Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

In Aeroplane issue July 2019 there was an article on the J2M. The article was a fine example of the low quality of the current Aeroplane for it was far less detailed than the J2M article published in Air International /Air Enthusiast some 40 years ago! At the end of the article there was the usual claim that Japanese pilots considered it heavy and ponderous. Yet, neither does this article nor any other source (in English) claiming that provide any solid evidence, i.e. pilots' names and their actual personal accounts.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

In Saburo Sakai's "Samurai", he* writes, "It was well suited to bomber attack but, like the Shiden, demanded high skill from its pilots. The overemphasis on speed and armament made the plane logy in aerobatics. Compared to the Zero in this respect, it flew like a truck. We suffered appalling losses in training. Later, when the Hellcats and Mustangs roamed over Japan proper, those pilots in Raidens who opposed the enemy fighters discovered all too late the airplane's inability to maneuver."

Later, "Where the Raiden shone against the B-29, it was helpless before the swifter, more maneuverable Mustang", and, in giving a pocket description of Sadaaki (Teimei) Akamatsu he writes "Akamatsu shot down no less than ten of these excellent enemy planes [F6F & P-51] while flying the Raiden, a feat most other pilots considered to be impossible."


*He or Martin Caidin,who had a heavy hand in the eventual translation.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Hmm, Allied test report describes it as easy to fly with good turning aided by Fowler flaps. So I wonder how reliable are Sakai's comments.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

It is absolutely necessary to be careful with portions of Caiden's "Samurai" because of his ignorance of Japanese technical vocabulary and his editorial additions. For example, Caiden initiated the confusion over the type of USN carrier planes Sakai attacked on 7 August 1942 and which wounded him. Caiden didn't understand that the term "kanbaku" (carrier bomber) meant dive bomber, while "kanko" (carrier attack plane) was torpedo bomber. Sakai wrote that he attacked kanbaku, actually SBD Dauntless dive bombers, which Caiden wrongly assumed were TBF Avenger torpedo planes. There was never any confusion in Japan. For example the motion picture on Sakai depicted his opponents as SBDs.

Best wishes,
John

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

It had a higher wing loading that the Zero and other similar Japanese fighters, so cannot help but have lower manoeuvrability. It is entirely a matter of what you are used to - most Allied fighters (particularly US and carrier types) had similar wing loadings so it would seem unremarkable to pilots used to these types. Sakai's comments are entirely reliable when viewed with this in mind. If Sakai had ever had to fight with the Raiden he would have learned to make use of its superior power.

I suspect that much the same background will have affected his judgement of the Shiden.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Graham, shouldn't manoeuvrability be considered as a combination of rates of turn and roll? Sakai's account also claims that the P-51 was more manoeuvrable. Was it? Probably the P-51 rolled faster, but very likely the J2M turned better, especially with its Fowler flaps deployed.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Manoeuvrability is difficult to pin down. Peak values of turn rates and roll rates are valuable guides, but also the rates of onset matter. Pitch rate as well.

I've no opinion of P-51 vs Raiden in particular, but suspect that Sakai had little experience of the P-51.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

I strongly suspect that we need a new, honest, translation of Sakai's book Ozora no Samurai (Samurai of the Skies). Strangely enough I have a number of copies of his book, because when I picked them up the English translation of the titles were all different (Truth of the Zero Fighter, The Fate of the Zero Fighter, Last Moment of the Zero Fighter, Saburo Sakai air combat record, To the End of the (top) mortal combat samurai sky without regret it). I compared the characters at the beginning of each book (I do not read Japanese), and they were all different. But I assume these are just slightly different editions of his book. Can anyone comment on these different versions?

Enjoy!

Frank.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Another comment on the Raiden is to be found in Chapter 25 of the Okumiya/Horikoshi book "Zero". The latter is quoted as follows:

"Soon after its introduction to combat we cut back the production of the Raiden interceptor plane; despite our plans that the fighter should replace the Zero, it suffered from poor pilot visibility and lacked the flight endurance necessary for Pacific operations."

This last point, short range, is also mentioned in the Allied pilot's report quoted in the July 1971 Air Enthusiast article. Another criticism was the lack of manoeuvrability at high speed caused by the heavy ailerons.

These shortcomings would not have prejudiced its use as a homeland bomber interceptor.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

That report, iirc, mentions heavy ailerons above 350 mph. A6M ailerons were very heavy well below that.

Short range on internal fuel indeed, but drop tanks were available. Regarding pilot visibility, I recall the TAIU report rated it very good.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Re visibility, there's the same answer as above. It depends upon what you are used to. The USN was very late to respond to the value of all-round vision, and the British had no such types in the far East until postwar. Even the USAAF had a majority of high-back types in the Pacific war, until the very end. When you're winning, what you aren't used to you little miss. Whereas the Japanese pilots were almost entirely used to 360 degrees of view, barring a small minority from Ki.61/early Ki.100 aircraft, so can only be expected to notice the shortcomings of the high-back Raiden in this respect..

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Osprey books are very hit and miss but they do often cover topics not well represented in the English language market. For this thread, it may be worthwhile to look at the following title:
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....4,203,200_.jpg


Yasuho Izawa has done some excellent work on Japanese aircraft and for this title he has talked with a number of veterans. Opinions on the J2M from combat and test pilots are included as is the Allied report on the aircraft. Development of the type and its teething troubles are also examined.


The Raiden was a "hot" aircraft that required extensive training to fly well. Lt. Takeo Kurosawa who oversaw the transition of 381st Kokutai found the type to "be better than the A6Ms he had previously flown in combat. However he quickly realised that it would take time for his less experienced charges to master the J2M" (Izawa p 25).


From page 28, Ensign Akio Matsuba's [301 Kokutai Sento 601st Hikotai) experience with the J2M: " The engine in his brand new fighter suffered a sudden loss of oil pressure and then seized during a test flight from Suzuka, forcing Matsuba to conduct a high speed forced landing with the fighter's undercarriage retracted. Not a fan of the Raiden before this incident, Matsuba (who claimed the J2M was "difficult to fly') duly reverted to flying an A6M5 whenever possible"
Another view on page 31 from Ens Chitoshi Isozaki (302 then 343 Kokutai): "He thought that the J2M was inferior to the A6M in horizontal manoeuvrability, however, although its greater speed and rate of climb made it a better bomber interceptor"


From the book it appears teething troubles with the J2M soured many pilots on it and for others, the fact it faired better at dive and zoom techniques as opposed to the more dogfight, twist and turn style of the A6M meant many veteran pilots had to adjust their technique. As Graham has pointed out, often how an aircraft is viewed can be traced to what pilots are comfortable (the old open versus closed cockpit debate of the early war years for example) with and what flying style and fighting techniques they prefer (aerobatic dogfighting versus boom and zoom attacks).

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

The above is the reason it would be essential to have original test reports written by test pilots as they should be able to offer a more balanced review.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Not if the test pilot had been trained in the old ways (as of course they had). He would display precisely the same bias in his opinions, whatever he might express publicly that might upset the management! Something that would not concern service pilots encountering the type. It is to be expected that he would also report on the advantages of the type, but the truth is that the Raiden did not have so good a view as earlier IJN fighters, and wasn't as agile either. The emphasis placed on the importance of these matters compared with its advantages (when the engine was working properly) is something for the type's supporters to stress, but with all the advantages of distance we should be able to recognise both sides of the matter.

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Perhaps not entirely relevant here, but to back track a bit. Did Sakai actually fly the J2M? Without re-reading Caidin's book I have no recollection he did.

I also recall he was very critical with regard to the Shiden as well. I think I read an interview somewhere on the 'net where he more or less claimed it was useless.

So perhaps Sakai's views on both types, being an A6M man to the end, is not a very good start to try and evaluate the J2M at all?

Cheers
Stig

Re: Japanese pilot opinions on the J2M
 

Japan wiki gives a good summary of the Raiden. https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B...A9%BA%E6%A9%9F) Google Chrome browser has auto translate.

In summary the Raiden had many development problems that slowed its acceptance (planes and pilots lost) and by the time it was "ready" the competitor Kawanishi N1K1-J Shiden had superiority in dogfighting and range.

Unfortunately the N1K1-J was a "P.O.S." as Sakai and Honda says!

see at 3:28min
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3H_9iR7zvMk&t=434s