close
標題:
P-38 vs Ki43
發問:
Well the USAAF was got many P-38 in pacific , and many aces are driving P-38 , but Ki43 is a plane easy to control , and it is a single engine figher . Which one is better ?
Why There aremany P-38 Ace? IN Pacific Theater, USAAF mostly uses P-38 simply because they have no other choice. It was either P-38, or P-40, but P-40 were no where near as fast as P-38, so it will be an disadvantage to use P-40 over the fast and nimble Zero. The problem is, P-40 is never good for long range Fighting and with air base is a precious commodity in Pacific, a long range Fighter with speed is in need over the Pacific. Before P-47 or P-51 comes out, Allied can only depend on Naval Aviation or P-38 to fight off Japanese Fighters However, even when P-47 and P-51 comes out in 1942, the USAAF still a little keen on destroying German Airforce, and allocated most New Fighter in European and still keeping the P-38 in the air superiority role in the pacific. Amazingly, There were handful of P-51 operate in the pacific since 1943, but not with USAAF, but rather RAF and RAAF. USAAF only start Deploying P-51 in late 1944 and fulling deploy them in 1945 when the waris nearly over. That account for the extented duration of P-38 and the pilot that fly them, that contributed there were more P-38 ace in Pacific rather than in Europe P-38 vs Ki-43 P-38 is overally better than Ki-43, with more powerful engine mean higher Topspeed and higher climb rate. But on the armament front, Ki-43 is severly lacking than P-38. Butin term of turnign circle, and mobility,Ki-43 lighter airframe and larger wing proved to be better than the P-38. But overall, the ration is 1:6 (1 P-38 lostto 6 Ki-43 lost) before the last year of war. During the last year of war, Ki-43 were widely uses by Kamakazi pilot .
其他解答:
P-38 vs Ki43
發問:
Well the USAAF was got many P-38 in pacific , and many aces are driving P-38 , but Ki43 is a plane easy to control , and it is a single engine figher . Which one is better ?
此文章來自奇摩知識+如有不便請留言告知
最佳解答:Why There aremany P-38 Ace? IN Pacific Theater, USAAF mostly uses P-38 simply because they have no other choice. It was either P-38, or P-40, but P-40 were no where near as fast as P-38, so it will be an disadvantage to use P-40 over the fast and nimble Zero. The problem is, P-40 is never good for long range Fighting and with air base is a precious commodity in Pacific, a long range Fighter with speed is in need over the Pacific. Before P-47 or P-51 comes out, Allied can only depend on Naval Aviation or P-38 to fight off Japanese Fighters However, even when P-47 and P-51 comes out in 1942, the USAAF still a little keen on destroying German Airforce, and allocated most New Fighter in European and still keeping the P-38 in the air superiority role in the pacific. Amazingly, There were handful of P-51 operate in the pacific since 1943, but not with USAAF, but rather RAF and RAAF. USAAF only start Deploying P-51 in late 1944 and fulling deploy them in 1945 when the waris nearly over. That account for the extented duration of P-38 and the pilot that fly them, that contributed there were more P-38 ace in Pacific rather than in Europe P-38 vs Ki-43 P-38 is overally better than Ki-43, with more powerful engine mean higher Topspeed and higher climb rate. But on the armament front, Ki-43 is severly lacking than P-38. Butin term of turnign circle, and mobility,Ki-43 lighter airframe and larger wing proved to be better than the P-38. But overall, the ration is 1:6 (1 P-38 lostto 6 Ki-43 lost) before the last year of war. During the last year of war, Ki-43 were widely uses by Kamakazi pilot .
其他解答:
文章標籤
全站熱搜
留言列表
