Japanese Opinion on the Bf 109

[@Duke-225]

I understand the Germans obtained a P-38, P-51, and P-47 during the war. Perhaps others too. I'd like to see a video on their impressions of captured allied aircraft if any such records exist.

[@thomaskositzki9424]

These documents exist for sure! They tested captured equipment extensively as any good army does. They even had a squadron which traveled from airfield to airfield to have frontline pilots inspect/test the captured planes themselves. Can't find any links right now, because I totally forgot the name of the squadron. :/

[@michaelinsc9724]

I'd really like to see videos on this too, as well as from the American, British, and Soviet perspectives please.

[@rolandmittermayr3615]

@@thomaskositzki9424 Was called Wanderzirkus Rosarius.

[@jpjpjp453]

Luftwaffe Test Pilot: Flying Captured Allied Aircraft of World War 2 by Hans-Werner Lerche is a book you'd like to read.

[@jpjpjp453]

@@thomaskositzki9424 From Wiki-Zirkus Rosarius (also known as the Wanderzirkus Rosarius) was an Erprobungskommando-style special test unit of the Luftwaffe, specifically of the Luftwaffe High Command, tasked with testing captured British and American aircraft, all of which were repainted in German markings. The purpose of testing allied aircraft was to discover any strengths or vulnerabilities in their design or performance. This information was highly useful in enabling German service personnel to develop tactics designed to counter strengths and exploit any vulnerabilities. The unit was formed by Theodor Rosarius in 1943 and was part of the 2.Staffel/Versuchsverband Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe (second squadron of the Experimental Unit of Luftwaffe High Command). The Zirkus also toured operational airfields showing Luftwaffe pilots the captured aircraft and training them in techniques to counter these aircraft. The Zirkus Rosarius seemed to have merited the use of its own Geschwaderkennung ("wing code") of "T9", with a few of the unit's aircraft coming from KG 200, which already used the "A3" identification code of that wing.

[@darthcheney7447]

Take this from someone who spent 20 years working with Japanese, they will never admit their product is inferior in any way. So this does not surprise me.

[@TheTW11]

I was about to make the same comment. I too have spent over 20 years working with the Japanese and you are spot on.

[@TheSiprianus]

@@TheTW11 I've spent over 20 years working with the Japanese and I also approve of this comment.

[@OsborneCox.69.420]

i've spent 150 years working with the Japanese and can also confirm.

[@mitchelloates9406]

Well, I spent 20 years US Navy enlisted, and 22 years working for the US truck subsidiary of a certain German auto manufacturer - no matter which nation you're talking about, or if it's a corporate, political, or military hierarchy, in a situation where comparisons like this are being made, you often end up with just two choices - you can be honest - or you can keep your job....

[@smellyfella5077]

@William Mulvaney I had a 1981 Toyota SR5 pickup...most dependable vehicle I've ever owned, that 22R 6-cylinder was a damn good engine....1.5 million miles on er' and was still going strong before I got T-boned in a intersection and the pickup was totaled.

[@daszieher]

"...if we're being optimistic" Ah, yes. The interservice cameraderie and mutual support!

[@reggiekoestoer1511]

Asking the RAF for Spitfires would be easier than that...

[@KEHT92]

@@reggiekoestoer1511Again, really? Spitfires are too overrated...

[@kittyyuki1537]

@@KEHT92 He's probably not shilling for Spitfires, but rather demonstrating lack of interservice cooperation via the obsurdity that is it would easier for the IJA to request an enemy nation for their latest fighter (Spitfires at the time for the RAF in this instance) than for the IJN to lend their evaluation aircraft to their peers over in the army.

[@KEHT92]

@@kittyyuki1537 Yes, I kinda oversaw it. Thanks for correcting. But the thought isn't that false: I mean the navy and the army almost fought each other... There'd been intrigues and false statements that made problems to one or another person from the army or the navy...

[@reggiekoestoer1511]

@@kittyyuki1537 My deepest thanks to you. Well explained.

[@ShortThrowShifting]

It's incredible to me that Losigkeit was inadvertently revealing how the Americans would eventually counter Japanese aircraft, and they failed to recognize this beforehand, instead demanding that he conform to their dogfight rules as if that's what the enemy would do. I can imagine the shock in their chain of command when the first reports of the Americans using Boom 'n' Zoom tactics prevailed. What a way to squander a massive tactical advantage. Mind you that doesn't even begin to encompass the other pitfalls and shortcomings of the IJAF.

[@richardschaffer5588]

It’s not incredible that the IJAFs were slow to realize that they needed to work out tactics to counter Losigkeit’s tactics the RAF did it in the Battle of Britain too. Change is had , you first must admit weakness. That’s always a bitter pill for me personally but obviously necessary when facing an existential problem.

[@Darkron9]

This brings to mind a presentation at the Planes of Fame air museum some 25 or so years ago. The speakers were American pilots who flew Hurricanes for the RAF. When the pilots flew against the 109, the Hurricane has a distinct maneuverability advanrage. The 109 pilots learned to boom and zoom the Hurricanes. When the Hurricanes were sent to the Far East, they thought they would have the maneuverability advantage they had against the German aircraft. After suffering several losses, the Hurricane pilots "became" the German pilots and started using boom and zoom against the Japanese aircraft.

[@randallreed9048]

The discussion about the German pilot--with extensive combat experience in Europe--not playing "by our rules" seems to echo the Japanese Imperial Navy and their habit of discarding naval wargame results that ran counter to the beliefs and expectations of the highest ranking officers. For any of these "test" situations--in ALL armed forces-- these events could make or break careers and reputations. In aviation and shipbuilding, huge monies were at stake based on an inevitable series of assumptions and educated guesses about future combat that could be years in the future. If I was flag rank, I would be anxious about any of these so-called "tests" and their built-in biases.

[@josephstabile9154]

"Pride goeth before the fall", writ large. It never fails (hubris, that is)...

[@afre3398]

A big part of the picture was also the "Akutan Zero" It was found intact by the Americans in July 1942. This was the first air worthy Zero the Americans get their hands on. And it helped them alot

[@kiwihame]

Superb overview. Not at all surprised by any of that. It was interesting that they weren't open to picking up on the huge hint that Lösigkeit was trying to give them. Your enemy will fight according to the strengths of his plane, not the strengths of yours. Great collaboration guys. Well done!

[@user-njyzcip]

The IJA and IJN were so obsessed with their own ideas sometimes I feel like they were oblivious to how modern warfare works. That Kantai Kesen idea by the navy, for example...

[@advorak8529]

@@user-njyzcip It is a bit like a cavalry charge - or waves after waves in the Russian style. Or a Banzai charge.

[@jerry2357]

A serious case of NIH syndrome.

[@PabloPagues]

Exactly what I thought. Then the americans designed highspeed fighters to counter japanese doctrine. They had a glance at the future, an early warning but i can see why it was difficult at the time to see that. The japanese had the better planes if compared with americans or russians. At that point in time, they were correct in their judgement.

[@Dimension2010]

Hint? He was simply terrible for not even doing things relevant to the test. It was About the difference in dogfighting capability of the fighters, not tactics, certainly not some merging and passes. Most people could get bored from that pretty soon. It's more interesting how he even got the embarrassing idea. Totally a waste of time or anything with nothing can be learnt from.

[@marksedin4909]

I'll be happy to translate documents from russian if you need

[@zerko2787]

Hiho! Oh yes ... pls Military Aviation. Soviet views on German aircraft, and what to learn from it, would be great!

[@reyverde8820]

We could share the work... if you don't mind

[@Paraphen]

I'd offer to do so for Latin but... you know...

[@rkl7l7rr72]

Me to

[@SP-sy5nq]

@@Paraphen just in case we need to look over medieval flight attempts?

[@briangreen1781]

"And the army could borrow it... If they were feeling optimistic." 😆 It's like asking for a backrub from your ex.

[@timonsolus]

Your ex would happily give you a back rub - with sandpaper gloves! 😆

[@spindash64]

The difference is that your ex probably cared about you for at least one singular moment in the past

[@augustosolari7721]

Easier for them to get a model of the spiftfire or Mustang...

[@daszieher]

Depends on how you treated your ex.

[@LupusAries]

@@daszieher or how psycho your ex was/is......

[@Rammstein0963.]

Fun fact, when the allies first encountered the KI-61 "Tony" I think it was, supposedly they thought the Japanese had gotten their hands on a license to build 109's due to the similar appearance.

[@thanakonpraepanich4284]

Yeah, the Japanese Army Air Corp kept Hien so closely guarded that the Navy did not know the plane existed until the Doolittle Raid where it flew the first combat mission. It almost got shot down by Navy Zeroes who though it was American escort fighter. The first nickname of Ki-61 was Mike, not Tony, thanks to Dolittle speculating it was a licensed built Me-109. And I think it was IJN papers that though it was a licensed built Macchi C.202. OSA got that paper and made the same mis-identification leading to Tony reporting nickname. Now if the temperamental Ha-40 engine did not ate water pumps, bearings, cooling hoses and gaskets like they were fuel during the plane's debut in Rabaul campaign. Almost 200 intact air frames were left on the island because nobody can get the engine to start.

[@johnreed9435]

They also thought it was the macchi 202, hence the name Tony

[@timonsolus]

@@thanakonpraepanich4284: The Japanese Army should have kept all their Ki-61s (with unreliable liquid-cooled Ha-40 engines) for the defence of the Japanese home islands, and relied on the radial-engined Ki-43 and Ki-44 in their overseas bases.

[@jeffk464]

@olus They converted the ki-61 into the ki-100 which was a great fighter. Japan licensed an old version of the 109 engine and their version was supposed to be very unreliable, which seems backwards. The ki-61 with a reliable higher power version of the 109 engine would probably have been very effective.

[@timonsolus]

@@jeffk464 : The Italians also failed to make a reliable copy of the DB 605 engine.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

*Hey all, hope you enjoy this video and found this evaluation as interesting as me. Big thank you to supporter/viewer QAZ for making the translations.* Editing this video was one big challenge, thanks to multiple loud and violent 'disagreements' with Adobe Premiere If you see some rough edges, just look away. I won and that's what counts. *Corrections* 06:17 - I say Type 79 Fighter, it is of course Type 97 as written (Stupid German number twist) - Thank you to Andrew & Petros for pointing it out

[@alexkorman1163]

If you could find the documents about it, would you ever cover the Japanese copy of the An/M2 .50 cal?

[@michaelinsc9724]

Many thanks to QAZ!!!!

[@TactWendigo]

I haven't seen you do anything on the P-38 Lightening, I've been listening for awhile and I was curious if either I've missed it or if you haven't done it, is it something planned for the future?

[@dansotelo228]

Wow! This as a history nut, was an eye-opener into a can of worms... I had no idea Germans were asking Japan for their opinion on the performance of the 109. I know very much how they shared technical information on all other types of fighters including the ME-262 but had no idea about the early 109 & Japan. I really appreciate this type of history.

[@stay_at_home_astronaut]

This was a very good video.

[@psychohist]

Sounds like Losigkeit knew what he was doing. In WWII, air fights were always within visual range, so the first to spot the enemy had a big advantage. The Bf 109's strongest feature was likely its small size, making it less likely to be seen first. This feature lent itself to hit and run tactics, which ultimately all the top WWII aces from all the combatants ended up using.

[@randallreed9048]

For that matter, ALL the top aces in WW1 made the majority of their kills by shooting down their victims from above and behind. Dogfighting, as such, was for losers and pilots with death wishes.

[@markmitchell450]

Well how are you going to fire at something you can't see So your comments are not exactly smart Planes where rated on the rate of climb and break off left or right and the speeds at various altitudes All planes had there optimum operating windows and advantages or disadvantages

[@riazhassan6570]

@@markmitchell450 And that, of course, is the right answer. There was no perfect fighter for all aspects of combat. They all had some areas of weakness or shortfall and some of advantage. This was faster at this altitude, that at that: this could dive better, that could turn better, etc. Pilot competence, using one’s own strengths and exploiting the other’s weakness, was the crucial factor in the contest

[@Marc-zi4vg]

The 109's advantage (at a time) is that it was light and had a powerful engine, and is very slippery in the air (at a time) meaning that it could retain...some call it speed, momentum, but most called it energy, something the pilots knew and weaponized it and form another version of dogfighting called "energy fighting".

[@bobuboi4643]

@@randallreed9048 orr?. For people who's planes excel at dogfighting and would rip apart in high speed dives?.

[@capnrotbart]

Absolutely fascinating! It is so rare to hear about these kinds of comparisons between different craft. Perhaps you could make a mini-series about these sorts of comparison flights, you are already two episodes in anyway.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Would love to but unless original documents are in German or English, I am highly reliant on others to provide me with translations (like here with QAZ) which takes a lot of their time and it is not reasonable for me to ask them to put together one after the other :)

[@timothycampbell495]

The test reports of the RN's Eric Brown and Grumman's Corkey Meyer would be excellent resources if you decide to do any direct comparison videos.

[@alan6832]

@@MilitaryAviationHistory The Ki-27 was proved or disproved in combat with planes that performed in ways that were quite similar to the 109E7, those being P-40 and Spitfire. So we have plenty of hindsight with which to assess the validity of their assertion that the Ki27 could defend itself against such aircraft. The loss ratio should be conclusive.

[@jamesrussell7760]

@@alan6832 The Flying Tigers, flying P-40s, were deadly against the Ki-27s and even the Ki-43s, so long as they used Boom & Zoom tactics.

[@glenchapman3899]

@@jamesrussell7760 It was one of the great strengths the US and other allies brought to the war. Ability to adapt to situations and develop successful tactics very quickly.

[@yaragi]

Thanks to QAZ for his contribution, stuff like this is much appreciated by so, so many viewers and your audience in general, there's a limitless number of them for every one that leaves a comment about it. Cheers to all & stay safe!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Agreed, QAZ did a fantastic job

[@yaragi]

@@MilitaryAviationHistory My apologies for forgetting to mention: So did you!

[@rickglorie]

Yeah, it shines a light on the japanese/german collaboration also, and confirms the difficulties between army and navy in Japan. Fascinating.

[@davidness8477]

This all breaks down the average citizens perception of war history tempered by each nations media and including influencial citizens input. Of special interest to me is the how and why role of International Bankers in all of this. Loans before, during and after must have kept these competing nations economic and politically challenged for many years. Just think of the inflation influence alone, not to mention the psychological stress on the citizens.

[@davidhimmelsbach557]

@@davidness8477 Inflation crushes the pain of loan repayment. At a national level, with fiat currency issuance, International Bankers are a nullity. They are NOT used. The printing press is used, instead. In the post-war world, the US taxpayers totally subsidized external loans. Alien nations were NOT paying the freight. If you think so, then you've flunked logic and economics 101. Most foreign nations are ROTTEN credits -- and would be paying 2% and more PER MONTH for all credit extended. As sovereign powers, they are NOT required to pay back their loans -- and normally -- they don't. Even the US dis-honored re-payment in gold after WWI. And the USSC backed the government 100% when they screwed American creditors. The gold clause was the reason why the original interest rate was at ROCK BOTTOM during the war. Without it, the interest coupon would've had to double. [ In the American Civil War the Federal government (the North) had to pay ~15% for its borrowings. Such debt had no gold clause, of course. ] { International Bankers only had meaning -- at the level of sovereign states -- when the gold standard was operative. }

[@franciscomoutinho1]

IJA: "NO!!! You have to use the tactics we expect you too!" Losigkeit: "Bf-109 goes Brrrrrrrrr."

[@spitefulwar]

BF-109 laughed at their suffering. :D

[@kumaflamewar6524]

I kind of wish they'd had the chance to evaluate the bf 109f, if common mythology is to be believed it was one of the most loved variants

[@MajinOthinus]

@@kumaflamewar6524 The F was good, but the G was great.

[@AHBdV]

When you want to asses how well the Bf-109 is in a turning dogfight, then it is useless if the pilot only dives away constantly. Sure, he knows the Bf-109 shouldn't do that with Hurricanes and Spitfires, and probably immediately understood he shouldn't with the Japanese planes either. But for understanding the strengths and weaknesses it is important to also do things you normally wouldn't. Otherwise you don't get objective data.

[@Nightdare]

@@AHBdV Then again, the disregard for 'boom and zoom' tactics, and focus on dogfights came back to bite the IJN in the ass when the US upgraded their Wildcats to Hellcats

[@zacharyleao2526]

I just like that the German pilot was some sort of WW II Maverick, breaking all the rules of JAAF TOPGUN

[@stevekaczynski3793]

He was flying as he would have in Europe and utilising the virtues of the 109.

[@carsonm7292]

@@stevekaczynski3793 And giving free insight into how Western aerial combat theory was evolving, for that matter-yet the Japanese insisted that he play by their rules, as if the Americans would be so compliant!

[@Eonymia]

8:22 "oh no, he is using hit-and-run tactics, utilizing the strengths of the plane. That's illegal. I'm sure this will never happen again."

[@MrBejkovec]

Meanwhile in 1945: „Oh well...kuso!“

[@drcovell]

I do Cybersecurity work, including testing websites for weaknesses. After I (always) break in, the usual coder response is “Who would think to do that.” Same shit, different day/dumbass (SSDD)! There’s a new chat expression for IM. 🤣

[@user-hr1uw4cj2z]

yeah Americans surely will NOT use this tactic right?

[@brianrogers7360]

Gen. Claire Chenault: Hold my beer

[@GameDevNerd]

Stop taking away our advantages! Hey, he's comitting a war crime! 😂

[@matchesburn]

7:51 Japanese: "No! No! No! Stop fighting like that. Fight like how we want you to fight! No more energy fighting and hit-and-run tactics!" [A few years later] Losigkeit: "Tried to tell you so."

[@20chocsaday]

Dont forget, there are such things as rituals / rules in fighting. Think of Judo, or the Marquis of Qeensberry. How long would it have been since the adjudicators were alone in a cockpit and it was 'Kill it before it kills me".

[@nigelchurchill7563]

Too bad the americans obliterated the germans using the exact same tactics

[@KoalaTContent]

@@nigelchurchill7563 If I recall correctly it was mostly the overreaching battle of Britain that put the most strain on the Luftwaffe

[@UsoundsGermany]

@@KoalaTContent Plus losses on the eastern front... Luftwaffe had happy days early on, but from 43 onwards Russian airforce recovered, also lots of planes lost at Stalingrad not only transports

[@irohnick]

@@nigelchurchill7563 too bad the germans had the most takedowns in the history of aviation alltogether on both Bf109 and Fw190 aircraft and that the only reason others gained aerial superiority was because of logistic problems and possibly outnumbering by the end of it (as aviation can't do shit if the ground counterpart of the armed forces are fucking up)

[@bificommander7472]

IJA: Eh, what are we gonna need a high altitude interceptor for? B29: Look out below!

[@Warmaker01]

Hindsight's 20-20. High altitude bombers was not a Japanese army concern in 1941 when the testing of the Bf109E was done in Japan. The Imperial Japanese Army was neck deep in fighting in mainland China who had no real high altitude bombing capability. Also, the IJA envisioned itself campaigning in Far East Asia against Chinese, Russians. The army favored expansion in China and against Russia.

[@josephstabile9154]

@@Warmaker01 And lo, that philosophical trend line brought them to the "Boulevard of Broken Dreams"... To loosely paraphrase a liquor commercial: Keep thinking, my friends... BTW, wasn't Tokyo bombed in '42 from low altitude, and scorched in '45 from same? Ignoring taps on the shoulder from the grim reaper is never wise.

[@josephstabile9154]

Ref the 1945 Perry Como hit: "(A Hubba-Hubba-Hubba) Dig You Later"...

[@matchesburn]

@@Warmaker01 "High altitude bombers was not a Japanese army concern in 1941" ...They kinda knew about the IJN plans and that they'd soon potentially be at war with America (although, even worse, they actually thought that that would avoid a protracted war and lead to America suing for peace or something... anyone that would've known even the slightest bit about American culture and politics knew that wasn't going to work out - and the few that had the guts to try and make that known were quickly told to be silent by higher ranking superiors). They knew we had B-17s then and there. They should have been concerned.

[@jamallabarge2665]

The Japanese bombed civilians in China. They must have watched the action below and wondered if their homeland would be so attacked.

[@demos113]

My gratitude to QAZ for all the work he did for this! :-)

[@earthenjadis8199]

8:32 - "It's pointless because his tactics are different." And here's a reason why Japan lost their war against the USA.

[@kameronjones7139]

Ironically the usa used his tactics of hit and run to devastating effect

[@SilverforceX]

Moreso the USA had working radar and cracked JP communication code, so they could see forces 180 NM away at sea, and could find out what the JP plans were in advance. On top of this, a massive economic and production advantage.

[@christianl.e.l17]

The real reason: more resources.

[@dulguunjargal1199]

@@christianl.e.l17 The Japanese not Changing Tactics to represent it aswell

[@zlatanclovecic1944]

​@@christianl.e.l17 Not only more resources. The more flexible thinking was also very important. On the contrary, the Japanese officers tended to always stick to the plan even if it was obvious the plan is completely wrong and the situation rendered the plan useless.

[@AdurianJ]

Sweden was relatively close to buying the Zero but then the Air Force developed and built the J22 in house instead

[@jayklink851]

Realistically speaking, were the J22's 13.2mm rounds as devastating as video games, like War Thunder, make them out to be? I wonder the foot lbs/kgs of pressure is

[@fowlergaming5140]

@@jayklink851 from what i understand they were on par with polish 14.4 in terms of velocity

[@jayklink851]

@@fowlergaming5140 Roger that! Just looked it up, 1006 meters per second (14.4mm)👍

[@damienmaynard8892]

Delivery was the issue at the time.... Still, the J22 was more impressive in the air than on paper!

[@damienmaynard8892]

@@jayklink851 The Italian 13.2mm had a pretty good punch so, since the Swedes had Reggiane's in or entering service, the indigenous weapons should have been made to be equal or improved.

[@cynicalmedic252]

Would love to eventually see a follow up video on the Japanese Army Air Service's evaluation of the Fw 190 A-5 they managed to get.

[@rustyshackleford6069]

You just know that because of War Thunder lol

[@Circa88]

@Faaiz Ahmed Rabbani true. I first learned about the Japanese BF-109 after seeing it in war thunder and doing research on it.

[@Tarepa_]

In a Japanese book I have, it says as follows: "In Japan, they have tested the speed and acceleration of captured American aircraft (P-51C, P-40E) and imported German aircraft (Fw 190). In the spring of 1945, at 5,000 meters above Fussa, Ki-61, Ki-84, Fw 190, P-51C, and P-40E lined up in a horizontal line and began flying at full speed in unison. In the first few seconds, it was the Fw 190 that took the lead. However, three minutes later, the P-51C overtook it, and the Ki-84 and below closed the gap with the Fw 190. When we stopped after about five minutes, the P-51C was far away, followed by the Ki-84 and the Fw 190 at about the same position, the Ki-61 a little later, and then the P-40E."

[@bartbernard6127]

@@rustyshackleford6069 I just know of War Thunder because of this thread.

[@tianyizhang2205]

@Faaiz Ahmed Rabbani War Thunder isn't always right, they didn't tell you that Japan never actually got the Heavy Tank No.6.

[@brenthopley874]

Hi Chris, just stumbled across your youtube channel and having spent 50 years in both the civil and military aviation industries (the latter for the most part in uniform) and being a keen aviation historian myself, your presentations are among the best online I've seen. They are well presented, generally very well researched and very informative. Thanks for making the effort to educate us about aviation history.

[@jayklink851]

Brilliant video! Thanks for spending, I'm sure a lot, of time at the archives researching this video, and others like it. Love the topic, Bismarck is the last vestige of military aviation, Discovery Wings, History Channel and Military channel have gone the ways of the dinosaur.

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Cheers, Jay

[@iain075]

Well said sir. Informative, nicely produced and superbly researched.

[@martijn9568]

''Discovery Wings, History Channel and Military channel have gone the ways of the dinosaur.'' It really depends what you are looking for IMO. Especially the OG Discovery Wings/Great Planes was a fantastic program.

[@jayklink851]

@@iain075 He does his homework!

[@jayklink851]

@@martijn9568 You're correct sir! Disc Wings programs were aired on the 'Military Chan', you know "Wings of the Luftwaffe/Red Star"; unfortunately however, the Military Channel was converted to "American Hero Channel", which like the current History Channel, is a bit crappy. Although occasionally they run the OG military content.

[@rusvietdog5338]

Interesting analysis of the Japanese’s perspective on the Bf-109. I really do enjoy the comparisons of each country’s aircraft especially on their strengths and weaknesses. Good video and awesome job!

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Thanks, yes, I agree, it's always itneresting to see how the same piece of kit is rated differently across services and countries

[@jpgabobo]

Great Video. Interesting connection to the Ki-44 bias. Thanks for all the work you put into these projects. Love learning about these beautiful machines. (and give Premiere a kick for me when its not looking!)

[@F0KK3RM4N]

Definitely enjoy these types of videos, really get into the minds of those from different perspectives to see what they focus on the most

[@MilitaryAviationHistory]

Exactly! thank you

[@onyourkilllist6880]

*_“Damn you Losigkeit! Why won’t you turn with me!”_*

[@jakeb6703]

Sound like warthunder pilots lol

[@onyourkilllist6880]

@@jakeb6703 😂🤣😂

[@naamadossantossilva4736]

The guy had years of experience fighting the best pilots in Europe.The japanese should be thanking him for all that condensed wisdom.

[@reggiekoestoer1511]

Pretty much me in every Warthunder game with my Zero

[@Dimension2010]

“I'm only here just to perform my own test”

[@_AnanasIEgenJuice_]

Imagine bringing a plane all the way from Germany to Japan along with a skilled pilot and then telling him how he should fly his plane against the japanese fighters.

[@darreng745]

The Japanese rarely considered how their opponents would react, preferring to assume that their opponents would act as how they predicted or how they themselves would have reacted.

[@_AnanasIEgenJuice_]

@@darreng745 Yea, that was what I was going for

[@LipziG3R]

But that is the point of an evaluation and comparison. They don't want to learn how the German plane doctrine and tactic works - They want to compare their planes against the German ones while applying their own doctrine - Which was mostly dogfighting. It is no use to compare the BF-109 "gun and run" tactic to the Japanese one, of they won't use their planes that way. They wanted to learn something about the German flight characteristics to maybe find something they could implement on their planes to improve their performance within their own doctrine. If you don't comply with the simulation you're useless, no matter how well the plane performs or how good the pilot is. You just can't compare 2 planes in specific scenarios if one plane does something entirely different, than the other. That's like trying to compare the acceleration of 2 cars for 0-100km/h but one driver does some tight turns to show how stable the car is in a turn - It's nice but not useful for a specific comparison.

[@_AnanasIEgenJuice_]

​@@LipziG3R Learning about different doctrines sounds like a better use of time to me than wasting time looking into specific flight characteristics of a plane you never will meet on the battlefield. If they had seized that chance of actually learning about run and gun/boom and zoom, then that could possibly have helped them against faster US fighters. A lot of flight characteristics could probably have simply been learned by paper. Weight, power, wing loading, wing profile etc.

[@danielwhyatt3278]

Yeah, that’s certainly a very bold and cocky move there by the Japanese pilots. That wasn’t going to last long.

[@mbryson2899]

This video is a good example of why I enjoy this channel so much. New details to flesh out history of which I was only vaguely aware. QAZ is the kind of viewer I really appreciate, sharing knowledge with us, using skills on our behalf to our benefit. :)

[@johnscarpa5116]

Fantastic. I am suspect from the words used by the Japanese to describe the 109's performance that there was a little bit of pride influencing their evaluation.

[@Jens-Viper-Nobel]

It was, and to some extent still is, a degree of viewing themselves as superior in all respects to the rest of the world. For example, Their navy worked on the assumption that they could entice any enemy into a final and decisive battle in which the "superior" Japanese force would anihilate the enemy with it's superior tactics and bravery. More surprisingly, they never adhered from that belief despite being mauled heavily in the time since Midway. Even Yamamoto succumbed to this "victory fever" as they dubbed it themselves after the war, though he had the better understanding of knowing that if the Americans would have time and opportunity to get into full industrial gear and arming up, there would be little that Japan could do to stop them from destroying Japan. To be honest, a lot of this victory fever most likely stemmed from the fact that ever since it's formation, nobody had ever succeeded in attacking and conquering the Nippon. So at some point down the road of history, they became convinced that no nation on earth would ever be able to defeat the determined and brave Japanese soldier, and their tactics and strategies were far superior to that of any and all other countries. A contradiction in terms that becomes even stranger when considering the fact that the so called kamikaze wind that destroyed the attacking fleet several hundred years earlier was in fact a sort of divine luck as it was realised that if that storm had not occured, Japan would indeed have been unable to claim that they had never been successfully invaded when WWII came around. But it became a doctrin engraved in the overall mindset of all Japanese that Japan simply could not be conquered or even attacked on it's own soil., thus further expanding into the belief that the Japanese people as a nation of people were superior to all other people on the earth.

[@tomhart837]

THEY STILL DO WHICH IS WHY THEIR WORD FOR FOREIGNER IS "GAIJIN" WHICH ALSO MEANS "BARBARIAN". THE VICTORY dISEASE CAME FROM THE EASE THAT THEY OVERRAN THE EUROPEANS AT THE START OF THE WAR. PARDON THE CAPS, TOO LAZY TO RETYPE@@Jens-Viper-Nobel

[@RonJohn63]

Great thanks, QAZ!

[@bawneff5133]

From an American perspective, this is such great history. The language barrier really hides some amazing details between Germany and Japan that is I'm sure largely absent from much of the history scholarship done in and by Americans or other English speakers. Thank you!

[@deckape714]

That was fascinating, Thank you Bismarck and QAZ

[@peckbrian2546]

Thank you, QAZ!! This is fascinating. What a service you have provided to us all!

[@stacyobrien1729]

I love listening to all of the facts, especially the little known ones, that you present. My family thinks I'm nuts but I can't help learning these facts from the war, thanks for your hard work!!

[@wingy252]

I don't know how I got hooked on the subject but it's been a passion of mine to learn about since I was 13 now I'm 27 😆

[@Weisior]

Dude beats Japanese in dogfight using hit n run tactics Japanese: wait, thats illegal

[@AHBdV]

The Japanese pilots were using the same tactics against the slower Chinese fighters.

[@Ares-jx4ep]

@Justin Illhardt Most victims do.

[@sarrumac]

@Justin Illhardt Ok target.

[@m.steward9146]

ZLY: Brilliant analysis. But the Japanese were interested in performance data, not Losigkeit's aggressor squadron bullshit.

[@rconger384]

P40s under claire channault's flying tigers held their own against Japanese fighters in China. It was all about zoom and boom and winning.

[@randallreed9048]

Very nice piece of exposition! I now k ow that after 60 years of studying WW2 on all fronts, I know very little about Japanese Army aviation and its aircraft. They had some very nice aircraft and I am left with wanting to know more. Thank you so very much!

[@carlbradshaw7064]

Great video. New info about the Me109 test and the interservice rivalry affecting the Army vs. Navy designs. Great stuff.

[@AhnkoCheeOutdoors]

I really enjoyed this episode. I have always been extremely interested in Japanese military aviation history. My father was a veteran of WWII fighting in the SW Pacific theater, so I inherited his interest in WWII history. I forgot how early the Ki-44 development was inaccurately remembering it as a post Pearl Harbor design. I remember my father telling me the Ki-44 was more a "drag-racer" with great straight-line performance, but not a great handling "sports car" like the Ki-43. That's another thing I find interesting, that the BF-109 was not tested against the Ki-43 which I believe was already in production. I would have liked to see that comparison. Back to the Ki-44, my dad once talked to a pilot of a F4U Corsair who returned from a mission barely surviving an encounter with an experienced pilot in a Ki-44. The Corsair was a very capable "hot rod" in it's own right, but on this one occasion this American was running scared because he had great difficulty getting this Ki-44 off his tale. The Corsair pilot told my dad that he was used to fighter Zeros, and easily pulling away from them, but he had to resort to using his water-injection to loose this Ki-44. Dad said the Ki-44 was not the best dogfighter the Japanese produced, but it was one of few planes that B-29 pilots feared. As a side note I had an uncle who was a pilot for the IJA who flew various planes during the war, but his favorite was the Mitsubishi Ki-46 a surprisingly quick and agile twin engine plane originally designed for reconnaissance, but later mounted with cannons, and used against US B-29 bombers. I remember my uncle having burn scars on his face with a google shaped clear complexion around his eyes from the one time he was shot up while piloting a Aichi E13A , with his engine catching on fire but he survived to fly another day. My dad and my uncle were at the battle of Lingayen Gulf, but on opposite sides. They became great friends after the war. This uncle became in English teacher after the war. He was very meek and soft-spoken, his facial scars the only thing indicating his involvement in the war. Thank you again for your very informative, and interesting videos.

[@martijn9568]

''That's another thing I find interesting, that the BF-109 was not tested against the Ki-43 which I believe was already in production.''', I too would have loved to hear that.

[@KanJonathan]

There should be some Ki-43 pre-production models back then. IIRC the Ki-43 prototype got a lot of debugging works to be done.

[@lesforan7695]

I love it when former enemies become friends.

[@khairulhelmihashim2510]

great story!

[@Bepppe]

The person translating from Japanese is a hero, many thanks!

[@kamikaze2009]

maybe it was not a real person but it's AI translated? lol

[@martinsaunders7925]

Taking 1940 technical Japanese and translating using AI? Not yet.

[@Riccardo_Silva]

It looks like japanese were not accustomed to, call it, DACT training. No one was, back in those days. On the other hand, when they understood the limitations of their training methods, their opinion on Ki44 capabilities changed drastically. Exceedingly interesting video! Great!

[@Krusesensei]

What is DACT training?

[@rustyshackleford6069]

Leaving a reply so I also get notified if someone explains what it is. Guessing it’s Downed AirCraft Training? Doesn’t sound right though...

[@craigmcculloch4342]

Dissimilar Air Combat Training

[@gosquidgo1]

@@Krusesensei dissimilar air combat training. Dogfighting other types of aircraft other than the one that you’re flying.

[@Riccardo_Silva]

@@rustyshackleford6069 🤣😂Dissimilar Air Combat Training! Ask Top Gun pilots! 😂🤣😂

[@capthawkeye8010]

"Aileron damage" on landing refers to ground-looping incidents. The Bf109 was very punishing in a crosswind, and had a narrow wheel base.

[@myronplichota7965]

Many thanks to you and Mr. Translator for this amazing presentation. I had no idea that such tests took place. The pilot reports appear to be very honest. It is interesting that in the Bf-109 v Ki-27 contest, both pilots were dissatisfied with their kill potential. An unsurprised Ki-27 pilot could defensively turn tighter than the Bf-109 and/or do vertical stuff, making a difficult target for the attacking Bf-109, but a Ki-27 is ill-equipped to bounce a Bf-109. I remember reading in Hans-Ulrich Rudel's book "Stuka Pilot", that he managed to shoot down attacking Soviet fighters with his forward guns in low-level turning combat (which resticts the opponent's vertical options, lest s/he smash into the ground). Like the Ki-27, the Ju-87 had a low wing loading by Western WWII standards. Despite the pointy tips on the Ju-87 wing planform, the stall/spin characteristics were excellent. The Aichi D3A Val dive bomber was also a dangerous opponent at low altitude in the Pacific theatre. I suspect that the disastrous Ju-87 losses in the Battle of Britain were due to training that 1) totally relied on fighter cover and tail gunners for defense 2) forgot the Dicta Boelcke 3) ignored newly-learned rotte/schwarm doctrine Rudel barely survived WWII because he figured out on his own how to prevail flying the Ju-87 in a 1vX situation with or without fighter cover. I don't recall him pissing and moaning about lack of fighter cover or lousy tail gunners. These days, A-10 Warthogs can carry Sidewinders in case there is serious opposition. The WWII Samurais failed to comprehend the rotte/schwarm teamwork concept, preferring the WWI single-combat approach. That is why "inferior" P-40 and F4F squadrons that used teamwork tactics racked up superior kill ratios. I would rather be discussing cross-country thermal soaring in gliders, but you've got to start somewhere :)

[@ovk-ih1zp]

Thanks QAZ, great work on an under represented but fascinating subject. Big thumbs UP!

[@luckymacy745]

Excellent history lesson. I can’t recall ever getting this much detail on the 109 trials by the Japanese. The quotes from the pilots are ‘priceless’. Thanks to the supporter who brought this forward and thanks for sharing with us on KZbin. Looking forward to your next entertaining aviation history lesson!

[@cyclingnerddelux698]

Lovely episode! I really get the sense that there was a difference in thinking in terms of how fighter aircraft should be employed. I must say, I expected to hear Japanese criticism of the BF 109’s lack of endurance.

[@quentintin1]

well it was not tested for acquisition, but for comparative performance testing, so the range issue was not a factor, also it was tested by the Army, which is to my understanding that they had a slightly lower emphasis on planes range than the Navy

[@cyclingnerddelux698]

@@quentintin1 Excellent points!

[@timonsolus]

The Japanese Ki-27 had an even shorter range than the Bf 109E.

[@jwenting]

Interesting comparison. I can understand how they were frustrated with Losigkeit, but he was flying the aircraft the way it was intended to be flown, and pretty much how the Japanese could expect most Americans and other allied pilots to fly against Japanese fighters of the same generation, so maybe they should have heeded him some more and have him instruct some of their instructors. Might have made the Japanese harder to kill for American pilots once they got their Hellcats and Corsairs.

[@thefellathathuntsvatniks]

Yeah. There is just a good news and bad news: The good news is for the Army, while bad news for the Navy. The Army is more prepared to the upcoming American tactics more than the Navy did. If not for German pilots like Losigkeit that participated the simulated dogfight, the outcome will be the same as the Navy. Unfortunately, the Japanese still lose the war. Still that's why Japanese Army pilots are more formidable ones than the Navy pilots who didn't even get a chance to evaluate German planes due to the myth of the Japanese Zero superiority. And in terms of tactical aerial formation, the Army is more superior to Navy due to the fact of the same foreign pilots introducing them to Schwarm formation. Whereas the Navy relied on a Vic formation. Sadly even for a Japanese boom and zoom fighter pilot, the Americans began using planes superior to that of the Japanese can make during the war, making all of their tactics useless

[@matchesburn]

@@thefellathathuntsvatniks IJA: "We learned a lot from that Losigkeit fellow. Should we inform the Navy about our findings." IJA [pure disdain]: "Let them figure it out for themselves."

[@thefellathathuntsvatniks]

@@matchesburn Few years later... Army: Thank you Losigkeit! I owe you one. Navy: *nOoooo!! yOU cAn'T jUst diVe oN Us aNd jUst zOoM awAy! ThIs iS cOwaRDicE!*

[@midgetman4206]

@@thefellathathuntsvatniks it makes me wonder what they would think of modern air combat and it's missiles

[@fredmaughan5669]

Thank You QAZ! Chris has a fresh, original perspective on so many things. And he backs that up with unimpeachable sources. BRAVO!

[@edwardpate6128]

During this same time period the Flying Tigers flying the P-40 were dominating the Ki-27 and Ki-43 in China using the kind of hit and run tactics the German pilot was using with the 109.

[@mackfisher4487]

Quas, Thank you for translating these documents. Amateur historians have a difficult time not being able to read primary source information, your work helps everyone who's interested. Thank You

[@shawnadams1965]

Tub of Sauerkraut... check! So now that I watched the video, very informative and interesting. I'd like to thank QAZ for making it possible!

[@Token_Civilian]

Great job QAZ on the translation to make this video possible. More like this one MAH! Great vid.

[@weissrw1]

Great video!!! I had no idea of the variety of fighters the Japanese had just in the Army. Add the Navy and they must have had a bunch. I also really liked that the German pilot was not going to play pretend this and pretend that -- he just flew to win.

[@seeingeyegod]

yeah they had a lot of great stuff but seemingly could never decide on one aircraft to mass produce, and then add that to the famous rivalry and animosity between the army and navy.

[@mirado8738]

Thanks for the translation QAZ and for bringing it to us MAH. For me it was new information that I never thought about but also think it is very intersting^^

[@jroch41]

Thanks to QAZ for translations! Good episode. Vergiss' nicht das Kraut!

[@deltavee2]

Thanks, Chris for another interesting video (they all are!) and also *thanks to QAZ for the translation.* This viewer/subscriber absolutely enjoyed the work of you both. I had no idea that Japan was using some German engine technology. The Japanese were genteel and courteous in their assessments as is their cultural bent but there was no mistaking the analysis after the politesse was rubbed off. Would have been a different war if they were flying 109s against Wildcats and Lightnings, I dare say. Yes, the P-38s made their point in Europe but the Wildcats...hmmm. And somehow I don't see 109s landing on carriers with that unfortunate undercarriage. They'd all be good for one flight and that's all she wrote. Guess what I'm going for in World of War Planes! The 61 if it's available and the 60 hopefully. Cheers from Canada

[@xxdomoxxkunxx]

Would you be interested in doing a video of the He-51 compared to other fighters during the Spanish Civil War? I feel like the Spanish Civil War was an interesting moment in time as outdated equipment got tossed into a grinder and every nation has to relearn what they thought they knew about warfare

[@alanrogers7090]

Wonderful show today. Thanks, especially to QAZ for his translation skills. The testing of various aircraft has been talked about before, but here we see a slightly different point-of-view, ie the Japanese evaluating their present and future aircraft against an ally's best fighter. I fully agree about the Ki-27. Where it was in use, it did not typically see "front-line" enemy aircraft. It was in the field in numbers, so, keep it, for now, but keep developing those other aircraft as well. A very good presentation. Perhaps you can revisit this episode with Justin Pyke, for his input?

[@nicolatesla9429]

This is very intetesting! Makes me wonder if there are still evaluation documents available about the Fw190 and Me410 that were sent to Japan.

[@johnreed9435]

I believe it was the 210 that was sent there

[@2854Navman]

Very informative, thoroughly enjoyed it. Thanks for the work both to you and QAZ!

[@bryangrote8781]

Learned a lot from this video. Very interesting comparisons and also foreshadows what the Japanese Army pilots would face vs the the Flying Tigers about 6 months after these tests. The Bf-109E is a good analog for the P-40B/Cs used by the Tigers as other than the inferior climb rate of the P-40s they have similar performance in top speed up to 15000’ as well as similar dive speed, roll, and turn rates and the “hit and run tactics” used by the German pilots are also similar to those later used by the Tigers. Also liked the coverage of the Ki-44. The “Tojo” is usually a forgotten and under-rated fighter (apparently even by the Japanese themselves according to the documents discussed here.) I wonder if the Ki-44 had been used vs the Flying Tigers instead of the K-27s and Ki-43s if the Tigers would had much less success. If so I also wonder if that would that have led Japan to an earlier transition to faster but less maneuverable fighters and to “boom and zoom” vs turn fighting tactics?

[@echodelta2172]

They did employ some Ki-44s against them but didn't have as much success.

[@Chiller01]

Fascinating video. The first hand direct comparisons between the Bf109E and various Japanese types was a rare glimpse at the state of the Japanese Army air capabilities prior to the onset of their aggressive expansion.

[@hissingoose]

Japan: “you can’t use boom and zoom tactics, that’s not our style” P-38: “ok, I’ll take my ball and go home... just kidding”

[@bobuboi4643]

The p-38 could not dogfight, would rip apart if it went in a dive, couldn't energy fight. Doubt it's ever winning against a ki-44 or ki-61.

[@DamnedSilly]

@@bobuboi4643 You're high. The P-38 could out climb and out dive most anything the Japanese built as well as being at least 75 mph faster than either that you mentioned and had a ceiling 6-8 thousand feet higher than either. It out gunned the 44 and was comparable to the 61. It didn't dogfight, it bounced. In the Pacific theater, the P-38 downed over 1,800 Japanese aircraft, with more than 100 pilots becoming aces.

[@fishdroid]

This video is a good example of why I love this channel. Your attention to detail is very good, and I always learn so much it is amazing. I have been a self-taught student of military history since I was in the 5th grade, consuming books on the subject at a rate that my parents probably could not really afford. I was very excited to learn that your translation of Japanese original materials. As you said, that kind of detail is not found in many videos, and is much appreciated by consumers as myself. Great job Chris!

[@newfangledcypher5309]

Love your content, appreciate your sources!

[@GumboGalahad]

I really like when material comes from original contemporary sources. Hindsight is always 20/20 so when you can learn what people thought of this at the time as opposed to historians writing about it years later is always a big plus for me. Thanks to QAZ and to you for bringing this to light. Subscribed.

[@emperorjulian2159]

Primary sources - that's what I love, no third hand Urban legends on TV. That's why this channel and MHV/nV are greatest ways to take knowledge from if you have no time to read a whole book in 30 minutes of free time a day.

[@johnappleby405]

Original and interesting material just what makes this channel so good

[@iskandartaib]

Interesting that the Ki-43 wasn't tested against the Bf109, given that it was in widespread service.

[@bernardwills9674]

I can only suppose they had a rough idea how they stacked up but were more uncertain about the other aircraft

[@_Wiseguy7]

Same. I was also wondering the same thing considering it was the army's best fighter in service at that time.

[@fishingthelist4017]

The Oscar would win based on the parameters of the test because it was a superior dogfighter, provided Losigkeit was kept far away from the airfield. Perhaps the reason they tested the Ki44 instead of the Ki43 was because the 44 was a newer design that broke away from the Army doctrine of maneuverability at all costs. They could have wanted to show that the unpopular fighter was a match for the great Bf109, and thus a great fighter in itself. Whatever the reasoning, the Shoki did become popular with pilots after the tests.

[@_Wiseguy7]

@@fishingthelist4017 I understand that, you'd think they would like to know how the ki-43 would compare to the bf-109 and user that as a benchmark.

[@miquelescribanoivars5049]

Ki-43-I wasn't much of a leap performance wise when compared to the Ki-27 so the evaluation would had been similar except the climb rate and top speed would be somewhat closer.

[@modrysokol]

You did a very excellent and in depth study of all the various comparisons between German and Japanese aircraft. Also many thanks to your supporter for making the translations. Keep up the good work!!!

[@sergionuno]

Captain Aramaki "That troublesome guy, It´s pointless because his tactics are diferent". Wile talking about a pilot with combat experience, in many scenarios. Well...if you are expecting, for the enemy to act the way you want...you will probably get killed.

[@kimhannibaljensen6968]

in 1941 at the testing the Japanese had been at war with both the USSR (1932-1939) and China (1937-). The Japanese pilots have lots of combat experience which the Americans quickly feelt. So why should they ask a stranger to train their pilots or start using a different tactic when their own until then had been a success ??

[@Tallus_ap_Mordren]

My impression was that they were not doing training of pilots, they were testing the characteristics of the aircraft. So, if the German pilot wasn’t flying within the test parameters, the DATA acquired was USELESS. Garbage In, Garbage Out. I had a similar experience in my fencing class in high school. I was one of only two left-handed fencers on our team. The star fencer of our next opponent team, M, was left handed, slow, but with excellent technique. My coach instructed both of us left-handers spar against our starters to get them used to fencing against M. Several times during practice, he had to admonish me, “No, stop fencing like Jeff, fence like M!” I had instinctively fallen into my normal patterns, not the slower, deliberate technique M used. When I diverged from the training instructions, I was actually making the training of my team mates less effective.

[@echodelta2172]

@@kimhannibaljensen6968 Because the Chinese and Russians were trained worse and had completely different tactics and equipment than the US. By mid-42, the Japanese were getting steamrolled by the US. Because they refused to learn.

[@kimhannibaljensen6968]

@@echodelta2172 In 1941 the Japanese pilots were some of the best trained and most experienced pilots in the world, equipped with planes that was on par with and often better than their European counterparts, their tactics fit their equipment and was tested in combat. From December 1941 to mid-1942, the Japanese overran the British, Dutch and Americans. Their luck ran out (mostly because the Americans broke their code and later because the allies planes and equipment became better than the Japanese's). So in 1941 when the tests took place, the Japanese have no reason to doubt their equipment, their tactics or their pilots and therefore no reason to try to imitate the Europeans. Hinsight is just not a good argument that anyone should have done anything else. And that was my point.

[@jamesricker3997]

They did get killed He warned them about how vulnerable their aircraft were to boom and zoom tactics, they didn't listen

[@dmflynn962]

Thank you for the video. The Japanese and German opinions of the comparisons of their fighters was interesting. It is even more interesting to consider that the opinions were not made with the hindsight that we have today. The video was clear, concise, and objective. I appreciate hearing your opinions, too. The little "digs" here and there have been fair, too. I, too, was surprised that the Japanese did not compare the Ki-43 inasmuch as it was the main Army fighter at the time. I would expect that it had a tighter turning radius and better climb rate, but slower speed and dive rate, and that most pilots would have preferred the 109.

[@Dwargwarf]

So they tested the E Series in 1941 wasn’t that the year of FW190 introduction and first service year? Wonder how they would have reacted to that beauty

[@aggnesswang-spzabt5023]

Japanese technicians tested a Fw190 A-5 for real, there are photographs.

[@alessiodecarolis]

In 1941 started to being in service a better version, the F, but it had an inferior armament, only two mg and a 20mm cannon, all in the nose, was more manovrable and faster than the E

[@NielMalan]

Thank you for the great work! This helps to explain why the Japanese entered the war so confidently: they knew how their aircraft compared to the best in Europe. If you have any more of these reports, keep them coming.

[@noahwail2444]

Very interesting. I think the short range of the 109 would be a problem to the japanese, their other planes flew very long distanses. Many thanks to QAZ for the translations, I am shure a lot of people learned a lot here. I would realy like to se what the germans ment about the planes they captured from the allies in flying order.

[@firemochimc]

Yeah Zeros with droptanks i think had some of the longest range of any fighter in 1941.

[@martijnb5887]

That was what I was thinking too. But range was probably less an issue for the army than for the navy.

[@martijn9568]

@@martijnb5887 Maybe, but Southeast Asia is still very big. Probably similar in size to Eastern Europe and western Russia. I'm nut sure how well the ground in Southeast Asia is for the development of airstrips.

[@timonsolus]

The Japanese Ki-27 had an even shorter range than the Bf 109E. Although the Ki-44 had much longer range.

[@samadams2203]

Very neat, I love learning about cooperation/learning experiences between different cultures and systems.

[@rimshot2270]

The Japanese later developed the Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien or "Tony" fighter which closely resembled the Bf. 109, but was in some ways, superior. Only the Corsair and the Mustang gave it serious trouble.

[@MrBejkovec]

For the P-38 in the New Guinea theater the Tony was also no match at all tho.

[@bryangeake5826]

@@MrBejkovec ..in boom and zoom tactics!! In a close in turning fight, as with the Me 109, the P 38 was inferior! The K 61II, with the more powerful DB 605 derivative that had been refined and made to work (the Ha 140 was that engine, but was too undeveloped for general service and then the factory got bombed, so no Ki 61II were put into serious service) would have restored balance to that duel, and with the P 51 I think; but that never fully occurred.

[@R3dp055um]

Excellent stuff! Very well done, and most interesting. Thanks to the gentleman who did the translations.

[@jacobtanner486]

“How dare he energy fight instead of dogfighting our paper planes, this man has no honor”

[@GrausamerKerberos]

The downplaying of the Ki-27 shortcomings must be an artefact of Japanese culture. They love their euphemisms when things are not going their way.

[@dallesamllhals9161]

OL 2021? &%¤Oh dear TOO SOON :-O

[@creatoruser736]

"We're surrendering, but if you really look at it we accomplished a lot!"

[@spindash64]

I can’t say I blame them: you don’t want your pilots to get a morale drop because you proved their planes were obsolete and they still don’t have a better plane in

[@psychohist]

"The Ki-27 has an opportunity to be shot, but not a chance to shoot" doesn't sound too euphemistic to me.

[@user-njyzcip]

Confucius cultures in general love bs like this, cuz they don't wanna piss off their superiors

[@billchessell8213]

A completely new take on the bf109 and Japanese aircraft, of which I know little. Fascinating. Thank you.

[@walrus4046]

Sorry I'm right out of sauerkraut, else I'd let you have some lol Very interesting topic thanks and also to the translator. Great stuff!

[@fishingthelist4017]

Liberty cabbage.

[@harv5425]

Excellent video. thank you for the translation Qaz

[@Sakai070]

Definitely surprised with the ki-44 comparison, figured the 109 would have been at least measurably superior. Also surprised at no Ki-43 comparison.

[@paulwebster6406]

An absolutely brilliant and fascinating video and I have to say that this is new to me too I had no idea this took place (I do read about and am interested in military history but I’ve never come across this) and the bit about the ki-27 being able to out turn the 109 is especially interesting as it would appear that the only chance for that aircraft would to be to lure the Messerschmitt into a turning fight but no doubt as better machines entered the theatre (p-47 p-51 p-38 Corsair wildcat hellcat etc) it was phased out and once again as always an absolutely brilliant video and a special thanks to qas (i hope that’s right) for doing the translations and stay safe and well 👍😊

[@pashalis88]

You should do a video about the FW-190A4 and the Ju87,how it came in Japan ( i think , but I'm not sure this happend during wartime)what are the conclusions that the Japanese make with what airplanes they compare them. Also you must make a video about the BR.20 and how Italy sold them to Japan in the early stages of sino-japanese war (before the production of Ki-21 bomber ) keep the good work

[@marcosfernandez7207]

Very interesting comparative study, and video. Thank you both, guys! I sorely missed however the ki43, probably the most difficult combat plane to fly around, say, by 1943. By the time the testing was done, it was expected to be one of the future workhorses of IJAAF. So, I've expected to know how the little falcon would came up against the Bf109E7. Much slower and less armed, but with an excepcional rate of climb and maneuverabity. Two virtually opposed planes. I don't understand why it was not tested. But the very good showing of the Shoki was a blessing for the future, as there was a strong resistance in IJAAF for the kind of plane and fighting trim it presented. And it remained a potent and viable combat airplane far longer than the Oscar. I will see this video again. The idea of having the enemy's point of view on each other equipment is very nice, and there are many instances of this occuring that could provide useful videos. I remember the great Molders evaluating an early production Spit, without constant speed propeller, and finding it very limited as a combat aircraft. He was right, after all, in respect to the Hurricane, "a tugboat with retratable landing gear". In the end, the final outcome as ever depended on situation, skill, and... luck! Not to say, obviously, a good measure of courage, to begin with.

[@EK-gr9gd]

Would be an interesting video, why Germany never built a medium range fighter, like the Hawker Tempest. Even the Fw190D-9 had a maximum range of just ~ 1.200 km.

[@supergreg72]

Amazing work. Big thanks from Canada!!!!!!!!!!

[@christopherflack7629]

Would love to see you do a version of this on the ME262

[@joellamm5266]

He already did one and an "inside the cockpit" episode too

[@firstduckofwellington6889]

@@joellamm5266 I think he means a video similar to this one, looking at the Japanese "reaction" to the Me262(reaction as they never acquired one.)

[@joellamm5266]

@@firstduckofwellington6889 oh ok thx

[@christopherflack7629]

@@firstduckofwellington6889 yes that’s exactly what I meant I did think of editing the comment to say that. Cheers. Excellent name btw first Duke Duck.

[@pickeljarsforhillary102]

And 163.

[@woodrobin]

By restricting the parameters to eliminate hit-and-run (a.k.a. boom-and-zoom) tactics, the Japanese skewed the simulated air combat to favor the strengths of their own aircraft (turn rate and speed retention in turns) and against the strengths of the Bf-109 (climb rate, dive speed, speed retention in dive, air frame strength allowing high-G maneuvers) .

[@paulwallis7586]

"....Tactical rules...?" Too bad if the enemy isn't playing by those rules.

[@tangerinestar-2646]

What an exciting and revealing overview. Thank you very much. I hope to see more such collaborations with QAZ and analysis based on actual Japanese documents. If I may I would like to ask for a video detailing the ShinMaywa US-2 which has a fascinating development history and deployment. Keep up the great work!

[@smyrnamarauder1328]

Fun fact:Ki-61-IIs Ha-140 engine was not copy of DB605.Even Aichi Atsuta engines were not compatible with Ha-40s. Request:Can we get "detailed" video about Ki-61?

[@janhemmer1414]

Every source I can find on the internet claims it was a license build ab 605 tho...

[@Teh0X]

I'd love to learn some more detailed things about Ki-61 directly from Japanese documents. All English books about it tell the same things and leave out bit too much. I could only find details about pilot's armor from one single American document. Still couldn't find any mention if the full view cockpit was lighter than razorback. Fun fact #2: There was a subvariant of Ki-61-I tei with 30mm guns in wings, which most likely saw combat.

[@smyrnamarauder1328]

@@janhemmer1414 check japanese wiki for ha-40.Japanese in fact have different designation for licenced DB605:Ha-240

[@janhemmer1414]

@@smyrnamarauder1328 I don’t speaking Japanese. But from what I learned the Japanese simply couldn’t build a inverted inline V with the tolerances provided by Daimler, so they ultimately ditched the dB 605 copy.

[@smyrnamarauder1328]

@@janhemmer1414 yeap thats exact story(youtube didnt send notification sorry)

[@charliedontsurf334]

This was really interesting. I remember reading somewhere the many allied pilots mistook the Ki-61 the improved Ki-60 for the Me 109.

[@beemeratt]

There’s a reason it’s Allied nickname for the Ki-61 was “Tony”. They thought it may be a Macchi C 202. The liquid cooled engine just made it look very similar.

[@MadRat70]

Germans: "We have something special to sell you." JapaneseArmy: "So sorry, N-I-H" (not invented here)

[@danl.909]

Fighter comparisons, “fly-offs” as they were sometimes known, are fascinating. Thanks for the video. It was quite interesting to see the opinions of the Japanese pilots about the BF-109. Perhaps you might make another one on the opinions of the great British test pilot, Winkle Brown, who flew a great many British, German and American types and had some occasionally controversial opinions about them.

[@HartmutJagerArt]

Opinions on an aircraft are always distorted by a person's / pilot's own nationality pride and bias ! -

[@number1genoa]

I have read Wings On My Sleeve by Eric Winkle Brown, a fascinating book and I understand he still holds the world record for the number of different aircraft flown. If I recall correctly he did not rate the 109 particularly highly but praised the FW 190, he was also critical of the legendary Corsair as it had some deadly vices for carrier borne fighter. (Small margin between Stall and approach speed, tendency to tip stall (roll in) and of course that long nose) He said the KI 61 Tony was comparable to a late 30's fighter Fun Fact: More ME 109's were lost to ground accidents than combat due presumably to the narrow track undercarriage that was designed to fit the span of a standard German Rail Car.

Very nice Video. Interesting to hear about the Japanese perspective on this plane

[@plumahoplita]

indeed a good comparison

[@parvuspeach]

Extremely interesting! many thanks to you and for the translation! I've always wondered about that comparison because of the aforementioned Ki60 inline licensed engine, they had to have done official tests, very glad the records survived. Also, Ki44 is one of the better looking planes ever :D

[@stephenkearney8589]

Fantastic piece, thanks. In response to your question, it was all new to me. I suppose there is an instinct to find your own product superior. I'd love to have seen a comparison between the Bf 109 and the Mitsubishi Zero. The Americans carried out their own comparisons against a captured Zero, the lessons learnt being incorporated into the Grumman Hellcat - rather odd against wartime assertions that the Zero was just a copy of American aircraft!! One thing I'd really like to see explored is Japanese investigations into the death of Yamamoto. The Americans, to Churchill's fury, might as well have put it in neon lights across the sky that they had cracked the Japanese codes - but the Japanese themselves refused to see it! This was denial plus! But what was the official Japanese reasoning? All thoughts and observations welcome - on this subject, that is. Great channel anyway. Keep it up