Originally posted by Masherbrum
IIRC, this had a top speed of around 417mph. The Navy wanted this to replace the -5 (and based on the -5 platform) because of performance gains "all over the board". But the end of WWII cancelled production. I want to say their tailcodes were 70188 and 70913 but don't quote me on it.
Grumman claimed a max speed of 435 mph. I've seen published climb rates for the XF6F-6 that were below that of the F6F-5. This is typical of the non-technical writers dabbling i aviation history. They often publish MIL power performance rather than Combat power ratings. I don't have the Grumman data handy, but I recall that its climb rate was virtually identical to the F4U-4, while having considerably greater internal fuel capacity.
Ultimately, it was the Navy that elected to produce the F8F-1 instead of the F6F-6.
Since the F6F production could be quickly adapted to the revised aircraft, Grumman's manufacturing management wanted the F6F-6 to go into production immediately. Bob Hall (Director of the Experimental Department) wanted his F8F to get the nod. Arguments were made to Roy Grumman. Grumman, who saw great merit in both aircraft formally asked the Navy to make a decision. Not surprising, there were advocates of both types within the Naval Aviation hiarchy. However, it was determined that the F6F-5 was adequate for the short term and a new production line was being tooled-up for the F8F, thus the Bearcat was selected.
Had the F6F-6 been selected, Grumman would have been began delivering these by November of 1944, meaning it would have been in combat no later than January of 1945, months before the F4U-4. Originally, the Navy planned to phase in the F6F-6 as they did the F6F-5, sending them to combat units as replacement aircraft as well as refitting units coming back from deployments. We all know that the F8F didn't see combat, although it was deployed on carriers enroute to Japan at the surrender.
I have always been an advocate of "a good solution in a timely fashion is always more desirable than a perfect solution too late". If I had to make the choice between the F6F-6 and the F8F-1, I would have picked the improved Hellcat as this would have placed better aircraft in the fleet sooner. However, I would also have gotten F8F production underway at Eastern Aircraft ASAP, stopping FM-2 production immediately. Of course, the politics of such a decision would not have sat well with Grumman. Eastern did receive a contract for the FM3-1 (F8F-1) in February of 1945, but hadn't yet begun basic assembly when the war ended (largely because the obsolete FM-2 was consuming much of Eastern's resources). Another reason for selecting the F6F-6 was that F4U-4 production was typically slow. Grumman was delivering Hellcats at nearly twice the rate F4Us were being delivered, and the F4U was being manufactured by Vought and Goodyear (and Brewster, until their pathetic delivery and quality control resulted in a cancelled contract). Getting better aircraft to the fleet as fast as possible would weigh heavy on my thinking.
My regards,
Widewing
