 toggle and how complex that issue could really be. To some basic popular misconceptions about what tactics the Zero pilots were taught to use and how a little mishandling of them (pulling up in front of the enemy you just boomed-and-zoomed too quickly) could create an opening to be killed by their opponent. It's amazing how fast that 2+ hours flew by, I was hooked. Excellent content. A must-watch by anyone who really wants to know the granular story about IJN carrier aviation in WW2 and not just a few talking points commonly spouted that are frequently wrong or at least only half-right.
I literally just finished installing a window listening to this.
And was completely educated and entertained the entire time!!
Buy the video... not the window.
I have operated military HF radio in Viet Nam, in the area of 'Zero's radio trouble' in 1968. That was not a low sunspot (bad HF radio) year. I still had intermittent trouble because other radio operators were not trained to deal with changing radio propagation. 1941 was on the way down and 42 /43 was bad. There is noise there, esp in the New Guinea area and latitude as marked in your chart about 1:51 in video, from thunderstorms much of the year. I was riding on an aircraft that got hit by lightening there. There is a difference between IJN bomber and fighter aircraft for radio, quite a bit and the same as for our side. Fighters of necessity must use voice radio whereas in the period (and even for me at time in 68), the lead bomber could have a radiotelegraphy operator (as I believe was the case for 'Tora Tora Tora' or equivalent thereof Dec 1941 Hawaii ergo Nagumo at fleet knows of success Pearl Harbor right away). The bomber...and it's antenna, is larger. AM voice radios, especially mistuned voice radios, are terrible and full of 'interruptions' (spark plug noise) as I have heard WW2 German pilots describe (and say the jet was great that way, no interruptions). I also had plenty of spark plug noise in vehicles at the time. Altogether, radiotelegraphy would be 10 to 50 times better for their gear than AM (and now it is over 100 times better but only radio amateurs like me use it). 10x better is 3X better range, 50X better is 7X times the range. There is no hope for a fighter pilot of the time to adapt to changing radio propagation. If you fly 600 miles from the carrier, you fly in and out of 'dead zones' unless you change frequency every 30 minutes or so. No way (now, it is automatic and/or relay and/or satellite).
More information about the zero than I thought existed! Thanks Justin and Drach!
Great video, I’m not even halfway through yet but I’m loving the obvious effort and care you guys put into the discussion.
I came across this while recovering from a bilateral fusion. Within the first 20 min of trying to suffer through this, I rolled out of bed got up and walked laps in the hospital until i exhausted myself. All the while shaking and writhing in agony.
Then as my phsical pain nearly equaled my auditory assault from trying to discern this documentary not to mention my only other choice was literally dying, I gave it another watch. Thankfully I stuck through it because it finally became an excellent show and I learned quite a bit.
Thank you for almost killing me and then saving.
Very good video! The newest idea (to me) was that the greatest problem with the Zero was the radio! That is certainly not something I've heard said anywhere else, but I have heard the Soviet's claim that American radios were one of the best items of lend-lease, so perhaps the failings of many nations radios is something that's not as well appreciated as it should be.
Absolutely, it's easy to forget that a compact reliable radio was really high tech in the day.
Keeping in mind that the army field radios had a range of 5 to 6 km and weighed 17 kilos, yeah reliable radios were high tech.
This was absolutely fascinating. I thought I new quite a bit about the Zero. Boy, was I wrong lol. Loved the info, and was glued to my headphones from beginning to end. That info on why the IJN struggled so badly in communication makes so much more sense to me now. What an incredible stroke of bad luck for an otherwise exceptional plane (for its day).
Yay someone clarifying how the IJN designations worked! It always irks me a bit to hear those wrong (or ignored) from even scholarly sources...
o7 I did my best! Don't make me try to sort out Japanese aero-engine designations though...
@@justinpyke1756 Oh, no worries. Most any time talk turns to engines for any service, let alone Japan's, and my eyes just kind of gloss over. It's one of those things like math where I know it's a really important subject, but I just can't bring myself to focus. "The Spitfire had, depending on the mark, Rolls-Royce Merlin or Griffon engines" is about as technical as I can get there, haha. Thanks for this though. I love seeing conventions and myths sort of brought back into line with reality, and Japanese military equipment (as well as German) have a lot of such mystiques about them that really need to be examined and put into practical context. (I'm a definite aviation nut myself. I was working on my own masters in military history, but ended up getting very ill and education had to be side-lined and just have never gotten back around to it, alas).
@@justinpyke1756 The designation system is in all honesty pretty logical, when it gets explained. Which it often doesn't.
I want to thank you for clarifying the model designation part!
Ah yes, the ‘5 minute’ guide to the Zero
Edit: Daddy Drach hearted!!!!!!
More like "5 minute guide" x30
More or less
uncondensed to 2:33 hours
Drach is the peter jackson of short guides to naval history 🤓
It's just 30 5 minute guides rolled into one video
This was one of the best episodes you've done and there are plenty of quality material that you've shown us.
The service you and other online historical channels provide is utterly amazing!
That bit about the radio communication in the Southern Pacific was really interesting. It just shows that when implementing new technology, you run into new problems that you've never had to face before. Previously, battles were started or canceled because of the local weather. Japanese couldn't use radios because of the Sun's weather.
2 hour vid combining my to favourite subjects - Airplanes & Ships & I have haven’t even gotten through the 4 hr dry dock - feeling well spoiled :)
You aren't the only one lol
A great video, your aviation expert shed a lot of light on the iconic Zero, which is worthy of a long discussion. Your guest knows aviation which a great combination with your naval knowledge and this video great.
This video is just about right in length, given I am on Pandemic Stay-at-Home!
Tbh, it is more of a podcast with pictures than a video, but it is just fine with me.
Proper analysis rather than "fanboy" ravings - this is what keeps me on this channel.
Greg`s airplanes is a great channel for all things ww2 aviation. He goes deeper into detail than anyone I've been able to find.
Yeah, Greg's aircraft is my favorite channel for ww2 aircraft by far! His amount of technical detail and background information is right up my alley! I thought I new alot about ww2 aircraft but he has made me a scholar! I watch his videos over and over again. I don't know if it's the way he presents the information or what it is that makes me love his videos but I have learned things I never seen or read anywhere else. I especially love his 8 part series about the P47 Thunderbolt. It's my new favorite aircraft now because I finally learned the truth they tried to cover up!
So generally I relisten to the video every 6 months or so since it’s such a wonderful wealth of knowledge and information. Thank you for both of the wonderful zero videos
Wonderful video. Honest, unbiased, detailed analysis. Very welcome when compared to those terrible American "documentaries" I've suffered through on the subject.
Fascinating stuff, excited for the next one.
Ed Hartley as an American growing up watching those documentaries it makes me sad to learn just how off base they were on so much of what they covered 😢
..the 'Hell' of Japanese engine designations; (usually two names/designations per model, up to three for each, army, navy, manufacturer, or more!), oh and then the allied name...
Keith Schick well unless you’re born knowing everything about everything it is certainly possible to watch those shows then learn later of the issues with them. It’s called... learning, and there’s nothing stupid about that.
This video was awesome! I've been a fan of the Zero ever since I was a kid, and this video expanded my knowledge of my favorite plane by leaps and bounds compared to what I have read in specification books for decades, and that's knowing most of the information that was already mentioned in this video. The numbering convention and design history and philosophy was the best part of the video. Thanks so much for this video!
‘Man I really should stop bingeing Drachinfel’
Drachinfel uploads two and a half hour long video.
‘Hard mode it is!’
T. Bone “Cowabunga it is!”
It only counts as 1!
So many comparisons bean count capabilities and end up in 1v1 assessments when in truth it usually was a systematic comparison of aircraft capabilities, aircrew training and experience combined with logistics. Truly enjoyed your analysis!
1:20 The 7.7 mm Machine gun Type 97 was a copy of Vickers E type not the British FN Browning type as fitted to the Spitfire, although both are short recoil they are two very different weapons - the "difference" is that Vickers Guns were amenable to synchronization which the Zero had on the cowl firing through the propeller, the Browning (all Brownings) was difficult to synchronize and that was a major problem in the fitting of 13.2mm Browning clone HO 103, either the single or completely replacing the 7.7mm Type 89 (army), made use of Ho 103 Brownings sub optimal, due to synchronization problems.
Excellent. I didn't catch the name of your guest speaker, but I'm deeply impressed not only with his knowledge of the A6M Zero and its variants, but also by the various other Allied and Axis fighter aircraft mentioned during is presentation. Extremely well done by both of you! Thank you very, very much! I will listen to this a second time within the next week or two.
His name is Justin Pyke by the way.
Any chance that the development of naval aviation as a whole will be covered on this channel?
Over time :)
@@Drachinifel Very cool.
@@Drachinifel Hooray if you can keep this level of quality, I will watch at any rate.
@@whiskeytangosierra6 ??? Isn't the quality always up there??
@@ZerokillerOppel1 There are variable levels of high quality. Drach has raised the bar on UA-cam.
I feel as if I just had a collage level lesson on the A6M Zero fighter ... Thank You Both!
Videos with leght like these make you think "well that was well wasted time" instead this wasnt time wasted at all, great vid
1:42:00 Thank you so much for addressing the radios and particularly in the context of Midway. I was keen to hear which you might have to say on that very point. You are a scholar and a gentleman.
This one has been on my list for a long time to watch. Never thought I had the time. Now I'm 1.5 hours in on a Wednesday night/morning. Don't judge my amount of life. Praise my willingness to learn!
“Japan might’ve been the only country in WWII to have an HE shell for a rifle-caliber MG”.
Not true, the Soviets had them too, although they were referred to as “Immediate Action Incendiary” ammunition, and their main purpose was to produce a bright flash that indicated one was hitting their target. Simo “The White Death” Haiya was shot in the face with an HE round by a Soviet counter-sniper in the Winter War (yes, they were so scared of this guy that they sent guys with explosive rounds intended for machine guns out specifically to kill him). He lived (and might’ve killed the poor guy that shot him), though it fucked up his jaw.
As for the engine on the Zero, actually one of the major problems was a completely different plane: the D4Y dive bomber. It originally had a copy of the DB 601 engine in it, but this engine had so many problems in the D4Y that it needed a new engine. Unfortunately, Mitsubishi’s Kinsei engine, the first choice for a new engine for the Zero (and its planned successor, the A7M), was the engine that the IJNAS decided to earmark for what would become the D4Y3, and it wasn’t until the final year of the war when the powers that be finally threw up their hands and let Mitsubishi stick this new engine in what was to be designated the A6M8 (which was supposed to be a fighter-bomber/dive bomber variant intended to replace the D4Y, D3A, and other types still in service), but by then, the war was effectively over.
They didn’t give this engine to the Zero because dogfighting doesn’t require more power to turn; the bomber needed speed more.
@@wrathofatlantis2316 If you'd watch the damned video, dogfighting was NOT SOP for IJN pilots, Boom and Zoom was. Dogfighting became more and more of a necessity as Allied planes improved whereas the Zero was still stuck with Sakae variants for propulsion.
Of course it really should've been replaced in 1943, 1944 at the latest.
@@wrathofatlantis2316 please watch the video
@@chooseyouhandle I watched the "damn" video, which is excellent, and if you had, you would have noticed the american pilot describing the Japanese's obsessive hit and run tactics was CRITICIZING them as wasting their aircraft... They later learned this was in fact a low effectiveness tactic without a lot of speed, centralized guns, and unrealistically good gunnery... Turn fighting was always going to be king with all props, for reasons I explain here: ua-cam.com/video/gSWWm_Ceqbw/v-deo.html Hit and run was the default assumption at the start of WWII, which is why they produced all these useless twin engine day fighters... Turn fighting became the rule later in the war, as the vertical high speed dive and zoom tactics turned out to be possible, but hard to use due to low gun hit rate at high angle and fast closure. Hit and run had its use against slower climbing opponents that turned better than you... The Zero needed armour and firepower, NOT speed, for turn fighting. You can easily counter speed and hit and run by either going head to head or turning, which is why the Zero got an armoured windscreen BEFORE it got back armour (A6M5b before A6M5c), which should be a clue... See my videos if you want to learn what WWII air fighting was REALLY like, not the current useless theories...: ua-cam.com/video/lCBOxbaxXBE/v-deo.html
@@wrathofatlantis2316 sounds like your selling something
As far as Aircraft designers go, Jiro Horikoshi is still considered by many to be one of the greatest aerospace engineers who ever lived
Many japanese designers are considered the greatest of all time. Success or failure is clearly not considered in the evaluation.
A side note, Japanese aircraft manufacturers are still in business today (although except Mitsubishi, they are no longer making aircraft anymore). Mitsubishi and Kawasaki are pretty obvious, Nakajima is now known as Subaru, and Aichi were integrated into Nissan.
@@muhammadnursyahmi9440 Mitsubishi was also split apart in the post-war occupation. Only Mitsubishi Heavy Industries still builds Aircraft, the Mitsubishi Automotive company (which is the one that people are most familiar with) has nothing to do with aircraft manufacturing or shipbuilding.
@@adamdubin1276 oh, thanks for more information
Great movie by ghibli as well
Wow! Thanks, it took me 3 days to listen to the end, but I'm glad I did. This level of detail is what makes your channel so great. In the vein of French pre-Dreadnoughts, I dare you to do a video on those exemplars of carrier warfare, the Skua and the Roc!
Have been listening to your guest on other videos as well as other posters and catching up quite a bit on understanding this somewhat mysterious Second Sino-Japanese chapter of the war. Always fascinated by it because it has been so overlooked and under reported or simplified in it's history. Justin is a great source on this, particularly the Aerial factors. His sources are up to date and seemingly thorough. Always worth a listen for gleaning historical knowledge when he is featured as a guest.