F4F-4 vs Zero 21

[Squire]

Its a standard F4F-4 (FM-1) or so thats whats indicated on the sheet. Have a look and decide for yourself. Max speed is max speed , and 285 at sea level is what it did according to that test. Its not my data, and I have no way of "proving" anything indicated. I can only show you the data, and you can make what you will of it. Maybe its crap, maybe its closer to the truth. I have no way of knowing, I never flew a Wildcat.

[HoHun]

Hi Widewing,

>There was no dive speed redline imposed, simply because it could achieve terminal velocity without over-stressing the airframe.

It would be more accurate to say that Wildcat was inherently safe in a dive because it had too much drag to reach dangerous speeds in the dive, and the elevator became too heavy to overstress the airframe.

The FM-2 manual states that a stick force of 100 lbs has to be applied and held for a moment before the Wildcat even begins to pull out of a terminal velocity dive. No chance to pull excessive Gs with a flick of the wrist :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[brady]

Ok, squire, so most likely it is refering to the later models at WEP as indicated in Americas 100k, since the above test clearly states:

 
"Close to sea level, with the F4F-4 in neutrail blower, the two planes were equil in leval speed."

  I was realy asking about the first link you posted, I infered (perhaps incorectly) that the data and charts on that page were derived at from AH player testing or AH flight figures provided by HTC. And not from outside sources, for as we all know AH and the real world dont always jive.

[Innominate]

Quick offline test.
(Numbers are not exact, errors are rounded down for the a6m, up for the f4f)
5000feet, no flaps, 25% fuel.

F4F-4:  185mph     3.2g's
A6M2:  185mph     5g's

F4F-4:  150mph     2.5g's
A6M2:  150mph     3.g's

F4F-4:  130mph     2.1g's
A6M2:  130mph     2.9g's

If anyone would verify these numbers it'd be helpful.
The f4f's sustained turn was right around 150mph,
From this test, it's obvious that the a6m2 has a very large turn radius advantage on the f4f-f.  Though the closeness of it at 150mph is a bit odd, since the a6m seems to be able to maintain about the same g-load down to 130mph.  (Though maybe I just wasnt pushing it)

BTW: does anyone have the formula for  speed + gload vs turn radius handy?

[Sox62]

Originally posted by brady
"In it he shows that the Wildcat was not nearly as inferior to the zero as everyone thinks.The first generation U.S. fighters more then held their own."

  Well it is not being disputed that men like those in VMF 121 did good, the issue at hand is how well did AH do in modeling the Wildcat, at present this is in dispute. It is also widely held even by the US Navy/marines that the wildcat was "decidely inferiour" to the Zero.


 "The F4F could (if they had any alt) ALWAYS dive away from the zero by diving steep in a slow turn. "

  Anyplane with suficnt alt to acheave a break away spead could dive past and break away from another plane, heck give me 20 K and will pull away in a C47:), the above test clearly staets that given an equile start the wildcat could not dive away.

 "Add to this self-sealing fuel tanks,and armor that the zero NEVER had."

 Later models did have this feature.

You miss the point.Maybe the later models did have rudimentary self-sealing tanks(never any real armor).But the later models at this point were fighting OUR later models.Namely the F6F,the P-38,and the Corsair.

The F4F's never fought the later models.

Check the book out-it's an interesting read.The Japanese pilots seemed to consider a P-40 or an F4F a pretty even match.(This was after the very early part of the war when the U.S. had changed their tactics,and stopped trying to turnfight the zero)

[brady]

Ok, check out this spead chart for AH planes, and keep this statement in mind:

  "Close to sea level, with the F4F-4 in neutrail blower, the two planes were equil in leval speed."


 
  "Americas 100k states that Late model Wildcats could make about 285 mph on the deck "With Military Power". (p. 473)"

   What is wrong in AH Why the descrepency?

[brady]

Sox, I am not to shure what your point is m8t, were debating handeling and spead isssues hear presently, durabality was a side issue and was not realy in to much dispute. Anadotal evidance is not realy going to help decide the issue.

[brady]

The Report sighted above clearly states that the Zero had a Maximum speed of: 270mph at sea leval and 287mph at 5,000.

 Now since the F4F-4 in AH has no wep, and since max speed preformance figure from Americas 100K states:


 "Americas 100k states that Late model Wildcats could make about 285 mph on the deck "With Military Power". (p. 473)"

    Now this from the report:

 "Close to sea level, with the F4F-4 in neutrail blower, the two planes were equil in leval speed"


    1) The F4F-4 is in AH to fast on the deck.

    2) The test height was higer than indicated

    3) The True deck spead of the F4F-4 is in dispute

    4) The Zero is to slow on the Deck

    5) I am on crack and the figures are right


     Of the 5 above reasions for the problem at hand either 2 or 3 seam the most likely.

[F4UDOA]

Widewing,

You said

Ultimately, however, it was concluded that the FM-2 was the best American dogfighter below 10,000 feet. This is especially noteworthy when we look a the other planes tested, which included the P-51D, P-47M, F7F-1 and XF8F-1, as well as several Corsairs.

Could you tell me where in The Joint Fighter Conferance this conclusion was reached?

[F4UDOA]

Brady,

I feel your pain.

The funny thing about HTC and flight models is this.

1. They only use source documents for American flight models.

2. They do not consider head to head A/C test as source documents or valid reference material.

This is also a problem for me because I have a number of test similar to the A6M2 test which show results that vary greatly from the AH FM.

In fact when it comes to the FM-2 you are in fact reading the wrong test report.

Read the test between the A6M5 vrs the F6F-5, F4U-1D and FM-2. You will jump of a bridge after that one.

It can be found in the "Warbird History Zero". It contains both reports back to back.

For instance the FM-2 should outclimb the A6M5 by 400FPM up to 4K. Aslo the FM-2 with a 1350HP engine was only 6MPH faster on the deck than the A6M5 and 4MPH slower than the Zeke at 5K. The FM-2 have a top speed of 321MPH at 13K and the Zero 335MPH at 18K.

Also the A6M5 could outclimb the F6F-5 by 600FPM up to 9K. But was equal to the F4U-1D in climb to 12K where the F4U was 500FPM better.

None of this is represented in AH.

Also the results from the FW190A5 vrs F4U-1D and F6F-3/ P-51B vrs F4U-1A are not used in AH except to represent the P-51B and FW190A5.

Flight manuals are also not used as you might expect.

Basically as long as the information is close they will not change it. Believe me I have tried.

[brady]

F4UDOA, my book By Mikesh, contains the same Flight test between the A6M5 and the FM-2 that u referd to, but I wanted to try and stay focused on the A6M2 vs F4F-4 issue since the A6M2 is the only early war Japanese fighter we have and this preformance issue between the F4F-4 and it is creating what I would consider a non historicaly corect Matchup in the CT. I thought about going to bat on the A6M5 later.

 
   So in a Nut Shel your telling me I am screwed huh? That I have done I can do and that non of this is somthing HTC will listen to?

[Squire]

Brady. I cant understand why you keep asserting that the F4F-4 in the data I included was a late model.

It states right on the data sheet that its an F4F-4 (FM-1).Thats the 1942 model of the Wildcat. Its sea level speed is indicated as 284. Its engine is a P.W. R1830-86, the date on the test is July 1943.

The late model F4Fs could do 280 on the deck "with nuetral blower" yes, thats referring to the F4F-8 (FM-2) with wep. With the blower engaged it could do near 300, as it does in AH. "

As far as "wep" goes, thats a very artificial method AH uses, Im sure all the early F4Fs had what the pilots referred to as "emergency power" which is simply the highest rpm without destroying the engine.

As for your first question, the data in the "Midway" post was collected by its author, Badboy. It looks very complete to me.

Later.

[brady]

Squire,


"I cant understand why you keep asserting that the F4F-4 in the data I included was a late model"

  I am not, I am stating that in America's 100K they say that it was the speed for the late model.

 "The late model F4Fs could do 280 on the deck "with nuetral blower" yes, thats referring to the F4F-8 (FM-2) with wep. With the blower engaged it could do near 300, as it does in AH. "

  In AH they have the F4F-4 doing 284 on the deck, it has no wep, in the flight test they say that the F4F-4 and the A6M2 had the same speed on the deck, the A6M2 has a tested top speed of 270 on the deck, all things being equil so should the F4F-4 on the deck( per the flight test), howeaver in AH it is aprox. 15 mph faster on the deck than the test's indicate it should be.

 "As for your first question, the data in the "Midway" post was collected by its author, Badboy. It looks very complete to me."

 It is a very nice presentaion, howeaver real world and AH dont always jive, and their are a few issues that are in question, namely those that are being debated hear presently.

[Squire]

I think perhaps there is much more of a grey area with the deck speeds of the A6M2, than the F4F. At least there is data out there for it, without arguments about how the IJN rebuilt its engine before it was tested, ect.

As for the F4F, well, there is data that shows the AH model is correct, there is also data that shows its off. Nothing new there I guess. I doubt we will ever get a definitive answer that will convince all.

Btw, my squad does training in the DA on a fairly regular basis (as Im sure you have all had ample fights in both types too), and I find in a 4 vs 4 the A6M2 has no trouble getting above and behind F4Fs. Still, you cant expect in the sometimes very large many vs many fights in AH events, that the A6M2 isnt going to get shot at quite a bit. Thats really the problem, and it was the problem for them in WW2. Air combat is confusing enough that it often negates technical advantages. Very little has been said about that on this thread. Just how carefull are they being? Not that that cant be applied to almost every other fighter, because it can. Pilot X asks "How come I got shot down in my Spitfire", well, because you dove low and turned at everything in sight, thats why.

[brady]

"I think perhaps there is much more of a grey area with the deck speeds of the A6M2, than the F4F. At least there is data out there for it, without arguments about how the IJN rebuilt its engine before it was tested, ect."

     This may well be to, howeaver the test findings are from a captured A6M2 that had virtualy nothing done to it, nothing that would effect it's preformance, so between it and the F4F-4 it think presently the Zero's speed is perhas the least disputable, while the F4F-4's speed referances seam to be convluted.

 
"As for the F4F, well, there is data that shows the AH model is correct, there is also data that shows its off. Nothing new there I guess. I doubt we will ever get a definitive answer that will convince all."

  I am shure you are correct in this, nobody will be compleatly convinced, personal biases will always collor this no mater what.

  The last part of your statement is also true, that is why I tryed very hard to use as many numbers in my argument as i could.