F6F Hellcat

[Tank-Ace]

Lets remember though, thats not nessicarily a reflection on the plane's inherent qualities, but on pilot skill.

[PR3D4TOR]

The Marianas turkey shoot is a perfect example how the F6F got it's impressive record. It's much the same with the German scores on the eastern front early/mid-war, facing an enemy flying out of date aircraft with poorly trained pilots and tactics unsuited to modern aerial warfare.

[Baumer]

Since we're throwing out anecdotal points of view, here's one to consider.

When the Navy formed it's flight demonstration team (later named the Blue Angles) it was left to them to select the aircraft they would use. The pilots had a mix of Hellcat and Corsair experience, and as a group they selected to fly the Hellcat over the Corsair. They did this because when flying in tight formation they felt the Hellcat was much better at flying on the edge of it's performance then the Corsair. This doesn't mean it could out turn a Corsair, just that near the edge it was more stable and predictable. 

[DMVIAGRA]

The Hellcat is quite the fighter, to those who know how to use it. I kind of quible with it because I'm used to the throttle of the Jug and when I need WEP on it sounds like it's on 40 Manifold Pressure; really wierd. I'm sort of used to the canopy slightly, It reminds me of the D-11, and the rest of the P-40 models. A good strong point about it is with speed it turns well, it carries an exceptable load of ords, the six .50s pretty good, it's also rugged.

If you compare the veiw to a Spit I'll kill, because all Spit have to do is kick the rudder and you can see.

[MAINER]

The Hellcat is quite the fighter, to those who know how to use it. I kind of quible with it because I'm used to the throttle of the Jug and when I need WEP on it sounds like it's on 40 Manifold Pressure; really wierd. I'm sort of used to the canopy slightly, It reminds me of the D-11, and the rest of the P-40 models. A good strong point about it is with speed it turns well, it carries an exceptable load of ords, the six .50s pretty good, it's also rugged.

If you compare the veiw to a Spit I'll kill, because all Spit have to do is kick the rudder and you can see.

Yes I have to agree. In the right hands it is a deadly machine.

[Karnak]

If you compare the veiw to a Spit I'll kill, because all Spit have to do is kick the rudder and you can see.

Even without that the Spit's rear view is better due to the bulged canopy and windows behind the pilot's armor.  I would not compare the two.  The P-47D-11 is, as you say, a much better comparison.

[SIK1]

Nobody flies the Hellcat because it is a POS deathtrap that should never have been made, both in real-life and in Aces High.


This drive-by post brought to you by the ghosts of AH past

Wow! there's a name I haven't seen in a long time.

When I first came to AH Mathman use to wax me all the time in that POS no matter what I was flying.

 
Sir

[MAINER]

Nobody flies the Hellcat because it is a POS deathtrap that should never have been made, both in real-life and in Aces High.


This drive-by post brought to you by the ghosts of AH past

 is somebody getting killed by hellcats a lot? 

[Karnak]

is somebody getting killed by hellcats a lot? 

Mathman was the best F6F driver I've ever seen in this game.

[Oldman731]

Mathman was the best F6F driver I've ever seen in this game.

In fact, is his Hellcat web site still available?

- oldman

[Shuckins]

For you youngsters out there, Mathman was one of the best pilots in the game, right up there with Leviathn.  It didn't matter what you were flying, they would hand you your head.

There was a plan by Grumman, at one point, to install the Pratt & Whitney R2800-18w, the same engine in the F4U-4, in the Hellcat with a Hamilton-Standard hydromatic airscrew with four 6501 blades.  Many sources mistakenly quote it's top speed as 417mph at 17,000 feet altitude, but its true top speed was 425mph at 25,000 feet altitude.

A pity it didn't go into full-scale production.  THAT version of the Hellcat in AH would have been a handful against almost every plane in the game.

[Widewing]

For you youngsters out there, Mathman was one of the best pilots in the game, right up there with Leviathn.  It didn't matter what you were flying, they would hand you your head.

There was a plan by Grumman, at one point, to install the Pratt & Whitney R2800-18w, the same engine in the F4U-4, in the Hellcat with a Hamilton-Standard hydromatic airscrew with four 6501 blades.  Many sources mistakenly quote it's top speed as 417mph at 17,000 feet altitude, but its true top speed was 425mph at 25,000 feet altitude.

A pity it didn't go into full-scale production.  THAT version of the Hellcat in AH would have been a handful against almost every plane in the game.

The Navy and Grumman concluded that the F8F-1 was far superior to the upgraded XF6F-6. Rather than consume resources on the lesser fighter, the program was dropped after two prototypes were built. The F8F turned out to be one of the best, indeed, probably the best prop driven air to air fighter ever to active service. It easily outclassed the F4U-4 air to air. It missed combat by a week or two. Several squadrons were aboard carriers just days from operations off of Japan. F8Fs took part in the huge Tokyo Bay fly-over when Japan formally signed the surrender.

The Aces High F6F-5 is about 20 mph too slow at best altitude, according to TAIC and Navy test data. It's low altitude speed (up to about 15k), where we generally fight, is correct...

[Shuckins]

The Navy and Grumman concluded that the F8F-1 was far superior to the upgraded XF6F-6. Rather than consume resources on the lesser fighter, the program was dropped after two prototypes were built. The F8F turned out to be one of the best, indeed, probably the best prop driven air to air fighter ever to active service. It easily outclassed the F4U-4 air to air. It missed combat by a week or two. Several squadrons were aboard carriers just days from operations off of Japan. F8Fs took part in the huge Tokyo Bay fly-over when Japan formally signed the surrender.

The Aces High F6F-5 is about 20 mph too slow at best altitude, according to TAIC and Navy test data. It's low altitude speed (up to about 15k), where we generally fight, is correct...

The thing about the F6F-6 is that it could have been put into production immediately, with almost no down time on the production line.  Higher performance was despertely needed with late war Japanese fighters matching and in some cases exceeding that of the -5 Hellcat.  With the invasion of Japan looming on the horizon, some in the Navy and at Grumman thought that larger numbers of the upgraded Hellcat would have been preferable to a much smaller number of Bearcats.

Depends on one's point of view I suppose.

[Widewing]

The thing about the F6F-6 is that it could have been put into production immediately, with almost no down time on the production line.  Higher performance was despertely needed with late war Japanese fighters matching and in some cases exceeding that of the -5 Hellcat.  With the invasion of Japan looming on the horizon, some in the Navy and at Grumman thought that larger numbers of the upgraded Hellcat would have been preferable to a much smaller number of Bearcats.

Depends on one's point of view I suppose.

I don't think the Navy trials were completed when the decision was made cancel the program. Despite the relative simplicity of the change, the Navy had very strict rules about qualifying new or improved aircraft. Adding to this is getting a production line running. Grumman was running at full capacity in late 1944, early '45. They were pushing out 600 F6F-5s, plus F7Fs and the new F8F-1 every month. In addition, they were building amphibians as well. The logistics of getting a line running include a steady supply of engines and propellers. Indeed, there were notable changes to the whole QEC. You can't even begin until your suppliers are up and delivering everything you need. Next, you have to phase in the new aircraft, which means a separate line for the short term. Aircraft require a great deal of documentation. The Navy will have to develop and print manuals and checklists for pilots and maintenance personnel, which will have to be distributed prior to the aircraft arriving. The Navy will have to provide the required special tools. Thus, even when fast-tracked for acceptance, it can take months to get a line tooled, documentation written, printed and get people trained. I doubt that manufacturing could have begun prior to October of 1944. However, the first production F8F-1 was delivered in December of 1944. Understand also that the F8F-1 was scaling up slowly because the Navy did not want any reduction in deliveries of the F6F-5.

The Navy recognized that the F7F and F8F were top tier fighters, among the best ever. However, the Navy also recognized that the F6F-5 was still a very capable machine and was continuing to get the job done with minimal losses. That's where they rightly placed their priority. It was thought that an invasion of Japan in the fall of 1945 was a given. The Navy planned to have the F4U-4, F8F-1 and the F7F in considerable numbers for the invasion. Both Vought and Goodyear would be building the F4U-4/FG-4, replacing the F4U-1D/FG-1D. Grumman and Eastern Aircraft would be building the F8F-1/F3M-1. Had the war continued another few months, the fast carrier air groups would have been quickly outfitting with the latest fighters. Many F6F-5s were to be transferred to escort carriers, replacing the FM-2 as their primary fighter. F7Fs were all headed to the Marines, until the larger Midway class carriers were operational.

[Shuckins]

Widewing I appreciate the information you presented and your point of view.  But there are a couple of things that I'd like to point out for your consideration and judgement.  First, the decision to route a production line of R2800-18w engines to the F4U-4 was made at about the same time as the F6F-6 was being developed.  I find the decision to be a bit inexplicable because at that time the Corsair had not yet carrier qualified and would not do so until December of 1944.  The Hellcat had been carrier qualified for two years.

Secondly, the changes in design basically involved a simple horsepower upgrade with modified propeller gearing and blades.  Since the 18w was essentially the same engine I presume the engine mounts would be the same, especially since Grumman tended to overengineer or beef up critical structural members.  Corky Meyer wrote about the prototype F6F-6s and basically indicated that production problems were predicted to be minimal.  As stable as the Hellcat design was no flight anomalies were expected to crop up.

Thirdly, with massive kamikaze attacks against the fleet being predicted for the invasion of Japan, not only would increased speed for the intercept be critical so also would loiter time.  Did the Bearcat have the range to allow it to remain on station as long as the Hellcat and Corsair?  How about firepower?  If memory serves, the first Bearcats delivered to the fleet were only armed with four fifty caliber machine guns.  Would this have been enough to destroy a kamikaze quickly enough to allow a Bearcat to intercept another target in a sky that was certain to contain a LOT of them?

Regards, Shuckins