?? Read the relevant references is all I can say, there's nothing hypothetical about either case. Records esp. of main carrier strike force (Kido Butai) aren't obscure or much questioned AFAIK and show they lost 1 A6M and 6 Vals while claiming 33 Brit a/c in the 5 April 1942 Ceylon raid. The Brits claimed 19 J aircraft losing 19 Hurricanes and 4 Fulmars. 9 April the Hurricanes did slightly better, claiming 8 J aircraft for 8 losses. The JNAF claimed 38 Brit a/c for 2 A6M's and 2 Kates actually lost (the J losses esp as the striking a/c weren't necessarily 100% to air combat, though). Shores "Bloody Shambles" has many earlier Hurricane combats mostly against JAAF but a few (later Malaya campaign esp) v. A6M's, which indicate the Ceylon results were not a fluke, Hurricane consistently bested by Ki-43's as well as A6M's and didn't even do that well against Ki-27's.

On Darwin raids in 1943, the Spit (tropicalized V's) losses over a series of raids and a number of months are known from any number of Western references. The JAAF and JNAF losses of relevant units in the period can be seen in Hata/Izawa's "Japanese Naval Aces and Fighter Units in WWII" and their book with Shores "Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931-45". An Aussie website had a chart of all claims and losses (including bomber) of both sides in those raids day by day, but now unfortunately dead. It showed the J losses 30% of the Spit claims (overall, many claims were against bomber/recon), and just 1 J fighter actually downed by the Spits. Such claim accuracy isn't shocking for cases where J's had upper hand, slightly worse than typical 1942.

So "would a", slaughtered A6M's, maybe could a and should a (to form that basic triad ), but didn't in the actual circumstances, Hurricanes or Spits. There were no reprises of Hurricane v. A6M after Ceylon and only a few of A6M v. Spit after Darwin; maybe only one, that between BPF Seafires and actual J fighters id'ed as Zeroes (as opposed to kamikazes) 15 August 1945 where BPF Seafires claimed 8 Zekes for 1 loss, but the real results and actual identity of opponents isn't known, AFAIK.

The Spit debacle at Darwin *doesn't* show than no Spit mark or unit could beat any iteration of JNAF A6M units, surely in some combinations of each they could and would have (perhaps did in that 1945 combat, for example). What it shows is that the JNAF fighter units tend to be underestimated and esp. the speed of their decline overestimated (still pretty formidable in 1943, it wasn't a matter of simple tactics change for a given unit to go from getting beaten to presto, beating the A6M's). This is perpetuated by sources which repeat claims (or repeat of old sources which do), without factoring in (often much different) actual results, even after 60 years.

Joe

Doesn't it? It confirms that the aircraft was a capable one. As much as you attempt to fudge around it, the proof is in the pudding. The Firefly proved its value to the RN when it shot down those aircraft. It wasn't an exceptional performer but it was adequate which as I've pointed out, is all you really can ask of any weapon. It had none of the vices, which most of the other aircraft you speak of, nor did it necessarily have their advantages, either but it was relatively easy to deckland and it carried a useable warload.

I won't attempt argument on most of your points because you clearly have superior knowledge to me on them, Joe. However this one I find interesting because its generally acknowledged that the tropicalisation of the first Mk.Vs which arrived in Darwin was pretty inadequate, with all sorts of problems being encountered particularly with the freezing of guns at altitude (rapid climbs from humid conditions of the Wet, meant that the moisture would often condense and then freeze on the guns, causeing stoppages). There were similar problems with the cooling and lubrication systems as well. They weren't cured until late 1943, if I remember correctly.

"The Firefly proved its value to the RN when it shot down those aircraft."
I don't think I can agree with this reasoning. Every plane that shoots down a couple opponents has proved its value? I remember a Kingfisher pilot spotting for shore bombardment and calling for help when jumped by a Zeke, then reporting with amazement that it had shot down the Zeke. Even if we accept that these unverified Firefly victories are in fact valid claims, it hardly vindicates the plane as a fighter. I like the Firefly as an attack plane, or maybe as a night fighter, but as a day fighter, it was not in the same class with contemporaries like the Corsair.
Who shot down more Zekes, Fireflies or Dauntlesses?

The Brit Chiefs of Staff thought way, but not Churchill. He was continually pushing for CW ops in the IO and PTO - mainly for post-war prestige reasons, to show Britain was still a 'player.' Check out Grave of a Dozen Schemes, H.P. Willmott, ISBN 1-85310-777-8; this deals with the problems (besides exhaustion) facing the British.

Much of the problem was sheer incompetence. For example a plan was proposed to send a couple of hundred thousand soldiers to Australia (to be housed and fed at Australian expense) in preparation for the recovery of Malaya and the NEI in 1946. Australia's reaction to this was, roughly, "Send all the blokes you want, mate, but you'd better send food, housing, and transport with them,'cause we've got buggerall to spare..."

It turned out that no one in Blighty had the slightest idea of the Australian infrastructure. They didn't know how many ships could dock at a given port, where rail lines went (or if there were any), how much food OZ produced, nothing. One would think that the Colonial Office would have had a clue, but apparently not.

Please note that my remark concerning incompetence was not directed at CW soldiery, but at the government echelons who should have been collecting information.

I partly take that point (also note I already recommended that book earlier in the thread ). In other cases it seemed to go all the way to the top, in general strategy of the late war. We can't say Churchill, either, wanted Britain to bear a heavier burden because it would defeat the Axis ASAP with no other consideration, just what he thought optimal between the risks of 'not a player' and exhaustion postwar, which again was just realism (since both those things happened to a degree anyway, no idle concern either one).

Joe

Ah, I see where from some of the confusion comes. According to FAF graph, climb rate at sea level for G-2 was indeed only 20m/s (slightly over 3900fpm), but it increased from there and best climb rate was achieved at 2km, being 23m/s, or 4500fpm. After that, climb rate began to decrease: naturally, different conditions may have led to different performance (engine cooling etc). Altitude of 6000 metres was reached in just under 6 minutes; IIRC, German sources give time-to-climb of 5.1 minutes, which was probably flown with 1475hp setting. I see no reason why a K-4 or G-10 with MW-50 wouldn't do considerably better.

As a side note, top speed at sea level was found to be bit over 520km/h, and highest speed of 636km/h was achieved at 6700 metres. G-6's performance was slightly inferior.

According to Barrett Tillman's book, Dauntless, 138 planes were destroyed by Dauntless pilots and gunners. Carrier based got 106 and land based 32.

Fewer than 80 were shot down by Japanese aircraft (records from Guadalcanal are incomplete).

FWIW, the type sunk over 300,000 tons of enemy shipping, including 18 warships ranging from subs to battleships. Six were carriers.

Now that was a usefull airplane even though it was considered obsolete.

This is simply awesome to read.
I like the part about radios.

Amazing what a rugged plane with a pair of .50's in the nose and a pair of .30's in the rear can do regardless of intended mission.

The main reason the RN was kept out of the Pacific for most of the war (even if they had any resources) was Admiral King. The reasons he gave were logistics and lack of compatability, others have stated other reasons. Victorious was a special request and was only loaned until the first Essex class were available.

The BPF only got out in 1945 because of political pressure. Even then it was only because Nimitz bent some rules to help.