PDA

View Full Version : What was the deal with the J2M?



Ba5tard5word
06-29-2009, 01:22 PM
I've been flying it offline recently for the first time in my new work-in-progress Air Pirates campaign, and it's just about my favorite plane now, and definitely my favorite Japanese plane. It's fast and maneuverable, it doesn't flip easily like the Ki-84, it has more ammo than the Ki-84, and it doesn't have the auto-flaps that make the N1K annoying to fly for me.

I guess in the IJN it was just a case of too little too late? From what I have seen it's generally portrayed as an unmaneuverable plane meant solely for attacking hi-altitude bombers, but at least in Il-2 it is really great for battling at sea level.

Ba5tard5word
06-29-2009, 01:22 PM
I've been flying it offline recently for the first time in my new work-in-progress Air Pirates campaign, and it's just about my favorite plane now, and definitely my favorite Japanese plane. It's fast and maneuverable, it doesn't flip easily like the Ki-84, it has more ammo than the Ki-84, and it doesn't have the auto-flaps that make the N1K annoying to fly for me.

I guess in the IJN it was just a case of too little too late? From what I have seen it's generally portrayed as an unmaneuverable plane meant solely for attacking hi-altitude bombers, but at least in Il-2 it is really great for battling at sea level.

JtD
06-29-2009, 01:35 PM
In real life the plane had a few defects and problems that kept it from becoming as useful as it was supposed to be. Instead of several thousand planned, only about 500 were built. It's not that the Japanese did not want it.

DKoor
06-29-2009, 01:43 PM
Check out the J2M5 high altitude performance... last time I checked those were outperforming P-47D-27's over 8,000m.

BillSwagger
06-29-2009, 01:44 PM
The J2M is a big challenge up high. It holds it energy well, and i think its a relatively light plane so it is somewhat maneuverable.
I think its made of wood is it not?? or has some wood components.
I know many late war JPN planes started to include wood parts, to conserve light aluminum alloys.

The down side of the J2M is it is easy to snap a wing if you turn fast and tight, or roll at high speed, but i think that is common for most JPN planes.

I'm surprised to not see the Ki-44 in the list of JPN planes. That plane was a beast, too, at least for speed and climb rate.

ROXunreal
06-29-2009, 01:45 PM
This toyplane is too unreal for this game, just like I-85. I mean, it's both fast as hell, climbs as hell and out turns almost anything. I even had a hole in the wing and it didn't keep me from shooting down a mustang

Wildnoob
06-29-2009, 01:57 PM
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/8871/raidenk.jpg

J2M's section in the object view section (witch I don't know the reasons, but at least for me is in fact in the B6N section)

pretty interesting...

as is know unfortenetely for the Japanese, the J2M4 couldn't be improved at a satisfatory way to achive production, but with totally sure it was fantastic. the M5 version is already a soberb aircraft.

Wildnoob
06-29-2009, 02:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ROXunreal:
This toyplane is too unreal for this game, just like I-85. I mean, it's both fast as hell, climbs as hell and out turns almost anything. I even had a hole in the wing and it didn't keep me from shooting down a mustang </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hmm

I will not contest you, no way, but anyway take a look at this:

"In February of 1945, an American technical intelligence team discovered a single Raiden abandoned among the trees alongside the Dewey Boulevard on the outskirts of Manila. It was disassembled and transferred to Clark Field, where it was repaired by the Technical Air Intelligence Command (TAIC) and test flown. A senior test pilot attached to TAIC rated the Raiden as being the best Japanese fighter he had flown, offering a good performance, good stability, good stalling characteristics, and good takeoff and landing qualities. It had a steep climbing angle and a rapid climb rate. Handling and control were good, but the ailerons became rather heavy at speeds above 325 mph. Stalling characteristics were exceptional. Even though there was relatively little stall warning, the recovery from the stall was extremely rapid, with very little altitude being lost. There was no tendency to spin, the aircraft being exceptionally stable. The manoeuvring flaps were rated as being very effective. On the negative side, the brakes and rudder brake action were poor, the ailerons were heavy which made the manoeuvrability fall off at high speeds, the mechanical reliability was poor, and the range was short."

source: http://www.century-of-flight.n...i%20J2M%20Raiden.htm (http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/photo_albums/timeline/ww2/Mitsubishi%20J2M%20Raiden.htm)

personally I would say something that is hipotetic in the war terms but anyway:

the bigest US answer for the late war Japanese figthers like the Ki-84, the J2M and the N1K2 in terms of piston engine aircraft where the P-51H and the F8F. this ones would outclass the historic war models.

of course that a wartime operational well flow American figther like a Hellcat, Corsair, P-38, P-47 and P-51 can bring a really a match for such planes. but in fact without account real life problems, mainly in IL2 they are same as fast at low and medium altitude (that's the MAJOR problem), can outclimb and outurn those planes at pratically any speed. their only advantage is on superior pratical service celling. there they can outrun then. so are in fact one step ahead at lower and medium altitude. altough I didn't incluid the J2M because never face it. it's like figth a LA-5FN with the Lufwaffe, you can be even very effective against it if used the proper tactics and your advantages, but the less you relax they going to be in firing position against you, mainly at lower level.

but repeat, that's just my personal view.

BillSwagger
06-29-2009, 02:19 PM
The Japanese had strict requirements for production aircraft regarding ROC and speed.

It wouldn't surprise me if some of those planes had some of the best climb rates in the sim.

TinyTim
06-29-2009, 02:22 PM
Climbs like a 25lb Spit, dives like a Fw190, runs like a Jug, turns like a Yak-3, punches like a Tempest... what can one possibly want more?

DKoor
06-29-2009, 02:37 PM
Yes... quite likely the best Japan fighter in the game.
Ki-84 outperforms it slightly in some areas but none of those areas are really important (sea level speed, turn rate).
Raiden outperforms Hayate where it really matters, in RoC and high altitude performance.

It appears little chubby tho http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

Wildnoob
06-29-2009, 02:44 PM
based on that report, I make a idiot test now just for joking...

take 4 J2M5's as ace level oponents in quick mission and I was in a P-51D. altitude was 7500 meters. previosly I tested both planes, and really the J2M is inferior in the dive. it's not a drastic difference but is a little inferior in regain control as fast as the Mustang.

then, they come chassing me. I close the radiator, engage WEP and dive down straigth down. surprisely, it happens wat I was expecting. they manage to close up a little, but not much, and I take a safisfatory distance from them while was diving. then, at about 3000 meters and almost 800 km/h, I start to climb puting the plane like a rocket. again, manage to reach almost 5000 meters and the Raiden's where close, but still a little distance. don't conduct further more, but later will do it.

well, like I saied it's just a joke, but know, it's the AI. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

at witch level LOGIC that I can't say, but at least in this joke seems that the poor control autorit of the J2M seems to have bee modelated.

JtD
06-29-2009, 02:45 PM
I still prefer the Ki-84, it 'feels' better. TinyTim, you're bing quite a bit optimistic with all of your comparisons. One could also say "climbs like a Jug, dives like a 25lbSpit, runs like a Yak-3, turns like a Tempest and punches like a Fw190D" with about the same accuracy. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BillSwagger
06-29-2009, 03:03 PM
First and foremost, nothing compares to the "jug". I get more energy /speed out of that plane than any other plane including some jets.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


The J2M is no miracle plane. It takes decent piloting to be successful in most planes in the sim, and the J2M isn't an exception.
It has more to do with a pilots ability to negotiate and time turns at 7000M+, which takes a bit of skill and practice. Certainly a different type of game than TnB in a Spitfire or La-7 at 1000M.

Ba5tard5word
06-29-2009, 03:29 PM
The J2M's top speed at sea level is like 350 mph so it's definitely outrun by many late-war planes like Fw-190 A's and D's and P-47's and Tempests and La-7's and so on.

But it just handles really sweetly at sea level and keeps its speed up.

TinyTim
06-29-2009, 03:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
The J2M's top speed at sea level is like 350 mph so it's definitely outrun by many late-war planes like Fw-190 A's and D's and P-47's and Tempests and La-7's and so on.

But it just handles really sweetly at sea level and keeps its speed up. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I've got it to 580kph at sealevel. This might be a few kph's behind La-7, P-51 or Tempest deck speed, but it's not only top speed that counts, it's acceleration too. J2M takes a lot less time to reach it's max speed due to favorable thrust to weight ratio.

In other words, if P-51 starts running from a J2M (both flying at, say, 350kph), Jack will catch the Mustang before the latter will start outdistancing the persuer.

Trefle
06-29-2009, 04:45 PM
J2M is the kind of plane that makes you a worse pilot if you fly it too much cause it has very few weaknesses (gives bad habits ) , even without tactics or practice in it , you will have success more often than not cause it outperforms most of his opponents in almost everything .

I respect people who fly it though , it's a nicely designed and good looking plane , but like a few other "ace-maker" planes in the sim (like Spit 25lb , La-7 etc) , i prefer to stay away from them , that's also why i rarely fly the 109G2 these days except against Spits , prefering it the F4 or G6 , more challenging

Wildnoob
06-29-2009, 05:01 PM
oh, can't belive I forgot, the P-47N would be a excellent ride to figth the J2M.

damm that we don't have it on the sim, even that the D "late" model we have should be very close to it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ba5tard5word
06-29-2009, 05:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">would be a excellent ride to figth </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

wildnoob, it is spelled "fight." There aren't any common English words I can think of with "igth" in them but there are several with "ight" but I see you typing "figth" or "fligth" here quite a bit.

flight
right
fight

etc

I'm not being critical, just making a friendly suggestion. I've studied a few foreign languages and they really made me realize how screwed up English spelling is.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Daiichidoku
06-29-2009, 05:35 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/pft.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/pft1.jpg


at least the climb is accurate http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Wildnoob
06-29-2009, 05:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by:Ba5tard5word
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">would be a excellent ride to figth </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

wildnoob, it is spelled "fight." There aren't any common English words I can think of with "igth" in them but there are several with "ight" but I see you typing "figth" or "fligth" here quite a bit.

flight
right
fight

etc

I'm not being critical, just making a friendly suggestion. I've studied a few foreign languages and they really made me realize how screwed up English spelling is.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry, please sorry for my extreme ignorance mister Ba5tard5word.

f-i-g-h-t

now I understand how to wrote this write this word, witch by the way I never imaginate I was wroting wrong.

buddy, I don't have words to you. think that say thank you would be even a offense.

you folks can't belive how help me to improve my english and are everyday doing it, like you that tell me that I was writing a word by a totally wrong form that there's absolutely no sense with witch I wanted to mean with it. I need to improve my english skills, oh, I really need. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

hope that say this not offend you, but thank you very much my man! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

waffen-79
06-29-2009, 06:03 PM
Man I love this SIM, been here since almost the begining and register years later to participate with the community...

and Just when I was flying only for the IJN/IJA:

A6M5a
Ki-84-lc
N1K1-J2

I have to learn also the J2M5 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Feathered_IV
06-30-2009, 04:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Check out the J2M5 high altitude performance... last time I checked those were outperforming P-47D-27's over 8,000m. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of my favourite memories of online play was on ZvsW when the Raiden first appeared as new content. Up until then, the P-47's had ruled the roost. That first weekend, the Jugs were slaughtered. The fights were going on at more than 30,000ft with the J2M's holding the opening advangatge in height. The Jugs never thought to look above them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

staticline1
06-30-2009, 02:20 PM
Live and learn I guess Feather.

However how close is its high altitude performance compared to reality? Everything I've seen shows the J2M5 having a top speed of 382MPH which is noticibilty lower than the P-47. I won't deny their improved high altitude performance over other Japanese fighters and some of the problems the T-bolts may have come up against was complacency as they had little to no competition so why watch your back? When it comes to flying to each strengths at high alt the P-47 should still usually come out on top, even more so when the N model comes into play.

horseback
06-30-2009, 08:59 PM
Generally I think that you'll find that Japanese late war products had a great many quality control and fit issues made worse by poor pilot quality. When you compare their claims vs actual Allied losses in most late war clashes where we can track casualties for both sides, even the prewar trained veterans were not nearly as successful as they thought.

While the basic designs were good, it's my understanding that Allied technical experts usually had to make a great many fixes to get the aircraft safe to fly by our standards; much of the stock of their best radial engines were damaged in firebombings of their factories, their late war work force was considerably depleted of skilled manpower, and they'd lost most of their best prewar trained military ground maintenance people.

Of course, the FMs in the game are based on what was supposed to be the factory ideal, but the CEM we use is considerably less complex than the real thing, so we can hardly get a realistic feel for how hard it was to manage the real thing. Some things that are modeled can detract from the ergonomic and automatic conveniences on an aircraft versus another whose worst vices can't be modelled in the sim.

cheers

horseback

BillSwagger
06-30-2009, 10:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
Check out the J2M5 high altitude performance... last time I checked those were outperforming P-47D-27's over 8,000m. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

One of my favourite memories of online play was on ZvsW when the Raiden first appeared as new content. Up until then, the P-47's had ruled the roost. That first weekend, the Jugs were slaughtered. The fights were going on at more than 30,000ft with the J2M's holding the opening advangatge in height. The Jugs never thought to look above them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

There are two other planes that have always been more troublesome for me, though. When i ever i see a J2M i can either run them down or out run them (in a Jug). Its really still a miss match, and i don't see why all the fuss between a Jug and J2M. Other than lack of speed and dive performance, the J2M comes apart pretty easily if you ever noticed. Maybe Im the only Jug pilot who's shot one.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
but probably not.
The D0-335, and ta-152H are a bigger hassle at that altitude in that they both outrun the Jug and match the JuG in toughness, but they carry those unforgiving 30mms.

P-47M with the Browning M3s, please. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Wildnoob
07-01-2009, 04:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
When i ever i see a J2M i can either run them down or out run them (in a Jug). Its really still a miss match, and i don't see why all the fuss between a Jug and J2M. Other than lack of speed and dive performance, the J2M comes apart pretty easily if you ever noticed </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:with the J2M's holding the opening advangatge in height. The Jugs never thought to look above them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it's just look at those quotes and that's the answer.

Feathered saied: "the J2M's holding the opening advangatge in height. The Jugs never thought to look above them."

that's logic, seems that people don't accept the fact that the J2M has a excellent supercharger, matching the Thunderbolt's one. so, it can climb very high with great speed, and if saw a P-47 below, it has the universal altitude advantage but also tecnical capacitation for it.

and by the way, like BillSwagger saied, if the Jug pilot take the enemy to much and much higher, do some stops to level up gain speed and start to climb again, it's possible to outrun the J2M. and, the J2M don't dive as well as the P-47 also. in a summary I would say: the Jug is inferior to the J2M in one to figths at lower and medium level, but at high altitude, is one of the best figthers of the war, and more then a match for the J2M as well as vice versa.

BillSwagger
07-02-2009, 10:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> "the ______'s holding the opening advangatge in height. The _______'s never thought to look above them."
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is nothing about this quote that couldn't also be said with different planes.
Most planes will do well against the plane with an altitude disadvantage, especially if they catch them off guard in a climb.

There are a few other planes that can compete better than the J2M, not that its not a great plane, i just don't see why people are making a fuss about it. It has clear disadvantages.

M_Gunz
07-02-2009, 10:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
There are a few other planes that can compete better than the J2M, not that its not a great plane, i just don't see why people are making a fuss about it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Simple ________ to _________ reason as always. They got shot down when they felt they should not. So fuss-fuss-fuss.

Wildnoob
07-02-2009, 10:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> "the ______'s holding the opening advangatge in height. The _______'s never thought to look above them."
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is nothing about this quote that couldn't also be said with different planes.
Most planes will do well against the plane with an altitude disadvantage, especially if they catch them off guard in a climb. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

let's say you are in aP-47 at high altitude. witch one would be more easly to caugth you from above without you see, a Zero or a J2M?

DKoor
07-02-2009, 10:44 AM
A6M is totally incapable of fighting the P-47 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif .
Difference in speed is enormous.
All the P-47 has to do is get a full throttle I doubt Zero can do something even from dive.

BillSwagger
07-02-2009, 10:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> "the ______'s holding the opening advangatge in height. The _______'s never thought to look above them."
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is nothing about this quote that couldn't also be said with different planes.
Most planes will do well against the plane with an altitude disadvantage, especially if they catch them off guard in a climb. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

let's say you are in a Hellcat or Corsair at high altitude. witch one would be more easily to catch you from above without you see, a Zero or a J2M? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


They would both have you if you didn't see them, but i think for obvious reasons the J2M might have a step on the Zero.

I wonder if the F4U can outrun a J2M.

SILVERFISH1992
07-02-2009, 10:46 AM
I'v taken out a few 109s with a zero, its perfectly capable of fighting anything, it just cant keep up.

Ba5tard5word
07-02-2009, 10:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder if the F4U can outrun a J2M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At sea level, I think the J2M is faster.

The J2M's main strength to me is its ability to keep its speed up in maneuvers, something planes like the Corsair or Tempest are not good at. Corsair would probably be better at diving because it's so heavy.

TinyTim
07-02-2009, 11:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
There are a few other planes that can compete better than the J2M, not that its not a great plane, i just don't see why people are making a fuss about it. It has clear disadvantages. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In such debates it's cruical to distinguish the versions. J2M is just not enough. While J2M3 and J2M5 have nearly identical performance below 6km, are they lightyears apart higher (not lightyears really, but not far off: 100kph level speed and 5mps climb). The J2M5, sporting a three stage supercharger, is a high altitude monster, a fearsome opponent for any fighter up high, while J2M3 is, indeed, nothing special at those altitudes.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
The J2M's main strength to me is its ability to keep its speed up in maneuvers, something planes like the Corsair or Tempest are not good at. Corsair would probably be better at diving because it's so heavy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. It might not be as tight in turn as the Zero, but it retains energy in a turn extremely well - it turns like bobsled on its track.

Saburo_0
07-05-2009, 06:04 PM
I think the J2M3 and esp the -5 are great planes. But the Japanese pilots of the time were most;ly very inexperienced, and I've only read 1 account that suggested a Japanese pilot had the concept of E-fighting in mind. Coming from Zeros the Japanese pilots were intimidated by the Raiden's landing speed, and frankly had no idea how to fight in it.
Add in the quality and numbers of American pilots and planes... well it never had a chance to shine. Oh, and of course manufacturing defects and poor support/maintenance.
just my 2 pence

VW-IceFire
07-05-2009, 08:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder if the F4U can outrun a J2M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At sea level, I think the J2M is faster.

The J2M's main strength to me is its ability to keep its speed up in maneuvers, something planes like the Corsair or Tempest are not good at. Corsair would probably be better at diving because it's so heavy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Corsair maybe...but the Tempest is extremely responsive at speed. I would say moreso than the J2M. I have done online fights where the two meet and the J2M is a dangerous and competitive opponent of the Tempest throughout the Tempests best range of speeds. What the Tempest has is more firepower and slightly more responsive controls at speed. As soon as the speed drops then I know I'm in trouble because the J2M will win. At high altitudes the J2M5 is significantly better than the Tempest so I will never fight one there.

BillSwagger
07-05-2009, 09:25 PM
The F4U-1c is faster at sea level than the J2M.
It also holds its energy well in and out of turns, where the Tempest really loses a lot of speed if you turn it too tightly.
The J2M, being lighter, might have better acceleration, but if the F4U or tempest have the momentum, as they should, then they easily out run the J2M down low.
Seen it twice now.

WTE_Galway
07-05-2009, 10:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder if the F4U can outrun a J2M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At sea level, I think the J2M is faster.

The J2M's main strength to me is its ability to keep its speed up in maneuvers, something planes like the Corsair or Tempest are not good at. Corsair would probably be better at diving because it's so heavy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Corsair maybe...but the Tempest is extremely responsive at speed. I would say moreso than the J2M. I have done online fights where the two meet and the J2M is a dangerous and competitive opponent of the Tempest throughout the Tempests best range of speeds. What the Tempest has is more firepower and slightly more responsive controls at speed. As soon as the speed drops then I know I'm in trouble because the J2M will win. At high altitudes the J2M5 is significantly better than the Tempest so I will never fight one there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Sea Fury would be a better match than the tempest I suspect.