Akutan Zero is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2009. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 7, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
U.S. devised tactics to defeat
Japan's
Mitsubishi
A6M Zero
fighter plane from the 1942 capture of an intact example dubbed the
Akutan Zero (pictured)? | ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 10, 2013, July 10, 2017, and July 10, 2022. |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
removed some spam. goatse island? X_X 24.12.11.213 ( talk) 21:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've finished drafting this article. It was a lot of fun :) I'd like to nominate it for FA status. Is there anything that's missing? Raul654 ( talk) 01:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm still slightly astonished that anybody thinks the F6F was developed in response to the Zero. The design was drafted before Pearl Harbor (i.e., before anybody in the navy ever saw an A6M) and the only change from the X job was the engine. The Akutan Zero was flown in September but Grumman delivered the first dash threes at year end. That was not enough time to make production-line changes and then spool up the first production batch.
Furthermore, NOBODY whom I ever knew at Grumman said the Akutan bird influenced the Zeke. They include two test pilots and the F6F tech rep.
Far as I know, H & M were the source of that rumor, which has been accepted at face value for decades.
I believe the image of Tadayoshi Koga's corpse should be removed. It brings nothing to the article and I find it disrespectful to show a dead body, atleast without the familys concent.(approval) bad english sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.65.95.70 ( talk) 10:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Seconding removal. From the manual of style, images should respect "conventional expectations of readers for a given topic as much as is possible without sacrificing the quality of the article. Avoid images that contain irrelevant or extraneous elements that might seem offensive or harassing to readers;". While remarkable that an image of his body is available, the body doesn't add anything to the incident. There isn't a question that is answered by the image, "did he really die?". Readers can reasonably assume he died in the place crash without photographic evidence required. Lucaswood1 ( talk) 01:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
My concern is that the page isn't marked as having a pic of a dead body... I'd like some sort of header to note that there's content that not everyone might be content seeing. (Tee-hee, homophones!) Friedlad ( talk) 15:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I can provide page cites to (or send copies of pages of) the 1956 first English edition of Zero!, Okumiya, Masatake and Jiro Horikoshi, with Martin Caidin. Zero! New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1956.
"Even as we reeled from the debacle of Midway, another event occurred far to the north which, although lacking the drama of open conflict, was no less serious."
"In the Aleutian campaign I (Okumiya) was Admiral Kakuda's air staff aide. I could not realize at the time how far-reaching an effect this seemingly trivial incident of losing to the enemy a single intact Zero could have. We felt strongly that the unnoticed capture of the airplane, assisting the enemy so greatly in producing a fighter plane specifically to overcome the Zero's advantages, did much to hasten our final defeat." P. 163.
Another book by one of the same authors, Fuschida, Mitsuo and Masatake Okumiya, with Clarke K. Kawakami and Roger Pineau (eds.), Midway, The Battle That Doomed Japan, The Japanese Navy's Story, Annapolis: United States Naval Institute, 1955, briefly describes the Dutch Harbor raid and notes that only one fighter from this mission failed to return to the carrier, as it was hit while strafing and made a forced landing. P. 140.
Kablammo ( talk) 19:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
With these changes, is this settled now? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
This article uses the following inline reference style <ref>Rearden, Fighter, 66–70.</ref>. This evening I have been learning how to use the {{rp|66-70}} template with the <ref name=Reardon/> tag.
This article is an opportunity for me to ask about the merits of each of these styles. I am editing an article on Thomas Willing where I need to provide several inline citations for a book. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 00:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Japanese historian Masatake Okumiya stated that the acquisition of the Akutan Zero "was no less serious" than the Japanese defeat at the Battle of Midway, and that it "did much to hasten Japan's final defeat".
May I offer the view that this is an overstatement? The Mitsubishi A6M Zero was Japan's most advanced shipboard fighter at the beginning of the war, but in terms of speed, armament and ruggedness it was outclassed early on by U.S. carrier-based fighters. While acquisition of the Akutan Zero was certainly helpful to the U.S. war effort in terms of scoping out the Zero's strengths and weaknesses, it seems quite a stretch to compare its importance to that of the Battle of Midway. In that tide-turning encounter, Japan lost four aircraft carriers, suffering (as the Wiki article notes) "irreparable damage" to its carrier force — its primary weapon in the Pacific War and, not incidentally, the force it had employed against Pearl Harbor and the U.S. Fleet in 1941.
Sca ( talk) 14:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I changed the incorrect use of pull-quotes to block quotes (what was intended). Because this is a Front-Page'ed article, I was verbose in my justification. Please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotations, discussion on cquote etc. in archives, and note what a pull-quote is: Repetition of text from the article. I would have thought that before accepting it for FP it would be given a once-over with an eye to such things. Długosz ( talk) 15:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
This article mentions that the Thach weave was developed prior to Pearl Harbor, but the Thach weave article says Thach designed his tactic "soon after the United States' entry into World War II". Ant thoughts?-- Knulclunk ( talk) 18:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
"Also, its engine cut out under negative acceleration due to its float-type carburetor. We now had the answer for our pilots who were being outmaneuvered and unable to escape a pursuing Zero. Go into a vertical power dive, using negative acceleration if possible to open the range while the Zero's engine was stopped by the acceleration"
on this especific aircraft I already hear that during the repairs the allies instaled in carburator on the wrong way, so thefore this had happen.
as far as I know the A6M didn't have any problems to make negative G dives. ok, this can may have be reported during the trials, but I think that a information saying this must be place in the article, because people may gonna think that the aicraft couldn't make negative G maneuvers like early Spitifres and Hurricanes, witch is may be wrong.
I have almost sure that the A6M2 could do negative G maneuvers without any problems. but I are just talking, I don't have sources, I know, but please, check this information folks, you may are providing a wrong tecnical information about the plane. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.174.230.132 ( talk) 20:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Great article
Tad and his friends sound like 19-year-old punks -- shooting at other pilots in the water after their planes went down. Comeuppance of a sort in the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.72.204 ( talk) 07:56, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Akutan Zero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:35, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Are either the Japanese or American serial numbers for this aircraft known? If they are, then they can be added to this article and the article can be added to the List of aircraft by tail number. Mjroots ( talk) 08:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Akutan Zero is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2009. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
December 7, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the
U.S. devised tactics to defeat
Japan's
Mitsubishi
A6M Zero
fighter plane from the 1942 capture of an intact example dubbed the
Akutan Zero (pictured)? | ||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on July 10, 2013, July 10, 2017, and July 10, 2022. |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
removed some spam. goatse island? X_X 24.12.11.213 ( talk) 21:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I've finished drafting this article. It was a lot of fun :) I'd like to nominate it for FA status. Is there anything that's missing? Raul654 ( talk) 01:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm still slightly astonished that anybody thinks the F6F was developed in response to the Zero. The design was drafted before Pearl Harbor (i.e., before anybody in the navy ever saw an A6M) and the only change from the X job was the engine. The Akutan Zero was flown in September but Grumman delivered the first dash threes at year end. That was not enough time to make production-line changes and then spool up the first production batch.
Furthermore, NOBODY whom I ever knew at Grumman said the Akutan bird influenced the Zeke. They include two test pilots and the F6F tech rep.
Far as I know, H & M were the source of that rumor, which has been accepted at face value for decades.
I believe the image of Tadayoshi Koga's corpse should be removed. It brings nothing to the article and I find it disrespectful to show a dead body, atleast without the familys concent.(approval) bad english sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.65.95.70 ( talk) 10:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Seconding removal. From the manual of style, images should respect "conventional expectations of readers for a given topic as much as is possible without sacrificing the quality of the article. Avoid images that contain irrelevant or extraneous elements that might seem offensive or harassing to readers;". While remarkable that an image of his body is available, the body doesn't add anything to the incident. There isn't a question that is answered by the image, "did he really die?". Readers can reasonably assume he died in the place crash without photographic evidence required. Lucaswood1 ( talk) 01:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
My concern is that the page isn't marked as having a pic of a dead body... I'd like some sort of header to note that there's content that not everyone might be content seeing. (Tee-hee, homophones!) Friedlad ( talk) 15:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I can provide page cites to (or send copies of pages of) the 1956 first English edition of Zero!, Okumiya, Masatake and Jiro Horikoshi, with Martin Caidin. Zero! New York: E.P. Dutton & Co., 1956.
"Even as we reeled from the debacle of Midway, another event occurred far to the north which, although lacking the drama of open conflict, was no less serious."
"In the Aleutian campaign I (Okumiya) was Admiral Kakuda's air staff aide. I could not realize at the time how far-reaching an effect this seemingly trivial incident of losing to the enemy a single intact Zero could have. We felt strongly that the unnoticed capture of the airplane, assisting the enemy so greatly in producing a fighter plane specifically to overcome the Zero's advantages, did much to hasten our final defeat." P. 163.
Another book by one of the same authors, Fuschida, Mitsuo and Masatake Okumiya, with Clarke K. Kawakami and Roger Pineau (eds.), Midway, The Battle That Doomed Japan, The Japanese Navy's Story, Annapolis: United States Naval Institute, 1955, briefly describes the Dutch Harbor raid and notes that only one fighter from this mission failed to return to the carrier, as it was hit while strafing and made a forced landing. P. 140.
Kablammo ( talk) 19:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
With these changes, is this settled now? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 17:05, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
This article uses the following inline reference style <ref>Rearden, Fighter, 66–70.</ref>. This evening I have been learning how to use the {{rp|66-70}} template with the <ref name=Reardon/> tag.
This article is an opportunity for me to ask about the merits of each of these styles. I am editing an article on Thomas Willing where I need to provide several inline citations for a book. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 00:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Japanese historian Masatake Okumiya stated that the acquisition of the Akutan Zero "was no less serious" than the Japanese defeat at the Battle of Midway, and that it "did much to hasten Japan's final defeat".
May I offer the view that this is an overstatement? The Mitsubishi A6M Zero was Japan's most advanced shipboard fighter at the beginning of the war, but in terms of speed, armament and ruggedness it was outclassed early on by U.S. carrier-based fighters. While acquisition of the Akutan Zero was certainly helpful to the U.S. war effort in terms of scoping out the Zero's strengths and weaknesses, it seems quite a stretch to compare its importance to that of the Battle of Midway. In that tide-turning encounter, Japan lost four aircraft carriers, suffering (as the Wiki article notes) "irreparable damage" to its carrier force — its primary weapon in the Pacific War and, not incidentally, the force it had employed against Pearl Harbor and the U.S. Fleet in 1941.
Sca ( talk) 14:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I changed the incorrect use of pull-quotes to block quotes (what was intended). Because this is a Front-Page'ed article, I was verbose in my justification. Please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotations, discussion on cquote etc. in archives, and note what a pull-quote is: Repetition of text from the article. I would have thought that before accepting it for FP it would be given a once-over with an eye to such things. Długosz ( talk) 15:53, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
This article mentions that the Thach weave was developed prior to Pearl Harbor, but the Thach weave article says Thach designed his tactic "soon after the United States' entry into World War II". Ant thoughts?-- Knulclunk ( talk) 18:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
"Also, its engine cut out under negative acceleration due to its float-type carburetor. We now had the answer for our pilots who were being outmaneuvered and unable to escape a pursuing Zero. Go into a vertical power dive, using negative acceleration if possible to open the range while the Zero's engine was stopped by the acceleration"
on this especific aircraft I already hear that during the repairs the allies instaled in carburator on the wrong way, so thefore this had happen.
as far as I know the A6M didn't have any problems to make negative G dives. ok, this can may have be reported during the trials, but I think that a information saying this must be place in the article, because people may gonna think that the aicraft couldn't make negative G maneuvers like early Spitifres and Hurricanes, witch is may be wrong.
I have almost sure that the A6M2 could do negative G maneuvers without any problems. but I are just talking, I don't have sources, I know, but please, check this information folks, you may are providing a wrong tecnical information about the plane. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.174.230.132 ( talk) 20:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Great article
Tad and his friends sound like 19-year-old punks -- shooting at other pilots in the water after their planes went down. Comeuppance of a sort in the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.72.204 ( talk) 07:56, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Akutan Zero. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:35, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Are either the Japanese or American serial numbers for this aircraft known? If they are, then they can be added to this article and the article can be added to the List of aircraft by tail number. Mjroots ( talk) 08:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)