WWII history question...

[Qikdraw]

In another forum I post at a guy was saying that a Japanese Zero flew over his office the other day, and I had heard somewhere that some of teh Japanese planes during WWII were actually designed by Howard Hughes, and that the American gov't at the time didn't like them so they rejected them. Is this true?

Qikdraw

[nacktman]

In another forum I post at a guy was saying that a Japanese Zero flew over his office the other day, and I had heard somewhere that some of teh Japanese planes during WWII were actually designed by Howard Hughes, and that the American gov't at the time didn't like them so they rejected them. Is this true?

Qikdraw

Would have to research it to be sure, but it is possible.
The Japanese begged, borrowed or stole most everything they built in the early part of the last century ... the design for the ZERO included.

[usuallylurk]

You have to remember that there was no "cold war" or Warsaw / NATO bloc in the 1930s.

Right up until a few weeks before Pearl Harbor, we were selling oil to Japan. Many American companies were doing business in Germany -- including oil , communications, food, etc. right up until December 9, 1941.

Up until Pearl Harbor, the United States was neutral, and Germany and Japan were countries that operated their economies along standard capitalist lines.

One example = Fanta Beverages are now owned by Coca-Cola. But, Fanta was started during WW2 by a German group that WAS Coca-Cola of Germany before the United States got into the war. They had to keep going, they had to keep the business running. After the war, Coca-Cola bought out Fanta - and the right to bottle their products again in post-war Germany.

There were ties between the Bush family -- and some German corporations. It should also be noted that some German enterprises had investments here in the United States!

But there was international investment everywhere .... unlike the post-war / Cold War situation where there wasn't a lot of Eastern European investment in the west, and vice-versa.

[Qikdraw]

You have to remember that there was no "cold war" or Warsaw / NATO bloc in the 1930s.

Right up until a few weeks before Pearl Harbor, we were selling oil to Japan. Many American companies were doing business in Germany -- including oil , communications, food, etc. right up until December 9, 1941.

Up until Pearl Harbor, the United States was neutral, and Germany and Japan were countries that operated their economies along standard capitalist lines.

I don't mean to imply it was wrong or bad, I was just looking for a bit of history that is flapping in my head to see if it was true or not. :)

I looked it up on wikipedia, but it didn't mention anything, but then I only checked the Zero, not any of the other planes. Plus Wiki doesn't have all the answers. :p

Qikdraw

[Midwest Buck]

It's in Wiki. The Zero was designed by Dr. Jiro Horikoshi of Mitsubishi. His memoir, regarding the development of Zero was published in Japan in 1970, and it was translated in the 70s, by the University of Washington Press as "Eagles of Mitsubishi, the story of the Zero Fighter"

[nacktman]

Did the research ... and not on wiki which is totally wrong on this.

By all accounts, Hughes did not actually design the ZERO fighter but did design the H-1 Racer which the ZERO was a carbon copy of.

Dr. Jiro Horikoshi did not 'design' the ZERO, he merely copied the Hughes H-1 Racer and added armaments.

In his own words, "Now regarding the Japanese ZERO ... The Japanese ZERO was a shock of the utmost magnitude to the United States because it had been thought up to that time that the Japanese were far inferior mechanically, I should say in point of aircraft design and mechanical aptitude, to the United States and nobody expected the Japanese to have an airplane that would be at all competitive. Well, in any event, when one of these Japanese ZEROS was finally captured and studied and analyzed it was quite apparent to everyone that it had been copied from the Hughes plane. That is the only relationship between the Japanese ZERO and the Hughes H-1 design. I had no dealings with the Japanese or any other foreign government for the plane and to the best of everyone's knowledge the Japanese had no other access to it except through whatever espionage they may have had or through seeing photographs of it which naturally were published all over the world."
~ Howard Hughes

[jon71]

After World War I America basically went isolationist and only kept a skeleton crew army. We were using WWI bi-planes in fact. At that time the Zeros were the best in the world. Five years later they were almost antiques. What we were using in '45 bears a strong resemblance to commercial and military planes of today (to a point, of course). In fact there was a rough design for the stealth bomber but with wars end no actual work was done on it until deep into the cold war. I find it mind boggling the advances that were made in five years.

[vintagecarguy]

The idea that the Mitsu Zero was a copy of Hughes racer was just war time propaganda.
It's amazing that after Air And Space Magazine ran an article several years ago about how it was an original Japanese design and how the copy bit was propaganda that some were so convinced by the wartime moral boosting story that they sent letters arguing with the historians who had more than enough documentation and first hand reports.
I guess a good story told well and told often has power.

[naturalmanwa]

I read somewhere that the US Army Aircorps had a chance to buy a plane design that later turned into the Zero in the late 30's. Possible it was the Hughes plane, he did a lot of stuff for the gov't over the years.

In the late 40's/early50's there was a design called a (flying wing) by Lockheed or Consolidated that was competitive with the Boeing B-47 and Boeing won out, some say it was politics. The design was very similar to the Stealth bomber.

[luvnaturism]

In the late 40's/early50's there was a design called a (flying wing) by Lockheed or Consolidated that was competitive with the Boeing B-47 and Boeing won out, some say it was politics. The design was very similar to the Stealth bomber.

The Flying Wing design theoretically offered some good advantages over traditional bomber designs, but it had severe problems that couldn't be overcome with the technology of the time. It was unstable and difficult to fly (Edwards Air Force Base was named for a test pilot killed when a Flying Wing went out of control and broke apart in the sky). The copilot had such poor visibility that he couldn't make takeoffs and landings, an obvious downer for a combat aircraft. The jet version was 100 knots slower than the B-47.

All in all, far more than politics went into that decision. Later on the technology did come along that makes a plane like the stealth bomber practical; it just didn't exist in the '50s.

[luvnaturism]

I read somewhere that the US Army Aircorps had a chance to buy a plane design that later turned into the Zero in the late 30's.

One difference in military philosophy between the US and other Allies and the Japanese had to do with the perceived value of pilots. The US considered that it takes a long time and a lot of expensive training to make an effective combat pilot. The Japanese regarded pilots, along with everyone else, as expendable commodities.

Therefore the US put heavy armor into the planes to try to protect the pilots so they could be shot down and still live to fight again. Of course that didn't always work, but sometimes it did. The armor, along with need for US planes to fly long distances to get to combat, made for larger, heavier fighters that were initially at a severe disadvantage against the lighter, more maneuverable Zero. It's also true, as stated above, that at the beginning of the war US pilots were fighting in outdated aircraft.

The US philosophy of protecting the pilot as much as possible paid big dividends later in the war. At the beginning the Zeros were flown by highly experienced combat pilots who were among the best of the best. However the Japanese began to lose so many of them as the US brought better planes into battle that they were replacing great pilots with ones who were poorly trained and who had little chance to survive. Also, the Japanese never developed a more advanced replacement for the Zero, whereas the US introduced about four generations of new fighters during the four years that the war lasted.

[nacktman]

Air and Space got it wrong, plain and simple.

The original specs for the Hughes H-1 are identical to the 'original' specs for the ZERO which was introduced 2 years after the H-1.
Funny how it could have been an exact copy and still be considered 'original'?!

Now as to the army air corps possibly buying the H-1 and making it a fighter ... could be it was floated by the procurement section of the War Department but as a lightweight machine designed for speed it was less than desirable as a fighter though it's ability to move and turn helped its case some, heck, even the old Custiss Bi-planes were 'heavier' that the army was using at the outbreak of WW2 and it was just as able to move and turn.

[vintagecarguy]

The Smithsonian Air and Space Museum got it right.

Exact...ok heres the numbers.....




wing area
racer:138 square feet
zero: 241 square feet

wing area is a CRITICAL specification for an aircraft.
they both have an empty weight nearly the same with a drastic difference in wing area.


the zero was slower than the racer,had a lighter wing loading and greater maneuverability,at the cost of pilot protection.
the racer was heavily wing loaded and meant to do one thing,go fast.
zero...light wing loading,long range dog fighter...racer..heavy gas sucking,heavy wing loaded speedster.

Oh,I see,exactly the same..I guess round engine monoplane equals same.guess they are both just copies of the Deperdussin racer of 1913.

[nacktman]

As anyone can see the Rei Sentoki or Rei-sen or ZERO Fighter has the same basic specs as the earlier Racer - modified to increase maneuverability at the expense of speed.
No, the Smithsonian got it wrong ... they /we do not always get it correct the first time. Modified does not mean original.
<table style="width: 428px; height: 398px;" border="4" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr><th colspan="3" align="center">

Specifications: </th> </tr><tr> <th align="center" width="100">
</th> <th align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea" width="200"> A6M2 - Model 21 </th> <th align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea" width="200"> A6M5 - Model 52 </th></tr> <tr><th colspan="3" align="center"> Dimensions: </th> </tr><tr> <th align="center"> Wing span: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 39 ft 4 7/16 in (12 m) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 46 ft 1 1/16 in (11 m) </td> </tr> <tr> <th align="center"> Length: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 29 ft 8 11/16 in (9.06 m) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 29 ft 11 3/32 in (9.121 m) </td> </tr> <tr> <th align="center"> Height: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 10 ft 0 1/16 in (3.05 m) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 11 ft 6 5/32 in (3.509 m) </td> </tr> <tr><th colspan="3" align="center"> Weights: </th> </tr><tr><th> Empty: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 3,704 lb. (1,680 kg) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 4,136 lb. (1,876 kg) </td> </tr> <tr><th> Loaded: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 5,313 lb (2,410 kg) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 6,025 lb (2,733 kg) </td> </tr> <tr><th colspan="3" align="center"> Performance: </th> </tr><tr><th> Maximum Speed: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 331.5 mph (288 kt)
@ 14,930 ft (4,550 m) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 351 mph (305 kt)
@ 19,685 ft (6,000 m) </td> </tr> <tr><th> Service Ceiling: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 32,810 ft. (10,000 m) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 38,520 ft. (11,740 m) </td> </tr> <tr><th> Maximum Range: </th> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 1,930 miles (3,107 km) </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> 1,194 miles (1,922 km) </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table style="width: 428px; height: 190px;" border="4" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2"><tbody><tr> <th align="center" width="300"> Powerplant A6M2: </th> <th align="center" width="300"> Powerplant A6M5: </th></tr> <tr> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> One Nakajima NK1C Sakae 12,
fourteen cyl., air-cooled, radial engine
rated at 940 hp for takeoff and 950 hp @ 13,780 ft (4,200 m), driving a three-blade metal propeller. </td> <td align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> One Nakajima NK1F Sakae 21,
fourteen cyl., air-cooled, radial engine
rated at 1,130 hp for takeoff and 980 hp @ 19,685 ft (6,000 m), driving a three-blade metal propeller. </td> </tr> <tr> <th colspan="2" align="center"> Armament: </th> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" align="center" bgcolor="#adeaea"> Two forward-firing 7.7 mm Type 97 machine-guns in the upper fuselage and
two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 cannon with two external 132 lb (60 kg) bombs.</td></tr></tbody></table>
H 1 (Short Wing) Specifications



Gross Weight 5,492 lb
Empty Weight 3,565 lb

Span 24 ft 11 in
Length (overall) 27 ft 0 in
Wing Area 138 sq ft
Root Airfoil NACA 2418
Tip Airfoil NACA 2409

High Speed 352.4 mph

Powerplant P&W SA5-G (R-1536)
700 HP @ 2500 rpm


Fuel 250 gal
Oil 30 gal

FAI 3km Speed Record: 352.388 mph, September 13, 1935

</pre>
<hr>
H 1 (Long Wing) Specifications



Gross Weight 6,200 lb
Empty Weight 4,097 lb

Span 32 ft 0 in
Length (overall) 27 ft 8 in
Wing Area 191 sq ft
Root Airfoil NACA 23012
Tip Airfoil NACA 23006

High Speed 330 mph

Powerplant P&W SA5-G (R-1536)
700 HP @ 2500 rpm


Fuel 280 gal
Oil 30 gal

Transcontinental Speed Record - Burbank (CA) to Newark (NJ)
7 Hours 28 minutes 25 seconds, January 19, 1937





</pre>

[vintagecarguy]

Type 96.....Mistsubishi A5M...direct forefather of the Zero

built light with flush rivets and internal structural bracing since no engine available in Japan could get the speed demanded by brute force.
Designed by Jiro Hirikoshi.Later he creatles the A6M Zero
First flight......February 4,1935........

215 mph on 850 H.P.


Huges Racer first flight...
AUGUST 1935...AFTER the plane by Hirikoski........

Hirikoshi...February 1935
Hughes...August 1935


Aircraft are often similar but independently created.

Horten brothers flying wings in Germany lead to Gotha 229 jet fighter.
Northrup flying wings in USA.
Not copies,both independent.


The Zero is a great design by a great engineer.
The Hughs racer is a great design by a great engineer.
Both great,both independent.

[Skinview]

No, the Smithsonian got it wrong

Now vintagecarguy, you should know that nacktman is always right. It doesn't matter how much data and how many authoritative sources you have, nacktman is always right.

[naturalmanwa]

War always brings out the best in airplane designs. The zero was fast for 1935 but a few years later when the P-51 and P-38 came along, and also the F4U and the Hellcat (for you navy guys) it was slow. We had good pilots, but so did they. One shot down the great pappy Boyington.

[Baron Lake]

In case you hadn't noticed Skinview, your verticle stabilizer has been shot off. I think it was by one of them old A6M2, model 21's but it went by so dang fast.....

b.l.