Originally posted by brady
But:
The book also states:
"Americas 100k states that Late model Wildcats could make about 285 mph on the deck "With Military Power". (p. 473) "
Late model as defined elswhear is not a F4F-4.
Bellow we have the statment for the Testing in San Deigo, with a F4F-4 and the A6M2:
"Close to sea level, with the F4F-4 in neutrail blower, the two planes were equil in leval speed"
So hear in lies the dispute, Why was the testflight different. Why the descrepency on the speads, what model of F4F is the chart refering to.
Why the differances in preformance between 1,000 and 5,000ft?
Brady, I have already told you the the charts SPECIFICALLY refer to the F4F-4. It's annotated. Each type has its own curve and each is annotated.
Here's the quote again so that there is no misunderstanding:
"Late Wildcats could make about 285 to 295 mph in MILITARY power at sea level," This statement conforms to the charts. There is nothing to debate about this, it's there in black and white for all to see.
Now, when the Zero was tested in San Diego, did they test it with captured Japanese 87 octane avgas, or did they use the U.S. standard grade 100/130 octane avgas?
Something not mentioned is the fact that the F4F-4 pilot can engage low or even high blower, over-boost the engine and gain considerable speed over neutral blower. So could the Zero pilot, if and only if he had high octane fuel to minimize detonation. Burning that Japanese dishwater, I'd bet he melts pistons in 60 seconds. The F4F pilot may eventually damage his engine. But, the Zero pilot absolutely will damage his engine (unless he has the 100/130 avgas).
Remember, I'm not arguing that the Zero isn't porked. I'm arguing the F4F-4 IS accurately modeled. I feel that the A6M2 as modeled in AH does not live up to its reputation. But, then again, in the real world it didn't either, at least after Allied pilots discovered its weaknesses.
My regards,
Widewing