Originally posted by F4UDOA
WW,
Action sorties or not. In almost the same number of "Action Sorties" the F4U lost less aircraft to every possible cause.
Also if you were to ask a pilot or examine the rate of loss anti aircraft fire in every war accounts for more loss of aircraft. But somehow the F4U despite dropping tons more ordininance lost less aircraft to AA.
And even more important the so called "Ensign Eliminator" lost less aircraft operationaly from all causes than the "Nice safe *****cat".
In the end the F4U may have been harder to fly but it's performance in the air far exceeded its reputation as an ensign killer when the real numbers are brought to light.
FYI. The FM-2 had the highest K/D of all Navy birds including the F6F. or 32 to 1.
The F6F and F4U based on carriers both had a K/D or 20 to 1.
When placed in equal operating conditions the Nany F4U K/D was as high as the F6F.
The overwhelming number of F6Fs lost to tripleA were lost attacking high risk targets that F4Us never even got near. Rabaul being a typical example of a land base and no small amount were lost to Japanese fleet AA. Every Island air base had to be destroyed, and it was Hellcats that did much of the destruction, and these bases were well protected by heavy caliber tripleA. Before and even after the F4U went aboard ship, much of its attack missions were against Japanese infantry. The Japanese infantry had damn little heavy caliber AA, mostly limited to smaller caliber, man-portable weapons.
When the F4U did go aboard carriers, the F6F had already killed the majority of experienced Japanese fighter pilots during the previous year. I would not be surprised if the majority of enemy aircraft encountered in 1945 were either bombers or Kamikazes. The Hellcat obtained its kill ratio fighting the core of the IJNAF and IJAAF. The F4U arrived on the carriers when the core of Japanese air power consisted of barely qualified pilots with little or no combat experience.
Go back and look at the Action Sorties again. Indeed, F6Fs and F4Us engaged the enemy a similar number of times. Yet, the F6F shot down 2 1/2 times as many enemy aircraft. Why? For one, the F6F was right in the middle of the action, even though the F4U was in combat much earlier. That's the advantage of being carrier qualified. A second reason was that the F6F was used primarily as a FIGHTER, the F4U as a fighter-bomber. It wasn't until 1945 that the F6F saw a significant increase in attack missions over the numbers of '43 and '44.
Even at the end of the war, the number of F6Fs aboard carriers, in combat, exceeded the number of F4Us in like circumstances.
As to operational losses, the F6F spent its whole career flying from carriers, the F4U only a matter of months. Operational losses will be higher when you land on a 300 ft by 50 ft piece of deck as opposed to a 6,000 ft runway. 1/5th of the F6Fs sent on the Turkey Shoot dusk strike were forced to ditch, having insufficient fuel to get back, or get aboard after sundown. That amounts to nearly 35 Hellcats listed as operational losses. You have to analyze why the F6F had more operational losses, not just point to the number and say, "see I told ya." Had the F4U been assigned carrier duty from the outset, operational losses would have been staggering. Losses were lower because the Navy was wise enough to recognize that the F4U was a death trap for low-time pilots operating from a carrier. Therefore, the Corsairs went to shore duty, where their poor over-the-nose vision and nasty stall handling was not a serious issue.
Without question, the F6F was the most important fighter in the Pacific war from the date of going operational until the surrender. It shot down more Japanese aircraft than the F4U combined with ALL USAAF fighters. That's saying something. And I'm not even counting the kills by FAA Hellcats against Japan.
My regards,
Widewing
