[GuerraCivil]

Yes, more logical and underlines again the Japanese problems with inadequate logistics and limited supplies.

When it comes to the skills of Japanese pilots, they could fight relatively well with technically inferior equipment up to 1943. For example the AVG pilots had first to pay some price before learning to deal with IJA´s Ki-27 Nate fighters which were obsolete compared to American fighters: much slower, fixed undercarriage and armed with only two 7,7 mm guns.

In air combat over Rangoon on 23.12.1941 AVG lost two Tomahawks in combat against Nates whereas Japanese lost no fighters in the combat - two days later over Rangoon AVG was still in the process of learning right tactics and combat skills losing again two Tomahawks in combat against Nates. In air combat over Mingladaon on 23.1.1942 AVG lost three Tomahawks against Nate-equipped IJA unit 77 Sentai. The fighter vs fighter encounters between IJA and AVG were not always onesided victories for the latter. Lots of AVG´s success story is based on the fact that their primary targets were IJA´s bombers and it was not easy for the slower Ki-27´s to provide effective escort defenses against the guerrilla tactics ("hit and run") of AVG´s faster P-40´s. One wonders what these Ki-27 pilots of IJA could have done with Zero´s when pitted against AVG´s Tomahawks...

Japanese fighter pilots and their planes were considered inferior to their Allied counterparts by 1943, but even at that time they did quite well against the Spitfires in air combats over Darwin. Technically Spitfire Mk V was in some respects clearly more advanced fighter plane than Zero/Oscar but in the actual combat the Australian Spitfire pilots were often unable to make much use of the technical advantages (like more speed and more horsepower) of their planes.