Best Pacific Fighter II

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I will have to go with the Corsair for the reasons that renrich has posted. It was the ultimate fighter in the pacific.

It is not productive to spend time saying this or that landbased plane could takeoff or land on a carrier. What is important was whether an AC could successfully conduct operations from a carrier. P47s were launched from a carrier, Hurricanes(not Sea Hurricanes) landed on a carrier without arresting gear, a P51 was launched and recovered from a carrier. That did not make any of those land based planes a carrier borne fighter.

Don't tell that to sys. He will argue with you that the B-25 was a carrier borne bomber!

 

[Maestro]

I must play the Devil's advocate here... Even though I like the F4U for its look and general performances, I must say that I think the Hellcat was better...

I saw a ducumentary on the Historia channel about Hellcats pilots. It was said that the Hellcat has the best kill ratio of the PTO (19:1) and has the best armor... So if I was a navy pilot, I think I would choose the Hellcat.

 

[Vincenzo]

in less 4 years war (talking on pacific) 6 months aren't so few time

 

[syscom3]

I have to disagree, even after Midway the IJN was still a formidable force, and it certainly did not effect the IJ Army's combat aircraft.

I thought the Corsair went into action around the same time the Hellcat did.

While I think the Corsair, Wildcat, and P-40 were great planes, I just don't see any data where they shot down a massive amount of enemy planes, even trained ones.

Beginning in summer 1942, it was P40 pilots in NG (ANZAC included) and F4F's in (or near) Guadalcanal beginning the attrition of the Japanese forces.

Through out 1943, it was predominately Corsairs, and some 13th AF P38's and P40's that engaged the rapidly declining Japanese AF over Bougainville and Rabaul. Over in New Guinea, it was a mix of P40's and P38's that whittled down the IJA forces there.

There was a USN Hellcat squadron based in the central Solomons for a short time in mid 1943, but it was reassigned as soon as the Corsairs were available in quantity.

By 1944, the quality of the Japanese air units was a fraction of what it had been in 1942. And the Hellcat didnt really get into the big battles untill summer 1944 with the invasion of the Mariana's. Untill then, they only had periodic combat, as opposed to the other types that were flying everyday the weather allowed.

And ..... consider the navy's decision in 1945 that the Corsair (over the Hellcat) was the best interceptor of Kamikazi's.

As for which plane was stronger, Hellcat or Corsair, the F4U was superior and was just as strong as the Thunderbolt. That was proven in the P47 vs F4U thread we had last year.

Now for what airplane you wanted to be in when flying 500 miles from the nearest landing strip, and a water ditching or jump into the jungle usually meant you will perish ..... what was better .... a single engined F4U or the twin engined P38?

As for the B25 being a carrier bomber; Leonard showed us pics of a PBJ going through carrier trials on the USS Oriskany dated, 1945. And dont tell the Doolittle raiders that the B25 was not carrier capable.

 

[Catch22]

Would anyone be able to direct me to the P-47 vs F4U thread? My search didn't bring anything up. All I need is which section it's in and I can find it from there.

 

[vikingBerserker]

The reason why the USN pushed the Hellcat so much was due to the early problems with the F4U which were not ironed out until April of 1944 HowStuffWorks "Chance Vought F4U Corsair" when they were finally approved for carrier use. That's why it had been given to the Marines.

Summer of 44? 4 Carriers worth of Hellcats were used to attack Markus Island in Sept of 43 (shooting down 22), then struke Rabual in Nov of that same year.

The Hellcat acheived a 19-1 kill ratio (USN Marines) and the F4U acheived an 11-1 kill ration. If they were put into service around the same time, then the F4U would also be flying against the same quality of japanese pilots.

 

[lesofprimus]

Im split on this... To be honest, the choices are too basic for me to catagorize... The F4U for example, has several variants that are vastly different...

The Top 2 for me would be the F4U-4 and the N1K2-J Shiden KAI, both for different reasons.... From a purely air to air aspect, the N1K2 had it over the Corsair if marginally so... It all came down to the pilot in the end.... My Grandfather also thought the Shiden KAI, if properly produced and maintained with proper fuel, was the Best in the Pacific....

But all around Champ has got to be the F4U-4....

 

[Lucky13]

I believe it was the Bf-109N designed for the Graf Zepplin

Think that you mean 109T, T for Trager.

Anyhoo, I'm stuck between the Corsair and the Lightning. The lightning had one upper hand in having two engines, get hit in one, you had a slim chance to make it home, get hit the engine on a Corsair and you're shafted!

 

[vikingBerserker]

Think that you mean 109T, T for Trager.

Anyhoo, I'm stuck between the Corsair and the Lightning. The lightning had one upper hand in having two engines, get hit in one, you had a slim chance to make it home, get hit the engine on a Corsair and you're shafted!

Yup, that's the one.

 

[renrich]

The Corsair went into combat on Feb. 14, 1943, the Hellcat near the end of August, 1943. That is a little over six months difference, in a war that was something over four years. The number of combat sorties flown by both was about the same. The Corsair more air to ground than the Hellcat. The Hellcat had more than twice as many kills as the Corsair and I think it would be accurate to say that the Hellcat kills came mostly against second rate Japanese pilots although some of the Corsair kills did also. It would be interesting to know how many kills for both were registered against Japanese fighters flying in the kamikaze role but the Corsair kills were 1662 fighters and 478 bombers, where as the Hellcat had 1445 bombers and 3718 fighters. A lot of the Corsair kills against fighters came in 1943 flying escort for bombers in the Solomons, probably against Japanese veteran pilots. The P38 had 1700 kills in the PTO. I would like to know how many combat sorties it flew but do not have that info. Because an airplane took off from a carrier doesn't make it carrier capable. I think I saw a video of a C130 being launched from a carrier. I doubt a C130 or a B25 ever tried a landing on a carrier much less completed one.

 

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Now for what airplane you wanted to be in when flying 500 miles from the nearest landing strip, and a water ditching or jump into the jungle usually meant you will perish ..... what was better .... a single engined F4U or the twin engined P38?

I think I would take ditching into the water. The Catalina did a good job at finding it's lost sheep!

The F4U was probably the best all around, but I do like the P-38, for it's long range and speed.

The Hayate was also a excellent plane, but like the N1K2 appeared in limited numbers.

 

[syscom3]

I think I would take ditching into the water. The Catalina did a good job at finding it's lost sheep!

That wasnt exactly true. If the PBY found the downed airmen, they were usually saved. But if not ......

 

[Soren]

F4U Corsair, no doub about it.

The Japanese did have aircraft such as the Ki-84 which could prove a mouthful for any US fighter though, but the F4U-4 was a better a/c.

 

[Butters]

This is a tough call, but all in all, I give the nod to the Corsair.

The primacy of carrier operations in the PTO rules out land-based AC like the P-38, and the late-model Japanese fighters like the Frank and George.(The Japanese planes also suffered severe reliability problems. A plane in the hanger is not an effective combat weapon...) Either the Corsair or Hellcat could have accomplished most of the tasks of the Lightning, but the P-38 was no carrier fighter.

The Hellcat had the advantage of being easier to fly, esp in regards to carrier operations. The F4U's nickname, "Ensign Eliminator", is a demonstration of that. And for relatively inexperienced pilots, a docile handling machine allows them to concentrate on fighting the enemy rather than flying the AC. That alone probably accounts for much of the discrepancy in kill ratios over the F4U. As does the fact that the majority of VF units were equipped with Hellcats, whereas many of the Corsair's missions were devoted to ground attack.

Still, in the hands of a skilled and aggressive pilot, the Corsair had enough of a performance edge over the Hellcat to entitle it to top honors as an air-to-air fighter. It's kinda like the Me 109/FW 190 contest...The '190 may have been a better AC for the rank and file, but it seems that most of the experten preferred the '109. At least from what I've read.

In any case, either the F6F or the F4U would have been able to defeat the Japanese air forces on their own. They were both very versatile and efficient combat aircraft.

JL

 

[vikingBerserker]

Ok here is some real data. The chart below shows USN/Marine Kills by Plane (F6F vs F4U) by year. I got this data from page 68 of http://www.history.navy.mil/download/nasc.pdf

It does not include Allies flying these planes.

Interesting enough, the number of combat sorties flown during 1943 were almost the same, even though the F4U had 5 more months worth of data.

 

[Catch22]

Interesting data, thanks for putting it together.

About the same number of sorties though, the F6F also had almost 2 years longer naval service than the F4U did, and there were more VFs than VMFs, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[syscom3]

Interesting data, thanks for putting it together.

About the same number of sorties though, the F6F also had almost 2 years longer naval service than the F4U did, and there were more VFs than VMFs, if I'm not mistaken.

2 years? Both were flying combat missions in 1943.

Look at it this way. In 1945, the Hellcat was already a dated design, while the Corsair was just getting into its prime.

And for the Hellcat vs P38; the P38 was pretty much superior to the Hellcat in most flight regimes.

 

[Catch22]

2 years? Both were flying combat missions in 1943.

Look at it this way. In 1945, the Hellcat was already a dated design, while the Corsair was just getting into its prime.

And for the Hellcat vs P38; the P38 was pretty much superior to the Hellcat in most flight regimes.

Naval service, meaning carrier service. Wasn't clear I suppose.

 

[Butters]

I checked out that site, VB. It's a fantastic source of info!

Thanks,

JL

PS: Is the link to this site archived somewhere in this forum?

 

[vikingBerserker]

Thanks Butters - I really don't know.