Flying torches

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Hans, is trying to claim the Wildcat, a plane that had a slower climb rate, slower top speed, less manuverable and had less firepower is a superior plane to a Zero that enjoys all these advantages. It´s a ridiculous notion. It´s revisionist history because the Wildcat had a star on it and not a red circle.

His reason being the Wildcat dove faster and took more damage.

Ike is trying to claim that a Zero, a plane with a slower dive speed, no armor protection for the pilot, no self sealing fuel tanks, a flimsy fragile airframe and less firepower is a superior plane to a Wildact that enjoys all these advantages. It's revisionist history because the Zero had a red meatball on it and not a white star.

His reason being that the Zero had a higher top speed, a higher climb rate and greater maneuverability ( the claim of greater firepower is bogus....the 20mm cannon had a slow rate of fire, was prone to jamming and was exceedingly difficult to aim all contibuting to an overall lesser firepower).

Tocaff, I made the jab regarding his obsession with the History Channel because he seems to belabor under a distorted impression that Americans get their view of history there. This American gave up cable and broadcast television well over 15 years ago. This American's view of history and WWII in particular comes from a lifelong addiction to reading which includes the works of combatants and historians from all nations, not just the victors.

That the Wildcat was the Zeros equal and turned the tide in the airwar in the South Pacific before the second generation American fighters arrived in the theater is not a spurious claim being made by Hansbolter. It is a direct quote from Bergerud who authored what is recognized by historians world wide as the definitive work on the subject.

Nuff said

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: OG_Gleep

But the party line is that the Zero dominated until the after guadacanal.

I have to disagree the party line. The F4F had around a 1-1 kill ratio against the Zero in '42 , keep in mind these were mostly manned by green pilots that weren't battle tested. I think the statistics bear out both planes had thier positives and negatives. If the Zero was a superior platform it would have faired much better, especially with the IJ pilots experience prior to '42.

[tocaff]

Zeros outgunned the Wildcats.

Hmmm
2X.30 cal and 2X20mm for the Zero
6X.50cal for the Wildcat

As I said before the 20mm cannon was a good weapon, but not the ones used by Japan.  They were inaccurate, low rate of fire, short ranged and a limited ammo supply.
.30cal was a WWI weapon and was a joke against armored planes, that's why the US moved to the .50cal, Japan didn't (among others).
.50cal was a punishing round to get hit by, had a decent range, good rate of fire and a good ammo supply.

Yeah, right Ike that equals out to a Zero having more firepower.  You sure do have a warped way of looking at things. 

I'd like to pose a general question as when I ask Ike directly he always manages to ignore them

A plane's performance envelope varies according to altitude so are we looking at the issue at hand correctly?  At what altitudes were battles generally fought at?  It's possible that the Wildcat was better at certain heights and the Zero at others.  Would this throw a fly in the ointment?

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: tocaff

Zeros outgunned the Wildcats.

Hmmm
2X.30 cal and 2X20mm for the Zero
6X.50cal for the Wildcat

As I said before the 20mm cannon was a good weapon, but not the ones used by Japan.  They were inaccurate, low rate of fire, short ranged and a limited ammo supply.
.30cal was a WWI weapon and was a joke against armored planes, that's why the US moved to the .50cal, Japan didn't (among others).
.50cal was a punishing round to get hit by, had a decent range, good rate of fire and a good ammo supply.

Yeah, right Ike that equals out to a Zero having more firepower.  You sure do have a warped way of looking at things. 

I'd like to pose a general question as when I ask Ike directly he always manages to ignore them

A plane's performance envelope varies according to altitude so are we looking at the issue at hand correctly?  At what altitudes were battles generally fought at?  It's possible that the Wildcat was better at certain heights and the Zero at others.  Would this throw a fly in the ointment?

Not to mention speed.

The Zeros vaunted advantage in maneuverability almost completely disappeared at high speed.

It was designed for slow speed aerial acrobatics.......ie designed for WWI....as it's .30 cal machine guns further attest.

[decaro]

Actually Ike there was at least one IJ ace on THC's "Dogfight."

I can't remember his name, but he made a career out of shooting down Wildcats. When he encountered a Wildcat, he would climb into a high loop and sucker the Wildcat into going after him, but the F4F didn't have enough power and couldn't climb all the way; it would run out of energy, stall, fall, and become meat on the table for the Zero ace who would then dive down on his hapless prey.

This maneuver worked very well until the IJ ace mistook a new Hellcat for the Wildcat -- understandable as they both had essentially the same Gruman design -- and that was his last dogfight.

[mdiehl]

This thread and its predecessors is the genesis of my sig line. Nevertheless, HansBolter is substantially correct, and I have seen some simply incorrect statements. As usual, these sorts of claims are inaccurate for the general type and inaccurate for any specific variant. For the record, the F4F had a top speed of 318-325 mph, depending on variant (F4F-3, F4F-3A, F4F-4, FM2) and production block. The A6M2, which was the most common variant of the Zero and the kind predominantly flown in 1942, had a top speed of 332 mph. The A6M5 variant that went into production in late 1943 had a top speed of about 350 mph. As with all Allied and Axis a.c., logistics and maintenance inadequacies could adversely affect performance as opposed to rated specs.

The Zero's advantage as a fighter lay in low speed engagements. The F4F in high speed engagements. The F4F, which is often described as less maneuverable than the Zero by those who know very little, had a superior roll rate and turn rate at speeds in excess of 280 mph. The A6M2's advantage lay in its long range, an asset that had real value only when striking fixed position targets like land bases or ships in port. If it could use that range to catch enemy aircraft at low airspeed or in some other positional disadvantage, or if the Zero driver could count on an enemy a.c. to continue to maneuver until it burned too much kinetic energy, the Zero tended to do quite well.

During WW2, facing American pilots in F4Fs, the Zero had a mixed record. Some days were very good. Other days were equally bad for Zero drivers. In CV vs CV engagements, F4F pilots consistenly shot down more Zeros than they lost. One can find a number of contributing factors, most of which HansBolter has mentioned already. One oft-overlooked one was the tendency for even veteran Japanese pilots to pull up in front of an F4F after making an overtaking-firing pass, bringing the A6M into the fire of the F4Fs .50cal. Because USN pilots were exceptionally skilled at deflection shooting (probably better than any other nation's pilots), and because the A6M was an a.c. that could not sustain substantial damage, the 4-6 (depending on variant) .50s on the F4F3-F4F4 were sufficient to down Zeroes that made said mistake.

The combat record of A2A combat in 1942 suggests that both planes were lethal and very good early war naval a.c. The record also shows that USN pilots in F4Fs shot down more A6Ms than they lost to A6Ms. In contrast, in the Guadalcanal campaign, USMC (predominantly) and USN pilots operating F4Fs from Guadalcanal lost slightly more F4Fs to A6Ms than they shot down in A6Ms.

The empirically justified conclusion is that the two types (A6Ms and F4Fs) IN COMBINATION WITH the pilots flying them, were equals, through September 1942. Thereafter, USN/USMC pilots obtained better results than IJN pilots.

[OG_Gleep]

Yeah I saw that episode. Was quite amusing...didn't they have the pilot of the AC that won that combat telling the story?
 

I have to disagree the party line. The F4F had around a 1-1 kill ratio against the Zero in '42 , keep in mind these were mostly manned by green pilots that weren't battle tested. I think the statistics bear out both planes had thier positives and negatives. If the Zero was a superior platform it would have faired much better, especially with the IJ pilots experience prior to '42.

 
I didn't say it was true, its just what is injected in to popular media.

[Ike99]

HansBolter is substantially correct, and I have seen some simply incorrect statements.

Yeah, except for the fact that he believes Wildcats cleared the skies of Zeros, and in ever increasing, in short, turned the tide.. Unless he has now broken ranks with Bergerud and changed his opinion given the historic record.

The record also shows that USN pilots in F4Fs shot down more A6Ms than they lost to A6Ms. In contrast, in the Guadalcanal campaign, USMC (predominantly) and USN pilots operating F4Fs from Guadalcanal lost slightly more F4Fs to A6Ms than they shot down in A6Ms.

[tocaff]

Ooops, he ignored the question again.  [;)]

[mdiehl]

Yeah, except for the fact that he believes Wildcats cleared the skies of Zeros, and in ever increasing, in short, turned the tide.. Unless he has now broken ranks with Bergerud and changed his opinion given the historic record.

I haven't seen where HB claimed that the Wildcats "cleared the skies" of Zeroes. At times they cleared the skies of other stuff as a matter of historical record, but I've not seen that particular claim made by him either. They F4F certainly DID turn the tide. The empirical record shows it. It was the F4F that regularly beat the A6M in CV battles, and it was the F4F that held the line in the Guadalcanal campaign.

[tocaff]

Well folks here we are again. It's Ike against, well everybody. His "facts" are always right and to even suggest that they're not is wrong. Mind you this is true in spite of historical fact and it doesn't matter what you present to him to refute his claims. The simple underlying theme here is Ike seems to hate the US and so he lines up against it all of the time. This is nothing new as there have been several threads like this.

Fact-a .30cal mg hits lighter and has less range than a .50cal

Fact-though the 20mm canon was a good weapon the Hispano that was used on the Zero wasn't.

Fact-no plane or pilot protection = danger

Fact-the higher the speed the worse the performance of the Zero.

Fact-the Wildcat, better or not fought the Zero to a standstill.


Maybe just once he'll listen.

[Ike99]

Well folks here we are again. It's Ike against, well everybody. His "facts" are always right

Hi Todd. Yes, my facts are usually right because I generally know what I´m talking about before I type things.

For example you typed...

Zeros outgunned the Wildcats.

Hmmm
2X.30 cal and 2X20mm for the Zero
6X.50cal for the Wildcat

I didn´t know this revisionist Bergerud wrote a book on Zero and Wildcat specifications too. [:D]

Todd. Yes, Zeros had more powerful armament than the Wildcats. The Wildcat did not have 6, 50 cals. It had 4. It always had 4, no matter what you read from one of Han´s history books. [:D]

I knew this was an error as soon as I saw what you typed but was waiting to see if any of the other esteemed historians here you put so much belief in recognized it.

Seems not.

And WTF is this?

The simple underlying theme here is Ike seems to hate the US and so he lines up against it all of the time.

Once again, just more proof what makes the Wildcat superior is it had a star on it and not a red circle.

Throwing nationalism into a plane debate. How pathetic you are.

[tocaff]

As usual you're playing at being a know it all and yet you don't know didley. 

F4F-3  4X.50cal mgs
F4F-4  6X.50cal mgs

Look it up, it's a historical fact for the entire world excepting you. 

I don't know where you come up with your "facts", but why don't you try to get it right.

I don't even know who those names are that you're throwing around. 

[Ike99]

Yes, correction the F4F(4) had 6. That´s not the model that ¨held the line¨ though is it.

[Ike99]

I haven't seen where HB claimed that the Wildcats "cleared the skies" of Zeroes. At times they cleared the skies of other stuff as a matter of historical record, but I've not seen that particular claim made by him either. They F4F certainly DID turn the tide. The empirical record shows it. It was the F4F that regularly beat the A6M in CV battles, and it was the F4F that held the line in the Guadalcanal campaign.

Hans-

Which is why the Wildcats seriously defeated the Zeroes as soon as the Allied pilots learned to avoid dogfighting them and started utilizing diving slashing attacks instead.

Zeroes were flying torches looking for a place to flame out!

I find making this statement a grand stretch when the kill ratio was around 1 to 1 don´t you?

[OG_Gleep]

Since this is getting personal, unfortunate since it was entertaining, if for nothing else then for the activity it generated (forum is kinda slow) I'll try to sum it  up as an amused bystander.

Ike: Zero is a superior Dog Fighter based on the specifications of the plane
Most everyone else: Wildcat equal or slight edge based on what happened.

IMHO both sides are right. If you ran the F4F-4 and A6M2, A6M3 through a simulator, the Zero would have a significant statistical advantage. By that standard, it is a superior Dogfighter.

War can't be simulated though.

There are other A2A combats where on-paper-superior-fighter was dominated by its on-paper-weaker-foe. 6 day war pops into mind.

[Ike99]

Since this is getting personal, unfortunate since it was entertaining, if for nothing else then for the activity it generated (forum is kinda slow) I'll try to sum it up as an amused bystander.

Ike: Zero is a superior Dog Fighter based on the specifications of the plane
Most everyone else: Wildcat equal or slight edge based on what happened.

IMHO both sides are right. If you ran the F4F-4 and AM62, and AM63 through a simulator, the Zero would have a significant statistical advantage. By that standard, it is a superior Dogfighter.

War can't be simulated though.

There are other A2A combats where on-paper-superior-fighter was dominated by its on-paper-weaker-foe. 6 day war pops into mind.

For me OG_Gleep it isn´t personal. I do resent Todd trying to gather Wildcat support by cheap tricks upon peoples nationality though. He always says I hate USA and come down against US equiptment but if you look on the ¨Wildcat¨ thread I said...

I am civil Todd. Am I the one using CAPS?

But one thing is certain and everyone agrees upon it, the Wildcat is modeled too weak in the game. By how much is open too debate. If this is because the plane itself is modeled too weak or the pilot experience is set too low at game start is the question.

They should raise something, otherwise in CF, watching the tactical battles when Zeros vs Wildcats is going to be painful.

My objective is to get ¨CF¨ as historicaly accurate as possible as far as each sides equiptment is concerned. Saying the Zeros were ¨flying torches¨ for Wildcats is far from reality, just as the Zeros dominance over the Wildcat in UV is also far from reality.

But about the Zero-vs-Wildcat debate. They are pulling out the best abilities of each seperate Wildcat model.

The F4F3 was faster and more manuverable than a F4F4 because of the additional weight of the 2 extra machine guns on the F4F4. It also climbed better. The F4F4 dove better though and obviously had more firepower. You can´t have both though.

So, what do we compare to what? A Zero is not a Zero just as a wildcat is not a Wildcat. They´re are seperate models.

Zeros outgunned the Wildcats? What model of Zero and what model of Wildcat are we comparing against each other?

Hmmm
2X.30 cal and 2X20mm for the Zero
6X.50cal for the Wildcat

The A6M5 ¨Zero¨ was armed with two, 13.2mm guns instead of the earlier 7.7mm, as well it carried more 20mm cannon shells.

The A6M5b model ¨Zero¨ had armor protection for the pilot AND self sealing fuel tanks.

So we need to be specific on model type when comparing. My own opinion is we limit ourselves to the time frame of UV. This would bring the Wildcat F4F3 & F4F4 ¨Wildcats¨ against the A6M2-&-A6M5 ¨Zeros¨

The game just has the ¨A6M5¨ I´m assuming it´s the A6M5¨A¨ ¨Zero¨ meaning...

A faster top speed
13.2 instead of 7.7 Machine guns
more 20mm cannon shells

over the earlier model ¨Zero¨

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: mdiehl

Yeah, except for the fact that he believes Wildcats cleared the skies of Zeros, and in ever increasing, in short, turned the tide.. Unless he has now broken ranks with Bergerud and changed his opinion given the historic record.

I haven't seen where HB claimed that the Wildcats "cleared the skies" of Zeroes. At times they cleared the skies of other stuff as a matter of historical record, but I've not seen that particular claim made by him either. They F4F certainly DID turn the tide. The empirical record shows it. It was the F4F that regularly beat the A6M in CV battles, and it was the F4F that held the line in the Guadalcanal campaign.

Appreciate your standing up for the facts. Ike has a penchant for inventing quotes.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99


I didn´t know this revisionist Bergerud wrote a book on Zero and Wildcat specifications too. [:D]



Throwing nationalism into a plane debate. How pathetic you are.

Are you even remotely aware how predictable this was. I am surprised it took you so long. Bergerud engaged in the most exhaustive and objective study of the entire air campaign that anyone has EVER produced. His work is recognized world wide as the definitive account and you have the unmitigated gall to label him revisionisrt because the facts he uncovered disprove your irrational claims. You lost even the smallest inkling of credibility you might have been hanging on to.


This "debate" is all about nationalism. Your irrational arguments are based soley on your deep rooted anger, frustration and envy over the manner in which your countries third world military force got spanked by the anglosaxons. Pathetic? Take a long hard look in the mirror!

[SuluSea]

Ike , I understand the A6M5b didn't come on line until 1944. By that time they were outclassed by cutting egde US fighter aircraft.


You're only proving the other members here correct when they assert that you evade questions of importance to the topic and mix in some facts with the falsehoods to keep things mixed up.

I wouldn't call automatic fire extinguishers for the fuel tanks of the 5b self sealing fuel tanks but if you do that's fine.