Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Vermillion on February 08, 2002, 04:33:27 PM
-
Ok, so label me a luftwhiner, and hand me a studded leather nightie, but this is been bothering me for most of this tour.
**Warning: The following is a rant. And as such, it is based solely upon arena experience and observations. No actual testing or data has been collected**
It was one thing to turn the P-38 into a friggin tank, but what the hell did Pyro do to the F6F-5 Hellcat in 1.08?
All of a sudden its the new Niki. The thing goes into the vertical and can loop practically forever, not to mention it will turn with just about anything other than a zeke. And before you start to flame me, remember what the F6F-5 is, Big & Fat.
Ever stood next to one in Person?
And its obvious that the arena population has figured it out too. Take a look at Deja's stat compilation page, you'll notice that F6F-5 usage has literally tripled this version (Tours 21,22,23 and 24).
Tour12 8680 10581
Tour13 2655 3700
Tour14 1250 2293
Tour15 2750 4399
Tour16 1326 2029
Tour17 3805 5253
Tour18 3373 4095
Tour19 3796 4182
Tour20 2756 3431
Tour21 6119 6456
Tour22 9638 11099
Tour23 10512 12175
Tour24 10428 12405
Yes, I know it had a reputation to be a decent turning aircraft. But lets be realistic. It was a decent turning plane compared to other US planes. Notice the emphasis, on "compared too".
Now if I could just remember how Wells taught me to do the E retention test he developed I would go get some real data, and stop squeaking and moaning like Mandoble ;) joking
Seriously, is it just me, or this plane performing outside of its historic envelope?
-
Having flown the F6F before and after the changes were made I can say that I have not noticed any difference other than what was stated, that the stall was made much more docile.
Since that was "fixed" ( I use quotes because I don't know whether the change reflects a realistic stall behavior or not) I think that could have other effects on how it is used in the MA. I THINK a lot of people stayed away from the Hellcat because they could not get over the violent stall and spin. Since that was removed people are more willing to give it a try and the people who do use it will turn and burn a lot more without fear of it snapping out on them. The fact that the plane is easier to fight in now could also lead to higher % of use since people seem to flock to the planes they think they can kill things with the easiest.
Yes it was a monster of an aircraft but it had equally monsterous wings, I believe (have to check my sources here) that it had the largest wing surface of any U.S. fighter which in layman's terms MAY (I'm not an engineer) lead to it's good turn performance despite it's overall large size and weight.
*edit* Not to denounce your claim, who is to say that I'm right and you're wrong just my own observations from spending a lot of time in the cockpit of the F6F. Before and after the changes were introduced.
-
I'll have to find the link, but I do believe I recall reading how when the RAF tested the F6F, it gave the SpitV pilot fits in turns down to 160mph.
I'll have to look for it again, but I know I saw read that once....;)
-
No Soulyss thats what I want is opinons on it.
Maybe thats whats going on now, its just so stable near stall speed that it makes it a very good loop fighter. Which I find difficult to believe. I've just never heard of the Hellcat being a pure vertical E fighter in history.
Started diggin thru my books.
Yes it had big wings. Gross weight was 12,500 lbs with 334 sq ft. of wings. for a wing loading of 37.42 lbs/sqft. For comparison the P-51D was 9500 lbs with 233.19 sq ft, for a wingloading of 40.74 lbs /sqft. But the big thing was its wings were more efficent with a Clmax of 2.27, compared to the Clmax of 1.89 of the P-51. (Data from AHT)
According to AHT, the F6F-5 should have a 3G turn radius about 77% of the P-51D. (p. 603). I'll test that and see what I can come up with.
-
Those stats don't mean much as all planes are used now more than in previous tours because of increased player volume. Kill % each tour would mean something.
There's nothing at all uber about the F6F, just a good all around plane.
The latest issue of Flight Journal has an article by Grumman test pilot Corky Meyer about the F6F. He describes it as having very easy flying characteristics. You could stall it inverted and it would just roll over and recover.
ra
-
I think we need to hear what Mathman has to say on this subject he is probably the best stick regarding the hell kitty
-
the f6f was known to be a very pleasant plane to fly.
It stalled at pretty low speeds and very gently, a perfect feature for a CV aircraft.
the reason for the low usage before 1.08 was the nasty stall, that prevented proper TnB in this plane. It's a nice E fighter also, but too slow to survive in the MA without the ability to turnfight p51 / La7 / dora and actually most of the plane set including spit IX (at alt)...
I did a vertical zoom test in ver 1.07. the result for the f6f wasn't spectacular at all. when 1.08 came out, I checked to see if anything changed - found no difference for the f6f within the margin of error. the f4u-d improved a little.
It will never be the new nik. It's a pleasent plane to fly but blows E in a turn, acceleration is so-so, climb rate is below avrage and max level speed is matched with N1k and spitIX (alt dependent). still "only" 6*0.5 guns.
Bozon
-
To succinctly answer your question, Verm:
No, the F6F is not the new N1K.
Next!
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
F6Fs are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! :)
I had about a 1.1:1 over all K/D in tour 24. So I classify as a newbie yet!
The following are kills of and killed by:
Against the F6F I was 19/12.
My favorite food seems to be Spit 9s 31/9 :D
And they wanna perk it :rolleyes:
Against the NIK2 I am 16/20 :(
But when I fly the NIK2 I am 50/41.
When flying the F6F I am 2/5. :eek:
At least for a newbie like me, the F6F ain't no NIK2.
The F6F has an overall K/D of 14977/17036 in tour 24
The NIK2 had an overall K/D of 30870/25901 in tour 24
Conclustion after interpeting the above stats????
Either A: PERK the F6FU (because it is Blue!)
Or B: AKEagle+ can't fly of course!!! ROTFL!!
So what if I suck at this? I am having a blast! :D
AKEagle+
-
Lol sorry but no way can you compare it to the Nik.
F6F-5 is a great plane with E, without E then its a fun plane to work your bellybutton off and surprise the unwary.
But i will disagree with Bozon in as much as it has nothing to fear from P51's or LA7's 1v1 they are just meat on the table unless they run away of course :)
It is totally survivable in the MA, its all down to the mindset of the pilot and knowing when to bug out from a fight before its too late, yup that SA phrase.
Yea i know it may come as a surprise to some of you but you dont have to fight till the bitter end especially if you can see it coming.
Then again sometimes it can be fun :)
The FM did not have any changes other than the flaps and by all accounts they were surely porked before.
If the F6F-5 has a bit of room to dive it can regain E so fast that many suckers will find out to late that if its BLOO, squat and ugly ya best keep clear.
And the plane that troubles me the most in a 1v1 is the P38 with a good pilot.
-
I'm seriously flabbergasted at this person suggesting the F6F is some uber aircraft! I was shocked and near laughed out loud while I read this person's complaints. The F6F is one of my three main mounts and it is really a difficult time in the arena in one. Due to its speed, you have to always be wary of the other buzzards bouncing you. Instead of whining about what it did to you, hop in one and see how well you do in this "super UFO." Yeah, it has a big wing and can turn well, but you do not want to bleed all your E because you do not recapture it all that well (like most other USA iron.) It's one of those E-fighters against planes slower than it and a Turn & Burn aircraft against those faster than it. Does neither that great but does fit in the middle just enough so that you can outfox someone not real familiar with her fighting characteristics. It has a good initial dive rate so I suppose if flown well can out fight someone in a looping engagement who doesn't understand the kitty. But there is no way the kitty has the E-retention and acceleration of the N1K and many other aircraft.
-
Oh really Steven, is it quite so funny?
Ever heard the names Hooligan and Drex ? Because they're the ones who told me at breakfast one day at the CON (remember the new version had just came out).... "*pssst* you tried the Hellkitty out yet? Its the new Niki".
Ahhhh... but they're just dweebs, and there was the alcoholic haze too deal with.
Of course I'm admittedly just a dweeb myself.
We don't know anything compared to you pro's thats been here almost a full year ;)
LOL!
-
Originally posted by Vermillion
Ever heard the names Hooligan and Drex ? Because they're the ones who told me at breakfast one day at the CON (remember the new version had just came out).... "*pssst* you tried the Hellkitty out yet? Its the new Niki".
They were both incorrect, as time has borne out. The F6F is a very capable arena plane, but it lacks many of the elements that made the original N1K such a killer. It doesn't turn as well, doesn't hold E as well (pre-fixing), doesn't accelerate as well (though it dives beautifully), doesn't feature four 20mm cannons, etc etc. In any event, it certainly will not survive a sustained turnfight with a Spitfire... not a Spit V anyway.
I don't typically consider the F6F a priority threat when I fly in the MA regardless of who's flying it.
-- Todd/Leviathn
-
vermillion
if you want a simple e-retention test here it is:
take your favorite aircraft. pick an altitude (imo 3000 ft is convenient) and record top speed at this altitude.
then go to sea level (make sure you are doing this offline and fuel burn is zero)
reduce speed in 10 mph incriments by lowering throttle (so you are level at/near sea level).
then type .speed ### where ### is the speed increment (your previous trial - 10 MPH)
then add full power. record climb rate as you pass through your altitude datum (ie the 3000 ft or whatever number you picked)
post this data and from this you can determine if the plane has mythical qualities or not.
-
Vermillion,
I can see that my post upset you. It wasn't anything against you. You might want to be careful who you listen to I guess. I do fly the Hellkittie often...or used to prior to the 3 weeks I took off in January (now I'm on to the F4U-1.) I do okay in the Kittie but you really have to choose your battles very carefully. Understand, from someone who concentrated on the kittie for a while and who realizes it's a very tough bird to survive in if flown like 75% of the other fighters in the MA, a comparison to the N1K is a very funny thing. Honestly, fly her in the MA for a week and tell us your conclusions after that. Seriously. Don't let other people's word and 1 battle formulate your conclusion. That's funny in itself too...1 lost battle and it's a UFO.
Loosen up, I count myself at best an average fighter online and I'm sure you can best me 1v1 any time. I am certainly no dogfighter....I'm a hunter and am very careful what I get my pink little body into. I will have been here 1 yr this May. I would've guessed w/ your high number of postings you've been here quite some time.
-
Originally posted by Vermillion
Maybe thats whats going on now, its just so stable near stall speed that it makes it a very good loop fighter. Which I find difficult to believe. I've just never heard of the Hellcat being a pure vertical E fighter in history.
"The Hellcat was a very forgiving aircraft. In a slow-speed stall, the nose would just drop; it did not snap into a spin, as some aircraft would do."
Commander Frank Fleming, USN
7.5 air to air victories in Hellcats
VF-16, USS Lexington
-
If there's a fighter in AH that can't loop until it runs out of gas I haven't flown it. My first full tour was this last one so I haven't tried all of them yet but even the C-47 does continuous loops.
The F6F-5 was designed to fight Zekes. It should be no surprise that it's very capable against everything else. The tubby looks might fool some people but it's a great airplane with an outstanding combat record.
--)-FLS----
Musketeers
-
Only problem I have with it is that it constantly eats 2 or more 30mm hits before actually going down. Or a huge number of 20mm's. Takes more punishment then a frigging B17.
-
Using mainly 190 to fight them, F6Fs, N1KJs and Spits are all in the same bag for me. The main difference between the F6F and the rest from the view point of a 190 piltot, is that the F6F will ping u to death up to 1100 yards, same effect with spit up to 700 yards and same with nikki up to 600 yards.
Ordering them by noticed E retention in my fights:
1 - Spit (any model)
2 - N1KJ2
3 - F6F
4 ... - The rest with the exception of Yak9U, Ki61 and La7 (all of them in 0 pos).
A tip: Dont try to dive with a Hellcat at ur six ...
-
cavalier wrote:
But i will disagree with Bozon in as much as it has nothing to fear from P51's or LA7's 1v1 they are just meat on the table unless they run away of course
sorry bro, you missunderstood me.
that was before the stall fix. trying to pure E fight p-51 and La7 was very hard. now that you can push the plane in turns, I find the p-51 to be a low threat in the f6f.
now IT IS a good plane in the MA. last tour was the first I flew a lot of the f6f. had 48 kills and 27 deaths in it, and I'm not very good.
it's a good plane, but nothing uber
Bozon
-
My point isn't that it beats everything in the arena. My point is that it (in my opinon) performances too well relatively to what it should.
A perfect example of the same thing, was when I and several others started asking questions about the P-47-11, in its first version out. Was it Uber? No. But it DID do things that made you go "WoW... thats something I didn't expect to see out of a P-47 !!"
If you asked the P-47 Devotee's, it was the best thing since sliced bread, and exactly everything that the "dogfighting" P-47 should be. Was it correct? Evidently not since there was a slight weight discrepancy, and it got changed. Ask them how much that 300 lbs meant to the performance of their ride.
Soulyss (who imo made the most honest qualitative look at the issue so far, rather than try to defend "their ride") may have hit the nail on the head when he says it might just be that the stall has been turned down to such levels that it keeps the plane very stable in the vertical, allowing it to milk much more E out of loops, where other planes wallow and stall.
I could be wrong about this whole thing, easily. But consider that in the past, whenever I've made a "something seems strange about this plane" post (and there's been many), I can only think of one time that I was wrong, and a subsequent change wasn't made to the FM.
-
I must have been really drunk. Don't remember saying the f6f is the next niki. I am the last person to listen to when it comes to aircraft performance, and the validity of the FM. I just fly em'.
Drex
-
This is my first post/reply, guys, so be kind!
An adequate response to some of the statements in these posts
about the Hellcat's "low performance" would require a 10,000
word dissertation! Many of the opinions about the F6F are based
on erroneous data or assumptions. Unfortunately, when an air-
craft gains a certain "reputation" early in its developmental period
it never shakes it
The Corsair and the Hellcat were built to meet the performance of
the same Navy contract. They had roughly the same gross weights, wingspan, Pratt & Whitney engine, propeller, and com-
bat range. The Navy desperately wanted the Corsair to be its
main carrier fighter, but the design possessed deadly handling
characteristics that caused it to be pulled from carrier operations
3 times during WW II. The Hellcat's low-speed handling and stall
characteristics, as well as its' excellent forward visibility when
landing, made it a much more forgiving aircraft for the young, in-
experienced Navy pilots coming out of flight school during the war.
Had the Navy not had the Hellcat design to fall back on it would
have been in serious trouble.
Nevertheless, Grumman was under considerable pressure by the
Navy to improve the Hellcat's roll rate and speed. In an article
in FLIGHT JOURNAL magazine, (Dec. 1998 issue), Corky Meyer
relates Grumman's attempts meet these requirements. They were given an F4U-1D to study and orders to improve the F6F's
top speed by 20 knots and improve the roll rate. Everyone who
flew both aircraft "knew" the Corsair was 20 knots faster. But
when flight testing began, Corky found that, when the two were
flown side by side with similar power settings, their level flight
speeds were identical. However, the Corsair's ASI consistently
read 20 knots faster, even when the two aircraft were in closely
stabilised flight.
It turned out that the Hellcat's AIS system's static and dynamic
orifices gave a different reading because they were mounted on
a single boom, whereas the Corsair's static orifice was on the
fuselage. Grumman engineers copied the Corsair's AIS location
and then got a similar reading.
The Corsair was 20 knots faster than the Hellcat below 5,000 feet
because of the way it's supercharger got ram air for its main-stage blower. But from 5,000 feet to their respective service
ceilings the two aircraft had almost exactly the same speed.
The Hellcat's low roll rate proved much harder to solve. The Cor-
sair's exceptionally low lateral stability, the very thing that made
it so tricky to land aboard a carrier, gave it's ailerons great power
and contributed to a fabulous roll rate. The Hellcat lateral stability, by contrast, was exceptionally high, making it a delight
to land aboard a carrier, but giving a low roll rate.
A complete redesign of the Hellcat's wing was out of the question
during wartime. Grumman eventually solved the problem by in-
corporating NACA spring tab ailerons to lower the stick forces.
The tabs closed the rolling performance gap, allowing the pilot
to get full aileron deflections at speeds of more than 100 knots
faster than had been previously possible.
These changes were incorporated into the F6F-5 production line.
The -5 was more than 10 mph faster than the -3. The -5's top
speed at 21,600 feet was 409 mph.
Despite these "fixes," the Hellcat never overcame it's "low perfor-
mance" reputation. Many sources routinely repeat the "pre-fix"
performance statistics, giving the F6F-5's top speed as 386 mph.
A 20 knot differential translates into 23 mph. Add that to the
erroneous figure and you get 409.
Unfortunately for flight sim fans, the lower figure appears to be
the one routinely used to program the flight model for the F6F-5.
And THAT is a shame!
Respectfully, Shuckins
-
Seriously, do not make any more comments until you've flown the F6F some.
It almost sounds like some people are saying the F6F doesn't stall. It does! If you aren't watching it she'll dip a wing on you in a turn and if you do not correct quickly you will roll and possibly spin her. Since I have experience in flying her, that is one thing I look for when I fight against her. And if you are watching, you'll see it...your opponent in an F6F and see the plane make a slight wing dip and wobble and then you know you have her. All her E is gone and she's one big heavy hunk of iron in the sky.
Fly the Kittie, her E isn't all that great. I don't fear the LW planes because when the 190s or 109s dive down on my six, I just make a slight turn one way or the other and you guys zoom off. I've barely more than a gentle turn, just enough to throw off your aim and thus I've not lost much of my own E and I'm ready for a fight when and if you come down to try to chase my tail. Once a LW plane tries to do that, I'll force you to make turns with me and then you've made a mistake. I don't fear USA planes in her either nor do I fear the F6F when I'm in other USA planes. I can't handle the Russian, Japanese or the Spits when flying her and I will think twice about engaging when I see one of them.
Again, fly her and then tell us your thoughts. That's the best way to forumlate an educated opinion.
-
I would like to chime in here.
While I don't think the F6F even comes close to approaching the myhtical qualities that the N1K had prior to 1.08, it is definitely a different plane than what it was before the correction. This is, from my experience, due entirely to the stall fix that was introduced. I am able to fly it closer to the stall than I did before. I am no longer worried about the vicious snap that was there before, thus I am much more aggressive in my attacks and fighting vs. whatever plane I happen to come across.
The secret, that I think many people are figuring out, to being successful in the Hellcat is to keep the speed between 225-300. At this speed, very few planes are able to stay with it. Unlike Zekes (and maybe Spits, but I haven't flown them much in a long time), though, you can't yank the stick around. This is how yopu blow all your speed and become a sitting target.
There is one other factor that I think catches people. It is its size. Being such a big plane, it tends to hide its E state very well. When it is going 300, it doesn't look like it is. I have been told many times by some of the guys that I shot down that they had no idea that I had the E that I did.
The next thing that I think is a bit of a stretch is its performance in the vertical. Unless I enter a climb at a very high speed, I can't get the F6F to do anything in the vertical worth mentioning. At most, I may close a bit initially, but then I stall and get nailed like the prom queen after the dance. But, with the stall what I would call being normal or correct now, I am able to hold my nose up a bit longer and get a shot or two into my opponent.
It has been my experience that the biggest drawbacks to the Hellcat are its speed, roll, acceleration and climb. All three of those things are vital in what I would consider to be a perk plane. The things the F6F does well (but not great, as there are planes that exceed it in many of these areas) are dive, turn and shoot planes down.
Oh well, just my 2/5 of a nickel's worth, and it probably doesn't make much sense.
-math
-
well math, you never make sense so we're used to it :D
good observations as usual though. :)
-
OK so now i begin to wonder if Verm was fishing or actually serious as i do not consider the following any basis for a serious post.
Tour 23
2 Kills of F6F-5
1 Death by F6F-5
Tour 24
2 Kills of F6F-5
2 Deaths by F6F-5
Tour 25 (current)
0 Kills of F6F-5
1 Death by F6F-5 with you in your LA7, to me as it happens last night, at which point you questioned the planes performance and suggested a lag jump, politely i will add and also mentioned you would query the performance on the BBS.
Now i am on a nearly empty 155mb ADSL pipe thats 1 week old and lag so far is unheard of which was confirmed by two totally flat netstat lines when i checked.
Anyway now you claim that after a total of 8 ! count em 8 encounters with an F6F-5 over the past 3 tours you feel capable of assessing the F6F-5's performance as ranking with a N1k ???
Lol come on :)
Maybe it was just that unknown pilot ability thing, if you check your LA7 stats you have not exactly been setting the world alight with it.
Please note this has been a RANT response and i freely acknowledge and support your right to RANT when pis... err umm annoyed :)
-
Drex, you weren't drunk, but I think you were highly hung over ;) I don't think it was the morning after you, Eagl, Pyro, and me went to that one bar until 4:00AM, because I was too hung over to eat that next morning (thank God I didn't drink them friggin Jaegermeister shots you and Eagl were downing), but I think it was the morning after that. Hooligan was the one crowing about about the new Hellkitty (him and his thing about fat blue planes :D ) and I think your response was more a matter of a few generals nods and grumbles of agreement.
Steven, I have flown them, a few sorties in the MA, some in the CT and I spent about 3 hours last night doing tests with stop watches to see what it would do by the numbers. Did you know that on average it will turn a 360 degree turn about 3 full seconds ahead of a P-51 (but since you can't measure turn radius, I have nothing to compare against the published data I have)? Did you know that between 250mph and 300mph its actually accelerating slightly slower than what AHT reports it should (hard test to perform without a digital speedometer)?
Cavalear, congratulations on having DSL. Because now you've joined a large club that I've been a member of for quite some time (ie I have DSL too). My connect is around 50-60ms and rock solid (I also check with UOping to check packet loss, would you like me to post some of my charts?), and after our encounter I too had flat netstat lines. But do you honestly think that makes either one of us immune to lag or warps? If so your fooling yourself. Especially with the server the way it has been lately. LOL! The most funny thing you hear online is "I CAN'T WARP, I'm ON CABLE !!!!!" :)
Nope guys I don't have alot of F6F kills in the past 3 tours, but do you think thats all I have encountered (especially with it the 5th most common plane this past tour), considering my arena time during that same period ??? To be honest, I usually just leave em to the Spits and other turn fighters on my team (I almost always fly Energy fighters), because of the performance I'm describing. Just like the Niki era, I would rather just leave them in my dust, hunt other planes, and not have to worry about wunder manuevers.
Ah well, I will make this my last post on this subject. Admittedly I started it with a rant (and stated such from the start, but it was more of a satire rant which I thought was clear), but I was just trying to start some decent discussion on the subject. I didn't think it would degrade to chest thumping, innuendo, and insults.
-
Well, the F6F did spawn the most US aces.
-
Cavalier, a lot of engangements end with no victims, specially near CVs, where the F6F can dive and hide (just a common example). Actually I have a small number of La7 kills and a small number of La7 deaths, but my number of engangements against La7 in the actual tour is scandalous (HT please delete that monster from hangar interface ;) ).
This plane (F6F) is also an excelent jabo (my second preferred after P47D30), cause that, its K/D ratio is affected by a lot of deaths to the field acks.
-
Verm dont be offended by anything in my previous post because that was not the intent.
I can fully understand avoiding fights with better turning aircraft unless you have an advantage, hell i do that all the time eg i will stay and have a go around with a spit9 but will soon bug out from a spit5.
I also am well aware of the vagaries of online gaming and i did say you enquired politely :)
Feel free to do some testing on any aircraft in AH i will take you totally seriously, but to make such a N1k comparison when the stats showed you fought them 8 times in 2.5 months well i could not stop myself posting :)
Now being totally serious the F6 does not have magical zoom or std climb ability, it will however zoom very well if held to a 2 or 3 g climb IF you have bags of E at the start.
There are also methods in a loop fight against a better climbing and faster plane to predict there flight path and once commited do an unloaded roll to new predicted vector and actually get your gun bearing on the target zone before the enemy even gets there, this could look like your being outclimbed when in reality all that happened is the enemy "took a short cut"
Pre 1.08 i actually think the F6 was more fun to fly because of the stall, but it was obvious the flaps were porked because all they did was add drag without lift, now though it is a much better killing machine
To explain the reason you died in our encounter was simply you stayed fighting inside too long, then dived away to escape. At this point i did have a large Aot, but knowing the F6, instead of a fast pull to line you up then dive, all i did was enter a low G spiral diving turn (this is where you thought i was flying away) the terminal velocity was much faster doing this and enabled me to catch you very quickly.
The initial diving acceleration of the F6 is much better than the La7, to try to dive away from a coE position is to invite death.
-
Just going from memory, I am pretty sure the F6f shot down more aircraft in the PTO than any other allied aircraft.
-
Negative on that. Actually I believe that the P-38 holds that distinction. The Hellcat shot down the most of any Naval aircraft in the PTO.
(source for that fact was smithsonean institute)
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
This is my first post/reply, guys, so be kind!
Nice read Shuckins, welcome to the boards!
Badboy
-
Despite these "fixes," the Hellcat never overcame it's "low perfor-
mance" reputation. Many sources routinely repeat the "pre-fix"
performance statistics, giving the F6F-5's top speed as 386 mph.
I have to disagree with this. An F6f-5 was flight tested. The report is here:
http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/fighter.htm
However, notice in the report that the WEP power was not to spec and that the critical height was a bit low. Restoring the power and critical height results in the 386 mph figure that is quoted in a lot of sources. The -3 and -5 did have different IAS readings and thus, different correction factors. They are in the pilot's manual. The true airspeed has those correction factors applied. I thought I read somewhere (maybe it was William Green) that it was the XF6f-6 that was 409 mph capable, with 4-bladed prop, more powerful engine, further cowl refinements, etc...
-
Actually Durr your about 180 degrees backwards on that.
Kills in the PTO during WW2.
F6F Hellcat= 5156
F4U= 2140
P-38= 1700
F4F/FM= 1006
P-40= 706
P-47= 697
P-51= 296
P-39= 243
P-61= 63
Source Barret Tillmans Archives
I have a detailed Navy/Marine breakdown of all recording Naval and Marine kills of WW2 down to the type of A/C killed and all allied losses due to all causes and sorties flown. I have never seen any Army docs on any major type defining kills and losses in ariel combat.
Funny if you read most Military history books they would make you think the AAF won the war in the Pacific with the P-51. But as you can see it recording almost a nominal number of combat kills. The P-38 was the dominant Army type but was only third on the overall list.
-
I too wonder about the F6F's top speed. Kinda hard to explain how two planes can be flying side by side in formation, one indicating one airspeed, the other reading 20 knots slower............
Grumman kept the F4U for testing for quite some time, and from all I can see, the F6F and F4U had almost mirror image performance above 5K feet altitude.
With all the political BS going on back then, is it possible that the "corrected" numbers were just left out, rather than admit a mistake?
I talked to Pyro on the phone a few months back and he said he knew about the issue, or alluded that he did. Whether or not it will be corrected in AH, or if it is even worth fixing remains to be seen.
-
Here's what's in the pilot's manual. The first pic shows correction factors for the -3 and -5
(http://www.iaw.com/~general6/f6f_ias.jpg)
The next one is a chart showing stall speeds in the landing configuration at various weights for the F6f-5.
(http://www.iaw.com/~general6/f6f5_stall.jpg)
This is what it says for the F6f-3
(http://www.iaw.com/~general6/f6f3_stall.jpg)
-
Well.... the F6F is good enough at most things to almost be a dweeb plane (now that the stall modeling has been changed). If it had a couple 20mms it WOULD be a dweeb plane. Sadly 6 .50s just isn't quite enough firepower for it to make the cut. I believe a minimum requirement for dweebishness is 2x 20mm, so I stand corrected.
Hooligan
-
Errm, dunno about the Nikki thingie, but I can tell you that I used to be able to do nilch in the F6F and that I now fly it regularly (my only ride if I take off a cv). It's now one of the most stable plane to fly in, has nice all round characteristics. verry easy to fly now.
-
One of the gentlemen in the above posts stated that, as far as he knew, the F6F was not used extensively as an energy fighter. Having read extensively about the air war in the Pacific it is safe to say that nothing could be further from the truth.
Energy tactics were the only kind that could be used against the superbly manuverable Japanese aircraft. The manuverability of every American fighter produced before 1945 wasn't worth a fig against them, at least at speeds below 200 knots! The one rule that was constantly drilled into Navy and USAAC pilots was this: "Do NOT dogfight with the Zero!"
The tactics employed by almost every U.S. fighter squadron were to dive, pull lead, fire, break away and climb back to altitude before the enemy could react. Any U.S. fighter jock who habitually tried to dogfight with the Zero was begging to get clobbered by one of the old masters or any talented newcomer.
Just how effective these tactics could be was demonstrated by Eugene Valencia's division of four Hellcats of Vf-9, flying off of Lexington. Between February and May of 1945 Valencia's "Mowing Machine" achieved 43 confirmed kills with at least that many probables which, because of the fast paced combat could not be confirmed. None of the four members of the "Mowing Machine" got so much as a single bullet hole in their fighters. With the seven kills that Gene got on a previous tour that made a pleasing round number of 50 kills for the division.
Forcing the fight in the verticle denied to the Japanese pilots the use of their manuverability. They had to stay and fight on the American's terms, and they lost.
Respectfully, Shuckins
-
>>I believe a minimum requirement for dweebishness is 2x 20mm, so I stand corrected. <<
Hehe, not where I come from :) In another sim/game I flew, many who flew the f6f were know as dweebcats :) It was the recommended a/c for newbies. It was very forgiving and allowed the TnB types to get kills...and then die :)
I've noticed that the sight of F6Fs in the MA is becoming more frequent but, for me that doesn't mean that it is an Uber plane. It may be the easiest plane for new pilits to fly. As for cannon as a prereq. for dweebs, I submit that a standard for dweebs is that the a/c must be able to turn until the cows come home. There are few a/c that fit that bill with the exception of those discussed already. But for every cannon armed TnB a/c there are many more cannon armed a/c that will kill you if you don't fly them properly within their envelope.
I have noticed though that, contrary to what has been written about the F6F and the F4U, both plane types have lousy climb and turn characteristics, and not compared to other US planes but, compared to nme plane types as well. The F4U was supposed to be a master at the spiral climb; I haven't found that at all. The F4U with its big prop and engine was to have been aided in a respectable climb rate, not so in the mA. It is routinely outclimbed by many a/c. But, I suppose thats a topic for another thread :)
-
Check deja's Tour 24 stats http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour24/Tour24.htm (http://www.dbstaines.com/TourStats/Tour24/Tour24.htm)
fighter vs fighter and you come up with this,
F6F-5 with 4.49% of total fighter vs fighter kills, that ranks it as seventh most prolific killer.
Out of 38 aircraft listed in use in a kills per death rating it comes in 27th place with 0.841 kills per death.
This is purely fighter vs fighter no GV or AA deaths distorting the figures.
Hardly Uber status.
To me it suggests its getting used a lot more yes, but not very effectively by the masses.
I suspect it will be getting even more use as at least 1 squad has started using it as there main ride.
-
Stats are what you make of them, but notice that there are about 20 non-perk planes that have a higher K/D than the F6F. Many of those are of course close.
It would seem that a uber plane would have a better K/D than a mediocre .841. Again, I'll bet the usage would plumet if there were a better plane for carrier attacks.
Notice that planes like the 190 A5, YAK 9U (what a babe!) and Ki61 have pretty impressive K/Ds, yet are relatively low in usage.
My point being that usage is hardly a measure of uberness.
If the YAK 9U had a decent ammooo loadout, the puppy would be perked IMHO! :)
And if the A5 were a allied plane, you bet your booties the puppy would cost you at least 10 pts :)
But then what do I know? I'm just have a computer and I can type (well sort of) ! LOL! :D
AKEagle+
-
"F6F the new N1K"
-
I think a few of the planes have their k/d ratio skewed anyway. It's my opinion that a good majority of the time people are taking Spits, LA7s and N1Ks from capped bases in a noble but suicidal attempt to defend a base. I don't think this type of fighting and dying impacts say for instance the P-47 all that much nor the F6F-5 for the reason of it's lower spectrum acceleration. Those K/D ratios are way cool, but they don't tell the whole story.
I'm not sure why I'm not flying the F6F-5 anymore even though it's my favorite WW2 aircraft historically. I think it might be because it's becoming popular or something, so I'm concentrating on the F4U-1 this and the last tour. The greatest thing I learned from the F6F-5 was when to engage and disengage (run away!) I have a feeling the same concern is not applicable when flying an LA7 (though I've never once flown the thing) just based on experiences against it in the MA. You don't just take a Hellcat into a furball and start turning and burning but rather must be more cognizant of position and always thinking a few steps ahead. After some time in the F6F-5 and F4U-1, I've become more of an opportunist and try to make my kills swiftly and with as little effort as possible. Sorry about that to those who don't like that style, but I pay my $15/month too and I prefer it that way. Besides, if I'm successful, you can always up again within seconds.
Long live the Kittie!
-
I flew the F6F on a homework break tonight, and let me tell you, I was highly impressed. The thing flew like a marvel! I am not a great player by any means, however in this one sortie I got 5 kills and 3 assists. I don't know if it was my lucky day or what, but I think I have found my new ride!
-
Originally posted by fdiron
Just going from memory, I am pretty sure the F6f shot down more aircraft in the PTO than any other allied aircraft.
Canoe armed with a crossbow could have done just as well against IJN in 44...
-
Guess I'll chime in here. Yes, we (squad) obviously have chosen the kitty as our ride, not because it is "uber" in any way, but because it is a well rounded bird that does nothing spectacular yet does everything reasonably well. One strong point is obviously it's dive... love it! And it does regain "e" fairly well with a simple quick dive. However, as my (poor) stats will clearly show, you can't just hop in one and expect tons of easy kills unless you are already good anyway. Sure, it's an easy bird to fly, but also an easy bird to die in. I won't insult anyone's intelligence by pretending to know what any plane was supposed to do in the real world, but comparing it to other planes in the game, it seems the F6 is really nothing to get worked up about. Just a nice all-around ride. Of course, I could be a bit biased, hehe, considering it's what our squad flies. So when you see that big blue thing streaking through a cloud of enemies with guns blazing, just chuckle, shake your head, and mumble about those lunatic squids and their demonkitties! :D
all
-
Originally posted by AKEagle+
Stats are what you make of them, but notice that there are about 20 non-perk planes that have a higher K/D than the F6F.
AKEagle+
hmmmm... PERK THE HURRICANE IID!!
:D
F6f is one of my favorite jabo rides... of course this means I get shot down by uber ack (PERK THE ACK!!) and a bunch of my kills are vulches ;) I have to admit, I couldn't fly it without spinning it before the "fix".
-
Originally posted by Pollock
I think we need to hear what Mathman has to say on this subject he is probably the best stick regarding the hell kitty
With ALL due respect to Math (one of the best), but Cavalear could run circles around anyone in the Hellcat.
-
Originally posted by Nath[BDP]
Well, the F6F did spawn the most US aces.
Only because by that stage of the war, where most kills were registered, the US was fighting 16 yr old Japanese pilots that were lucky to have 12 hours of cockpit time prior to being put out on the front lines. Think "Mariana's Turkey Shoot".
-
If I may inject a note of reality here, I would like to point out that very few of us "arm-chair" aces have ever, actually, flown a plane of any kind. We have formed opinions about individual fighters of World War II based on the things that we have read, discarding facts along the way that would tend to disagree with them. Arguing the relative merits of these aircraft with other "fliers" of AH is a great way to spend an afternoon. But denigrating specific aircraft because they do not measure up to our "nebulous" standards is just plain silly. ("The P-109 has to be the uber plane because it looks so COOL!")
Sorry guys. There is no uber plane. There never was. Each of these fighters were built to meet specific performance envelopes. To one degree or another they were all successful in the roles for which they were designed. The Nik was designed with the specific purpose of besting the F6F. Great speed and climbing performance were designed into it. With the Hellcat and the Corsair decimating Japanese airpower the need for fighters such as the Nik was overwhelming. However, the Nik was not a fighter that the great masses of undertrained Japanese pilots could safely fly. Saburo Sakai (If you don't know who he was, Shame on You!) described the Nik's handling characteristics as being treacherous. Many young pilots were killed by it during their familiarization flights. Only an experienced pilot could safely squeeze every last ounce of performance from it.
Inexperienced Hellcat pilots, on the other hand, had no such problems. The docile handling characteristics of the F6F allowed them to push it to its' performance limits with impunity. This was its greatest fighting quality, undoubtedly contributing to its sterling kill to loss record, the best of any Allied fighter to tangle with the Japanese.
Comparing fighters is like comparing apples to oranges. The one that you prefer depends on you personal tastes. I champion the Hellcat, not because it possessed mythical performance, but because it is often unjustly maligned. Why is it easier to believe, for instance, that the P-47D, which had a Pratt and Whitney R2800 of 2300 hp, the same as the F6F-5, and which weighed nearly a ton more in unloaded condition, was capable of 430 mph at its rated altitude, and the Hellcat was only capable of 386 mph at its' rated altitude. Elementary physics says that it is not possible. In bulk and weight, the F6F takes second place. Either the flight data on the P-47 is in error, or that of the F6F is in error.
So, which is it?
Respectfully, Shuckins
-
The P-47 had a turbosupercharger plus a mechanical supercharger. F6F had a two-stage, two-speed mechanical supercharger. The turbo allowed the P-47 to make full power at very high altitudes where the F6F could not maintain full power. At those altitudes, drag is reduced because of the thin air, and you can fly very fast if you can maintain full power as could the P-47 or P-38 (another turbosupercharged aircraft). Also if you check the power ratings you will find that the water injected versions of the engine in the P-47D had more power than the F6F-5 even at low altitude.
-
Weight isn't the major factor in determining maximum speed. The P-51B used the same engine as the Spit IX, but was 1,500 lbs. heavier and much larger, yet was still significantly faster.
The F6F was designed to be tough, easy to mass produce, and easy to fly off an aircraft carrier. Speed was never the prime goal in the design. The Jug was derived from a long line of fast planes, speed was always the main goal of the designers.
ra
-
P51 produced a few hundred pounds of thrust from its radiator. Believe its called the 'Meredith effect'.
Heres another neat piece of trivia- The F6f was not specifically designed to counter the Zero. The F6f was designed when it was shown that the F4f could not sucessfully handle a larger engine. I got my information from an aircraft magazine, I think it was called "Warbirds".
-
The info I have says the design on F6F began before the US entered
war in 1941. The main reasons being the F4Fs were outclassed by
the aircrafts of Germany, which the US considered a potential threat.
Putting together the data gathered by combat experience between
lend-leased F4Fs and 109s, the F6F went into design just 1 month
before Pearl Harbor.
-
I am aware that the P-47's engine was rated for performance at higher altitudes. I still maintain, nevertheless, that the F6F was capable of speeds greater than 400 mph at the rated altitude of IT's rated altitude. Corky Meyer, one of Grumman's chief test pilots maintains that it did, and if anyone would know the truth, HE would.
As further proof, I offer the following.
In July of 1944 a captured Zeke 52 was offloaded at San Diego and flown to NAS Anacostia where the Technical Air Intelligence was located. It was later flown to NAS Patuxent River, Maryland, where comparison flight tests were made with Allied aircraft. Reports of these comparisons were sent to units in the Pacific that were encountering this new type of Zero. The Weekly Intelligence Summary, Allied Technical Air Intelligence Unit, South East Asia, listed the comparison data in a report entitled "Flight Trials of Zeke 52."
The report stated that the F6F-5 was faster than the Zero 52 at all altitudes, having the least margin of 25 mph at 5,000ft and the widest difference of 75 mph at 25,000ft. Top speeds attained were 409mph at 21,600ft for the Hellcat, and 335mph at 18,000ft for the Zero.
The data was compiled by Technical Air Intelligence which evaluated the F4U-1D and the FM-2 and the main Army Air Corps fighters against the Zero 52 for the purpose of helping our pilots fly and fight against an agile and dangerous enemy aircraft. I hardly think they had any axes to grind.
Respectfully, Shuckins
-
I heard that the airspeed indicator on the F6f was positioned in a way that gave faulty airspeed readings. Wouldnt surprise me, aeronautical engineers were ignorant of many many things in the 30s and 40s.
-
They weren't ignorant of ASI errors, look at the charts Wells posted.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
If I may inject a note of reality here, ....
The Nik was designed with the specific purpose of besting the F6F.
No reason to ever let truth get in the way of "reality" though, is there? ;)
Both the F6F and the plane that would become the NiK were begun in mid to late 1941. At that time, the military's knowledge of their soon-to-be enemy's performance capability was relatively slim.
The Nik was originally designed as a seaplane that never went into production. After a redesign (basically replacing the floats with gear) some prototypes were produced, none of which really lived up to performance expectations. After many changes & problems, it finally went into production as the Nik1 in 1943, shortly after F6F's started arriving in theater.
The 1 & 2 versions of the NiK certainly turned out to be worthy opponents for the F6F, but they were not specifically designed to defeat it.
FWIW also the Corsair wasn't designed in response to the Zero, despite popular misinformed opinion.
D
-
Doberman,
I based my observation about the Nik on something Saburo Sakai said in his auto-biography "Samurai."
"The Shiden, known by its code name of George to the enemy, was designed as an interceptor to outfight the Hellcat. It lacked the Zero's range and was heavier, but it possessed great speed and was armed with four 20-mm cannon. It offered pilots safety through armor plating and excellent structure. I found it surprisingly maneuverable for its heavy weight..."
"Unfortunately, the Shiden's flight characteristics were treacherous and demanded an experienced pilot. Too many men with little time behind the controls of fighter planes never lived to fly the Shiden into combat. Their familiarization flights killed them."
Only guessing here, but i suppose Sakai meant that the designed had been modified to give it superiority over the Hellcat in certain flight regimes.
On another note, I wonder why 20mm cannon are not available on the Hellcat in Aces High, even as an option? More Hellcats were built with 20mm's than were Corsairs or Niks.
Shuckins.
-
I know that some F6F5s were equipped with 2x20mm and 4x.50Cal. The only photos I have seen of these were nightfighters but the sparse text I have read suggests that some dayfighters were also armed with this weapon set.
Shuckins, can you point to any documentary evidence about cannon armed dayfighter hellcats?
Hooligan
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Why is it easier to believe, for instance, that the P-47D, which had a Pratt and Whitney R2800 of 2300 hp, the same as the F6F-5, and which weighed nearly a ton more in unloaded condition, was capable of 430 mph at its rated altitude, and the Hellcat was only capable of 386 mph at its' rated altitude. Elementary physics says that it is not possible. In bulk and weight, the F6F takes second place. Either the flight data on the P-47 is in error, or that of the F6F is in error.
So, which is it?
Respectfully, Shuckins
Hi Shuckins
Interesting topic. I like both P-47's and F6F's. F6F is like Spit IX dressed up like P-47 :)
I don't know on what reference your figures are beased but P-47 and F6F had different engines.
P-47D-30: R-2800-59 engine. 2600 HP (takeoff) at SL, 2600HP (combat) at 25000ft 64"HG man pressure.
F6F-5: R-2800-10W engine. 2250HP (combat) at SL, 1975HP (combat) at 20000ft 59.5"HG man pressure.
One more thing; F6F is big plane. It's wing span is bigger than P-47's and had much more wing area than the P-38.
-
Vector,
You are correct. P-47's engine was rated for higher altitudes because of the nature of the war it was designed to fight. High-altitude combat against the Luftwaffe. Much of the Thunderbolt's bulk and weight is attributable to the complicated ductwork of its tubo-supercharging system.
Addressing the matter of drag, insofar as wing area is concerned, wing thickness is the greatest drag-producing factor. There was very little difference in wing thickness. The Hellcat had a wing thickness factor of 16 percent. That is, it's thickness was 16 percent of the width of the wing. The Thunderbolt's wing thickness factor was 15 percent. The Hellcat's wingspan was almost exactly 2 feet wider than the Thunderbolt's, hardly enough to be a major factor in the production of drag. The above information was published in an article by Corky Meyer in Flight Journal magazine, August 2001 edition.
By the way, that article is a great read. It's the tale of Grumman's attempts to solve the Hellcat's compressibility problems. The test dives were supposed to be limited to .75 mach, or a speed of 485mph (580mph true air-speed), with the dive starting at 28,000 feet. Corky inadvertently entered the dive at a 75 degree angle instead of the 60 degree angle mandated by test parameters. The resulting dive reached .77 mach, with a true airspeed of over 600mph! With compressibility forcing the Hellcat into a dive angle near to the vertical, he passed through 9,000 feet at more than 700 feet per second. His controls were immovable, as though set in concrete. Corky saved his life by reducing throttle to idle, thus greatly increasing the drag of his aircraft. The resultant 7.5 g pullout at 2500 feet bent both horizontal stabilizers at their midspan; the right one up at a 15 degree angle, and the left one down at a 15 degree angle. A complete inspection of the aircraft didn't show anything else bent or any rivets pulled! Grumman redesigned the elevator structure to withstand the 7.5 g buffet boundary as a result of the elevator failure. Grumman wasn't called "The Iron Works" for nothing.
But I digress!
The Thunderbolt was definitely faster than the Hellcat because of its complicated and powerful turbosupercharger. Nevertheless, at it's rated altitude of 21,600 feet, the Hellcat was perfectly capable of 400 mph in level flight. Of the two sources have quoted to substantiate that fact, one came from one of Grumman's main test pilots for the Hellcat, and the other was the result of tests run by Allied Technical Air Intelligence. Both sources agree that the -5 Hellcat's top speed exceeded 400mph at it's rated altitude.
Shuckins
-
Hooligan,
Sorry, I don't have the exact figures at my fingertips. During 1945 Grumman switched over at least part of its production run from standard armament of 6 fifty-caliber machine guns to the new armament of two 20mms and four fifty-calibers. Grumman's production curve averaged about 600 aircraft per month during 1945. Even at the relatively low figure of 20 percent of the production run, Grumman had to have turned out at least 480 of these aircraft by the time the Japanese surrendered in August.
The 20 percent figure is purely conjectural, but certainly not unreasonable.
By contrast, only 200 of the cannon-armed F4U-1C were produced by Vought, and only 400 of the N1K2 "George" were produced by the Japanese. Both of these aircraft are modeled in Aces High. Therefore, to return to my originaly question, "Why not the Hellcat?" As a perc-plane perhaps?
Shuckins
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
With compressibility forcing the Hellcat into a dive angle near to the vertical, he passed through 9,000 feet at more than 700 feet per second. His controls were immovable, as though set in concrete. Corky saved his life by reducing throttle to idle, thus greatly increasing the drag of his aircraft. Shuckins
S!
Very interesting reading Shuckins, thx!
I recall reading somewhere that P-47 (w/o dive flaps) pilots were told that they could get out of bad compression with firing their guns! Throttle down with elevator trim up and with guns recoil they could get out of it in case of emergency.
What comes to F6F-5 top speeds, manufacturer's and navy's reports differs 10-30 mph. Manufacturer reports 400mph@20000ft whereas navy reports 380mph@23000ft. Manufacturer's reports were considered too optimistic. After checking Jane's Fighters of the WWII, it states F6F-3's top speed of 376mph. Dunno.
-
"Why not the Hellcat?" As a perc-plane perhaps?
Because nobody has offered any proof.
Believe me I would love to have a 20mm armed hellcat as a perk plane. But if HTC is going to do this then somebody needs to show them some proof that mixed battery hellcats were used as dayfighters. Which squadrons did they fly in and where? What are the sources for this information so they can check it for themselves? If they were to add one they need a paint scheme for the one that would be in AH (i.e. they need some pictures of 20mm armed hellcats that are not nightfighters).
I don't have any data to show that 20mm armed hellcats were used as dayfighters and the details on where and when. Do you have this information? If so please tell us the sources.
Hooligan
-
Hooligan is right, no proof = nothing.
I am on same kind of situation in my crusade of baddle plade prop for P-47D-11. Evidence so far: America's 100.000 states that paddle blade kit were retrofitted to older jugs "group by group". Not enough, got to search more, and you too Shuckins, good luck! :)
-
I have seen some war art showing a nightfighter F6F shooting down an N1K2 in daytime, but, of course, it had the radar dome on the leading edge. Model the plane with the drag and weight of the radar system and you probably wouldn't need any perk points.
Charon