Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

ORIGINAL: Big B

Well,

The best known critic of the F4F-4 was John Thach (after his experiences at Midway). On the other hand Lt Cmdr Flately (XO of VF42, who fought the Coral Sea battle) thought the aircraft workable.

Both Flately and Thach together worked out F4F tactics after Midway and Coral Sea (according to Lundstrom). Flately disagreed with Thach over the wildcats capabilities and liabilities v the Zero, and Flately apearantly won Thach over to the POV that what ever the F4F-4 gave away in performance to the F4F-3 - it really wasn't enough to make a real difference in combat. Both agreed that the worst point of the F4F-4 was the 6x guns with 270 rds pr gun of the F4F-4, compared to the 4x guns with 450 rds pr gun of the F4F-3 (not for the added weight - but for firing time allowed). It appears at Midway, not a few F4F's were out of ammo too early - this appears to be the major source of anxiety between the two models (again according to Lundstrom). On the credit side of the F4F-4, it could carry drop tanks and therefore extend range, Pilots like Flately regarded range as the primary handicap of the F4F-3.

The remark that the F4F-4 "was a dog" is always taken out of context - it was made in reference to the F4F-4 with two wing tanks (Lundstrom 1st Team, page 443).

So to summarize, the F4F-4 did have a bit lower performance than the F4F-3, but not enough to make a difference in relation to combat with the Zero; the F4F-4 had greater firepower - but less trigger time (not a universally accepted virtue); and the provision for drop tanks provided a solution to the F4F's limited range problem(read - limited fuel, which translates into higher cruise speed, which translates into entering combat at high speed...THE biggest problem pilots identified after combat with the Zero - starting combat flying too slow); and folding wings allowed a major increase in the numbers available on board a carrier.

The Wildcat the pilots really wanted was the FM-2, with 4 guns and more ammo, provision for drop tanks (more fuel), folding wings, and most importantly - more horsepower which made maneuvering with the Zero a whole new ball game. test flights with captured A6M5's showed the FM-2 to more than hold it's own in climbing AND turning (besides the usual advantages of high speed roll and controllability, etc)... but it didn't arrive at the fleet until 1943.

Thanks Big B for the information. That makes sense; sure there were performance differences but they were largely outweighed by defensive enhancements.

I did not however, realize that there was any significant difference from the FM-2 and the F4F-4. I had always thought of the FM-2 as an F4F-4 made at a different factory. I'm sure your right, but I'll have to go read up on it.

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Thanks Big B for the information. That makes sense; sure there were performance differences but they were largely outweighed by defensive enhancements.

I did not however, realize that there was any significant difference from the FM-2 and the F4F-4. I had always thought of the FM-2 as an F4F-4 made at a different factory. I'm sure your right, but I'll have to go read up on it.

ORIGINAL: wdolson

ORIGINAL: niceguy2005

Thanks Big B for the information. That makes sense; sure there were performance differences but they were largely outweighed by defensive enhancements.

I did not however, realize that there was any significant difference from the FM-2 and the F4F-4. I had always thought of the FM-2 as an F4F-4 made at a different factory. I'm sure your right, but I'll have to go read up on it.

The FM-1 was essentially identical to the F4F-4. The FM-2 was the improvement on the design. It's been referred to as the "hot rod" Wildcat.

Bill