Ares Games
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Nakajima A6M2-N Stats

  1. #1

    Default Nakajima A6M2-N Stats

    I have provisionally worked out these stats for the Nakajima A6M2 float plane. I would appreciate some guidance from then Unnoffical Stats Committee please:

    940HP engine.
    Max speed 271mph
    Cruise Speed 184mph
    Ceiling 32,810 ft
    Range 1,106 miles
    Climb rate 714m/min
    2 x 7.7mm
    2 x 20mm canon
    2 x 132lb bombs

    Maneuver deck: L
    Damage: 16
    Short Range: ACC
    Long Range: C
    Climb: 3
    Ceiling: 13

    Also capable of carrying 2 x 132lb bombs (1 under each wing).

    Neil
    Last edited by Lt. S.Kafloc; 07-21-2014 at 14:40.
    See you on the Dark Side......

  2. #2

    Default

    L deck is a little too nippy (if you'll pardon the pun). J deck is closer, same as an early model I-16. Or a later one with 20mm. Performance suffered a lot due to the floats, not just the speed either. The poor roll rate of the Zero-Sen was even worse on this one.

    Armament should be CCA, CA. Damage 16 - it was heavier than a Zero-Sen.

  3. #3

    Default

    Cheers Zoe. All I need to do now is find 2 J decks. (Just ordered 2 x Last Biplanes booster packs from Ludibay.com. Now I'll have to paint up 4 Nakajima's!)
    See you on the Dark Side......

  4. #4

    Default

    I agreed with Zoe.

    The 90 degree turns of the L deck seems too maneuverable for a floating plane.

    (Saw the pictures of the plane in your album, Neil. )
    Voilŕ le soleil d'Austerlitz!

  5. #5

    Default

    Not to be pedantic, but the floater is A6M2-N. Nakajima also provided a second line for conventional Zekes, too... so it IS kind of a big-deal difference.

    Refresher on IJN designation systems:
    A - first letter - design mission (A=fighter)
    6 - first number - round of designs for that mission (A6 = 6th round of fighter designs)
    M - second letter - designing firm (M = Mitsubishi)
    2 - second number - major revision of basic design (2nd major version)
    -
    N - suffix - aircraft adapted from one mission to another, same as first-letter code for that mission (N=seaplane fighter; the N1K4-A prototype went through the same process in reverse to turn a floatplane design into a carrier fighter)

    Anyway, hope this helps.

  6. #6

    Default

    Came at me all of a sudden when I was flipping through a book on Axis aircraft. I should have the 2nd done soon. Wanted them for a Tulagi type scenario during Coral Sea.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marechallannes View Post
    I agreed with Zoe.

    The 90 degree turns of the L deck seems too maneuverable for a floating plane.

    (Saw the pictures of the plane in your album, Neil. )
    See you on the Dark Side......

  7. #7

    Default

    Yep, quite fogot when I typed it over from the Official Nakajima A6M2-N painting thread and How to build a float plane in the hobby section. Gotto get these eyes fixed, wear my glasses, etc, etc,etc.

    But cheers for pointing this out, wouldn't want anyone getting the wrong idea.

    Neil

    Quote Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
    Not to be pedantic, but the floater is A6M2-N. Nakajima also provided a second line for conventional Zekes, too... so it IS kind of a big-deal difference.

    Refresher on IJN designation systems:
    A - first letter - design mission (A=fighter)
    6 - first number - round of designs for that mission (A6 = 6th round of fighter designs)
    M - second letter - designing firm (M = Mitsubishi)
    2 - second number - major revision of basic design (2nd major version)
    -
    N - suffix - aircraft adapted from one mission to another, same as first-letter code for that mission (N=seaplane fighter; the N1K4-A prototype went through the same process in reverse to turn a floatplane design into a carrier fighter)

    Anyway, hope this helps.
    See you on the Dark Side......

  8. #8

    Default

    Happens, amigo, we all have our random brainfarts--also saw it as an opportunity to sneak in a primer on "So wot's all this crap mean?" for the rookies.

  9. #9

    Default

    Trivia: The winning side in WW2 did not put into service any floatplane fighters, or three-engined aircraft.

  10. #10

    Dom S's Avatar
    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Dom
    Location
    People's Republic of South Yorkshire
    Sorties Flown
    2,081
    Join Date
    Jun 2010

    Default

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loire_70

    [Also both Ford and Fokker trimotors were used by the winning team, but as military transports I thought them a grey area - the Loire was a definite combat aircraft. Come to think of it there was the Breguet Bizerte too. The French had a lot of weird flying boats....]

    I'll give you the floatplane fighter fact though, albeit only because by the time the allies got the concept ironed out, we had enough jeep carriers to render it superfluous. (Loire nearly broke that claim too though; the French navy had two squadrons of Loire 210 floatplane fighters in 1939, but they never saw combat as the safety record was so dire that they grounded them, so you can at least argue against them having been "put into service" even though they did equip operational units.)

    Dom.
    Last edited by Dom S; 07-21-2014 at 17:18.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dom S View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loire_70 ;)

    [Also both Ford and Fokker trimotors were used by the winning team, but as military transports I thought them a grey area - the Loire was a definite combat aircraft. Come to think of it there was the Breguet Bizerte too. The French had a lot of weird flying boats....]
    All of the trimotors seen on the winning side in WW2 were built well before the war (like the ones you mention); none were built *during* the war. A small, but important, difference -- production capacity wasted on obsolete units is production capacity not be used on units which could actually help win the damned war. (You mention the Bizerte -- that one was used more by the *Germans* than even the people who built it; and as far as I can tell, none were built in the all-too-short interval between WW2 starting and France getting run-over.)

    France is one of those "oddball" situations, much like Italy; some of them were on one side, some on the other, so it's hard to say exactly which side they were on.

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dom S View Post
    I'll give you the floatplane fighter fact though, albeit only because by the time the allies got the concept ironed out, we had enough jeep carriers to render it superfluous.
    Dom.
    SeeBees, too. When we could build an airstrip on almost any island or atoll, why invest in a second-rate plane just because it imitates a duck
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  13. #13

    Default

    We'll sink those too..then where will you be? Back on your carriers mate. Then we'll sink them too. (did we win the war?)

    Neil

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    SeeBees, too. When we could build an airstrip on almost any island or atoll, why invest in a second-rate plane just because it imitates a duck
    Karl
    See you on the Dark Side......

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    SeeBees, too. When we could build an airstrip on almost any island or atoll, why invest in a second-rate plane just because it imitates a duck
    Karl
    Quote Originally Posted by Skafloc View Post
    We'll sink those too..then where will you be? Back on your carriers mate. Then we'll sink them too. (did we win the war?)

    Neil
    Ummm.... Rob; you need to check your Squadron Commander's meds. He's talking about sinking islands now.
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus

  15. #15

    Default

    Damn, submersible islands, very cunning. Now we'll have to find them before we can sink them. Will they have periscopes? Or snorkels? Who can fault the ingenuity of the American Seebee's?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    Ummm.... Rob; you need to check your Squadron Commander's meds. He's talking about sinking islands now.
    Karl
    See you on the Dark Side......

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jager View Post
    Ummm.... Rob; you need to check your Squadron Commander's meds. He's talking about sinking islands now.
    Karl
    Depends on the size of the bombs, and what the island's made of -- hit an island of the same sort of stuff San Francisco or Anchorage is built on with a few "earthquake bombs", and see a live demonstration of the phrase "soil liquefaction"....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1964_Alaska_earthquake

    Then of course, there's this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Sinks ....

  17. #17

    Default

    Saunders Roe jet flying boat?
    See you on the Dark Side......



Similar Missions

  1. WGSF Official Nakajima B5N2 Kate thread
    By pflanzer in forum Painting Showcase
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 07-20-2023, 08:04
  2. Stats for Nakajima B5N Kate
    By Black Sheep One in forum WGS: General Discussions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-15-2014, 10:16
  3. Looking for a Nakajima Ki-27 1/144
    By Kaiser in forum Hobby Room
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-06-2013, 10:06
  4. WGS Burma/Malaya - 1/200 AIM Nakajima Ki-27b 'Nate', JAAF
    By Carl_Brisgamer in forum Metal and Resin Models
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-06-2013, 06:38
  5. Sweet Nakajima A6M2-N Type 2
    By richard m schwab in forum 1/144 Scale Dawn of War
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-23-2011, 17:30

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •