Hello,

I am interested in hearing the various opinions of the F4 and F6, I caught the tail end of a show the otherday on the tele and they were bragging up the F6 over the F4, they both look alike to me.

We don't hear many of the Grummans over the European, mostly Boeing

S!

BVM

Well..

I assume you're aware that the Hellcat was the natural progression of the Wildcat. That being said.. here are the finer details, specs, performance etc:

Hellcat

Wildcat

Some of the older aircraft encyclopedias describe the Hellcat as a "big beefy fighter" as opposed to the lighter, older and less powerful Wildcat. Personally, I prefer the Wildcat mainly because of it's reputation in bearing the brunt of the Zekes early on. Those pilots won with mainly tactics, however the Wildcat was also a tough little fighter.

While the two resemble each other, I can always tell the difference. The undercarriage is one giveaway.

Hi BVM,

although this two planes look somewhat similar, they have only the same developper, otherwise they are absolut different.

The F6F is a by far more big plane. With 31m² winarea and 5650kg it have the size of an P38, Ju87 and its bigger than the F4U, while the F4F with 24m² and 3500kg is rather in the Hurri class.

Another good visible different is the low wing of the F6F, while the F4F have a middle wing.

The F6F could carry more bullets, more bombs and was faster, nevertheless the F4F-8, better known as FM2, got used till the end of war.

The FM2 had only 4 MG´s again, with a longer time to shoot and it got a better engine, this pushed its performence much upward and brought it very close to the F6F. It could manouver better at slower speed, but wasnt as fast.

This advantage of the FM2 and its smaler size made it a very good plane for the smaler escort carriers. The FM2 was equal to the A6M5, or even better, cause the FM2 always could disengage in a smooth dive and could take some punishment while that, while the Zero, if cought below the FM2, couldnt do much and only needed some lonly bullets to be down.

In a real war, i would always choose the FM2 over the Zero. In a game, where we normaly dont run away, if we are in a bad position, the zero for sure have some advanages(climb ratio, so the FM2 need a good pilot to get into a advancd position).
The FM2 in Aces High is a real fun plane.

Greetings,

Knegel

Hello,

I wonder what the 109 could do against these planes!

S!

BVM

Not sure about any specific accounts, however, It's quite possible there were encounters between Martlets and 109's in the Mediterranean.*



*Re: Emil's Desert Air War from March 2002.

Much depends to the pilot and mission order.

In R/L often enemys got suprised, when it came to a fight, it depends to the pilots tactical and pilot skill.

For example the Me262 for sure was the most advanced fighter in WWII, but some stupid pilots did try to fight like in a propeller plane(slow donw and turn with the enemy). With such a behaviour the best plane cant show its performence.

After the few Bf109B and C´s in spain massacred the I-15 and I-16´s and all other planes, with the only advantage of a higher dive speed, many constructeurs saw that in "modern" warfare the turn ability is nothing, but speed is all.

As result the wingload of the planes got higher and higher and the drag smaler and smaler, resulting in planes like the P38, FW190, Yak 1/7/3, P51, P40, Ki61, Ki44, B26, Misquito, Me410, Me262 and He162.

This planes all had a rather high wingload, but due to their speed they all was very advanced, although most of them had a rather poor climb ratio and turn performence(in comparison to the A6M, Spitfire, Hurricane), they all did count as good planes.

But why??

The reason was the ability to escape, if needed.

Its well known that the 109´s and 190´s, although with problems in a close combat, still could escape the Spitfires in a dive.
With this advantage the pilot, if not suprised, was rather safe. VS the same fast diving US planes the 109/190 lost this most important advantage, what is specialy bad vs a numerical advantage.

The F4F had this advantage vs the Zero, but not vs the 109 or 190 and the german planes was faster and could climb even better than the FM2. So the only advantage of the F4F was the ability to turn tighter, so the relation was like FW190 vs SpitVB, the outcome we know.

The F6F-5 was a other class, but still slower than the german planes(109G6, 109G14, FW190A5, FW190A8, D9), but its by far closer to the german planes than the F4F

The F6F was specialy made to counter the light wingloaded japanese planes(A6M), cause if the discrepancy regarding the turnperformence is to big, its almost impossible to shoot each other down, at least if the enemy dont got suprised(P51 vs 262, Bf109E vs I-15).
So the F6F got very big wings(also good for carrier service), but this wings made it rather slow.

All over it was a very good carrier plane, flown by very good trained pilots, due to this, the F6F-5 squads dont had to fear any enemy plane, while the F6F-3 still was outclassed by the german planes.

Here is a very good plane performence comparison page, basing on the Aces high flight performences, which are good inside the "greyzone of realism".

http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php

Greetings,

Knegel

The Wildcat came first and then the Hellcat came next.
All those things that were wrong about the Wildcat
got fitted in the the Hellcat......
Oh, one other thing, the Wildcat was called 'Zero Fodder'
while the Hellcat earned the title 'Zero Killer'...

Simple answers are usually best....

Cheers mate
David

Recent reading for the New Guinea campaign has surprised me in some areas.

The F4F ended up about 1:1 against the Zero and so did the P-39! Under very trying circumstances.

As Ralf said, it was all about tactics.

The F6F was 19:1 against all Pacific enemy planes and 11:1 against the Zero. The big BUT though is that by the time the F6F totally took over from the F4F the experience level of their opponents had deteriorated quite a bit and they didn't practice good tactics.

that's because the Japanese depended a a small core of very experienced combat pilots. When they were gone the next generation was far less capable.

The US sent it's pilots home to train the next generation. Of course, that's also because they had the manpower to do so.

Really?



I'd like to know where you got the term "zero fodder". Perhaps in a dream?

But interesting is that the F4F wasnt "Zero Fodder" at all!

It was the F4F Pilots, who fought the elite pilots of the IJNAF down, while when the F6F came most of them was already history and got replaced by rather poor pilots, with an in most cases disadvanced number.

When the F6F came, the japanese fleet already was defeated and the US mass production of pilots, planes and carriers was going strong, iam sure, even with only the FM2 as carrier based fighter the USA would have won the war.