Interesting point of view.
Before the War, the Americans didn't think the Japanese to be capable to refuel in high sea and to conduct disciplined carrier based air raid while pre-war exercises had proved that Pearl Harbor was at risk. The Japanese got insight from the raid on Taranto (from both side) while the American still believed no torpedo attack could be conducted in a harbor.
A well know aviation mag published in 1941 an article about japanese air forces and said they couldn't be good pilot as their eyesight was hapered by their diet based on rice and because of their slanting eyes... They never tough of Japan as more than a turbulent yaping country.
I propose another: the Japanese won the war. They turned their defeat, after two atomic bombs, into a fruitful partnership with the United States. In this region, those who have really lost are the Koreans, subjected to the same partition as Germany... While they were the invadeds and not the invaders.
That is another war, the Cold War, who dictated it. And they're still denying a good number of war crimes in the way.
The Zero Fighter was was very manoeuvrable, and the Nakajima Ki-84 competed with his American counterparts.
Manoeuvrability is good but no that important if you use the good tactics. But Ki-84, N1K2-J, Ki-100 and J2M were on par with their american counterparts, same can be true for other types of aircraft. But as I said, raw performance did not all.
Show Posts
.
