This is quite the surprise!

[Pribs86]

Thank you guys! That is all. Have a great day!

[saburo_cz]

DCS A6M5, Dreams come true!

[Wizard_03]

What a welcome surprise!! Such an Iconic warbird!

[MAXsenna]

Whoa! Forum is already updated!  

[banjuska92]

[Reverend]

Oh, I'm pleasantly surprised.

Good thing.

Edited August 9 by Reverend

[LeCuvier]

I cannot find any announcement about the zero fighter. What info have you seen about it?

[MAXsenna]

4 minutes ago, LeCuvier said:

I cannot find any announcement about the zero fighter. What info have you seen about it?

Yesterday's Newsletter.  

[Slippa]

Ooh, nice surprise, cheers ‘team’ 

[Pikey]

Although not explicitly stated in the news letter, we can infer from the forum position that this will be EDs module. That's important when looking at development time and features, what's coming is fairly predictable.

[MAXsenna]

Although not explicitly stated in the news letter, we can infer from the forum position that this will be EDs module. That's important when looking at development time and features, what's coming is fairly predictable.

Not just assume, they have confirmed it. And, they kind of said they would do it sometime a year or so ago, just not when. So it was always pretty obvious it was always going to be an ED module.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[dcn]

A6M5b?It's A6M5c

[Darkline]

1 hour ago, dcn said:

A6M5b?It's A6M5c

Wait who said it was a B?

[Art-J]

34 minutes ago, Darkline said:

Wait who said it was a B?

The name of this very forum section did :D.

But indeed, WIP shot seen above clearly shows extra 13.2 mm guns which shouldn't be there on b variant. 

[mazex]

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

Edited August 11 by mazex

[DD_Fenrir]

1 hour ago, mazex said:

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

The A6M5 was not far the most numerous of the late war fighter Japanese naval fighter types and thus represents the most likely you would encounter.

The other issue with modelling a Frank is trying to find reliable data, and establishing how much of that performance was lost in build quality (pretty poor by that stage) and in reliability. A well built, carefully maintained Ki-84 would have indeed been a formidable opponent but in late 44/early 45 by all accounts they were rarely at their best in either category and their performance suffered accordingly.

 

[Gunfreak]

2 hours ago, mazex said:

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

For one, there wasn't a single Ki-84 involved in the battles in the Marianas. 

Which is what ED has decided to be their PTO experience. Sure there was just a few months between Saipan and Lyte gulf. But that's when the Ki-84 was first used. 

[dcn]

4小时前，mazex说：

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

Yeah I prefer J2M but M3 choce to make A6M5 then maybe ED took over it.And Zero can land on carrier.But anyway,I think DCS is a study sim not a game that focus on MP.I want Ki-84 too but as they have chose Zero we have to wait for years to see the opportunity.

[jeventy26]

4 hours ago, mazex said:

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

OK, I guess my Vals and Judy's will not have to worry about anything as I escort them on the way to deal death to the Enterprise  lol  We are home free boys!  

[Gunfreak]

Also the exact same problem can be said about the Spitfire vs the D9 and K4.

 

In theory a Spitfire should never win against those two in DCS. As long as they never get involved in a turn fight. Yet we known the Spitfire shoots them down plenty in DCS. 

Same for the Zero vs F4U and F6F.

[Gambit21]

Not a surprise in the least - I told you guys it was coming. Nothing else made sense and more than a foregone conclusion frankly.

That said I’m happy to see the forum/announcement etc. My favorite war bird - bring it on.

 

 

[Gambit21]

17 hours ago, mazex said:

Really nice to get the Zero - but for the late war scenarions and opponents, wouldn't a Ki-84 be more interesting? No one will dare dogfight the Zero and it is too slow to catch up with anyone that understands that? 

Nope...Zero is equal to it's contemporaries. You can toss all the 'on paper' numbers, dive speeds etc into the debate that you want to, but the historical fact is that the Zero had a 1 to 1 kill ratio until experienced Japanese pilots were exhausted later in the war. Also what an online pilot "understands" and what he actually does in the moment are usually 2 different things.

 

 

[Mr_sukebe]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Nope...Zero is equal to it's contemporaries. You can toss all the 'on paper' numbers, dive speeds etc into the debate that you want to, but the historical fact is that the Zero had a 1 to 1 kill ratio until experienced Japanese pilots were exhausted later in the war. Also what an online pilot "understands" and what he actually does in the moment are usually 2 different things.

 

 

As the zero was introduced in 1940, it's genuine cotemporaries' are more like a mkV Spitfire, 109-E, Wildcat etc.  Against those, the Zero was an extremely dangerous aircraft.

For example, the Zero pretty much mullered the Buffalo's and Hurricanes in Malaysia and against the RAAF Spitfire 5s, seemed like the Zero's had the upper hand.

Where the Japanese failed was to assume that the progress of aircraft tech would be substantially lower than it was, so the Zero didn't go through the massive enhancement programmes that say the Spitfire and 109 experienced, and the replacement and better aircraft were too late and too few.

 

Edited August 12 by Mr_sukebe

[Art-J]

In either case, we're getting a -5 Zero (whether it's really 5b or maybe 5c is not quite certaint for the time being?) vs non-water-injected -3 Hellcat. These two are not THAT far apart in relative performance and they'll be even closer given similar experience level of online players on both sides.

Edited August 12 by Art-J

[Gambit21]

4 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

As the zero was introduced in 1940, it's genuine cotemporaries' are more like a mkV Spitfire, 109-E, Wildcat etc.  Against those, the Zero was an extremely dangerous aircraft.

For example, the Zero pretty much mullered the Buffalo's and Hurricanes in Malaysia and against the RAAF Spitfire 5s, seemed like the Zero's had the upper hand.

Where the Japanese failed was to assume that the progress of aircraft tech would be substantially lower than it was, so the Zero didn't go through the massive enhancement programmes that say the Spitfire and 109 experienced, and the replacement and better aircraft were too late and too few.

 

I am very well educated on the history of the war, the Zero, it’s design, the philosophy behind it, it’s weaknesses, and how it relates to other aircraft in the war and the philosophy behind those aircraft etc. 

The fact of the matter is that the Corsair and the Hellcat were contemporaries in the skies regardless of when the Zero first started flying (or hit the drawing table). When the Zero was designed is moot. All aircraft in the pacific were the product of mid to late 30's design.

The fact and the latest information / research indicates that the actual kill ratio in the war in 1943 (when skilled pilots were still around) was 1:1. Dive speed numbers, lack of self-sealing tanks, somewhat inferior cannons notwithstanding. Where the rubber meets the road (in actual combat/kill ratio) it was the equal of both the Corsair and the Hellcat…it’s contemporaries in combat.

Internet information on this subject is hugely out of date. I found one article with correct/ up to date info the other day but can't locate it now.

I'd suggest looking at Claringbould's recent work...all of his books are excellent, very well researched, worth reading for anyone interested in aviation in the PTO.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 12 by Gambit21