F6F Top Speed

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by Redd
If the AH models are accurate and anything to go by you would back the f6-f in any co-e engagement . Would take a fair pilot skill adv to pull the f4u back to even odds.
Redd

I'm almost a full time F4U-1a pilot, and a rule of thumb I have Vs F6 is once I fall below him at any time during the engagement, it's time to extend and escape. I have not yet found a way to defeat a skilled F6 pilot in that situation.

Conversely, if I can remain above him throughout, I usually return home...

[F4UDOA]

Redtail,

The FM of the F4U-1 is different in AH2. Should the opportunity arrise I would luv to test it against the F6F in the DA.

I believe turn times especially with flaps may have evened the tables. I know the NIK2 has lost quite a bit in pure turning ability in AH2.

[F4UDOA]

Mathman,

Sorry about the tone of my post. Not trying to get into that kind of conversation with a fellow Navy/Marine pilot (Virtual pilot).

But the whole Corkey Meyer subject gets under my skin a bit. That whole issue should have been resolved by the end of 1944 and we are still having that conversation today.

[Soulyss]

F4UDOA, if you see me online in AH2 give me a holler I'll head to the DA in my F6F.  I'm not a hot shot F6F stick but I do have a lot of time in it, though I am finding the transition from AH1 to AH2 a little difficult.  I'll give it a go in the name of operational research.  I enjoy flying the F4U-1 also and if it is more manuverable in AH2 it may see more sorties from me than it has in the past.

[Mathman]

Originally posted by F4UDOA
Redtail,

The FM of the F4U-1 is different in AH2. Should the opportunity arrise I would luv to test it against the F6F in the DA.

I believe turn times especially with flaps may have evened the tables. I know the NIK2 has lost quite a bit in pure turning ability in AH2.

When?  

[Widewing]

Originally posted by F4UDOA
Mathman and WW,

Revisionest history is your answer.

Contrary to your statements the F4U was the mainstay in 1943 while the Japanese could still defend themselves. Not the other way around. It was the F6F "taking out the trash" in 1944 after the hard fought battles were won. How else would you explain the F4F/FM-2 suddenly becoming a super fighter when it was considered inferior just a year prior? Boyington, Walsh, Kepford, and Hanson were already multple aces without ever firing a shot in 1944.

Also WW. Your statement about the F6F attacking large aerodromes and hard targets seems a little skewed. If it was correct shouldn't it have dropped more ordinance? Were these strafing missions?

If the arguement is which aircraft shot down more aircraft then the answer is simply the F6F. If aircraft performance is the question then the answer is just as easy.

Oh yeah, I'm not the only one here with a "Favorite airplane".

How many F4Us took part in the big Carrier battles of 1943-44? Generally speaking, the F4U spent most of its time in the Solomon Islands, and later up to New Georgia. Meanwhile, the big brawls were occuring far away from there. How many F4Us operated in the Solomons during that period, in terms of squadrons?

By October of 1943 the Corsairs had to share their hunting grounds with several land based F6F squadrons.

Indeed, everywhere else where Naval aircraft fought )prior to the August 1943 introduction of the Hellcat), the primary fighter was the F4F-4.

Unlike the F6F, the F4U had to follow the war because they were not deployed aboard ship.

I never stated that the F4U wasn't a terrific fighter. It played second fiddle to the F6F because the Hellcat was deployed with the fleet, meaning that it was everywhere the action was.

Therefore, in terms of importance, the F6F was without peer in the Pacific. It was still the most numerous fighter when Japan tossed in the towel.

Here's an interesting bit from the NASC:



My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Shuckins
As to the FM-2, I believe it saw very little aerial combat during 1944 and 1945.  They operated off of jeep carriers in support of U.S. landings on the Pacific islands.  A poster in another thread stated that the pilots of the FM-2 were under orders not to seek combat with Japanese fighters because of the growing performance disparity.  

Anyone have any sources for this?

FMs were credited with 432 air to air shootdowns. The vast majority were by the FM-2.

With respect to the top scoring FM-2 squadron, the honor goes to VC-27 with 61.5 kills. Top FM-2 ace was Lt. R.E. Elliot of VC-27 with 9 kills confirmed. The Aces High FM-2 displays the colors of White 17 of VF-26 deployed aboard the CVE USS Santee. This squadron scored 31 victories.

An easy to find resource on the FM-2's Pacific service is Osprey's Wildcat Aces of World War Two.

For detail stats, you can use F4UDOA's link:NASC or just visit the Navy History Center online directly.

My regards,

Widewing

[joeblogs]

This from the latest edition of the Friends Journal (of the US Airforce Museum):

"Schilling saw a Curtiss-Wright CW-21 Demon and fell in love with the plane. He arranged to try it out and called it "the most impressive aircraft I ever flew. It had a fantastic rate of climb of over 5,000 feet per minute."

The Demon was never really used much in combat, but Schilling convinced Chenault to obtain some for AVG (the flying tigers). … They had very little armor plating and no self-sealing tanks …  Schilling led the flight of three toward their new home. Little did he know the engines were designed for 87 octane fuel and the Americans had put 100 octane fuel into them. This resulted in burnt and stuck valves, and eventually complete engine failure…"

Originally posted by Ecliptik
I vote for the CW-21 Demon over either aircraft.  

[GScholz]

The fuel must have been different in other ways as well. A higher octane rating alone wouldn't have damaged the engine.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by GScholz
The fuel must have been different in other ways as well. A higher octane rating alone wouldn't have damaged the engine.

If the ignition timing was not changed, the engine could be damaged as stated.

[hitech]

joeblogs, Im fairly certain higher octain does not produce more heat. Octain rating is not a messure of fuels "Power" It is a messure at what tempiture and pressure it will combust with out a spark.


Higher Octian is used so that an engine can run with either higher manifold pressure, or a higher compression ratio with out causing it to ignite before the spark. Hence using higher octain alown will not improve a motors performance.


HiTech

[joeblogs]

Yes your right about heat. My bad. Note that if the ground crews adjusted the carburetors to take advantage of the 100 PN fuel, the engine would have run hotter (leaner mixtures can generate more heat). But if they knew to do that, they would have known the fuel would damage the engine too...

Here's probably what happened. Higher octane fuels have more additives, especially at this time TEL. These additives attack certain metals for example the materials used to make engine valves, valve seats, and spark plugs. When an engine is designed for higher octane gas, these parts have to designed accordingly.

S.D. Heron's Development of Aviation Fuels, pp 596-7 talks about all the problems engine makers had with heavily leaded gas and exhaust valves. In 1935, the only engine Wright had that could run on 100 PN fuels (which were only made in experimental batches at the time) was an experimenal derivative of its cyclone (p. 606).

USAF data on the engine model used in the Demon says it was rated with 91/96 PN fuel.

-Blogs

Originally posted by hitech
joeblogs, Im fairly certain higher octain does not produce more heat. Octain rating is not a messure of fuels "Power" It is a messure at what tempiture and pressure it will combust with out a spark.


Higher Octian is used so that an engine can run with either higher manifold pressure, or a higher compression ratio with out causing it to ignite before the spark. Hence using higher octain alown will not improve a motors performance.


HiTech

[GScholz]

Originally posted by GScholz
The fuel must have been different in other ways as well. A higher octane rating alone wouldn't have damaged the engine.

[Grimm]

The Hellcat is better.

You know it,
I know it,
Bob Dole knows it
The American people know it.

It seems that Hellcats top speed is pretty debatable,  but I would say the F6F of AH is much more correct than what it was back in the days of AW.