"Zero or Hamp?" Topic

Is there a difference between the A6M3 Zero and the A6M3 Hamp? Is the Zero a Navy version and the Hamp the Army version?

No. They're just different reporting names for the same thing – they were all navy, the army never had the Zero, although Ki-43 Oscars were often misreported as "Zeros" by the allies.

Hamp or Hap was the name initially used for the A6M3 model 32, with square wingtips. The A6M3 model 22 (which came into service later) reverted to the rounded wingtips of the A6M2.

link

What MHoxie said.

To second Dom, any radial engine Japanese fighter was likely to be misreported by allied pilots as a 'Zero'. Kinda like all German tanks were 'Tigers'.

And the Ki.61 Tony, the only Japanese fighter with an in-line engine? That got misreported as a 'Messerschmitt'. No foolin'.

The official code-name was Zeke. As noted by MHoxie, the A6M3 with the squared off wingtips was originally reported as a new aircraft, so it got called Hap, then Hamp(when somebody realized that Gen. Arnold might take offense), but finally reverted to Zeke once it was realized that it was just a new model.

Zero stems from the fact that in IJN parlance it was the Carrier Fighter Type 0 A6M. Had Nakajima introduced a competitor, that would have been denominated Carrier Fighter Type 0 A6N.

And the Ki.61 Tony, the only Japanese fighter with an in-line engine? That got misreported as a 'Messerschmitt'. No foolin'.

Allied intel also initially thought there was a good chance it was a copy of the Italian Macchi C.202 Folgore. Hence the code name 'Tony'; short for Antonio!

-Will