June 18, 2013 at 3:53 am
I believe that if this fighter served in Japanese Air Force, it would beat any fighter came from ally army, including P-51 “mustang”.
Its layout even much greater than any Germany fighter in illusion.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217686[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]217687[/ATTACH]
I am unable to cavil at it in terms of the era it being.
Do you have your favorite?
By: QldSpitty - 21st June 2013 at 01:38
Shinden vs Ca15 Kangaroo?
By: markb - 20th June 2013 at 17:26
Some good pix of the Smithsonian’s stored Shinden here. They’re toward the bottom of the page.
By: Creaking Door - 19th June 2013 at 15:30
Do you have your favorite?
Yes, my favourite from that era would be the Hawker Sea Fury.
It makes an interesting comparison to the J7W1 Shinden; it is a bit larger, a bit heavier but has a more powerful (air-cooled radial) engine and an almost identical power-to-weight ratio and speed…
…of course, it doesn’t look anything other than entirely conventional.
Although the J7W1 Shinden looks futuristic…..is there any evidence that there was any advantage to its configuration?
By: D1566 - 19th June 2013 at 15:29
yep the jet version was a dream….the prop version was capable of 750kph(466 mph),,according to the Japanese test’s it did have a few minor problems…in particular with the 6 bladed prop..later tests were going to use a 4 bladed one..it only flew for 45 minutes so who knows….#2 is with the nasm in Washington.
Marginally slower than the DH Hornet then?
By: oz rb fan - 19th June 2013 at 12:17
The jet version was never more than a dream, was it? Indeed, would it have passed muster in the peerless hands of Eric “Winkle” Brown?:)
yep the jet version was a dream….the prop version was capable of 750kph(466 mph),,according to the Japanese test’s it did have a few minor problems…in particular with the 6 bladed prop..later tests were going to use a 4 bladed one..it only flew for 45 minutes so who knows….#2 is with the nasm in Washington.
By: Smith - 19th June 2013 at 11:56
Do you see from 1:24 through 1:39 they’ve bent the prop tips – by trying to take off peut etre?
By: Anorak - 19th June 2013 at 02:23
The Shinden looks a little like the de Havilland Technical School’s 1939 design, the TK5…
By: Moggy C - 18th June 2013 at 20:45
Well the scale totty looks quite good
Moggy
By: Stepwilk - 18th June 2013 at 20:32
Here’s one Japanese model-maker’s interpretation of a Postwar Shinden,,,
http://www.zoukeimura.co.jp/en/products/swssp01_shinden2nd.html
By: J Boyle - 18th June 2013 at 17:39
Whether it would have been better than any allied aircraft will never be known, according to the the Francillon book, Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War it only flew three times for a total of 45 minutes.
It looks like it may have had some stability issues in the pre-computer days. But even if it was a huge improvement over the state of the art (which I rather doubt since I can’t really believe Japanese aero engineers were that much better than the ones in the UK, Germany and the USA) it was a moot point coming so late in the war.
It’s fun to speculate about the “secret” German and Japanese products. There are plenty of books on them out there (including a few in my library, so I’m guilty of encouraging them) but the authors seem to think that having a general arrangement drawing or two is the same thing as having a production-ready aircraft. They seem to overlook pesky items like detail design and construction, not to mention flight and operational testing and development.
By: charliehunt - 18th June 2013 at 17:12
Nice work, Charlie, I was about to look for that myself.
While I think stating that it was such a good fighter is a bit presumptuous for something that can have flown so little, it was certainly an impressive piece of work. Do I remember right that there’s one at NASM?
Adrian
(I could look that up too, of course, but this is a discussion forum, and it’s much more fun to drop hints!)
Here you are Adrian
http://airandspace.si.edu/collections/artifact.cfm?id=A19600333000
By: Duggy - 18th June 2013 at 16:48
I would give the Shinden 2nd place.
1st would go to the Bugatti 100P.
By: adrian_gray - 18th June 2013 at 16:27
Nice work, Charlie, I was about to look for that myself.
While I think stating that it was such a good fighter is a bit presumptuous for something that can have flown so little, it was certainly an impressive piece of work. Do I remember right that there’s one at NASM?
Adrian
(I could look that up too, of course, but this is a discussion forum, and it’s much more fun to drop hints!)
By: Bob - 18th June 2013 at 16:23
Nothing like being taught your mother tongue…. 🙂
By: charliehunt - 18th June 2013 at 14:25
The jet version was never more than a dream, was it? Indeed, would it have passed muster in the peerless hands of Eric “Winkle” Brown?:)
By: oz rb fan - 18th June 2013 at 14:21
the prop strike was inevitable…they put small wheels on the bottom of the fins for later flight’s…the follow up would have played havoc with the b29’s…j7w2 shinden kai jet powered!!!
yes the materials were gone and most of the skilled pilots as well..but even with an average pilot a 750 kph fighter with 4x30mm cannons would mess up your day.
a shame she wasn’t tested by the allies post war to see what she was capable of.
By: Moggy C - 18th June 2013 at 13:32
Good find that footage.
The propstrike looks, on the face of it, pretty inevitable. I wonder if any of the design staff had to pay the price?
Moggy
By: charliehunt - 18th June 2013 at 13:27
Seconded! And particularly in his use of word apparently alien to some with English as their native tongue!!:D
But what a strange beast – the aircraft, of course. Marvellous but grainy mono footage here:
By: SqL Scramble. - 18th June 2013 at 13:14
Well said that man!:applause:
By: Moggy C - 18th June 2013 at 12:44
Traditionally we try to encourage posts from those who don’t speak English as their first language. It gives us a wider range of opinions and interests.
This means we tolerate the occasional strange usage or vocabulary. Few of us could post as coherently on a non-English language forum.
Please let’s maintain that tradition.
Moggy
Moderator