5 Things You Never Knew About the Japanese Zero

[@TJ3]

Play War Thunder for FREE on PC, PS5 and Xbox Series X|S here: playwt.link/TJ3History - Download the game and get your exclusive bonus now. See you in the skies!

[@douglashall2141]

War Thunder looks like a very cool game and very close to Accurate as well, as it would appear to me.

[@davidspencer8373]

Like video

[@Nativeat1YT]

Is there anyway to get the decal while already having the game?

[@rafaelmolina8942]

Hey TJ3 History could I join u in war thunder I would like some help with grinding the German tech tree at rank 4.

[@rafaelmolina8942]

Also my in game name is jimegal25.

[@tug-mug]

You missed one important factor about the Zero. One of the reasons the Zero was so light and and strong was because the Zero used the most advanced alloy in the world. None of the other combatant nations had at the start of the war, the 7075 aluminium alloy. It was invented by the Japanese company Sumitomo Metal.

[@Rvng2022]

Very important note. I searched Wikipedia, this Al 7075 is still very useful. Thks Matheo

[@jeffadams9807]

The Zero Was Also NOT Armored...

[@charliebailey2359]

You failed to mention that the US did capture one Zero, in Alaska. Koga’s Zero that was ditched on the Aleutian chain in Alaska. It was taken to Seattle and test flown. Much was learned on how to counter the Zero’s strengths by exploiting its weakness.

[@dukecraig2402]

​@@charliebailey2359 That's an overblown myth, Thatch was already working on his maneuver called the Thatch Weave in September of 1941 before the US even was in the war. The Flying Tiger's were already defeating Zero's quite soundly before the military got their hands on that Zero. The Cactus Air Force pilots flying over Guadalcanal and other US units and pilots were besting Zero's well before the report on that Zero was available to anyone, it took quite a while for that aircraft to be brought up to working order along with test flights and then pilots flying it in mock dogfights against other US pilots in their own aircraft then any reports being made available to anyone, by the time all that happened US pilots already knew how to deal with the Zero's and had downed plenty of them. The importance of that plane in regards to US pilots knowing how to fight against the Zero has been blown way out of proportion over the year's, looking at the timeline I seriously doubt it had any affect on it whatsoever.

[@nelsonlanglois9104]

That Aluminum Alloy is still used today : Aluminum Arrows in Archery , and M - 16s / AR - 15s lower Receivers

[@rahuljacob8305]

One small correction.. Actually USA got their hands on a zero and they were able to decode it's weakness..

[@TJ3]

Correct! This was not until mid 1942 however. So you are right, but these two Zeros at Pearl Harbor would have given them a 6 month head start on this information, which could have very well saved hundreds of lives and changed air strategy for some key battles!

[@rahuljacob8305]

@@TJ3 👍👍

[@gwillard19]

The weaknesses of the Zero were well known to the Allies before they ever got their hands on one. Small caliber guns, virtually nonexistent armor, etc. were common knowledge in the intelligence community. What the Allies learned from captured aircraft were its strengths. Maneuvering, max speed, rate of climb, max altitude were closely guarded secrets that were uncovered and used to devise a dogfight strategy against them that was successful.

[@neilwilson5785]

@@gwillard19 True, except that the Zero had two 20mm cannons in addition to a pair of 30 cals.

[@mbmann3892]

Yeah it was incendiary rounds. Those Zero’s we're made of tinder

[@twentypdrparrott694]

There is a Zero at the Planes Of Fame Museum in Chino, California. They fly it about twice a year. The plane has its original engine. They have a big airshow mid May each year. The Zero flies for this event.

[@jimmyhain]

Do they have the only known surviving "Kate" in that show as well?

[@maxwellharris507]

That A6M5 is numbers matching original; down to the frame, engine, and propeller

[@AnnyWC]

So I was not hallucinating when I saw that Zero in the sky!

[@dukecraig2402]

@@maxwellharris507 Isn't that the only airworthy one in existence with an original engine?

[@rconger24]

I think saw that one with my Dad circa 1971 in an Ontario bone-yard.

[@francisbusa1074]

Very good historical insights, especially from the Japanese perspective. However, I believe an intact Zero was captured, perhaps in the Aleutians in July, '42.

[@TJ3]

Correct. I tried to answer this in the comments and meant to cover it in the video. Essentially, the Pearl Harbor Zeros would have just given the US a 7 month head start.

[@gordonburton6721]

You are correct. It was repaired and flown.

[@michaeltelson9798]

The pilot tried to land on the spongy Aleutian island bounced and ended up upside down, with the pilot’s neck broken.

[@seangrexa4707]

All the hundreds of Deadliest Catch episodes and you think they could have thrown a little history lesson in one of them? Nope!?

[@Pgb633]

@@seangrexa4707 whats your point?

[@BELCAN57]

The "Zero" benefited from using the American designed Hamilton Standard variable pitch propeller. In fact, after the war Japan had to pay the company royalties on every copy produced.

[@Justin-yt7pi]

Nah?

[@BELCAN57]

@@Justin-yt7pi Yah ! I worked for the company.

[@fazole]

Not just the propeller. They built Wright 1830s under licence for their license built DC-3s and those same engines were copied and put in the Zero. They also bought and probably copied Link trainers from the US to train their pilots. US NACA designed airfoils were use around the world and Greg's Airplanes shows how the US, GB, and Germany all shared data for wing designs in the 1930s.

[@Justin-yt7pi]

@@BELCAN57 lol that’s your frame of reference.

[@bobkrohn8053]

As always, the Japanese copied most of their technology. Russians… same thing. If they were so brilliant, why aren’t we buying Russian cars, computers, refrigerators and TV sets. Read about the B-29 bombers they copied.

[@paulnicholson5997]

The Zero had little to no armor to protect their pilots, as the war dragged on the valuable experienced Japanese pilots were replaced by very inexperienced pilots, who were shot down much easier than earlier in the war. The Zero was also missing self sealing fuel tanks, leading to damaged Zeros catching fire or exploding once damaged. Once the Grumman F4F Wildcats were replaced with the much improved F6F Hellcats, alot of Japanese pilots were taken out thinking they were the earlier F4F Wildcats they faced earlier, leading to a shortage of experienced pilots, and the rest is history, as they say.

[@MrArdytube]

An aspect of the lacking armor was the samurai mind set… optimize courageous offensive capability at the cost of cowardly defense

[@paulnicholson5997]

@@MrArdytube No doubt, towards the end of the war, men with 3 days of training or less would drink thier ceremonial sake, end preform the kamikaze. The ultimate sacrifice.

[@rmxrider20032000]

The Japanese lost all of their good experienced pilots after the first year of American involvement in the war.

[@BlahVideosBlahBlah]

The armor is a bit of an overblown feature, as most WW2 aircraft had very little armor. The .50 cal guns that the US favored could punch through any aircraft armor in the early to mid war. The self-sealimg fuel tanks were a much bigger deal, because they didn't need to stop the incoming rounds to significantly improve survivability.

[@fubukilin8578]

@@rmxrider20032000 Nein, actually Japan lost most of the best pilots in 1943, during the battle of Guadalcanal, but 2 of the best and most famous pilots actually made it to the war ends, which are Iwamoto Tetsuzo (80 kills) and Sakai Saburo (28 kills)

[@steveb6103]

My dad was a F6F pilot and told me that one good burst was all it took. He would aim for the wing roots and the zero would 🔥.

[@rconger24]

My dad was an f6f mechanic and talked a lot about armor and self sealing fuel tanks. The zero didn't have those and made it vulnerable.

[@PsychoticSicarius]

The reason American pilots targeted the wing roots of the zero was because that was where the fuel tanks were if I remember correctly but correct me if I'm wrong please

[@Musafir09945]

Bro no crap because all the armor was traded for speed and maneuverability. and those .50cals also can rip early light tanks of ww2 to pieces. what can a simple plane do?

[@thinkablebaileylim6168]

I’m pretty sure that if the rear end of the wing root was hit, there was a chance that the whole wing would fall off the Zero

[@i_nameless_i-jgsdf]

@@rconger24 Late variants of the A6M was equipped with self-sealing fuel tanks.

[@erhardspies8779]

One Zero was indeed captured in the Aleutians. It was repaired and tested, and what turned out was that at a speed over 600km/h its ailerons got frozen, which limited its maneuvrability.

[@JAlexanderCurtis]

Yes this captured zero was pivotal in the war for America. After test flying it, the Americans learned it was very weak rolling right. This information was quickly fed to Pacific theater pilots who used this to outmaneuver the previously outmeaneauverable aircraft and get behind it, leading to huge losses for the zero. The exploit became so commonly used and effective that the Japanese had to redesign the next version of the zero, (A6M3 model 32) without the folding wingtips of earlier models in order to give back the roll rate to keep up with the Americans.

[@rodneypayne4827]

1. Various models of the A6m had armour and self sealing fuel tanks, only the A6m2 didn't. 2. Japanese industry used off the shelf components for systems in the A6m Eg. Bosh Ignition system and engine wiring harness Dunlop tires and brakes Hamilton Standard Propeller Pratt and Whitney pattern engine design for the Sakai, some even had the Japanese Badge for this company on the lower crankcase. 3. Aluminium supplied from stock shipped from Australia, some crashed Zeros even had BHP( Australian steel company) stamped on the inside of wing surfaces. 3.Over the Chinese coast the Zero faced experienced Chinese pilots flying the I-16 and I53 (supplied by Russia) and got a rude shock when they tried to turn fight and were outperformed by both and took losses then disengaged from combat almost immediately. 4. Most if not all engagements early in the war were fought by the Zero when they had a numbers advantage against fighters that were flown by pilots that were well trained but had little to no combat experience. 5. A6m was unstable at higher speeds suffered control surface lock up at relatively medium speed dives compared to even the early American fighters which also often resulted in overstress in turns and wing and tail failure. 6. Both main Japanese Army fighters at the time could out turn the Zero (Ki27 and Ki43) and the 43 was faster and could climb better. I could go on but these are just a few small points I'll post after years of research and building scale plastic model kits and studying reference books. There is a wealth of information available about Japanese Fighters if you know where to look.

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

The Ki-43 was not faster. Nor was it capable of out turning the zero. It was similar in performance but not better. Also the Ki-27 was a far smaller aircraft than the zero but far slower. Only armed with a pair of 7.7 machine guns. Another thing don't use information found on model boxes or sorts to claim it is factual.

[@rodneypayne4827]

@@sinisterisrandom8537 yes the 43 was better everything except range and firepower. You are only young so don't take Wikipedia or the internet articles as fact. Yes the 43 and 27 could outturn Zeros at low speed dogfights, it was tested and proven at the Akeno Flight School by the Japanese Army and Navy (the Navy was surprised but not dissatisfied because they wouldn't be fighting against each other) also the base for flight testing of all Japanese fighters (Or do you know better than them as well?). This research has been done by accredited historians far more experienced than you or me,using official documents available in Japan, and printed in definitive reference books. So don't go calling out people when you don't know all of the facts. News flash: YOU DON'T KNOW EVERYTHING! Also I might add that certain speeds allied fighters could indeed out turn Zeros including the Hurricane 1, Brewster Buffalo and Curtiss Hawk all proven in combat by pilot accounts and captured aircraft flight testing FROM BOTH SIDES! Zeros weren't all conquering and when flight tested at length by the Allies found to be average and not a very good gun platform. The cannon were next to useless with only limited ammo, horrible range and velocity as recalled by the pilots that flew them or are do you know better than them as well? One Zero pilot even said that he'd rather take on P40Es than Hurricanes because they were easier to shoot down and Hurricanes could take massive amounts of damage and still stay in the fight.

[@tempestfury8324]

@@sinisterisrandom8537 : The Ki-43 wasn't faster nor as well armed as the A6M. But it was smaller and lighter. And with it's Fowler-type (butterfly) flaps it had better lift and maneuverability than the "Zero".

[@danielmeador1991]

None had any of that they continued to lack that to save weight according to my book zero in action

[@rodneypayne4827]

@@danielmeador1991 rubber lined self sealing fuel tanks, armoured bulkhead behind the engine, armoured glass windshield, armoured seat and lower back armour,all were fitted from the A6M3 model 32 onwards according to various translated into English records and I have 4 researched reference books on the Zero that aren't American produced. If it's the book I'm looking at now that I have in my collection, it's filled with inaccuracies, errors and incomplete data. This book was produced during the 80s and reprinted continuously, modern research and access to more records prove a lot of the information as inaccurate. Plans from Mitsubishi show the international off the shelf components used.

[@rudeawakening3833]

My Uncle was a USMC “ tail gunner “ on a USMC SBD “ dive bomber “ A Douglas- Dauntless . He was stationed in the South Pacific during WWII . He got credit for shooting down a Jap Zero during the war . He was my fav uncle . RIP uncle Eddie !

[@chriscase1392]

I think it's a myth that the Grumman Hellcat was designed deliberately to counter the Zero. By the time the Aleutians Zero was discovered, transported, repaired, and test flown, (late in 1942), the Grumman was very close to going into full production. The Navy was not about to go back to square one to redesign an aircraft that was already a probable match for anything the Japanese could put into the air, if not superior.

[@bostonrailfan2427]

it was really just an upgraded F3F which was already doing well against the Zero in combat

[@scottmurphy650]

13:1 kill ratio for the Hellcat.

[@drivernjax]

You're probably right. The F6F was on the design boards in the late 1930s and went into production in 1942 or '43 but, that doesn't mean that it wasn't designed to counter the A6M. It's quite possible that the original designs were altered slightly as more information about the Zero came in but to say it was designed specifically to counter the Zero might be stretching things a bit.

[@bostonrailfan2427]

@@drivernjax “doesn’t mean it wasn’t designed to counter Zeros” that’s exactly what it means! it was drawn up from advances in TWO EXISTING DESIGNS! the Zero had nothing to do with it, the plane was already well past the testing phase and in production. there is no way in hell you go from design changes to full production to battling the enemy in numbers in months

[@cardiv5zuikaku944]

@@scottmurphy650 19:1

[@speedomars]

The Zero had a lower wing loading and a better horsepower-to-weight ratio, which translated into better climb rates and tighter turns. But the Zero was only marginally faster than the Wildcat below 18,000 feet. Depending on the source, the difference in speed was as much as 20 mph or as little as 13. Also, By 1943, the Zero was less effective against newer Allied fighters due to design limitations. It lacked hydraulic boosting for its ailerons and rudder, rendering it extremely difficult to maneuver at high speeds. By 1944, with Allied fighters approaching the A6M levels of maneuverability and consistently exceeding its firepower, armor, and speed, the A6M had largely become outdated as a fighter aircraft.

[@peterweller8583]

Kudos the P 38 had hydraulic boosted alerons but still had problems at high speed.

[@danielmeador1991]

Some early allied fighters could out speed the zero

[@leewatson8129]

@@peterweller8583 P38 problems were more related to 'compressibility' or the airflow starting to go supersonic, making controls hard to move. Not a problem for the Zero as it would break up before this happened.

[@peterweller8583]

@@leewatson8129 Yes I know and it was also I believe the first hydraulically assisted control airframe.

[@colRobinOlds]

Please someone tell this to Gaijin. They think american aircraft have turn rate of a railroad locomotive

[@moss8448]

Back in the 80's met a WWII veteran who showed me a card signed by MacArthur that gave him access to anywhere in the Pacific (The Bearer Of This Card) and his job was to seek out Japanese airplanes, no matter what shape they were in and do detailed studies that he explained was used to make recognition aides and engineering studies.

[@thinkablebaileylim6168]

There is a story about a Zero that was found and captured. A scout plane was on a routinely patrol around the Aleutian Islands. It was able to find a Zero that was virtually undamaged in the marsh. They picked it up and shipped it to the States. The plane was dubbed the Akuetan Zero, and it was evaluated for several of the Zero’s weaknesses. One such weakness was that when in a high speed dive, its ailerons froze. This restricted rolling maneuver. This info, along with others, was passed to engineers and onto fleets. This helped the United States develop amazing planes like the Grumman F6F Hellcat, which was designed primarily to overpower the Zero. Unfortunately, the Akuetan Zero would not survive the war. It was about to take off from a runway when it collided with a SB2C Helldiver.

[@ricardobeltranmonribot3182]

Like always, that aircraft had to ruin everything (the SB2C Helldiver), didn't work as a dive bomber, and was one of the worst aircraft of the war, and with your explanation destroyed the only Zero in US hands

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

@@ricardobeltranmonribot3182 we already had basically reverse engineered the Zero statistically, etc. So it wouldn't really be difficult to source a similar wood or metal type to make a zero just wouldn't be one from Japan.

[@ricardobeltranmonribot3182]

@@sinisterisrandom8537 I was talking about the machine itself, how many A6M Zeros exists in the world? not many, and that was a 1942-1943 model, a piece of museum, a trophy if like to see it that way, but a piece of history, we have many US, British and USSR aircraft, but not so many German, Italian or Japanesse ones, and US had one in almost perfect state, just to be lost by a aircraft that was alredy obsolete the moment was introduced; or if you want to see it from this point of weiu: we have pair of nemesis aircraft in display, the Spitfire vs the Bf 109, the F-86 vs Mig 15, for example, but do we have matching pair for the pacific theater of WWII?,

[@PowerfulTruth]

@@ricardobeltranmonribot3182 Actually, before Paul Allen’s Flying Heritage Collection closed its doors at the onset of the Covid Misadventure, he had both a beautiful Hellcat and one or two Japanese Zeros in the collection that were flyable. Saw them in the air together a couple of times. There was also a Zero being rebuilt/restored by a private party at Paine Field in Everett, Washington, just adjacent to Paul Allen’s flight museum complex. What a shame that Allen’s Sister killed off and closed the FHC and Combat Armor Museum, and has been selling off the collection. What a sinful, avaricious shame on her part. She pissed on her brother’s legacy, and sold out a magnificent and unique heritage.

[@ricardobeltranmonribot3182]

@@PowerfulTruth That is a sad information, but, it demostrates my point, there are so few Japanesse aircraft, and people disrespect, treats those machines like old shoes

[@jerryjeromehawkins1712]

One other weakness of the Zero... no self-sealing fuel tanks. This was done to conserve weight as the Inch thick rubber bladders which would fit inside of its tanks would increase weight greatly. This was another reason fir the Zero's long range capabilities. No bladders in the tanks increased the tanks volume. The Zero had great range... but at the cost of armor (none) and safety (self-sealing tanks.) Awesome channel my friend!! One of my favorite subs!!! 🏆🇺🇸

[@TJ3]

Thanks!

[@jerryjeromehawkins1712]

@@TJ3 Hey TJ... thanks bro. When you get a chance... look into the B-25. When it was retrofitted to self sealing tanks it lost about 25% of its range because of the space the bladders took up inside the tanks. Interesting stuff! 🇺🇸👌🏽

[@SoloRenegade]

Zeros did have armor

[@jerryjeromehawkins1712]

@@SoloRenegade wrong... "No armor protection was provided for the pilot, engine or critical parts of the airframe." Japanese aircraft were underpowered compared to comparable Allied aircraft of the day... its speed, maneuverability and long range was gained from making it as lightweight as possible. Not being a wise guy... but do some research Solo... pretty easy info to find bro. 🍻

[@SoloRenegade]

@@jerryjeromehawkins1712 there was in fact armor in the Zero, follow your own advice and do some research. The airframe was so lightweight however, that it didn't take damage well.

[@nomcarver4436]

As someone who is new to your channel and has 1,060 hours in war thunder, it’s good to know they are sponsoring you.

[@TJ3]

Lol about time! Haha

[@joshuamitcham1519]

Quit now. Ive been doing 8 hrs a day since 2016..

[@nomcarver4436]

@@joshuamitcham1519 dam. I used to grind hard but not like that. You poor soul

[@nomcarver4436]

@@TJ3 can I use the link and buy ge and still get your decal?

[@TJ3]

That's a good question! I don't know. I'll ask and find out. Might take a couple days to hear back but I'll let you know!

[@fazole]

A very key flaw in the Zero design which very rarely mentioned is the disparate armament. The 7.7mm mg had a higher rate of fire and a different bullet trajectory from the slower firing and lower velocity 20mm cannon. Therefore in a turning fight, the Zero pilot had to either use the weaker 7.7mm machine guns OR try to pull tremendous lead to land the low velocity 20mm cannon rounds. Also Saburo Sakai wrote their radios were garbage as late as the Guadalcanal battles which means the pilots could not organize a coordinated attack during the battle. The Zero was specified to cruise 10 hours at low power so that 1500 mile range figure is not a combat range, but a patrol range. At Guadalcanal they used the newer, faster, but shorter r range Zeoes, codnamed "Hamps" and they could not complete the 1200 mile round trip from Rabaul to Guadalcanal. Many ran out of fuel trying to get to emergency airfields. The book first team also says the Wildcat combat radius was only about 250 miles, the max range 840 miles quoted is for ferrying. The Wildcat could never even come close to that in actual combat or even patrol.

[@KyleCowden]

Another great on @TJ3 History! FWIW, there's a restored Zero at the National Museum of Naval Aviation. What's interesting is there's a single bullet hole in the side of the cockpit. The docent said that when they would come up on a grounded Japanese fighter, they'd poke a .45 hole in the side to ensure no ambush was waiting for them.

[@TJ3]

Very cool! Thanks Kyle!

[@larryconnell708]

The first combat of the AVG also known as the Flying Tigers took place on Dec 20 1941. Thirteen days after the attack on Pearl Harbor.

[@MrEsMysteriesMagicks]

Who would ever believe that the Zero's most vulnerable weakness was a lack of oxen?

[@samspeed6271]

The biggest problem with the Zero is that it didn't get upgraded as the war went on. When it was introduced, it was a very potent aircraft that was better than anything in the pacific theatre in flight performance, but it was delicate (no armour, no self sealing fuel tanks). By 1943, the Americans had upped their game. The F4F Wildcats, which were fighting an uphill battle against the Zero, were replaced with the F6F Hellcat and the F4U Corsair. The Corsair had a troubled development history, but once Vought ironed out the problems, the Corsair attained a 11:1 kill:loss ratio in the hands of Navy and Marine aviators. Put simply, the Corsair and Hellcat took the opposite approach to the Zero. While Mitsubishi shaved every gram of weight off that they could to make the Zero turn on a penny, the Corsair and the Hellcat were heavy aircraft about twice the weight of the Zero, they were armoured up to survive better and as such the sustained flat turn ability was ignored in favour of energy retention. Speed was attained through brute force rather than elegant aerodynamics. The Zero couldn't compete with faster, tougher and better armed enemies.

[@thanakonpraepanich4284]

The Kasei engine used in Zero had trouble putting out more than 1,100hp without supercharger and that power limitation cascaded into the whole project. The first gen Zero model 11 went to China with only 900hp under the cowl. Later on they managed to swap a Mitsubishi Kinsei bomber engine in and get 1,600hp and could make Zero theoretically out-fly Hellcat. Alas, it was May 1945 when the first converted prototype flew. How much power Double Wasp used in Corsair can pump out by the Korean War? 2,500hp?

[@samspeed6271]

@@thanakonpraepanich4284 the maximum continuous power for the F4U-4 (which was used in Korea) was 2100hp, but could be boosted to 2450hp with water injection to cool the engine. The F4U-5 was also used in Korea and according to Vought's heritage website, the engine in that thing could produce 2300hp continuous, it doesn't say anything about War Emergency Power. I've seen some figures thrown about mentioning getting Double Wasps in the Corsair up to 3400hp, but I don't know when that was or what magic the mechanics were doing.

[@jstephenallington8431]

There are theories that point to the Howard Hughes H-1 Racer as the inspiration behind the Mitsubishi fighter. Though it's not likely factual, there were some similarities. What is true is that the while the Zero enjoyed some great success earlier on in the Pacific, by war's end it's initial lead resulted in a net loss for the Japanese, giving the U.S. it's two highest scoring aces of all aces, Major Richard Bong and Major Thomas B. McGuire Jr., both flying the big twin-engine Lockheed P-38 Lightning.

[@christianl.e.l17]

H-1 Racer looks more as german Ta and URSS Yak 1 (but mini)

[@moss8448]

I think it was more about the engine that I've read somewhere that the plans for that engine were purchased by Japan

[@thatoneperson0396]

im a huge nerd when it comes to aircraft yet im still learning a couple things from this channel great channel aswell

[@paoloviti6156]

Very interesting video regarding the Mitsubishi A6M , also known as Zero. This airplane when entered in service both in China and during early year of war in the Pacific, as you stated, was virtually the best carrier airplane in world in that period. As it had an outstanding range, good firepower and a very reliable 940 Hp Nakajima Sakae 12 engine. Let's not forget also the highly trained pilots that achieved so much at the at the beginning of the war in the Pacific. I knew that Japan never reached the production level of USA from the beginning but I didn't know that the airplane had to be transported by cart in parts at the Mitsubishi factory. But for me there was various "fatal flaws" about this airplane: it had no with self-sealing fuel tanks and no armour protection of any kind leading to the loss of irreplaceable pilots, it had the tendency to have very hard for the pilot to control the airplane at high speeds not only by diving and finally it was also the failure to supply this airplane with more powerful engines that it was relatively available but the Navy always vetoed until far too late. Good job again as always 👍👍👍👍

[@sandspar]

very well said.

[@paoloviti6156]

@@sandspar thank you, I always find airplane very interesting even if it did some serious flaws...

[@sandspar]

@@paoloviti6156 You managed to say what I found lacking in this otherwise nicely done video in a very kind and non-condescending way. I too admire both the aircraft, and everyone associated with the legacy that was left for us to enjoy. Tend to be a little too vested in disseminating accurate information. Well done! That and the fact that any biplane can outturn any monoplane if slow enough.

[@paoloviti6156]

@sandspar again thank you for your kind words! You too confirm that the biplane out outcould outturn any monoplane except for the speed. Years ago, I had the fortune to talk with a veteran, I'm Italian, that was a pilot (unfortunately I forgot completely his name) flying the Fiat CR 32 and fought in Africa. He too confirm that he and expert pilots could be dangerous for the Hurricanes. Typically it had only 2 pop-guns so didn't create much damage. Sorry for my rambling but I think it is nice to share our passion for airplanes. Cheers..

[@sandspar]

@@paoloviti6156 😉 👍 I love that FIAT CR 32! It was in the IL2 simulator of 10 or so years ago and had the feel of an Italian roadster when I would (pretend) to fly it in the simulator of course, Best to you my new friend.

[@lunaticfringe8066]

The pilot of the crash landed Zero on Ni'ihau was assisted by Japanese Americans there, which many believe helped instigate the internment program.

[@fazole]

Yep. And that always gets forgotten about the interment camp issue. There was real fear and paranoia in the US. The US regular army was only about 100,000 strong in 1941. The local Hawaiians defeated them and captured the pilot too.

[@musoangelo]

The U.S. Navy recovered a zero in the Aleutian islands in July of 42 and it was taken to North Island naval air station and repaired and reversed engineered.

[@cliffjones8809]

I once read that, early in the war, the superiority of the zeros in speed and manuverability made it very hard to escape from a zero on your tail. A strategy to escape developed, which was to dive and then turn right, and the zero would not be able to turn fast enough to stay with you. Didn't make it easy to defeat them, but at least offered a little hope. I found that quite fascinating.

[@JAlexanderCurtis]

Ive seen an American filmstrip from early war of P40 pilots that says you have to get the first shot on a Zero and if you miss, you need to immediately escape because you will never win a dog fight against a zero, as soon as its on your tail you are dead. In the early war, the Americans were genuinely terrified of the Zero. Most of the midwar planes were specifically designed around combatting the Zero like the P38 Lightning and the F6F Hellcat.

[@colinburt6447]

RAF spitfire pilots fared badly against the Zeros in S. Asia at first, but it was discovered that the Zero's fuel pump couldn't cope with pitching to the right when tailing Spitfires in a dogfight. Once this information was shared, the Spitfires did much better against the Zeros, as they were also very manoeuvrable.

[@johnchambers2996]

According to Smithsonian, the first intact Zero was taken during the Aleutian campaign. The tests showed that due to its light weight, its turning ability due to engine torque, and its diving ability, were its main weaknesses; the best way to get away from one was to dive while turning left - never try to outclimb one. Also, the plane was a potential flaming coffin with no pilot armor or self-sealing gas tanks. With the advent of the Vought Corsair, the Grumman Hellcat, the Lockheed Lightning, and the Black Widow, after 43 about the only thing the Zero was good for was training or Kamikazes.

[@dukecraig2402]

Wildcats shot down the bulk of the experienced Japanese pilots before any of those planes even showed up, that's why they had the kill ratios they did, because they were flying against Japanese school boys.

[@johnchambers2996]

@@dukecraig2402 No so. Those advanced plane replacements for the Wildcats started "showing up" in mid 42 during Guadalcanal. Also, the loss of carriers to TBMs and Daughtless dive bombers didn't help much either.

[@dukecraig2402]

@@johnchambers2996 They weren't in any number's at that point to have an effect, it was the Wildcat that did the bulk of the work early on. The first unit of F4U's showing up is hardly the point where they started shooting down the bulk of Japanese fighter's. The Wildcat was not only there from day one but it was there through the whole thing, they were the only fighter operationally flying off of the escort carrier's and there sure was plenty of them floating around, they flew through the entire war in the Pacific and like I said pilots like Joe Foss either got all or the bulk of their kills flying them. The Navy or anyone else didn't "need" that captured Zero to start beating it, the fact is even the Wildcat was a superior fighter to the Zero when flown right and pilots like Thatch were already working out how to beat it before the US even entered the war, look at what the AVG did to them with their P40's and that was well before that Zero was flown and evaluated by the military, Chenault already knew what the Zero was like, the AVG already knew it couldn't turn at high speeds and it's other issues, once folded back into the military what they knew was already going to be filtering down through channels. The importance of that captured Zero has been overstated over the years, the narrative that US pilots couldn't have beat it without that captured Zero simply isn't true, the only thing it really did was make the high command admit that Chenault was right all along.

[@johnchambers2996]

@@dukecraig2402 Thanks for the information.

[@patrickcallaghan8577]

@@dukecraig2402 AVG didn't tangle with Zeroes. They fought JAAF...which didn't fly A6M's but rather the Nakajima Ki-43...it looked like the Zero and had some similar capabilities but that's it

[@edsvideos83]

A Zero was actually captured in Alaska in 1942 and brought to Langley Field to be tested in the Full-Scale wind tunnel.

[@johnneill990]

The Zero was at war prior to completing its qualification program which it failed during dive tests when the wings came off in a 400 MPH dive. The fix was thicker sheet metal for the wings. American Pilots noticed this change in that now the Zero was more resistant to 50 cal fire. Switching to API ammo restored the hitting power of the fitty.

[@jdeck1226]

your getting very close 100k!!!!

[@TJ3]

Woooooo!

[@Nativeat1YT]

Friday came quick lol. As usual amazing video! Also the zeros chasing the P40 over the water looks sick!

[@TJ3]

Yeah man, I couldn't believe how good that shot came out. When I saw that I was like, wow I would definitely get this game if I didn't have it already. Haha

[@Nativeat1YT]

@@TJ3 Same, the cinematic are great in this game.

[@randomprecisionmotors3130]

He fails to mention the Zero 'captured' in the Aleutians (more like abandoned), fully intact, and brought to the mainland for flight testing and evaluation...

[@MH-kc1eu]

The zero is paper thin, you can literally cut it open with a machete. But the US planes had heavy armor.

[@garyt903]

TJ3: Not sure if you do heavy bomber stories, but if you're interested in considering one... I recorded a video oral history of 11th AF (PACAF) B24 Pilot Colonel Jerome Jones, who flew in the Aleutian Island Campaign, bombing the Northern Kyrelle Islands, then Japanese home islands Imperial Naval Shipping Yards. Colonel Jones developed some remarkable and very unorthodox and dramatic evasive post bombing run maneuvers that included nosing all his B24's almost straight down to the ocean deck from 12,000 feet to out run the Zeros. Once the Zeros caught up - they got only two strafing passes. One from behind when they caught up with the B24's now 20feet off the surface, and the second when the Zeros overshot them, then turned around ahead of them and came back charging headlong into the B24's. Like medieval knight jousting to see who would move first. Colonel Jones had a specially fixed .50 BMG mounted in front of him as his own personal weapon. There are many other unusual, and violent occurrences on the Kyrelle's Bomb Run. I will attach the video here for you to see. Study the "Climb & Dive" technique Col. Jones developed. It's remarkable. I've never seen anything quite like it ever animated before. He is taking an entire flight of heavy bombers almost straight down with all four engines screaming redline at full throttle. "Smoking" the Zeros who were too lightweight to keep up. Then at the last second, nosing up to level position. This video is now part of the exhibit in the Prince William Sound Museum in Whittier, Alaska. Colonel Jones passed away in his sleep one week after we shot this video. I am not a professional videographer and I made this some years ago. Thank you for your consideration. Vimeo.com/89336863

[@lordkreigs1978]

I did not know about moving them with oxen. That was something new.

[@csjrogerson2377]

9:10 The Zero was never "fast", its engine was never powerful enough. Improvments did not keep pace with improvements in Allied aircraft. In addition, the control surfaces were so large and mandraulically operated (hydraulics would have added weight) they were impossible to use at speeds above 270-300 kns apart from straight and level flight. Reasons for the long range: smallish engine, light aircraft. Lightness achieved due to lack of: armour, self sealing tanks, radio, parachute and sparsity of ammunition. All of this led to poor survivability of the aircraft AND pilots. New US tactics removed their only remaining advantage, manoeuvrability. Thatcher weave in 2 pairs and zoom and boom

[@SoloRenegade]

yes, it was rather slow even early on, and never improved much, even as the P-40, P-39, and others were faster and continued to get faster with improvements throughout the war. Also, many aircraft had higher service ceilings than the zero.

[@trentbyington5957]

It did have a fast acceleration and climb because of its light weight tho

[@firefly510]

Thatch Weave.

[@ApophisTw0Thousand6309]

The part about the Zero's lightweight build being achieved by sacrificing certain features is misleading. When the Zero was designed, armor and self-sealing fuel tanks were at best novel technologies and nowhere near standard. The F4F3 variant of the Wildcat didn't have them. The Zero were equipped with radios as a standard and their rang was already impressive with them. However, they were poorly shielded and thusly unreliable. During the Guadalcanal campaign, atmospheric interference was so bad they were useless, so pilots simply ripped them out of their planes. Parachutes were encouraged by the IJN. Many pilots simply chose to go without them. Sparsity of ammunition was an issue for the cannons, but I'm fairly certain it wasn't because of weight saving measures. It is true that improvements to the Zero came far too slowly. It's replacement never got off the ground and the variant the would have been competitive with late war allied fighters, the A6M8, was online right at the very end of the war.

[@csjrogerson2377]

@@ApophisTw0Thousand6309 Spitfire IIs had seal sealing tanks in July 1940. Goodyear in the US were producing them in 1941 20mm canon shells were not in short supply at the beginning of the war. The 60 rpg was a weight saving issue.

[@Tellgryn]

The debate on the new fighter came from two groups, one wanted a high power fast fighter, with hard hitting power, the other wanted what came to be the zero, fast climb, maneuverability, very long range. Genda did not even want a new fighter, he wanted to replace the fighter with another strike aircraft. What you ended up with is the Zero the most overrated fighter in WWII, lack of armor, easy to catch on fire, no dive speed, lower pilot survival rates (in a system that only produced 100 or so trained men a year). When the navy commissioned the 2 new carriers the Japanese had to advance pilots out of training to those two carriers and rake in all the spare pilots they could find. The problem at the start of the war is pilots tried to dogfight the zero in turning classical wwI dogfighting, it would take months to realize you had to engage the zero in driving or head on attacks and drive away. The Zero was so light weight it could not take much damage, and to see the limits on the aircraft just look at the no walking are on the wing on both sides of the cockpit, it is a very thin piece of alumina, and would bend if stepped on, having to be replaced.

[@swalker6794]

You speak straight. It caught on fire so easily 'cause it didn't have self-sealing fuel tanks like our did.

[@jimc6687]

Curious on how you get all this great combat information, TJ! I recall as a young kid actually speaking with my dad's friends and work colleagues who were fighter pilots in WW II (one was German. We lived in Switzerland at the time and my parents would hold parties and my dad's boss flew a German fighter which created dissention with the American guests with his stories, and I was told to stop being so inquisitive or go to bed!)........and I wonder if you've had the opportunity for firsthand interviews?? It may already be too late....sadly....due to the passage of time. Jim C.

[@TJ3]

Lots of online reach primarily! I'm very much hoping to get into some interviews soon.

[@sanukawijeratne9014]

Thanks for your comment

[@peterruiz6117]

Saburo Sakai's first encounter with the F6F Hellcat was amazing reading. He was shocked that the American planes could follow the Zero through most of his tactics. Badly outnumbered, he only survived because the Americans were obviously inexperienced. Already missing an eye, his hand would go numb from yanking the stick around, and finally escaping by flying into a water tornado.

[@kevinbowen8192]

What book or reference? Would love to read that.

[@francisbusa1074]

@@kevinbowen8192 I read Saburo Sakai's book, "Samurai!" in 7th grade I think, about 1958. It was really good. I believe He may have lived until about 2000.

[@SoloRenegade]

he escaped by evading until he could get back over the island and the Japanese AAA chased off the F6fs

[@ph89787]

Although he lost his eye from the .30 rear gun from a flight of USS Enterprise’s SBD Dauntlesses over Guadalcanal

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

That was a F4F Wildcat being flown by Pug Sunderland not a F6F.

[@TheMartinchostar]

There is a Zero fuselage wreck at Imperial War Museum in London. Amazing light alloy structure and state of the art technology by WWII days. A must seen highlight for the history military planes enthusiast.

[@1977Yakko]

Later in the war when there's footage of a Zero diving in a straight line with no attempt to dodge enemy fire I hear stems from how difficult the plane was to control at extreme high speeds. The amateur pilots thrown as Kamikaze's against the USN were flying out of control and I guess they just straight up crashed as much as they were shot down.

[@khalilveronessi4819]

the planes used as kamikaze were not zeros, they where ki 43, that was a older and very outclased aircraft by the time.

[@tempestfury8324]

@@khalilveronessi4819 : Not sure where you get your information from but I have been studying WWII aircraft for 40+ years now and have a large library of source material from Jane's, Osprey, Squadron/Signal, Doyle, and many other prestigious publishers. Although there were several accounts of kamikaze attacks before the Battle of Leyte Gulf, that is recognized as the first substantial series of suicide attacks. The majority of those planes were A6M Rei-sen, as well as B6N and G4M bombers. Yes Ki-43 Hayabusa (Oscar) were used as kamikaze but it's simply ignorant to say the "Falcon" an older and outclassed plane to the "Zero". The Oscar was developed AFTER the A6M and had better lift and maneuverability than the Zero. Keep in mind that the Ki-43 was an IJAAF (Army Air Force) plane that was strictly ground based. The A6M was IJN and carrier based. So appropriately, the Oscar was the dominant kamikaze aircraft of the Japanese Army (about 6,000 were produced). That doesn't mean that the Zero (almost 11,000 made) wasn't used as a suicide bomb. In fact, there were over 20 different aircraft used as kamikaze by the Japanese Army and Navy.

[@khalilveronessi4819]

@@tempestfury8324 ok thanks for the information

[@thanakonpraepanich4284]

@@tempestfury8324 I thought they only start handing out Zeros to kamikaze missions after the mainland stockpiles of older A5M Claude and Ki-27 Abdul were depleted.

[@tempestfury8324]

@@thanakonpraepanich4284 Well like I said, the Zero was the main aircraft used in the first well-known kamikaze attack at Leyte Gulf. But by 1945 in the Battle of Okinawa, the Japanese were throwing just about anything they had against us. There just isn't great records of actual numbers by aircraft type. As for the A5M Claude (which was completely obsolete) they only built a thousand or so of them...and the Ki-27 (Nate) about 3,000. By 1945 the majority of those planes had already been destroyed so there wasn't some huge stockpile of them. The Japanese certainly used older airframes and engines for the majority of attacks late in the war. They needed to preserve planes that still had some combat effectiveness. But it was also a time of desperation and panic. Thus, they were still loading up A6Ms with bombs and using them in suicide attacks as well.

[@johnkeester3739]

Love to see your coverage on the P40 & the p51

[@charlesballard5251]

Is anyone else here as pissed as I am that the makers of the movie, "Pearl Harbor" changed the color of the Zeroe's in the sneak attack? Sure the movie centered on fictional characters and was just a vehicle to tell a story, but I hate that they made the Zero-sen's green like the Kate's instead of leaving them grey. That just rubs me the wrong way.

[@ernielara1553]

How about doing a movie about the Marianas turkey shoot!

[@timothymcdonnell307]

Thank you so much for this, & moreso, for helping our next generations appreciate what our "Greatest Generation" did for us. My Dad & 4 of 5 uncles served in WWII (the 5th in Korea), & their mothers, fathers, & sisters served & sacrificed so much at home. I chose a career to teach history to honor of them & all our generous ancestors who deserve so much of our humble gratitude.

[@stephenridgway3886]

1200 mile range. Always loved the Zero

[@fazole]

That range was at slow cruise speeds only. The Zero was designed to also fill the role of long range reconnaissance and patrol.

[@FunDadAdventures]

Awesome video man. Good stuff.

[@WildBillCox13]

The ox delivery anecdote is priceless history.

[@baguette2847]

the Zero is an incredible aircraft

[@dovidell]

WAS , but it sacrificed pilot safety for speed and range

[@baguette2847]

@@dovidell Well yeah, but you knnnnnnooowwwww... still

[@johnholmes4960]

It is well documented that Howard Hughes designed the zero. The U.S. did not like it because of Howard’s reputation. He was not a ball player when it came to the politics. So, Howard presented his design to the Japanese. The rest is history. Mitsubishi did build this plane, but the design was from an American, Howard Hughes. Look it up yourself.

[@CENTURION737]

In 1942 a Japanese zero was captured on Akutan island in Alaska and legend has it that the F4F Hellcat was developed from this event

[@ThomasDoubting5]

Lovely little aircraft I've flown a RC zero and it was delightful

[@johnkendall6962]

Sorry there were no Flying tigers in 1940. Flying tigers first combat was in Dec of 1941.

[@TrulyUnfortunate]

You left out one of the main reasons the zero was so effective. It was made out of wood which of course made it much lighter,fuel efficient as well as highly maneuverable.

[@SleepyZulu78263]

I was one of the zeros you see flying behind him, I was an extra. Thanks for having me tj3 💪💪

[@Musafir09945]

I already play war thunder a lot since like 2 years now. it is MY FAVORITE GAME, nothing can beat it to me. but I was having a bit of trouble with the m36b2. the beginner shell has 175 mm penetration (very good) but no explosive filler (not so good). The zero is also really op in the game, its maneuverability is crazy, just fake head on an enemy, get the hell outta the way of the enemy bullets (this plane has no armor btw, any stray bullet will knock you out completely), get on their tail and the 20mm cannons will do the rest of the work.

[@Vandal50001]

Great Work Brother. Real nice Info. 3ish out of 4 you got me on. Is great! DCS!

[@MrFlintlock7]

Darn good video! I already knew SOME but not all of the information, so I'm very impressed!

[@poulhenrikchristensen4804]

Nice content bro 👍 my first visit to your channel. Another fun fact, due to the zero was so hard/expensive to make it had its own life west, if it went in to the drink, and the pilot would just have to hang on and await pick up. Keep them uploads coming, and see you in game 😉 🖖

[@Nativeat1YT]

Also could we see the Italian C.202. I think of it like an Italian spitfire.

[@pauld6967]

Good video. The transportation by oxen is information that is new to me. Thanks.

[@TJ3]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@pauld6967]

@@TJ3 I play WT under a different name from here but I will keep an eye out for you in future sessions. Good luck in your battles.

[@lewis7315]

The zero was designed and built here in the United States as a Bendix airshow racer. The blueprints were purchased from the owners of the aircraft...

[@joesmith201212]

My grandpa was a pilot in WW 2 from what he told me the Zero was slower and lose stability in a dive so when he had one on his tail he would just go into a hard dive and the Zero couldn't keep up, so obviously he was right because he lives to tell me the stories

[@ZERO21-A6M]

Impressive video. Thank you.

[@Group73historians73]

nice info

[@TJ3]

Thanks!

[@nicholasfrede5287]

The US Army actually did get their hands on a Zero... the Akutan Zero, also known as Koga's Zero and the Aleutian Zero, it was a type 0 model 21 Mitsubishi A6M Zero Japanese fighter aircraft that crash-landed on Akutan Island, Alaska Territory, during World War II. It was found intact by the Americans in July 1942 and became the first flyable Zero acquired by the United States during the war. It was repaired and flown by American test pilots. As a result of information gained from these tests, American tacticians were able to devise ways to defeat the Zero, which was the Imperial Japanese Navy's primary fighter plane throughout the war.

[@pjduker05]

The Mitsubishi Zero fighter was epic due to it's light weight design. Much like an F1 race car, the plane made massive horsepower while remaining extremely light weight. Unfortunately the weight of the plane was achieved by only allowing the plane to have 2 small machine guns and no armor plating. While that makes for an extremely maneuverable air craft it also means it's not good in a fight. The Mitsubishi A6M Zero was an easy target for US fighters who not only had far more firepower available, but they also had armor plating for the cockpit, fuel cells, and fuselage. Of course not all US warplanes had the same armor configuration, but the Mitsubishi Zero, nor any other Japanese planes during WW2 came equipped with armor.

[@malikgrind1808]

Nice video sir Keep up the good work would be nice to see a bombing run survival edition next 🎉

[@TJ3]

Thanks Malik!

[@ottocarr3688]

After the zero was recovered it was repaired, flown and studied, revealing a major weakness til then unknown.

[@winstonsmith7801]

The Zeros did not have self sealing fuel tanks which made them catch fire very easily if attacked.

[@Klumster]

Your next video should cover the Macchi C.202 Folgore.

[@COACHWARBLE]

Recently I saw stats that the best pilots in WW2 were finish. When you see the stats combined with the types of lesser fighter planes I would agree the finish pilots were amazing.

[@projectcolonialviper2094]

Some great insights - thanks!

[@francescobarone9025]

Didn't the U.S. find an intact Zero in the Aleutian Islands that was used to develop the F6F Hellcat?

[@michaeltaylor2121]

An impressive warbird. Second favorite after the Spitfire.

[@jeffmoore9487]

Nicely done! I'd always wondered about production of the Zero. Thanks.

[@ukulelemikele2993]

Number six! A fully intact Zero with minor damage crash landed in the Aleutian Islands and the US was able to recover and return it to flying condition and they were able to learn all of the Zero's secrets and effectively deal with it.

[@brucewelty7684]

There is a technical problem you glossed over about the Zeke's range and capabilities. While it could fly a long way, its actual limitations were the planes it was escorting. Val 840 miles, Kate 608 miles. therefore both the Zeke and the Val were operationally limited to 600 miles.

[@Minong_Manitou_Mishepeshu]

Did Howard Hughes have any link to the Zero design?

[@TJ3]

I've seen other commenters mention this, but I'm afraid I'm not sure! Quite possible.

[@ApophisTw0Thousand6309]

​@@TJ3 No. Howard Hughes did not have anything to do with the design of the Zero. The only source for this is his publicist making a claim that he did, at a time when almost every Japanese aircraft was erroneously claimed to be a copy of some western design. The Japanese documentation of the Zero's design process precludes any notion of it being a copy of any western aircraft.

[@gm3aviation481]

Do you think you could do a story on the “Acutan” zero?

[@kennethmelnychuk9737]

Cover the CF105 ARROW?

[@charlieben3672]

To TJ3History : I sincerely enjoyed watching your videos; I learned a lot but if you don’t mind, try not to be too close to the microphone because every time you pronounce the letters B, P, -ed, or D, there’s always a loud thumping sound at the end. Thank you.

[@ulise89]

After late 1943 japan start building the Nakajima ki 84 . It was the most advanced fighter in the japan. Able to take down even the p51D . His rate of climbing was better than p51 and p47, and his big cannons were able to shot down very easy any american fighter. After the war the US made some tests on ki 84 , they made some adjustments, and they saw that ki 84 was even faster than the p51 mustang.

[@capthappy8884]

Ki84 and the nik 1. Both as capable as their contemporaries, but too few planes/pilots, too late. And the ki was faster climb and level flight, but still much less reliable in a dive. That was the default defensive move for p51s, hellcats, corsairs if they were jumped, they could easily outpace any ijn aircraft providing they had the altitude.

[@oneshotme]

Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up

[@muss8587]

The occasional lost Zeros still keep popping up to this day all over the Darwin/Tiwi Islands NT Australia!

[@nedmar423]

One fairly intact Zero DID land on American soil (Alaska) and its design led to the creation of the F6F Hellcat.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

A wonderful introduced Video About Zero Japanese Fighter

[@georgecurtis6463]

Well, as a kid living on an island in the pacific in the 50s I got to play in several zeros at the small airport. I was told a few things by folks from Wright Patterson about the zero but dont want to mention it because I cant back it up. One was a weakness in their engines. I found on an old rusted engine with a bosh fuel injection pump. Sadly I was not fully aware of its use. Not sure if it was a plane or vehicle. With these guys in the 60s , we found a Betty bomber shoved to the side of the airport in the jungle overgrowth. Went inside and looked around. The zeros that were on the island were red ones. I have found no history on red zeros.

[@fubukilin8578]

Also due to the flight characteristics of the zero, it's combat effectiveness extremely depends on the skills and experiences of it's pilots, in a seasoned hand a zero can still be pretty lethal in 1945, but in a rookie's hand it can be shot down by a Philippine Air Force P-26 Peashooter (true story XD)

[@timerover4633]

The American Volunteer Group, or AVG, engaged in its first combat on December 20, 1941 near Kunming, China. The aircraft used was the P-40B, originally intended for the British, but released by them to China in anticipation of more advanced aircraft. They were not engaged in 1940 at all, as they had not ever been formed. Also, the primary opponent of the AVG was not the Zero, but the Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa, code named "Oscar" by the U.S. That aircraft was viewed as more maneuverable than the Zero, but had a lighter armament and shorter range. The Zero was highly maneuverable at lower speeds, but could not turn with American fighters once the speeds were around 250 miles per hour. That is why the best way to break off combat with a Zero was go into a high speed dive and then turn away. The Zero was limited in its diving speed and did not have good high-speed maneuverability. I have a copy of the report of a fly-off conducted in 1944 between a later model Zero and the standard U.S. Navy and Army Air Force fighters. By that time, the Navy Wildcat was a very close competitor to the Zero in terms of speed and maneuverability. The surprising thing about the Zero captured in the Aleutians was the amount of U.S. manufactured radio equipment on the aircraft. I have a copy of that analysis as well.

[@jessishandsome]

Some of the Zeros was made by Taiwanese, during the occupation of Japanese. My grandpa was one of the workers that built Zeros, when he was 17. He was sent to Japan and learn how to build the plane first.

[@rileycpo]

How bout Robert S. Johnson's story from his book, "Thunderbolt"? He was escorted back to England after a BF-109 opened fire on him, but couldn't shoot him down. Instead, he guided him to the English channel so he wouldn't be shot down by German Anti-Aircraft fire. When departing the German pilot shock his head, saluted and flew away. Johnson made it back to base with no brakes and landed his bird.

[@birchtree334]

To anyone actually planning on getting WarThunder. Lemme tell you what's what about his game is a more or less vet. The game will try to advertise the top tier vehicles as much as possible. You start with old stuff from the 30s and are expected to work your way all the way up to the late 70s. Thing is... top tier is super broken in every way. It's a pain in the ass and it's been a while since I've had any fun. You'd do best to stay between 30s and 50s. So BR 3.7 to maybe 7.0. You'll know what I mean by BR once you start playing the game. It's a combat effectiveness based match making system instead of historical match making. But it it starts to break down real fast after BR 7.0.

[@sigeberhtmercia767]

Greg of Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles fame noted that the Zero did not have hydraulics for maneuvering. This meant that the Zero's advantage disappeared at higher speeds and that discovery led to a change of tactics for the U.S.

[@fazole]

Not many fighters in ww2 had hydraulic boosted controls. Spitfires, Bf-109s, P-51s, Hellcats, Corsairs, Thunderbolts. None of them had that. Some P-38s did fet them later.

[@sigeberhtmercia767]

@@fazole that's good to know. That kind of levels the playing field somewhat. Careful when taking on P-38s at speed it seems.

[@sigeberhtmercia767]

Correction to my original post: The video was done by Real Engineering. He noted that the zero fuselage was made of light weight thin skinned aluminium to assist in both range and maneuverability. To be more specific regarding high speed maneuvers, the ailerons became extremely sluggish at high speed with no control hydraulics to counter the problem (as fazole rightly points out the hydraulics was an extremely rare feature in WW2).

[@stephennewton2223]

Most folks say that the Zero outclassed the Wildcat, but, as far as I can tell, over Guadalcanal, Wildcats shot down more Zeros than Zeros shot down Wildcats. There are many factors involved in that, but, the Wildcat was a tough plane.

[@knowingyourmind]

It would have been a good touch to talk about the entact Zero that was found in Alaska that the U.S. was eventually able to get all the data that was needed, resulting in the final definition of the F6F Hellcat. There is a Zero at both the Smithsonian, as well as at Wright-Pat. Wright-Pat also has a George and a "Baka." 🙂

[@ryeboy2u]

TJ3 do you have any videos on the P-39 Airacorbra, the P-40, or the Hawker Hurricane ?

[@TJ3]

Not this series but they are on my list. I have done various videos that include them however.