Hi JtD,
I had uploaded this file previously to show that the F4U was reaching its official speeds and was not 10mph too slow at SL. I simply linked to it again to save time rather than uploading the original version.
I hope this didn't cause confussion.
I haven't tested the F6F for quite a while but at SL it seems pretty spot on and about 10-15mph too slow at critical alt.
I had thought that it was reaching the advertised speeds for sea and critical altitude but that it dropped off in between? I totally support you guys getting this solved. Love flying the F6F!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">Originally posted by ICDP:
Hi JtD,
I had uploaded this file previously to show that the F4U was reaching its official speeds and was not 10mph too slow at SL. I simply linked to it again to save time rather than uploading the original version.
I hope this didn't cause confussion.
I haven't tested the F6F for quite a while but at SL it seems pretty spot on and about 10-15mph too slow at critical alt.
![]()
Find my missions at Flying Legends and Mission4Today.com.
The Hellcat was never a direct response to the Zero. It was a direct response to the Navy wanting something better than the Wildcat and the Corsair was years away from perfection at the time so the Hellcat was developed as a "interim" fighter. Funny enough...most "interim" or "stopgap" fighters of WWII turn out to be the most used and built in the greatest numbers.Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VFA-195 Snacky:
Hellcat and Corsair were very similar in performance. Hellcat was a bit more stable at lower speeds and had a slightly better turn radius.
I read somewhere that the Hellcat was the direct response to tests done on a captured Zero. It couldn't out turn a zero, but it didnt need to if it could outrun one.
But if you look at the Hellcat...all of the design traits are taken from the Wildcat and expanded on. The Wildcat could almost reach parity with the Zero given enough development (the FM-2 for instance - also USN pilots did exceptionally well in 1943 thanks to training and tactics) but parity isn't good enough and the Hellcat is just all around better making it the perfect weapon against the Zero. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>but not in this sim m8
I find the complete opposite blindpugh. The F6F in the sim has all the same advantages over the A6M that it did in RL. It is faster, more agile at higher speeds and climbs better at the correct speeds. At altitude it is a far superior fighter. So apart from a slightly too slow top speed (which the A6M also suffers from) the F6F is totally dominant against the A6M.
The F6F could not outturn an A6M at lower speeds but if you use your superior speed you will totally dictate the fight. The F6F is to the A6M what the Fw190A is to the Spitfire MkV.
The Hellcat was never a direct response to the Zero. It was a direct response to the Navy wanting something better than the Wildcat and the Corsair was years away from perfection at the time so the Hellcat was developed as a "interim" fighter. Funny enough...most "interim" or "stopgap" fighters of WWII turn out to be the most used and built in the greatest numbers.Originally posted by blindpugh:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VFA-195 Snacky:
Hellcat and Corsair were very similar in performance. Hellcat was a bit more stable at lower speeds and had a slightly better turn radius.
I read somewhere that the Hellcat was the direct response to tests done on a captured Zero. It couldn't out turn a zero, but it didnt need to if it could outrun one.
But if you look at the Hellcat...all of the design traits are taken from the Wildcat and expanded on. The Wildcat could almost reach parity with the Zero given enough development (the FM-2 for instance - also USN pilots did exceptionally well in 1943 thanks to training and tactics) but parity isn't good enough and the Hellcat is just all around better making it the perfect weapon against the Zero. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>but not in this sim m8 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Absolutely in this sim. If you're good in a Hellcat you can flame swarms of Zeros without too much trouble. My personal online all time record is 8 Zeros in about 10 minutes...four of those kills were made within the same 2 minutes. Some of the pilots were just aweful and others were too preoccupied shooting other guys so it made it easy. But deflection shots and high angle passes are king in the Hellcat. The Hellcat responds so well during these manuevers you feel sorry for the guy in the Zero as the F6F is so much better.
Conversely...if I was flying the Zero I'd be in big trouble. BUT...most guys I fly against flying a Zero don't know how to handle the F6F. They put it in crazy turns which I just cut inside of and nail them. The F6F's speed is off a bit but VS the Zero its still superior and a damn good fighter. I was surprised to see how well it turned versus the Bf109 and FW190...it can cut the corners on both of them in any manuever except roll.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">
![]()
Find my missions at Flying Legends and Mission4Today.com.
blindpugh: If you are fighting the AI, I have to agree....they don't blackout, overheat....plus they can pull that silly "barrel roll while climbing/diving and accelerating at the same time." The Zeke is one of the worst offenders.
Against a human pilot, OTOH it's a totally different story. The F6F outclasses the Zeke in nearly every respect. Above 12,000 feet it's a slaughter. At high speeds your initial turn is very impressive. If you're in trouble make a shallow dive away....the Zeke faces two choices, either breakoff or breakup his ship. The 6 .50 cals do horrific things to the Zero.
One of my favorite tactics is to simply absorb the Zeke's gunfire and set up for a D'n'B (especially if the Zeke is out of cannon rounds)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">
Originally posted by marc_hawkins:
Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed. A 108:0 kill ratio is insignificant next to the power of the Force
http://www.fas.org/main/home.jsp
Originally posted by ICDP:
I find the complete opposite blindpugh. The F6F in the sim has all the same advantages over the A6M that it did in RL. It is faster, more agile at higher speeds and climbs better at the correct speeds. At altitude it is a far superior fighter. So apart from a slightly too slow top speed (which the A6M also suffers from) the F6F is totally dominant against the A6M.
The F6F could not outturn an A6M at lower speeds but if you use your superior speed you will totally dictate the fight. The F6F is to the A6M what the Fw190A is to the Spitfire MkV.
The Hellcat is within 5% of any figures anyone has produced in regards to its speed. The Hellcat pwnz0rs against human flown zeros using all its historical ability.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">
Cheers!!
A friend of mine performed the same test under the same conditions just yesterday. Here are his findings for the Hellcat:
F6F-5 HELLCAT
Deck: 317mph
3km: 336mph
5km: 351mph
7km: 375mph
Published: 303mph @ Sea Level. 375 to 386 at 7km, depending on source.
Did you correct for true airspeed, or are your figures indicated airspeed?
He is testing several other aircraft as well. Watch for Joop's test results to be posted soon on the Warbirds of Prey forums. (He's having surgery tomorrow, so it may be a few days.)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">
4H_V-man
The 2nd Horseman