著者
佐藤 達男
出版者
経営史学会
雑誌
経営史学 (ISSN:03869113)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.50, no.3, pp.26-51, 2015 (Released:2018-03-30)

This study aims to investigate Nakajima Aircraft Company's airframe business and its production efficiency during WW II in comparison with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.During the Pacific War, Japanese aircraft production was essentially based on job shop system for parts fabrication and sub-assembly. Nakajima Aircraft Company the largest aircraft manufacturer of war-time Japan and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries the second largest utilized both job shop and production line systems for their airframe final assembly lines depending on each plant situations. The United States Strategic Bombing Survey reports evaluated that Nakajima's airframe production system was more developed than that of Mitsubishi, which adhered to original, old-fashioned job shop system. This was substantiated from the fact that Nakajima expanded its production by 1944 to more than eight times of its 1941 production, and Mitsubishi produced only three times for the same period.However, in production efficiency measured by airframe weight produced per month per employee, Mitsubishi was predominant until August to October 1944. A positive correlation was observed between production efficiency and monthly number of airframe production. Mitsubishi's improvement degree of production efficiency agreed well with the estimation by learning curve theory, but Nakajima's improvement of production efficiency far exceeded the estimation. This is considered to be the effect that Nakajima's labor utilization rate, which was approximately half of that of Mitsubishi in September 1943, might have increased rapidly as the monthly airframe production increased. The difference of the final assembly line did not have decisive influence on the production efficiency, but the increase in the number of monthly airframe production was influential.The production efficiency continuously increased as the monthly airframe production increased, and then dropped sharply from the end of 1944 and after due to the rapid decline of monthly production, which was caused by shortages of essential materials and engines, US air raids from November 1944 and after, factory evacuation, and labor shortage.

言及状況

外部データベース (DOI)

はてなブックマーク (2 users, 2 posts)

[中島][三菱][中島飛行機][三菱重工業]

Twitter (17 users, 18 posts, 21 favorites)

さて、とPDFを読んで真顔になってる。これはどうにも評価に悩むぞ。 >>中島と三菱の大戦中における生産能力推移 https://t.co/EtYcfky9uO https://t.co/4aG3YLypMZ
ネットの世界は楽しいことがままあって、例えば、 「はて、日本の艦上機における規定運用時間数って」と検索したら、まったく関係ないが、 「太平洋戦争期中島飛行機の機体事業と生産能率」 https://t.co/EtYcfky9uO うひゃ!という論文がひっかかったりするところだったりします。ふひひ
中島飛行機でも零戦作ってるんですけどね (小泉工場に生産ライン3つ) 太平洋戦争期中島飛行機の機体事業と生産能率 https://t.co/Sxk5nScX1I #ij954 https://t.co/rGeeODMLi2
https://t.co/cJSrbgrVQr 楽しい論文見つけた
@yuuka_2ch ご教授ありがとうございます。 生産数の推移に頭が行ってなかったんですがこれ見る限り https://t.co/gFlbE9Onwh ほぼご指摘の期間に生産数減少していることがよくわかりますね。刀折れ矢尽きるとはまさにこのことか、と。 探せば同期間のアメリカのデータもすぐ出てきそうなんですが…やめときます
太平洋戦争期中島飛行機の機体事業と生産能率 https://t.co/f2FvMpsSeO
一方の中島飛行機が1940年3万3千人 https://t.co/KuCm5dO1jT グラマンみたいな小さな会社が新技術が多かったF4Fをしっかり完成させてライセンス生産も含めれば7000機も作れるような組織作りをどうやったのかとか

収集済み URL リスト