Objectively speaking, it clearly wasn't suicide. At high speed the F4F could easily outmaneuver the A6M. I understand that you don't like that conclusion, but there are dozens of pilot anecdotes that demonstrate the same. Again, I refer you to various works by John Lundstrom, Eric Bergerud, Eric Hammel, among others. I'm not very fond of anecdotes, however, because people tend only to pay attention to the ones that they feel support their version of reality.
mdiehl, what is your basis for stating a Wildcat is more manuverable than a Zero? Objectively speaking of course.
Do you have a graph of the Wildcat and Zero flight envelopes? Corner velocities, etc, etc or any other factual, statistical information on Zero and Wildcat flight characteristics? If you do produce them.
Because the overwelming general concensus among Allied aviators who flew the Wildcat against Zeros testify, Zeros are more manuverable. Do not dogfight with them, do not try to turn with them, do not try to out climb them, etc., etc. As well the testing of the nearly intact Zero captured in Alaska by the US said Zeros are more manuverable than our fighters.
This is, and has been the ¨party line¨ as someone said earlier for almost 70 years. If this new theory of Wildcats being as manuverable as Zeros is true, where is the evidence? The only thing you provide is a single aviator who said go right in and start twisting and turning with a Zero. Well he was killed fighting Zeros. Anything else to submit as far as evidence?
There are still flyable Wildcats and Zeros in the world today. Did any of these authors, before making their claims of Wildcat parity in manuverability with a Zero do any actual testing with any before publishing their works? I would find it highly suspect an author, who wishes to break from 70 years of traditional thought would make a statement such as this without it. If they didn´t, then they much wear the title of ¨revisionist¨
Yes, I have no doubt a Zero looses performance at higher altitudes, but,
every aircraft loses performance at higher altitude because the air is thinner and less ¨grip¨ on the flight surface. Where is the evidence a Zero looses more performance than a Wildcat at altitude ¨X¨ besides, ¨He said so¨??
As well, where is the factual evidence a Wildcat turns tighter than a Zero at speed ¨X¨?
Of course it is possible a Zero going say,
twice as fast as its corner velocity will be out turned by a Wildcat travelling at its corner velocity. This does not make a Wildcat more manueverable than a Zero though.
This is cherry picking specific points in a flight envelope and not any actual measure of manuverabilty. Actual dogfighting is not a game of chess, it is a very fluid affair with altitudes and speeds constantly changing. To believe a heavier, slower and square winged plane is going to be able to out manuever a lighter, faster, broader winged plane is really wishful thinking on
some peoples part.
You people are really trying to put a dress on a pig with this Wildcats are more manueverable than Zeros thing.
Todd- I´m still scratching my head trying to figure out how Evita ties into Zeros and Wildcats. [:D]
If your question is what was the pilot survivability % between Zero and Wildcat pilots, I don´t know. Certainly for the Zero pilots it was quite low. They went home if ill or wounded. The Allied flyers rotated their pilots out of the combat area after so many missions yes? But they had the luxury of a much larger pilot pool.
¨If you tremble with indignation at every injustice, then you are a comrade of mine.¨ Che Guevara
The more I know people, the more I like my dog.
[/center]
