A Brief History
On October 23, 1939, the Japanese G4M, named the “Betty” bomber by the Allies, made its maiden flight. Destined to be the main Japanese land-based bomber for the entire war, it was, like other Japanese planes, state of the art at the beginning of World War II but grossly outmatched by American models later in the war. Made by Mitsubishi, the same company that made the Zero and now makes cars and trucks, its performance was roughly on par with the American B-25 as far as speed and climb, and it had better range.
Digging Deeper
Unfortunately for some Japanese airmen, fatal flaws of the “Betty” included the lack of self-sealing fuel tanks and armor plate which had been omitted from the planes in order to lighten the weight and to increase performance. Both Japanese and Allies had many derisive terms for the plane in reference to its propensity to catch fire and burn. In terms of capacity, it was modest; the “Betty” could only carry a single torpedo or single, large bomb (800 kg) or 4 medium-sized bombs (4 X 250 kg). In contrast, the American B-25 and B-26 could carry 4,000 lbs worth of bombs (1 lb = approx. 0.45 kg). Another fatal flaw was that its firepower lacked the ability to properly defend the bomber against fighter/interceptors; it only had a single 20mm cannon in the tail and 4 medium 7.7 mm machine guns, which was insufficient to protect it from Allied fighters. For comparison, B-25’s had 12 or more heavy .50 caliber (12.7 mm) machine guns, and B-26’s had either 6 (early models) or 12 (most models) of the big .50 caliber machine guns. By the end of the war, 2,435 “Bettys” had been built. Unlike many other planes of World War II, the “Betty” was not to see service after the war. Its last assignment was to carry the rocket-powered Okha Kamikaze suicide plane to its launching point to attack Allied ships.
The other primary Japanese warplanes of World War II were the Nakajima Ki-43 “Oscar” (Army) and A6M “Zero” (Navy) fighter planes, both highly maneuverable. With 2 machine guns and 2 cannons, the “Zero” was well-enough armed, but like the “Betty,” it lacked self-sealing fuel tanks and armor. These lightweight warplanes were simply not as rugged as the American models they faced, and when the new and improved American models appeared (P-38, P-47, P-51, F4U and F6F), the Japanese fighters had no chance whatsoever. Top speed of the Oscar was a rather pedestrian 330 mph, while the Zero could only top out at about 331 mph, a poor comparison to allied fighters that could zip along at 50 to 80 mph faster. Other Japanese fighters were produced in addition to the “Oscar” and the “Zero,” but in much smaller numbers, and by the time they appeared, their superior performance was offset by insufficiently trained pilots. (Note: With 11,000 built, only the “Zero” among Japanese fighters was made in numbers greater than 6,000.)
The next most-often encountered Japanese fighter plane was also Japan’s best, the Nakajima Ki-84 “Frank.” Capable of reaching a speed of 426 mph, it also featured self-sealing fuel tanks, ample armor and armored glass, making it a match for the Allied fighters it faced. With a heavy outfit of 2 x 30 mm cannons and 2 x 20 mm cannons, it was also a well-armed bomber killer, however, its more common set-up was 2 x .50-caliber machine guns and 2 x 20mm cannons, a merely adequate weapons suite. The lack of quality fuel and poor maintenance hurt the performance of this fighter, and the production of only 3,500 meant they were outnumbered by the over 12,000 U.S. F6F Hellcats and the over 12,000 F4U Corsairs.
The primary naval bombers of the war were the Aichi D3A “Val” and the Yokosuka D4Y “Judy.” The “Val,” although the older model of the 2, was capable and accurate and did the most damage at Pearl Harbor and sunk more Allied ships than any other Axis airplane of World War II. With 3 machine guns and 1 x 250-kg bomb, it was modestly armed. The “Judy” was built in bigger numbers (2,000 of them) and could fly 100 mph faster than the Val (fastest dive bomber of the war at 340 mph), while carrying double the bomb weight. Development problems of the “Judy,” however, kept the “Val” on the front line longer.
The Nakajima B5N “Kate” and the Nakajima B6N “Jill” were the primary torpedo bombers of the Imperial Navy. They were faster than their American counterparts, the Devastator and the Avenger, with the “Jill” being 60 mph faster than the “Kate.” Both carried the same single torpedo or 800 kg-bomb load. Both had a rear-firing machine gun, but the “Jill” also had a second ventral machine gun. Some “Kate” models also had 2 forward-firing machine guns in the wings. Their torpedoes were of superior quality.
The Japanese did not produce as many aircraft in World War II as the other warring nations (the U.S., UK, USSR and Germany), and Japan did not have enough pilots, especially replacement pilots as they lacked sufficient quality pilot-training schools. With a few exceptions, their airplanes were much lighter and more fragile than American or British warplanes (or Russian planes as they found out at the end of the war) and were usually not as heavily armed. Small production runs of advanced types came too late and in too small numbers, and when they finally did, there were no experienced pilots to fly them. Jet and rocket technology could not be developed quickly enough by the Japanese, and even the desperate use of Kamikaze suicide planes could not save the Empire.
By mid 1943, Japanese air superiority was a fantasy. The edge in experience and technology their flyers enjoyed early in the war would not last, and the Japanese warplane-production industry could not keep up with that of the Allies. One thing, though, that cannot be questioned, is that despite their inferiority, the Japanese naval and army air forces never ran short of courage and dedication.
Question for students (and subscribers): What was the best Japanese plane of World War II? Please let us know in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please see…
Race, Grant and Henry Sakaida. Japanese Army Air Force Aces 1937-1945 (Osprey Aircraft of the Aces No 13). Osprey Publishing, 1997.
Sakaida, Henry and Tom Tullis. Imperial Japanese Navy Aces 1937-45 (Osprey Aircraft of the Aces 22). Osprey Publishing, 1998.
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="5867 http://www.crackedhistory.com/?p=5867">3 Comments
The differing design of Japanese and US aircraft reflectunderlying attitudes to combat.
Japanese planes were designed rather like a samurai, where one blow with a katana could decide the fight, hence the emphasis on performance rather than protection. US planes on the other hand were designed more like a boxer, where both sides expect to give and take punishment.
Interestingly, their respective aircraft carriers also displayed a similar design philosophy.
I am a major WWII buff, I have always been fascinated by this part in history. I have been to Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. I have always loved history, and my grandpa was a major plane buff. Growing up he always showed me models he built of different WWII bombers, and planes. So this article really took me back to those times. It is interesting to see the way that the Japanese designed their planes, it was more of a preformance plane, rather than a plane that had protection too. My grandpa use to say that the US planes were all about keeping their men alive, while the Japanese were all about destroying the opponent, no matter the cost. If you think about it, it is really true, they amubshed the US at Pearl Harbor, and some of these ambushes were sucide bombers, men who had no intention in returning. While the US when they dropped the atomic bombs, had all the plans of returning home. It is interesting to look at how two nations can design their weapons differently, but have one main goal to beat the other opponent.
The final sentence really rings true. Despite the of lack state-of-the-art equipment, those units had tremendous morale and fighting spirit. This, in it of itself, can be just as useful. Equipment and technology may fail, but the will of a soldier to keep fighting for his country and ideals is one of the best assets he or she may have.