F6F Hellcat

[lyric1]

The reason why the hellcat had such a spectacular K/d was that it was designed specifically to counter the zero and it did it very well. Had it been in the ETO I'd imagine its k/d would have been much less.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?topic=290433.0

[BaldEagl]

I used to fly the Hellcat a fair amount as my primary attack ride.  I haven't flown it much lately but have spent a good amount of time in it over the years.

IMO it's primary fault is it's low top speed followed by it's reluctance to climb from a slow start.  That said it can turn like crazy with flaps out and I've often turn fought P-51's, 109K-4's and FW-190's without ever dropping my ord.  I figure if I'm carrying ord on a mission I'm not dropping it until I absolutely have to so I got a lot of practice.  Loaded it's still competative with those planes but they tend to extend and reset which they can do at will.  Jugs are generally outclassed by the F6F.  Once the ord is gone the F6F is an excellent low speed turn fighter and like the F4F it's rugged as hell.  That said in a high speed dive you have to be careful pulling out with ord attached or you'll lose your wings.

I think the remodel that limited the rear vision lowered it's use the most.  Since then you just simply can't see behind you but I try not to let it bother me.  If I've got my SA up I have good idea what might be there anyway.

I chose it as one of my primary rides (along with the Spitfire XVI (pure fighter) and FW190A-8 (buff hunter/fighter)) due to it's versitility.  It can carry as much ord as most and flys and fights better than most once the ord's gone.  There's nothing in the MA I wouldn't try to engage with a light F6F.

BTW, Slapshot's one of the better F6F sticks if he's still around.  He used to fly it almost exclusively in MW and used to give me fits in my Spit.

[Widewing]

Did any of the Royal Navy Hellcats see action in the Atlantic or Med or just in the Pacific?


ack-ack

I believe that the FAA Hellcats managed about 52 kills during the war. They also fought a brief engagement against the Luftwaffe off of Norway.

There is a USN test of the F4U-1A and F6F-3 compared to a FW 190A-4. Generally speaking, it was not a good idea to engage either with a 190 unless one had a considerable E advantage, and even then, the 190 better skedaddle before E state equalize. One interesting note from the test is that which shows the F6F-3 reaching 391 mph @ 25k. That's 5 mph faster than the Aces High F6F-5 can do. TAIC tests show the F6F-5 being able to attain 408 mph.

Here's a link to the Navy test: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/ptr-1107.pdf

[Tank-Ace]

IMO it's primary fault is it's low top speed followed by it's reluctance to climb from a slow start.  That said it can turn like crazy with flaps out and I've often turn fought P-51's, 109K-4's and FW-190's without ever dropping my ord.  I figure if I'm carrying ord on a mission I'm not dropping it until I absolutely have to so I got a lot of practice.  Loaded it's still competative with those planes but they tend to extend and reset which they can do at will.  

Jugs are generally outclassed by the F6F.  Once the ord is gone the F6F is an excellent low speed turn fighter and like the F4F it's rugged as hell.  That said in a high speed dive you have to be careful pulling out with ord attached or you'll lose your wings.

I wouldn't go so far as to say its competative.... but it can hold its own given a fair chance. When I was playing, one of the things I least like to see was an ornery F6F pilot, because odds were good that if he was flying well, he knew the F6F well, and because they weren't afraid to HO anything without a spud-gun.

As for the F6F outclassing the jug, I would say thats true for the earlier models, but the D-40 can hold its own, and the M and N can walk away from you like the others. Also, I've never understood why everyone consides the F6F to be 'rugged' Yeah, if you're counting individual bullets its pretty tough, but I've never had one survive a tater, and they still die with a good burst from even .50's.

[MK-84]

Generally speaking, I've always considered the faster plane to ALWAYS have the advantage (historically speaking)  but that does depend on alt doesn't it.

Also food for thought when comparing...

The f6f may have been to counter the Zero
The late model 190's were more to counter a heavy bomber.

I would think that affects things to a degree.  What I mean is I'm not certain on a historical basis they could be compared.

[MAINER]

Not correct... The F6F design was modified once data from combat with Zeros was analyzed. This data resulted in switching from the 1600 hp R-2600 to the 2000 hp R-2800. The XF6F-1 first flew at the end of June, 1942, with the R-2800 powered XF6F-3 flying about a month later. This was 6 months after the Navy encountered the Zero. The first captured Zero wasn't test flown until September, 1942. Nonetheless, the F6F-3 incorporated changes as flight data began to make its way to Gurmman's Engineering department.

But the basic design was still the same. If they just upped the horse power thats not much of a change to the rest of the airframe

[Ruah]

its a great plane for sure and I try to use them - but the zero is a better carrier plane for the kind of launch, in the fight asap sort of playing that happens a lot off CVs.  And the F4U is just a better plane and has better views. . .which is shocking really.

[Reaper90]

My Hurricane loves the Hellcats. NOM NOM NOM

[DMVIAGRA]

I fly something that is fairly close to it as "a main ride", the P-47 D-11.

[FLS]

But the basic design was still the same. If they just upped the horse power thats not much of a change to the rest of the airframe

That just shows that the basic design was already sufficient. Don't forget that there was a lot of information out of China about Japanese fighters prior to the F6 design.

[MAINER]

That just shows that the basic design was already sufficient. Don't forget that there was a lot of information out of China about Japanese fighters prior to the F6 design.

When the flying tigers notified the U.S Government about the Zero they did not believe the capabilities they were describing. The U.S government did not take the info coming out of china seriously.

[Greebo]

I fly the F6F as my main ride in the MA. The relative scarcity of F6Fs online is one of the things that draws me to it really. I guess the main reason for this lack of use is the F4U series. Not only are the Corsairs faster but they are better turn fighters too, particularly the 1, 1A and 4. Their flaps seem more effective and they seem more stable in a knife fight, which is odd given their RL reputation for low speed handling compared to the F6F.

I think the F6F would have made a good 9th AF aircraft in the ETO, probably better than the aircraft which were used for ground attack there. However it would have lacked the speed at alt needed for the 8th AF's role.

Co alt I find I have no problem dealing with P-47s in the MA. However if they attack with an alt advantage there is not much I can do except wait for them to get frustrated and screw up, which is the case with all the fast bnz rides.

[AHTbolt]

I love the F6F

[icepac]

F6f faded into obscurity when F4U uber flaps showed up.

I think the F4U flap and gear speed need some looking into.

[Oldman731]

When the flying tigers notified the U.S Government about the Zero they did not believe the capabilities they were describing. The U.S government did not take the info coming out of china seriously.

Did the Tigers ever actually fly against Zeros?  Serious question, I was under the impression that the few Zekes ever used in China were used there and withdrawn quite awhile before the AVG became active.

- oldman