Author Topic: P-40 outroll Zero at speed (Read 1406 times)

agent 009 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 23, 2005, 02:52:20 PM »

Sakai also said; the Hellcat is the only US plane that can match the zero in any maneuver. Not "exact" quote, but it's from the book Samurai. Wish he would have commented on Corsair.

Maverick · « **Reply #16 on:** July 23, 2005, 04:42:12 PM »

Karnak,

You know you aren't the only person posting in the thread but you can take it personally all you want, not my problem. You also haven't provided anything to counter that mans experiance and comments either.

I'll take the word of a vet who flew the combat missions over speculation any day. I'll accept his opinions and speculation over just about anyone as well.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #17 on:** July 23, 2005, 07:13:09 PM »

If Widewing's BIO is accurate I think it's inlikely that Erik Schilling ever saw a Japanese flown Zero, let alone fought against one. So maybe we should keep the arrogant statements about "those who were there" a bit in check wrt to his opinion of the Zero.

BTW Widewing how come he ended up flying transports instead of fighters after the AVG?

Widewing · « **Reply #18 on:** July 23, 2005, 07:27:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
If Widewing's BIO is accurate I think it's inlikely that Erik Schilling ever saw a Japanese flown Zero, let alone fought against one. So maybe we should keep the arrogant statements about "those who were there" a bit in check wrt to his opinion of the Zero.

BTW Widewing how come he ended up flying transports instead of fighters after the AVG?

Erik fought against the Ki-43, not appreciably different in performance from the A6M2. A tad more agile, about 10 mph slower.

Erik was recruited by CNAC when most of the AVG members walked away after General Bissell offered them the rank of 2nd Lt. in the AAF. This was in violation of their covert contract with the US Government, which promised all volunteers their original ranks when and if they returned to US service. Bissell had the most successful and experienced group of American fighter pilots that existed at the time and treated them like they were dirt simply because he disliked Chennault from their pre-war days (Bissell was an advocate of the theories disproved by Chennault in China). All but a handful left when the AAF took over. Some went home, where their value was recognized and later went back to war. Some became test pilots for aircraft manufacturers and some joined CNAC.

My regards,

Widewing

Squire · « **Reply #19 on:** July 23, 2005, 09:13:25 PM »

As with anything else you need to take Schillings comments in the vein that they were said.

He is simply pointing out that they flew their P-40s to their strengths, and that it had some attributes (some, not all, not uber, some) that made it effective in fighting Ki-43s, Ki-27s, and other IJ a/c that were of that type of manueverbility (like an A6M).

Its what all successfull pilots did, they found what tactics worked with what they had.

Im sure a lot of ex AVG or USAAF pilots who flew P-40s in the Far East and Pacific that were good at it chaffed at all the post war glamorization of the P-38 and Corsair, and felt that "we did ok with what we had". Its hardly a surprising sentiment.

Maverick · « **Reply #20 on:** July 23, 2005, 09:42:29 PM »

Grun,

I find it remarkable that you label my post as "arrogant" as I take the word and opinions of a vet who flew fighters in WW2 over the "expertise" of those who say he is all wet and never flew any fighter in WW2 . Now which is the arrogant stance?

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #21 on:** July 23, 2005, 10:16:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
If Widewing's BIO is accurate I think it's inlikely that Erik Schilling ever saw a Japanese flown Zero, let alone fought against one. So maybe we should keep the arrogant statements about "those who were there" a bit in check wrt to his opinion of the Zero.

Kind of like Sakai's comments about the P-38. He never engaged, let alone saw one in combat.

ack-ack

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #22 on:** July 24, 2005, 01:49:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
Grun,

I find it remarkable that you label my post as "arrogant" as I take the word and opinions of a vet who flew fighters in WW2 over the "expertise" of those who say he is all wet and never flew any fighter in WW2 . Now which is the arrogant stance?

Yours, especially as you somehow try to raise yourself by blindly agreeing with anything they say even agreeing with their speculation apparently out of hand.

Now Mavercick, have you posted anything that disputes that Schilling never actually fought or even saw Zeros on combat sorites "over there?"

Thats how this game is played no?

MiloMorai · « **Reply #23 on:** July 24, 2005, 06:53:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
I find it remarkable that you label my post as "arrogant" as I take the word and opinions of a vet who flew fighters in WW2 over the "expertise" of those who say he is all wet and never flew any fighter in WW2 . Now which is the arrogant stance?

Even a 'vet' who never flew against the Zeke?

So agree Grun. Afaik the AVG never met any Zekes in combat so what would he know except for second had stories told him by other pilots who did.

One thing I have learned is that any Nip a/c that had retracting u/c was labelled a 'Zero', especially early in the war.

Maverick · « **Reply #24 on:** July 24, 2005, 10:15:19 AM »

Grun,

You are welcome to your opinion. If believing a vet who flew the P40 in combat against the Japanese whether or not it was against a "zero" vs the opinions of someone who never flew any WW2 fighter is arrogant then I'm happy to be so.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #25 on:** July 24, 2005, 10:36:57 AM »

So as long as he flew aginst nay Japanese plane that means he knows how the Zero works out in combat, right?

Thats just not right.