How did the Allies overcome the Zero Fighter?

The reputation of the Zero Fighter preceded it. Even before the US had entered the Second World War, intelligence had reached them. Rumours of a near-invincible fighter that had achieved a kill ratio of 12:1 against the Chinese in 1940.
But just a few years later, the A6M Zero was being used as cannon fodder in the Kamikaze campaign, deemed a virtually useless aircraft, except as a make-shift missile. And yet despite the Zero’s fall from dominance, this aircraft had a significant long-term influence on the tactics and engineering of Allied aircraft.
So how did the Allies beat the Zero? And how exactly did this mighty fighter shape the air war in the Pacific?
History Festival at IWM Duxford
Max Hastings will be at IWM Duxford's History Festival alongside many other speakers, 23 & 24 Nov, find out more: www.iwm.org.uk...
Credits
Thumbnail image courtesy of Brian M. Silcox Photography
Mitsubishi A6M Zero Replica N7757 In Flight By Cody Logan
Wind tunnel test model pictures of A7M via Secret Projects
Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Film archive
Explore and licence the film clips used in this video: film.iwmcollec...

[@nolongereatsshit]

One small point, it’s actually a common myth that kamikaze pilots only had enough fuel for a one way trip, if the weather required them to abort they needed to be able to return to try again. Some pilots returned multiple times from kamikaze missions (though too many returns was suspicious).

[@Makeyourselfbig]

Presumably it would only be suspicious if the other pilots didn't come back due to bad weather as well.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Also extra fuel = moar kablooie

[@eriks.9730]

Initially the pilots were given enough fuel for round trips because they were hunting for targets at long ranges, say from Okinawa to somewhere among the many islands and inlets of the Philippines. As the war progressed there was less aviation fuel available and the targets were closer as the American and British fleets closed on the home islands.

[@senianns9522]

'If at first you don't succeed'?

[@little_fluffy_clouds]

@@senianns9522 ‘…you can’t try again because you’re dead.’

[@percyprune7548]

A Hurricane pilot claimed that one method was to go into a high speed dive and pull out as low as possible at the greatest air speed which the Hurricane could take but would crumple the tailling Zero as it tried to pull out as it lacked the Hurricane's strength to endure the G forces.

[@richardlahan7068]

F4Fs and P-40s could do that, too.

[@freddieclark]

Not totally correct, at high speed the controls on the A6M became extremely heavy. This is most likely what happened.

[@GeneralJackRipper]

The Zero simply couldn't dive at the speeds other aircraft could.

[@andrewlayton9760]

The "Never exceed speed" of the A6M was relatively low at 370 mph (600 kph).

[@user-pn3im5sm7k]

A6M's are structurally superior to a Hawker Hurricane. The A6M, and Japan, were the first to invent & use 7075 duralumin, which is present in every AR-15/M16 receiver & aircraft structural stress points today. In other words, it is very strong and very light. For comparison US/Uk fighters used obsolete 30 series aluminum. As soon as the Allies reverse engineered an A6M they began to use this material extensively but mostly after the war. do not confuse armor & structural rigidity like so many other armchair historians. Also fun fact, if you just say "Hurricane" you could be possibly referring to the notorious Ki-84 Hayate (or Hurricane in Japanese). A late war fighter that not many Allied fighters could match. More used than an A6M by 1944.

[@DansModelBench]

The Australians learnt early on to not dogfight the Zero. They would fly their Kittyhawks up in the direction of the sun and gain altitude above what the Japanese typically flew. Then circle up there where it was hard for them to be spotted by the Japanese. If any Zeros flew under them, they would dive and unload everything on them and then zoom through them and out the other side and keep on going low to the deck and fly away. The speed they built up in the dive along with the surprise made it very hard for the Japanese pilots to catch them. The heavy armament of the Kittyhawk, combined with the lack of self sealing fuel tanks and little armour of the Zero, meant if they scored a hit on a Zero in the dive, it probably would result in a kill. It may not of been elegant, but it gave the superior firepower of the Kittyhawk the best chance of success and the Australian pilots a chance to fly another day.. Dog fighting the Zero often lead to the Aussies being shot down as the Zero was the superior plane in the early parts of the Pacific war and Japan still had experienced pilots at that point who could fly them well. Australians learnt to catch the Zero's unprepared and strike their airfields and take them out before they could fly. Both proved effective.

[@kasvos9292]

Boom and zoom.

[@mavfin8720]

@@kasvos9292 Yes. the Zero was beaten in two stages. First, they learned tactics to defeat the Zero w/o getting caught up in the turn fight, because you didn't turn-fight a Zero and live at that point. Second, they built fighters that made the Zero obsolete, and trained their pilots to fly to their advantages, not the Zero's advantages.

[@Lurch-Bot]

If they did try to follow, they became sitting ducks for your top cover due to the poor aileron authority at high speed, an area where Allied aircraft were generally still maneuverable thanks to control tabs and, eventually, boosted flight controls. You could absolutely win a turning fight with a Zero if you were going fast enough. Even the P-38 turned faster at particularly high speeds than the Zero. You get your wingman to lure them into a dive and then break right and you could get on their tail and stay there. Even if you got right down to the deck, you could avoid being jumped by the rest of the Zeros simply by firewalling the throttle. Even if they managed to land a couple of potshots, you could take it.

[@Lippdinos]

Excellent documentary! I understand it could have been longer by hours and not include all the important information.

[@rcflighttestengineer5636]

@@Lurch-Bot The turning circle is actually far greater at higher speed for a given G loading, if you want to turn tight you need to slow down, not go faster, this is why so many pilots getting caught in a valley die when trying to turn back, because they don’t slow down to reduce the turning radius. I have visited the site in Brisbane where captured Zeros were dissected and also flown by allied pilots against our fighters, this was where a lot of the tactics were developed to defeat the Zero with a sound understanding of its flaws.

[@Damorann]

If anyone wants a complete analysis of the Zero, go watch Drachinifel's 2 and a half hour video about the Zero where he interviews a man (whose name I can't remember) who is an absolute encyclopedia about the Zero. It's a wonderful, detailed, precise, and no nonsense BS description of the story of the Zero. An absolute must.

[@GeneralJackRipper]

Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles does a fantastic job with his video on the Wildcat vs Zero.

[@Wha2les]

Incomplete. We need a part 2 with all the nerdy discussion on the engines

[@Soenglish44]

​​@@Wha2les 👉🏻 the channel 'real engeneering' has a good video on the zero

[@BillBird2111]

"But, ultimately the kamikaze campaign did not have a significant impact on the course of the war." WRONG. The kamikaze campaign got Japan NUKED. Twice. The third bomb would have been dropped on Hirohito's Palace had Japan not surrendered, and that point was made very clear to the Japanese Emperor. I would call that "significant." Final point? If you look at the list of Japanese pilots who took park in both the battles at Pearl Harbor and Midway, you will find that the vast majority of them did not survive the war. The young pilots who replaced them were also shot out of the sky during the campaign in the Marianas (Saipan). The life expectancy of an Imperial Japanese pilot was very short.

[@GonzoDonzo]

@@Damorann love that channels vids. So in depth

[@HarryOld972]

Remember also the Americans developed the proximity AA shell, which used a very simple crude radar to detonate. It made their AA fire vastly more effective as they only had to get their shells reasonably near enemy aircraft and height settings were no longer required. As a result, if a fragile Zero went anywhere near a US ship it's chances were poor.

[@afterthesmash]

It was called a VT proximity fuze. It was only radar in the sense of detecting reflected radio waves. I believe it detonated when the rate of change in the beat frequency between the transmitted signal and received signal hit a minimum. Increased kill ratio by about 400%. Made in huge quantities, but only used over the open ocean for most of the war, to prevent disclosure. I believe the small vacuum tubes survived 20,000 gees during firing due to being packed in oil.

[@Chrisscpu]

@@afterthesmash made by Crosley in Cincinnati Ohio. They were so secret, they were transported from the factory at night in bread trucks.

[@FredScuttle456]

The shell was a British invention, handed to the Americans because they had superior production facilities. Crucial in stopping the V1 and the kamikazes.

[@alpaycelikel]

@@afterthesmash I heard brits started this project but was not able to finish due to lack of technical knowledge or resources and handed over it to americans who effectively completed and used it during the war, also I heard it was not only being used in pacific but in Europe against German v1s -not effective against v2s due to their speed. also I guess a similar proximity fuze used for mortars and artillery which effectively stopped German offensive at ardennes -germans desperately tried to capture this technology and offered prize for the soldiers who can bring a shell with proximity fuze

[@KausnHavok]

The Brits did, indeed, start it but they couldn't complete it and the U.S. did have the technology (from, of all places, a Hearing Aid from a civilian company which used miniturized glass tube which used 3 in a device) to complete it.

[@Rwdphotos]

They didn’t get into too much detail with it, but the hellcat was such an incredibly major improvement that it ended up being the death of japan’s top ace. He used to employ a tactic where he would climb high enough to stall out the previous wildcats, then pursue while they were in an uncontrollable freefall. He did it so often, that it he didn’t pay much attention to the slightly larger airframe following him, and was shot down while climbing to pull off the same ol maneuver. The hellcat didn’t stall out, but instead kept climbing, and faster than the zero. It was a total 180 for the air war, pun half intended.

[@cheesesniper473]

Also, a hellcat pilot could just pull a hard chandelle manuver and watch the zero fall out of the sky.

[@Ghost_TMS]

Toshiyuki Sueda VS Robert Duncan

[@sailordude2094]

The Zero went from hero to zero quickly. Thanks for the war history!

[@maemorri]

I think you really have to focus on the highly trained and veteran Japanese pilots who had been in active war for 4 and half years when the Pacific War started. Pilot experience and numbers account for most of the difference even before we look at the machines.

[@dgray3771]

@@maemorri It's a big factor, but the lack of development during the war on the Japanese side is what ultimately became their downfall. the A6M was in use from 1939 all the way till 1945. Still being made in 1945... F6Fs were prodiced from 1942-1945 which were 3 years superior

[@patrickporter1864]

Like every plane it had its day. The later spitfires were totally different planes from the mark 2 and 5. Also the fritz was not the emil

[@Lurch-Bot]

@@patrickporter1864 But they managed to keep the Spitfire maneuverable as it put on weight and got faster. The BF.109 just became a sh*t plane. The FW.190 didn't fare much better. The real issue was likely the fact that the Allies had the resources to spare for things like hydraulic controls, while the Germans were mainly focused on shooting down bombers and producing as many fighters as possible later in the war. So climb performance and armament were prioritized at the expense of handling. Late in the war, the Nazis faced a similar problem to shooting down enemy fighters as the Allies faced with the Zero early in the war. The main difference was that Allied aircraft weren't Molotov cocktails with wings.

[@HorizonStronghold]

@@maemorriThat’s actually the reason US pilots were better by the end of the war. The US had a policy that we would swap out our top pilots to train new recruits. The Japanese just kept all their best aviators on the battlefield until they died. This resulted in the best US pilots still being around at the end of the war while the average US recruit was superior to even experienced Japanese pilots. However, it did result in significant victories for the Japanese early in the war.

[@johnfisher9692]

The Zero's strengths were also its weaknesses. As long as its opponents did not out speed it, the Zero won but once Allied fighters got faster it lost. Its near total lack of armour or self sealing fuel tanks made it easy to flame it with a short burst which other aircraft could shrug off

[@samsonsoturian6013]

It was fast and agile because it was built like a cherry blossom, and they died like cherry blossoms too.

[@bighamster2]

I remember with horror finding out that the glider tug transport aircraft used during the invasion of Sicily didn't have self sealing tanks, and how that likely contributed to some crews releasing their gliders too early. But the idea of a fighter lacking them in 1944-45 is a whole other level, though.

[@jimreilly917]

Allied fighters were also built with the pilot in mind…part of the heavier weight of Wildcats and Corsairs was the tub….a heavily reinforced steel bucket surrounding the pilot seat. It allowed greater Allied pilot survivability. When the Zero was destroyed, most often so was the pilot. This took a severe toll on the IJN air force from Midway forward.

[@ColoradoStreaming]

I have a book with some P-38 quotes and they talk about that a lot. They would use their high air speed and ram right into the squadron of Zeroes causing chaos. They would just keep the speed up and drive through the mass of planes again and again. One Ace took the tracers out of his guns because the Japanese pilot could see the rounds and would dance the Zero out of the way. If the tracers were gone he just walked the fire back into the Zero in a turn.

[@rjwintl]

my Dad ( who shot down three ) said by the war’s end all their good pilots had been shot down and the new Japanese replacement pilots did not have the flight time experience and were relatively easy to shoot down !!!

[@richardknouse618]

A critical improvement on the American side was the development of a 50mm round specially designed to take down the Zero. The conventional rounds at the start of WWII would pass right through the paper thin skin of the Zero leaving a minimal hole. My father was in charge of a DuPont powder plant during WWII. He showed me an example of this round. It had a flat tip which would slow the round slightly as is hit the skin of the aircraft. This caused a cylinder to hit a blasting cap igniting an enclosed explosive. This explosive had a high brisance similar to black powder. Essentially it would all explode at once. The effect was to take off an entire wing or tail of the Zero with even a marginal hit. So it was no longer necessary to hit the pilot or fuel tank.

[@thestormofwar]

The US did not employ 50mm weaponry during in the Pacific for AA in any appreciable capacity.

[@richardknouse618]

@@thestormofwar This was 50 caliber, not 50 mm. I held an example of the round in my hand. The triggering mechanism involved a metal disk that rested in a groove within a cylinder in the head of the bullet. The gyroscopic action of the spinning bullet caused the disk to float to the center of the cylinder. The slightest slowing of the round would cause the disk to slam forward setting off the blast.

[@toomanyaccounts]

@@thestormofwar yeah 50 mm is gigantic. a lot of people don't realize how big a 20mm Antiaircraft round is.

[@Doc_Paradox]

50 caliber not mm chief.

[@demonicspire1345]

Are you sure you're not thinking of .50 BMG (0.5 inches) API rounds? The US experimented with explosive containing 50 caliber rounds, but I think the final determination was that shells smaller than 20 milimeters didn't have enough volume to be worthwhile putting explosive compound in, and instead it made more sense to use thermite containing incendiary rounds. (Fun aside, the Japanese actually used explosive rounds even in 7.7mm though their quality was somewhat dubious). The US did field 20mm cannons on some aircraft, and of course 40mm bofors were mounted on almost every ship as anti-aircraft, so possibly you could also be thinking of those. What you're referring to is primarily a fusing mechanism, which I'm not as educated about. A proper fusing mechanism to set off the charge, whether it be incendiary or explosive would absolutely be a a great asset in air battles given the thin skin on the zero. I'm also a bit confused, you mention brisance, but I'm pretty sure gunpowder is considered a conflagarant, not an explosive if you go by the brisance value (though you said black powder and this might only apply to smokeless).

[@guhr1dy]

I loved that Max Hastings was on here. The Secret War taught me so much about espionage that I still think about all the time.

[@heraldeventsandfilms5970]

Max 'Hitler' Hastings.

[@grouchogroucho7743]

Once they worked it out, the P-40 did quite well against the Zero in New Guinea. Climb, spot the Zero, dive, kill the Zero, keep diving away, climb and repeat. Do not dogfight! That was it. Once this formula was adhered to, the kill rate was quite good.

[@MattRhodes_Music]

@@grouchogroucho7743 the Flying Tigers!! Spot on from what I recall reading

[@hoi-polloi1863]

I remember reading a book about the Flying Tigers waaay back in Jr High. Great stuff. Here's a pretty detailed article about these "boom and zoom" tactics: en.namu.wiki/w/%EB%B6%90%EC%95%A4%EC%A4%8C

[@fredemny3304]

This is so much better than the notoriously poor 'Dark Skies' nonsense.

[@trickydicky2908]

@fredenmy I watch that channel for laughs.

[@stevepritchett6563]

And his over paced breathless voice is so annoying

[@assessor1276]

@@fredemny3304 Couldn’t agree more - Dark Skies, Dark Seas….Dark anything is simply inaccurate, poorly researched and badly narrated rubbish. When I see Dark anything in my feed, I head the other way.

[@Damorann]

Pretty sure the "Dark XXX" channels are copycat channels. Their content often mirror new stuff coming out within weeks of actually good channels publishing new subjects.

[@DavidWoods-r6o]

@@Damorann He is quite the scammer! And annoying as hell.

[@mark_wotney9972]

For lightness, the Zero was built with the fuselage and the wing as a single piece, not bolted together like other planes. This meant that serious damage to a wing meant the entire plane had to be scrapped or returned to the depot to be rebuilt.

[@MrHabernet]

Love your videos. The more the better! I’ll support IWM as long as I can. Cheers from across the pond

[@thestormofwar]

This gets a sub from me. It's surprisingly complete and accurate for a subject and touches on multiple reasons that all added up to the why the Zero eventually got outclassed. Nice work.

[@David_Lloyd-Jones]

The Aeronautical building of the Smithsonian, on the National Mall, has a Zero splayed out on a wall, and an American fighter of the period, perhaps a Hellcat, hanging in the stairwell, ominously in its range. The Zero is delicate, even beautiful. It carried no armour. The American fighter is a lumbering hulk -- and it's clear that the Zero was out of its class

[@augustosolari7721]

You can see that on the Depth of the windshield Armour.

[@johngregory4801]

The Hellcat was such a "lumbering hulk" that it had a 19/1 kill ratio against the Japanese.

[@republic0_032]

​​@@johngregory4801 who said a lumbering hulk is a bad thing? US aircraft were indeed much larger and bulkier than the competition but had the power to back it up

[@jameshannagan4256]

Have you ever seen the Zero next to a Hellcat or Corsair it almost looks like a toy. I love the Zero though, it's a beautiful plane and very deadly in the hands of a good pilot.

[@marveloussoftware4914]

The wildcat may be called a lumbering hulk. The hellcat was more armored but also more maneuverable due to a much larger engine. That "lumbering hulk" would fly circles around you.😅😂🤣😂😅

[@_Wombat]

I thought the narration was really good in this one. Interesting topic too, thanks.

[@jeff7.629]

General Chennault tired warning the US military about the capabilities of the Zero. The Chinese even captured one.

[@Mustapha1963]

Unfortunately, Chennault had made so many enemies in the Air Corp that no one believed his reports.

[@grandaddyoe1434]

. . . . but never told anyone else?

[@MakerBoyOldBoy]

The Chinese recovered a mildly crash landed Zero and returned it to flying condition. Several AVG pilots flew it and analyzed its capabilities. This was long before the Alaskan Zero was discovered. That the US AAC was oblivious to it is simply another check mark on the incredibly long list of Army Air Corps stupidities and delusional arrogant mistakes. Only US manufacturing overwhelming volume prevented the US Army from losing the war.

[@tvgerbil1984]

Chennault didn't actually come up against any Mitsubishi A6M Zero. It was the Nakajima Ki-43 Oscar he faced. The two types looked alike but the Oscars were flown by the Japanese Army in China where Chennault's pilots were.

[@garyslomczynski6579]

The Whole Zero found in the Aleutian islands was the death of the Zero!!

[@CoronadoBruin]

A concise and efficient telling of the story. Thank you.

[@MacMcNurgle]

I only recently heard that there was another factor, not mention here. The fact that the USN planes were armoured and that a downed pilot had SAR resources available, meant that the pilots that survived and came back into action had time to review their mistakes and learn from them. Indeed, to teach new pilots what those mistakes were and how to avoid them.

[@midwestmatthew9752]

@@MacMcNurgle True, but an interesting fact is that 90% of pilots shot down in WW2 never saw the plane that got them and often didn't even know what direction it came from. For that reason I would suspect the advice usually came down to "stay with the group and watch for the enemy like a hawk!"

[@MacMcNurgle]

@@midwestmatthew9752 There's a lesson in that too!

[@Heritage367]

Even if they couldn't offer many details about the planes that downed them, not losing a good pilot is huge!

[@Bazza.baz224]

So nice to hear a good narration instead of the awful AI robots on other sites 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@stellviahohenheim]

This is AI

[@karlherman3591]

@@stellviahohenheim With a feminine voice with a British accent, I can never tell if it’s AI or a person.

[@paulsteaven]

The Zero with tail number EII-102 on the thumbnail belongs to Tetsuzo Iwamoto, one of the top aces of Japan. Already an ace during the 2nd Sino-Japanese War, served aboard Zuikaku by the time of Attack on Pearl Harbor, served in the Guadalcanal and Philippine Campaigns, and all the way to the defense of Okinawa and Japanese home islands. He survived the war until his death in the 1950s. Fun fact: the 2 white bands mean it's from Zuikaku, 1 white band means it's Shokaku.

[@Conn30Mtenor]

The Japanese needed to continually upgrade the power plant to allow armor and self sealing tanks as upgrades but this wasn't a priority. Japan's lack of a training program for replacement pilots was a glaring failure

[@somethingforsenro]

it must also be said that japan lacked a lot of the resources to roll out self sealing fuel tanks in large numbers. those things were expensive at the time, and late in the war, japan just couldn't really afford them in large enough numbers to make a difference

[@memecliparchives2254]

@@somethingforsenro They manage to develop such aircraft with the Tony fighters, Judy dive bombers and Jill torpedo bombers. However the pilots they had were poorly trained by that point, not even kamikaze strikes would do anything.

[@doberski6855]

"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." May or may not have been uttered by Admiral Yamamoto, but it rings true. The Allies studied the Zero, and built vastly improved aircraft to counter it as well as the aircraft of the Luftwaffe.

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

Their capabilities were pretty well known pre war. A German who happened to be a Jewish designer for Heinkel took a job with Mitsubishi designing the Zero predecessor to escape Germany. As the war kicked off in Europe he fled to Australia and became the father of the Boomerang. Not that it was much of a fighter itself given it was an emergency fighter but more so he went from conception to first flight in under three months. Importantly his knowledge of Japanese fighter designs was a huge haul for the Allies.

[@brentonherbert7775]

Except by the time the"vastly improved aircraft to counter it" was built and actually deployed the war was long since over... A fact a lot of people seem to forget...

[@gvibration1]

Yamamoto had studied in America and was well aware of its industrial capacity. Even though America had massively disarmed. He was right. 😢Japanese knew they had to knock out the capability in Hawaii and cut America off from Australia as a base they could use to assemble and hit back. Before the fortification of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere was complete. They got close.

[@Samuel-hd3cp]

Brenton, the Corsair and Hellcat both available in 1943 were miles better than the Zero.

[@brentonherbert7775]

@@Samuel-hd3cp Yeah the END of 1943.... Was when the FIRST delivery of F6Fs were delivered... what year did they start the attack again? Japan had been on the retreat for close to a year by the time the F6F appeared in wide enough use and a lot of the more "skilled" (which i use that term losely) japanese pilots had already started taking irreplaceable losses. And ya know... Midway? The F6F did not change the war. It was merely another piece in the puzzle. the F4F did the job once they actually got more than 0 experience against the Japanese.

[@assessor1276]

Actually, the Hellcat was powered by a Pratt & Whitney R2800 (not an R2000). Most variants of the R 2800 were rated at about 2000 hp.

[@luskvideoproductions869]

Oh nice, Max Hastings! I love his work!!

[@mhpjii]

Superb video. Thank you.

[@tomservo5347]

As a kid I remember an old WW2 pilot telling me that the Corsair he flew was "ridiculously overpowered". In carrier landing training he said one of the first things drilled into the pilots flying the Corsair was to never, ever, slam the throttle forward during a wave off because the engine torque alone would flip the plane over. Glad I got to hear stories firsthand from WW2 veterans that are nearly all gone.

[@richardpcrowe]

I had the opportunity to film U.S. Navy Commander (later Admiral) John "Jimmy' Thach and he described the tactic that he developed to combat the agile A6M Zero while flying the markedly inferior U.S. Navy F4F Wildcat. That tactic was named the "Thatch Weave". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thach_Weave Additionally, Claire Chennault of the Flying Tiger espoused tactics that allowed the inferior P-40 Warhawk aircraft to compete on a relatively level field with the Zero. This tactic was composed of high speed slashing dives and absolutely no dog fighting. The Zero had higher speed than the F4F or Warhawk that opposed them early in the war (however it could not dive as fast as the Widcat or the Warhawk). It was also far more agile and had a longer range. However, the Zero had no armor and no self-sealing fuel tanks.

[@jameshannagan4256]

The Flying Tigers most likely never fought against any Zeros as they were withdrawn from China when they were in theater. Historians say that they rarely , if ever, fought against them, and most of them say they didn't fight any of them. It was mostly Ki-27s and Ki-43s (Nates and Oscars) and other aircraft other Zeros. The Wildcat wasn't really that outclassed once our pilots gained some experience and we learned the correct tactics.

[@andrewlayton9760]

I find it interesting that the Wildcat is called 'inferior' while achieving a 1:1 kill ratio versus the Zero prior to the F6F Hellcats coming to the fleet.

[@wesleypeters4112]

Japanese pilots in 1942 stated that the B-17 and B-24 bombers were difficult to shoot down, due to the ruggedness of the B-17 and the self-sealing fuel tanks on both, which allowed the planes to remain in the air, instead of bursting in to flames. Japanese aviators also hated the P-38 Lightning which could fly significantly higher than the Zero and at that altitude could pick and choose which engagements to take part in.

[@petestorz172]

While all Japanese planes were lost at Midway (except for some cruiser-based floatplanes), pilot losses were less severe. The BIG loss for the IJN was the loss of 4 of its 6 most capable carriers. These losses plus Shokaku being in repair and Zuikaku having to re-form its air group gave the USN a window of opportunity to take the initiative at Guadalcanal.

[@TexasHoosier3118]

Japan missed an opportunity by not sending out scout planes at Pearl Harbor. Japan made a mistake by not sending all 6 carriers to Coral Sea. Japan made a mistake by not bringing the Zuikaku and the 3 smaller aircraft carriers to Midway.

[@steveb6103]

One mistake by the IJN. When a carrier was damaged, its pilots stayed with the ship. Unlike the USN. When a carrier was damaged or in for maintenance, the pilots were moved to the operational ones. Also, they didn't make any effort to save downed pilots. The Japanese pilots knew if their plane was damaged to the point that there was no way to make it back, they were dead! That's why they would crash into ships even early in the war.

[@jameshannagan4256]

It was at Guadalcanal where Japan foolishly squandered their best pilots. Nothing like having carrier pilots along with the rest of your best pilots flying 8 hour missions where they had very limited time to actually fight and if their plane was damaged shot down the pilots were sure to die. That was one of the most foolish decisions they made in the entire war (to me).

[@petestorz172]

I'm sure that arriving at the engagement area after over 3 hours of flight and having to pay attention to your fuel level did not enhance IJN pilots' effectiveness. Fighting far from base meant many pilots would be lost if shot down or their planes succumbed to damage during the return flight. The IJN was not good at rescuing downed pilots nor at rotating pilots home to form the core of new squadrons.

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@petestorz172 It was actually 4 hours each way plus the amount of time they stayed to fight/bomb which was dependent on whether or not they could somehow refuel them at one of their other island bases closer than Rabaul. They suffered from a lack of fuel, spare parts, and especially competent mechanics. Those long missions took a severe toll on the shape their planes were in also. Their shortage of competent mechanics was so bad that I remember reading how the troops who overran Japanese airfields were amazed at the amount of lightly damaged aircraft they couldn't use and that they just didn't cannibalize the more damaged aircraft so the others could be used, they weren't capable of that simple (for the US) feat which could have made a difference in some of the battles.

[@Antidragon-nl7by]

The first anti-Zero fighter wasn't actually the Grummen Hellcat, it was the Vaught 4FU Corsair. The reason the Corsair doesn't get as much credit as the Hellcat was because the former was so difficult to land on carriers that it was almost exclusively given to the land based Marine squadrons, who then decimated the Japanese airforce during the Solomons campaign. Because of it's difficultly with carriers, the Corsair had problems deploying throughout the pacific (seeing the bulk of it's action during the aforementioned Solomons campaign) , but it was largely responsible for eviscerating Japanese air power and culling their best aces in the drive to neutralize Rabaul, leaving the navy Hellcat pilots to mop up the less experienced rookie replacements. Case in point, the Hellcat was retired almost as soon as the war was done, while the Corsair went on to fight in korea (becoming one of the few piston powered aircraft to take down a jet fighter).

[@babuzzard6470]

Yamamoto warned against a long protracted war.

[@tomcusack884]

He was educated partly at Harvard. He knew. He advised the Japanese Imperial Navy and Army about the industrial might and superior population/natural resources at America's disposal. We'll get the best of them for 18 months, maybe 2 years, 3 years if we're lucky but after that.....

[@snarflatful]

Excellent report. Thoroughly enjoyable.

[@yoke-munchan1813]

At Pearl Harbour, those zero pilots were the best season pilots from the war with China. Battle hardened and was eager for action.

[@narabdela]

It's so refreshing to get a well researched and well narrated WW2 video these days. It makes a welcome change from the usual lazy dross that seems to be prevalent on KZbin at the moment. Well done! 👍

[@brentonherbert7775]

Well maybe if you watched good stuff instead of AI generated dribble... Here's a hint... if you watch rubbish... youtube will only show you rubbish.

[@Chloeprettyoccasionally]

It is the actual imperial war museum so it's to be expected

[@Slartifartblast-s6n]

Lazy Dross = Dark Skies/Seas.

[@brentonherbert7775]

@@Slartifartblast-s6n Top tier intelligence comment right here... No wonder he dislikes dark seas he probably actually learns something from them.

[@ditzydoo4378]

On first contact the Allies had to swallow their collective pride and us collective tactics like the Thatch weave and Boom and Zoom because of the Zero's better handling and not get into a turning fight with it. Later with the likes of the F6F Hellcat, F4U Corsair, P-51 Mustang and so on it was our fight to dictate.

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

The shoot and scoot tactics were in use post Battle Of Britain before the US entered the war. Roald Dahl (Charlie And The Chocolate Factory etc author) goes into it a bit in his book, as did Clive Caldwell who, aside being Australias' ace with the highest tally, commanded a RAAF P-40 squadron in North Africa. He taught shoot and scoot was a better bet than a dogfight against 109s which were a superior machine at the time.

[@13thravenpurple94]

Fantastic video! Thank you so much 👍

[@rogerrees9845]

Very informative and interesting presentation.... Thank you IWM.... Roger... Pembrokeshire

[@wlg2367]

The reason there was little air resistance at Pearl Harbor was because Aircraft on the airfields were lined up trying to decrease sabotage but were easy targets from the air. Two pilots actually got air bound and had some success but with just two aircraft little could be done such a massive attack.

[@guidor.4161]

It's typical case of a highly specialised weapon being excellent in the use scenario it was made for, and terrible in completely different conditions.

[@Canada_Dominium]

The 'blitzkrieg' of pursuit fighters.

[@tonyjames5444]

Having flown the aircraft, (and virtually every other fighter both allied and axis), legendary British test pilot Captain Eric 'Winkle' Brown RN said the Zero was the best fighter up until 1943.

[@jameshannagan4256]

I still think it was, he's correct in my opinion.

[@johanndork5364]

@@tonyjames5444 I was privileged to have lunch with him once. He told a story of a Japanese pilot he met who was shot badly in the face flying his Zero still completed the mission and got home. He had a healthy respect for their pilots courage and determination.

[@robertmiller2173]

The Zero was a beautiful aircraft, it could handle extremely well, it had a long range etc Wow Max Hastings as well!

[@massmike11]

Its main problems where tin can build that was damaged easily and controls that stiffened up in a dive it also wasn’t particularly fast

[@johnw817]

The father of a high school friend was a fighter pilot for the Chinese Air Force. I think he might be in the first ever group to graduate in the academy. He used to tell me stories about his wartime days before he passed away (mostly because his children were tired of the stories and I was always game.) At the time, China did not have the number of pilots or the planes to go up against the zeroes, which, as the video said, were lighter and faster. He said they mostly got outdated American fighter planes which were heavier and slower and were good pickings for the Japanese zeroes. He said that he and a colleague finally figured out a way to survive a dog fight with a zero if not defeat the enemy. If they encountered a zero, they would start pulling up and circling. Because zeroes were so light, the centrifugal force made it impossible to follow the much heavier American-made plane. In the end, he said they would be at the back of the zero once they completed the circle.

[@cyclenut]

In 1977 and 78 i lived below Miami FL on the edge of the Everglades. I got to watch World War 2 aircraft being flimed while flying for movies. A few time there were F4U and Japanese Zero dog fights and other Japanese aircraft. It was cool . Another time I saw a B-17 and P-51 escorts, and a B-29 withh escorts. Where these were flimed is now built-up with houses.

[@riffhammeron]

@@cyclenut that's cool if they were real Zeros, but T-6 Texans were often used to portray Zeros in movies.

[@cyclenut]

@riffhammeron I was 14/15 and all I saw was them in the air, nothing more. So you may be right. Thanks.

[@jamesb.9155]

Amazing story and actual footage here.

[@markymarknj]

The F6F Hellcat had a P&W R-2800 Double Wasp engine. There was a P&W R-2000, but it was basically an enlarged R-1830 Twin Wasp. Early versions of the R-2800 Double Wasp were rated for 2,000 hp. However, the Hellcat did not have an R-2000 engine.

[@edclark4822]

Most excellent video most of the footage you've shoune I've never seen before .

[@greghanson5696]

Nice presentation. @9:24, All Series production Grumman F6F Hellcat's were produced with the impeccable Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp.

[@Lurch-Bot]

My grandpa was an aviation machinist mate in the USN during WWII and he probably overhauled a thousand of 'em during the war. I have a picture of him posing with a freshly overhauled R-2800 about to be hung on a Hellcat.

[@northwestprof60]

How? P-38 for the AAC and Hellcat for the Navy. Speed, firepower, climbing ability, durability.

[@petestorz172]

The A6M was not faster than the F4F or Hurricane. Where it was superior was in maneuverability and rate of climb. It may also have accelerated faster. The crucial key to its early dominance was in pilot quality and Allied pilots unknowingly playing to the A6M's strengths (being equipped with obsolescent aircraft like the P-35 and P-36 didn't help). As USN pilots learned and IJN fighter squadron pilots were attrited, the F4F began to do fairly well. The F6F out-performed the A6M, and USN pilots' and squadrons' better training left the A6M outclassed. The A6M's expendability as a Kamikaze was more due to the low training level of IJN pilots than to the aging of the A6M.

[@SoloRenegade]

and late war P-40N and P-39Q others had superior climb rate. they could be upgraded, the Zero could not. Even the SBD was used for CAP to defend carriers in Coral Sea, Santa Cruz, Midway, etc. and even shot down attacking zeroes. Multiple SBD pilots became aces.

[@DisinformationAgent]

Yeah a lot of this video is full of incorrect info. The IJA had the Ki-61 which was their equivalent of the Zero. It was not the fastest plane at the time. Honestly this video has a made for TV boomer vibe that doesn't hook me. Also the Zero had many variants throughout the years of the war and the IJN was adopting new frames near the end of the war.

[@SoloRenegade]

@@DisinformationAgent the Ki-43 was more of the IJA Zero. The Zero experienced almost no real improvement over the war as a consequence of its design. they removed too much structure to save weight, preventing them from ever upgrading to bigger heavier engines. Most later variants actually got worse, as they kept adding weight but no additional HP. Even Japan's fastest operational fighter plane of WW2 was slower than the P-40.

[@GaryCameron]

The other advantage of the A6M was its incredible range due to its very light weight. The Americans initially thought they must have had bases all over the place, as the zero could travel very far from its base.

[@petestorz172]

🤣 I'm a "Boomer". I understand having to choose details to fit a time limit, but this video took over-simplification into inaccuracy.

[@danpatterson8009]

The story of the Zero's development is a good example of engineering management. Put a talented young designer at the head of a small group of specialists, give them a detailed specification that doesn't change, and most importantly give them a manager who sees that they get the resources they need and prevents interference from other groups.

[@JB0143RP]

The zero only appeared dominate until better tatics prevailed. The Flying Tigers in China were highly successful against the zeros cousin (Oscar). Once even better US fighters entered the mix it was game over.

[@waynedome9140]

And the allies had more aircraft

[@v2-zy1qi]

I am honored to have found a channel that shares information with minimal bias, as larger and well-known channels often seem partial or skewed, especially regarding international issues.(This opinion may also be biased.) From an ordinary Japanese military enthusiast.

[@Peweskimooxy]

Oh my, I'm getting flashbacks to when the History Channel actually did shows about history, especially a lot of WW2 stuff. I do miss that.

[@daveheath3728]

One additional often unknown/ overlooked point ; in addition to it's thin metal skin , that skin was made from a lower grade aluminum alloy that was light weight but had a high magnesium component . This made the aircraft's skin vulnerable to an adversary's bullet strikes , particularly incendiary rounds . This made the aircraft catch on fire fairly easily when fired upon and exploding when rounds hit the fuel tanks .

[@Hazamandeous]

Always happy to see the Vought F4U Corsair get mentioned. Silly as it is, Battlefield 1942 showed me this aircraft as a kid and it quickly became my favorite WWII fighter. Great content here.

[@TonyGrant.]

Bf '42 was a great game. I used to love the pacific maps. It's mod Forgotten Hope was even better. I still play it occasionally.

[@mcm95403]

It may have been outclassed later in the war, but it's still one of the most beautiful planes of the period. I wish that one day I could go for a ride in one. Amazing piece of history!

[@ornerylurker8296]

This surely must be the most controversial opinion by far! I’d say she was rather plain for a plane! Though I do have a bias for bombers I suppose, I’ll support the sentiment. Prop planes were just so classy.

[@eggshan86]

The Hellcat!!!!❤❤ And superior training and experience by that point.

[@jamesfields2916]

"The eager are not experienced and the experienced are not eager". US pilot referring to Japanese pilots and lack of competition late in the war.

[@martinricardo4503]

The Zeros were defeated before the first Hellcats appeared operationally.

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@martinricardo4503 It was almost ready for distribution by the time the Zero was found, restored, and tested, for some stupid reason that myth persists.

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@martinricardo4503 I'll put it another way, the Zero had zero to do with with the Hellcat.

[@maemorri]

The gap in training, experience and numbers explains most of the Zero's early advantage.

[@freemarketjoe9869]

The Zero gas tank not being self sealing, and the plane being lightly armored to give it superior speed and maneuverability were, ultimately, the kiss of death. Solution? Don't dogfight it in tight turns, just overpower it in steep dives...boom.

[@SteveRose-iq1cs]

Great presentation, nice job

[@lewis7315]

The "thatch weave" shot down lots of Zeros! A tactic invented by navy pilot Lt Thatch. A pair of fighters would let themselves be jumped by Zeros, then "weave around" back a forth, shooting them down.

[@AllanBrogdon]

My brother bought a new Mitsubishi his father in law says the problem with them is a hellcat will out dive it.

[@johnserrano9689]

Jesus himself took the stick and ended the infidel threat....read it online so let's face we all know that's fact no matter what

[@Lurch-Bot]

When you jump the tracks, the Hellcat will nosedive due to being very nose heavy.

[@trentvlak]

Which Mitsubishi did he get, the Eclipse?

[@micahqgecko]

In the US, the tactics developed by Thatch increased the Wildcat kill ratio from 1.1:1 to 3:1 and later to 6:1 once veteran zero pilots were mostly gone.

[@tomhaskett5161]

I read that the Zero lacked armour plating, and did not have self-sealing fuel tanks. This meant that it could not withstand much gunfire

[@oakmeal53]

Great video

[@indygeo4267]

The "Mitsubishi A6M Zero" is my favorite aircraft that was used by an Axis power. Thanks for covering it!

[@Scaphism36]

2:40 guy on the left dropping his tool is the most relatable thing I’ve ever seen in black and white

[@markfranks1329]

The A6M was an outstanding fighter at the time of its introduction. For the first 6 months, it was the best carrier borne fighter in the world. That is a fantastic achievement if one thinks about it. To design an aircraft for carrier operations will always introduce an element of compromise, yet the A6M was easily able to best any fighter that it encountered that operated from land. In low-speed dogfights, it excelled. Only after thorough evaluation of captured examples were its flaws and weaknesses revealed. Grumman's F6F Hellcat was specially designed to counteract this amazing design. The term 'Zero' comes from the year of its introduction, 1940. In the Japanese calendar, 1940 was 0, or zero. It holds a very special place in the hearts of the Japanese people as the Spitfire does for British people.

[@gvibration1]

They could have done something to protect their best pilots.

[@markfranks1329]

@gvibration1 Unfortunately, armour protection for pilots and self-sealing fuel tanks, or lack of, was a price worth paying for maximum agility. In addition, a lot of experienced pilots, army and navy, who had fought over China also shunned the idea of enclosed canopies. This short-sighted doctrine continued into the early Pacific campaigns, where, as we know, a lot of these experienced pilots were lost and were never replaced.

[@massmike11]

The F6F design was begun before we met the zero. Not in response to the zero. Development of the F6F was begun in 1938

[@markfranks1329]

@massmike11 Yes, a replacement for the F4F was initiated as early as 1938, but after poor results in encountering the A6M by F4Fs, ALL effort was put into designing the F6F to counter the A6M. The F6F was, therefore, indirectly, a response to the A6M.

[@Doc_Paradox]

​​@@markfranks1329 I'm sorry but you're really grasping at straws. Again, as the other user said the captured zero was studied way too late to be effective in designing the hellcat. It did however influence tactics for pilots against the zero. The hellcat was not in any way shape or form meant to combat the zero. The hellcat was the next evolution in the wildcats design. From the moment they produced the wildcat, Grumman already wanted to make the hellcat it was only out of necessity because America needed a monoplane Navy fighter asap. The hellcat was an effort by Grumman to make the wildcat how they originally wanted as they were previously rushed. This included a better powerplant and airframe structure.

[@joevignolor4u949]

The Zero's fuel lines going from the wing tanks to the engine ran through the cockpit underneath the pilot's seat. US Navy pilots learned quickly that a few well placed rounds would sever the lines and cause a fire to erupt inside the cockpit. Some US pilots reported pulling up alongside a burning Zero and they could see the Japanese pilot still alive and moving around inside the burning cockpit.

[@gringogreen4719]

Two things to mention that the video does not. First off, to get that range, the Zero pilot would run the fuel mixture as LEAN as he could going to and from the area he was going to fight in. Charles Lindbergh did this when he flew "The Spirit of St Louis" across the Atlantic Ocean and taught this to P-38 Lightning pilots that effectively DOUBLED the range of that aircraft. For those who don't understand, running an engine lean makes it more fuel efficient but it significantly decreases performance. This is done by limiting how much oxygen the engine takes in. Once in combat you make the gas mixture rich so you can get more performance (speed and power) out of that same engine. The second thing is that once a pilot was trained by the Imperial Japanese Navy they were left out in the theater for combat. What happened with the US Navy and Marines (they were doing the most fighting the Japanese along the Army Air Corps) was once they gained experience many were rotated back to the US to train the next cadre of pilots going out to the Pacific to fight. So what happened as time went on, the Japanese lost their best pilots and the US got better and better quality pilots fresh from the States. After "The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot" in 1944, the Japanese quality of pilots was so diminished that poorly trained pilots had to be rushed out to combat and they did not last long. If memory serves it was less than five missions for them.

[@kiereluurs1243]

The fuel is limited, not the air. I doubt doubling. But interesting points.

[@gringogreen4719]

@kiereluurs1243 Well, the book was on the Lightning and it said that with drop tanks and running the engines lean, it basically doubled the range. No hyperbole, not stretch, just a fact that always stuck with me. The original range was from the manufacturer running the mixture rich without drop tanks.

[@gmansard641]

@@kiereluurs1243 I was about to make the same comment, that the US had enough fuel to give its pilots so many training hours.

[@0giwan]

Concerning fuel, another fact that I find FASCINATING is the quality of American fuel. German av gas was like 89 and 100 octane, maybe 120 at the most (and most rare). US av gas, by comparison, was like 130 or 150 octane by late war. This means that US aircraft could run jaw-dropping manifold pressures (like the P-47 would run 72"), which had an effect on engine performance.

[@gringogreen4719]

@0giwan Cool. I did not know about that but that is definitely something I was not aware of. Also it makes sense as the US wasn't under the same pressures that the other countries were under (from attack) so it could make a better gas.

[@kevinle5460]

Great research and presentation.

[@Mustapha1963]

We have Flight Officer Tadayoshi Kaga to thank- although his gift was certainly not given willingly. FO Koga was a pilot from one of the smaller Japanese carriers that covered the landings on Attu and Kiska in the Aleutian Islands chain. Koga's Zero was hit by ground fire and was unable to make it back to his carrier. Japanese pilots were ordered not to allow their planes to fall into the hands of the enemy intact, so Koga, spotting what he thought was a grassy strip on an island, thought to land and then destroy his airplane. The grassy strip turned out to be long grass covering water. When the Zero touched down, it flipped over, breaking FO Koga's neck. The Zero itself was practically undamaged, and, once discovered by American airmen, it was quickly recovered, transported back to the mainland and repaired so it could undergo thorough flight testing.

[@jameshannagan4256]

I didn't know the whole story so that was pretty cool, thanks. They did make one mistake in the otherwise good video, the Hellcat wasn't designed because we had an intact Zero it had been researched and developed long before that and was almost ready for distribution at that point. For some reason that myth persists, the Zero they found had Zero to do wifh the Hellcat's development. It did however, help us to develop better tactics to combat it.

[@markwray3905]

Thanks for posting 😊

[@roberthudson1959]

Very simple. The industrial might of the USA enabled the development of planes that could counter the Zero's advantages while taking advantage of weaknesses like the light armor plates and lack of self-sealing gas tanks.

[@mikecumbo7531]

True, plus, how many aircraft did the US produce during 1942-1943? How many flight crews were trained? Compare those numbers to what Japan produced. There was a point where the Japanese started losing too many experienced crews and planes. You can’t go one to one when the other side is making many more than you.

[@martinricardo4503]

All of the US Army and US Navy fighters that met the Zero in combat were in development or production before Dec 7, 1941. The Zero had little to no effect on those aircraft.

[@roberthudson1959]

@@martinricardo4503 Your conclusion is not supported by your argument. It would have been negligent of the Navy to ignore the capabilities of the Zero, at least while finishing the design process of planes that were still on the drawing board. I do recognize that some of the crucial differences were cultural.

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@martinricardo4503 Thank you I posted something saying the same thing, for some reason that myth persists and even the video was incorrect about that.

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@roberthudson1959 The Hellcat was almost ready for distribution by the time we found and restored the Zero, and for some reason that myth persists.

[@pmgn8444]

Good video. Needed to include more on the decline of IJN pilot quality and the USN's systematic training of new pilots by combat experienced pilots.

[@NativeLanguage02]

King and Generals and now this.

[@6catalina0]

There are two complete Japanese Zeros at the Pearl Harbor museum in Hawaii. There is a Japanese museum in Little Tokyo Southern California that has detailed history of the Japanese internment camps in America.

[@douglassauvageau7262]

Determined / dedicated Western innovators turned the tide in two years.

[@douglassauvageau7262]

Then (as always) Materials Science and Engineering was 'CORE'.

[@jameshannagan4256]

They were working on the Hellcat and Corsair before the war even started if I remember correctly. We knew war was on the horizon and were developing some iconic equipment as fast as we could.

[@Canada_Dominium]

@@jameshannagan4256 War with Japan came as a total surprise.

[@m42666]

In July 1942, a Zero was found that landed in a bog and flipped on Akutan Island in Alaska. Pilot did not survive & the Zero was recovered by the U.S. and made flyable. Lieutenant Commander Eddie Sanders flew the plane to evaluate performance & methods to counter the Zero were developed. Carburetor did not perform well in dives. Zero could not do rolls at high speed. Check out the details in the book “Cracking the Zero Mystery” by Jim Rearden.

[@MothaLuva]

10:02 Look at the power/weight ratio of each of the planes. Just looking at the engine power output is comparing apples and oranges.

[@allgood6760]

Thanks for this.. we have a Japanese Zero plane here in a museum👍🇳🇿✈️

[@StumpkillerCP]

The Zero did many things very well. But it did not protect it's pilot. It's easier to build an aircraft than train a pilot. And that was Japan's primary weakness.

[@micfail2]

It didn't help that the Japanese war criminals took a year and a half to train a pilot lol

[@DanniChan_Worldwide]

Wow! Max Hastings! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[@greggweber9967]

8:42 Even if it doesn't blow up, does it run out of fuel and ditch into the ocean with its pilot?

[@alessiodecarolis]

The Zeros' air superiority was mainly due to the lack of decent aircrafts to contrast them, plus its incredible range that allowed to display them, such as when they were capable to attack the Philipphines from Taiwan.

[@Canada_Dominium]

"The Zeros' air superiority was mainly due to the lack of decent aircrafts to contrast them" Yes, that's how superiority works.

[@asterixdogmatix1073]

Auckland's War Memorial Museum has a Zero in immaculate condition.

[@richtomlinson7090]

My late father had a piece of one.

[@Absaalookemensch]

Early in the war Japan was at it's peak in pilot training, fighter performance and numbers while the allies were at their low. A couple years later Japan was headed to their low while the allies were headed to their peak. The same went for Germany. The outcome was inevitable.

[@carlhicksjr8401]

Firstly, losing almost 70% of it's experienced pilots at Midway pretty much stuck a sock in the entire Imperial Japanese air arm, Army and Navy. As the skill level of Allied pilots increased, the skill level of IJ pilots plummeted. This made it correspondingly easy to develop tactics against them. Secondly the IJ had much the same pilot rotation policy as the Luftwaffe. That policy was 'fly until you die'. Once placed in a operational squadron, a Japanese pilot flew until they were demonstrably unable to fly anymore, either through death or severe injury. But Allied pilots were routinely rotated back to training billets to teach their knowledge to a new class of junior birdmen and those junior birdmen were therefore learning the right things even if they didn't always have the high number of hours in type that their first squadron commanders hoped they would. Lastly, Japanese industry was strangled by the Allied blockade. While new designs were sometimes trotted out [and, fair being fair, some pretty good ones], the A6M didn't get the necessary development it needed to stay competitive with a] more and better skilled Allied pilots, b] better Allied aircraft designs, and c] the flood of Allied ships and aircraft.

[@tvgerbil1984]

USN pilots were also guided back to their carriers by the YE-ZB homing radio beacons. It was a secured, and easy-to-use all-weather navigation tool and saved many US pilots from the danger of ditching into the vast Pacific. The British adopted this technology for their carriers later in the war. One can only wonder how many IJN pilots were lost at sea when they couldn't find a moving carrier after a long range mission.

[@carlhicksjr8401]

@@tvgerbil1984 Well, you should remember that those beacons were not turned on all the time, and that beacon can't land the plane for you. Remember Adm. Mitscher ordering his carriers to light their flight decks so his crews could land in the Marinanas.

[@petercooper2387]

Excellent video. One small correction, the Grumman Hellcat was powered by Pratt and Whitney's R2800 'Double Wasp' 18 cylinder radial. The R2000 engine was a development of the R1830 'Twin Wasp' for use in military transport aircraft such as the Douglas C -54 'Skymaster.'

[@MothaLuva]

9:23 No, it was a Pratt & Whitney R-2800 engine. 18 cylinder double row

[@teytreet7358]

The a7m looks beautiful

[@tsmgguy]

How did the Allies overcome the Zero fighter? "Shot and scoot" and "one pass, haul ass" tactics, developed by the US Marines in the dark early days of the Guadalcanal campaign. Edit: They also emphasized gunnery, perfecting the maximum deflection high-side pass shooting that was so effective,

[@AlanRoehrich9651]

Chennault had the AVG doing that in China long before the Marines landed at Guadalcanal.

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

The Commonwealth had been doing the same well before Guadalcanal. Ace Clive Caldwell in his book describes the same tactics used in North Africa. Even the famous childrens author (and ace) Roald Dahl said in his book "Going Solo" they did one pass tactics due to lessons learned from the Battle Of Britain. This was nearly two years before the USA even entered the war.

[@tsmgguy]

@@goodshipkaraboudjan But these tactics were not used against the Zero in North Africa and in the BOB.

[@peterrobbins2862]

​@@tsmgguytrue but American forces had been using spray and pray when they eventually reluctantly joined the war on the allied side

[@jameshannagan4256]

@@peterrobbins2862 Democracy is a real pain in the ass sometimes, FDR wanted to get the US into the war right from the start but he didn't have the power to do it. He bent and broke a lot of laws and if you research it it's actually pretty funny how much he cheated.

[@Canada_Dominium]

There was a P-40 ace named Dallas Klinger who would ram through at high-speed dives into Zero squads, guns blazing, then fly home "and walk in for lunch," as Martin Caidin wrote it.

[@michaelhowell2326]

I haven't really given it a whole of thought but it seems the Japanese really didn't upgrade their kit for almost the whole war.

[@wolfgangervin2582]

They tried, but apart from a couple of excellent land-based fighters (the Ki-84 and N1K2-J) and a decent interceptor (the J2M), things just kept going wrong in development and production.

[@米空軍パイロット]

They didn't have the industry to roll out new models in numbers.

[@wolfgangervin2582]

@@米空軍パイロット even the KI-84 only had like ~3500 made

[@米空軍パイロット]

@@wolfgangervin2582 And how does that compare to their opponents?

[@Mustapha1963]

They did try, even with the Zero as late as 1945. They installed ever more powerful engines in the Zero, topping out with one of just over 1500 hp (for comparison, I think the first series had a 970hp engine). The problem became one of weight; the new engines were far more powerful, but they also continually weighed more. Installing even modest armor plate to protect the plane's vitals and pilot also increased weight. And the Zero had a very, very lightweight airframe, which was perhaps the main reason it was so maneuverable. Increasing power ended up doing almost as much harm to its performance as it did good.

[@Tobi202]

DJ Cara got me watching this 🔥

[@actonman7291]

the japanese did not had enough numbers to replace their pilots lost in combat and low production they cant compete with the american industry that was to me the main reason they were defeated and put themselves into desperate tactics like use kamikazes

[@jameshannagan4256]

It's interesting to ponder that if the Japanese decided to use those tactics early in the war it could've been devastating for us.

[@kallekonttinen1738]

Damn.. was watching casually.. then comes Max Hastings, best ww2 history writer, you got my attention..

[@IshKJ]

There’s been a lot of creators uploading videos about the Zero recently has something happened recently?

[@augustosolari7721]

For a plane they tend to consider useless, the Zero Is pretty famous.

[@Alfie1970Waterhouse]

Thank you