View Full Version : Revised CRG: Zero

09-14-2005, 05:29 PM
This is the 14th post in a series of topics on the Revised Cockpit Reference Guide that i am working on. It will contain all planes this time blah blah blah ...
The point is that i need your tips, suggestions and corrections for the easy-to-print aircraft guide that i am working on. To get an idea of what that is you may want to download the old version (check my sig).
Mitsubishi A6M2,3,5,5a,5b,5c,7-62,7-63 "Zero" or "Zeke" (`40-`45)
The A6M "Zero" was the most famous Japanese aircraft of World War II. Although the Allies received reports on its incredible performance against the Chinese as early as 1937, they did not seem to take them seriously. As a result, when the War started and they first met them it came as a complete surprise that the Japanese were so advanced in military aircraft design. In fact, thanks to its almost unbelievable manoeuvrability, good speed and unsurpassed range for carrier-born aircraft, the A6M2 accounted almost single-handedly for the air superiority that the Japanese enjoyed in the Pacific up to the battle of Midway (June 1942). Although faster, the A6M3 that followed was not anymore superior to the Allied planes. Next was the A6M5, an attempt to bridge the gap created by the excellent Grumman F6F Hellcat. The A6M5a had strengthened wings and increased ammunition, and the A6M5b introduced self-sealing tanks and armoured glass in the cockpit canopy. The A6M5c was a land-based variant (in-game equipped with Water-methanol injection system). The A6M7, the last production model (entered service in mid 1945), was built as a fighter-bomber, with a special bomb rack, reinforced tailplane and underwing attachments for two drop tanks. In total a little less than 10500 A6Ms were built, 2/3 of which by Nakajima
and 1/3 by Mitsubishi.

A6M2,2-21: Maximum speed: 430km/h at sea level and 515km/h at 4600m. Turn Time 15.5sec at 1000m.
A6M2-N \Rufe" seaplane: Maximum speed: 395km/h at sea level and 470km/h at 4400m. Turn Time 17.5sec.
A6M3: Maximum speed: 465km/h at sea level and 560km/h at 6000m. Turn Time 16sec at 1000m.
A6M5,5a,5b: Maximum speed: 455km/h at sea level and 545km/h at 6000m. Turn Time 16sec at 1000m.
A6M5c,7: Maximum speed: 460km/h at sea level and 555km/h at 6000m. Turn Time 16.5sec at 1000m.

¦ The Zeros are terrible at diving. The early models disintegrate at 650km/h and the later ones over 740km/h.
¦ The Zeros are extremely vulnerable to enemy fire. Until the A6M5b model they lacked sufficient pilot protection and self-sealing fuel tanks.
¦ For the A6M3 to A6M7 models consider switching supercharger speed at 3300m.

A6M2,3: nose - 2x7.7mm Type97 MG (1000rpg/66sec), wings - 2x20mm Type99 cannon (60rpg/7sec).
A6M5: nose - 2x7.7mm Type97 MG (500rpg/33sec), wings - 2x20mm Type99 cannon (100rpg/11sec).
A6M5a: nose - 2x7.7mm Type97 MG (1000rpg/33sec), wings - 2x20mm Type99 cannon (125rpg/14sec).
A6M5b: nose - 1x13.2mm Type3 MG (230rpg/16sec), wings - 2x20mm Type99 cannon (125rpg/14sec).
A6M5c,7: nose - 1x13.2mm Type3 MG (230rpg/16sec), wings - 2x13.2mm Type3 MG (240rpg/15sec),
wings - 2x20mm Type99 cannon (125rpg/14sec).

09-14-2005, 05:33 PM
The previous posts:

13. Buffalo, Wildcat, Hellcat: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/6401059653
12. Sturmovik: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/8461065653
11. Beaufighter: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/8461022653
10. Me262,163,He162,Go229: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/5111042653
9. P11c, IAR80,81: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=2...801042653
8. P40, P39, P63: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m...341014153
7. Bf109, Bf110: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/5031062053
6. Ki84, Ki100: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/9451054943
5. I16, I153, I185: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/2921071943
4. Stukas,He111: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/3011097843
3. La5,La7: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/9311023843
2. CR42,G50: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/5971000843
1. Ki43,61: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/7311047743

09-15-2005, 06:20 PM

to attract LEBillfish or any other of the Japanese aicraft experts for Zero tips.

09-15-2005, 06:49 PM
hmm this is odd i thought the A6m5b is suppose to have One 7.7 mm Type 97 machine-gun and one 13.2 mm Type 3 machine-gun in the upper fuselage decking, and two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 cannon (A6M5b)......

09-15-2005, 08:31 PM
hm, i think you are right. I can't check right now how it is in-game. Can someone else?

edit: it appears that in-game it's without the 7.7mm gun.

09-16-2005, 12:02 AM
Zero tips for PF?.....

The Japanese mindset was purely "attack". Do not stalk and wait, attack. Do not jockey for the best position, attack. Do not evade or defend, attack. The A6m series of fighter exemplifies this. U.S. pilots often noted the skill, as they would roll out, and almost instantly without wavering of wings or yaw lock up solidly on a target and fire.

In Pacific Fighters the Zero is made to this mindset, as you cannot absorb hits, run, or dive away, so you attack constantly.

The earlier versions will instantly snap into position, use rudder to increase your roll rate then allow the large surface areas to hold you on your mark. Roll out, dive hard on your target yet begin to pull out early losing sight of your target under the nose. If practiced you will find him suddenly burst out in front of you then can strike heavily.

Trust the Zero to hold a climb well. It is quick, and when your opponent stalls and must struggle to regain control use your superior manueverability to stablize quickly and attack.

Do not hesitate to turn fight. Feel confident at very low speeds, 140-150km/h is stable for the Zero and it can quickly regain speed when needed. Lure your opponent into wasting his Energy, then utilize your planes abilities when slow. Use your climb to force them to struggle, then loop with flaps causing your opponent to stall.

Lower is better in the Zero. 2nd stage on the Supercharger shifts comfortably at 2.8km. Early WEP systems can be run indeffinately at 95% power, 85% prop pitch and 6 radiator, water methanol systems roughly 5 minutes yet quickly can be restarted after brief cooling.

A6M2-5a series have excellent nose guns with copious ammunition.

In the end, you must trust this plane to not stall, and mostly be aggressive never cautious.

09-16-2005, 04:32 AM
When it comes to Japanese planes : bow : is not enough for Billfish http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

09-18-2005, 04:42 AM
Let me add, that to say "Type 99 cannon" is not precise enough . The Type 99-1 was Oerlikon FF derivative fed with 20mm x 72RB ammo (128g, 600m/s, 520rpm), Type 99-1 model 3 was fed from 60 or 100 drum magazine, model 4 was belt fed.

The Type 99-2 was derivative of Oerlikon FFL, fed with more powerful ammo - 20mm x 101RB (128g, 750ms, 500rpm), its model 4 was belt fed. Model 5 with ROF 750rpm (which combined with good MV, simplicity and low weight made it one of best WW2 20mm cannons) came too late to be used.

Type 99-2 cured Zero armament problem, which was very different trajectories of mgs and cannons due to low MV of Type 99-1. Firing them and mgs together made any sence only at very close distance.

09-18-2005, 07:11 PM
Ive done a lot of digging about the genesis of the Zero and reasons behind it. Not just online but at book stores and the like.

i read somewhere, (classic line that) that the Zeros chief designer (Jiro...?) knew full well that the light construction was a drawback to the design.

It was, at that stage, the only way that Mitsubishi could meet the requirements put on them for the fighter and was why nakajima pulled out.

IF anything, blame the lack of engine technology in japan at the time, that more power was not available to permit a heavier frame and still meet the performance figures demanded.

I think there is a quote from the chief designer specifically about the lightness of the zero and lack of protection, that goes something along the lines of we built it the only way we could to meet specs, and it required a lightness of construction that "... defied all common sense."

i believe they knew it was too light, but it was a product of the specs, not purely the design.

that, and the ridiculous notion that protection and a method of communication was dishonourable.

09-18-2005, 09:25 PM
S! neural_dream

No data to add, just wanted to say big thanks for the reference guide; I always found Moser's references great, but wished they were easier to print. The printable pdf is just what I wanted, and I also find the additional info handy in a seldom-flown plane. Now I will always know when to switch supercharger and how much ammo my plane carries.

Looking forward to next revision http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif