Best Pacific Fighter?

Best Pacific Fighter?


  • Total voters
    146

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
since you are obviously not adept at catching self depriciating humor

Is there any other minutia in my post(s) you'd like to comment on?


Yea, how about I boot your @ss off this forum?

You're a noobe here - learn the ropes and don't be a d!ck or else your stay will be very short. At this point you're on thin ice. I suggest just going about your way and not make any more ignorant comments to me or any one else on this forum - I hope I've made myself abundantly clear!!!!
 
Personal favorite: FM2-While not many "aces" (5) flew it, they had a very respectable kill/loss ratio. The FM2's more powerful engine, lighter weight, larger tail control surfaces and increase in performance (climb, speed and turning ability) caught many Japanese pilots by surprise. There is even a case where a FM2 shot down a Zero while it was shooting up a Corsair during that aircrafts introduction to the war. Had the FM2 been introduced sooner, I believe it would have produced a considerable number of aces in the Pacific.

While outnumbered, slower, less manueverable than its antongonists, the whole Wildcat series seemed to get the job done. It's ability to take considerable damage and bring it's pilot home, operate in some of the worst conditions imaginable, operate from small carrier decks and dish out a good amount of damage, allowed the creation of excellent combat pilots and several aces who would go on to the the Corsair or Hellcat.
 
Actually MW, the FM2 just got back to the performance of the early F4F3 although with more armor and folding wings. Are you saying that an FM2 shot a Zeke off of a Corsair's tail when the Corsair was new to combat? I don't believe that the FM2 was deployed in Feb. 1943 when the Corsair first went into combat.
 
The FM2 was in use in early 1944. I'm trying to locate the mission of the FM2 comming to the assistance of the Corsair. As soon as I find it, I'll be sure to post it.

I've read that the climb and turn rate of the FM2 was actually better than the F4F3. While speed was only a couple of MPH over the F4F3, its rate of climb was 3,650 fpm (the F3F3 was 2,050). Ceiling of the FM2 was also slightly better.
 
My source shows the early F4F3 as having a SL climb rate was just over 3300 fpm and that it could touch 335 mph at 22000 feet. The F4F4 was less than 2500 fpm at SL. He also states that the FM2 almost retrieved the climb rate of the early F4F3. It is interesting to compare the performance of the early F4F3 with that of the Hurricane and Spitfire. However, some data is confusing because the F4F3 gradually acquired SS tanks which were heavier and held less fuel and took on more armor and thus lost performance.
 
I realise that numbers on paper don't tell the whole story but I have a book that gives the Shiden's performance as a Vmax of 369 mph at 18,370 feet and a service ceiling of 35,300 feet. The F4U4 could do 380 mph at SL, had a Vmax of 446 mph at 26000 feet and had a service ceiling of 41000 feet. What quality would make the Shiden superior? I agree this poll has gotten soggy and needs renovation.
 
ki - 84 was one of the better planes that flew during ww2 .Very well equiped that it could fight all americans planes,a very good engine(but unfortunatelly without good manufacturing)and design that it was very well flown at middle and big hights.Ki - 84 with better quality of fuel and more skilled pilots would be the winner in the Pacific!When it was produced the japanese had lost all the good pilots,the factories were almost destroyed and the fuel was terrible of quality....don't you agree?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back