Corsair vs Zero

[the lancaster kicks ass]

what i really hate on flight sims is when you're wingmen take your kill, you've just hit a target quite bad an it's going down, then the'll come along and hit it like twice, an as they got the last bullet on it it normally counts as their kill.............

 

[cheddar cheese]

I dont find that a problem as my wingmen normally always go down Cant blame em, P-39 vs A6M2 isnt exactly well matched

 

[Anonymous]

what i really hate on flight sims is when you're wingmen take your kill, you've just hit a target quite bad an it's going down, then the'll come along and hit it like twice, an as they got the last bullet on it it normally counts as their kill.............

In Fighter Ace if you do enough damage you get the kill and he gets an assist, if you don't, it's the other way around. I think the one to do the last 25% of damage to the target (approximate since damage % figures do not relate that well to actual damage) gets the kill.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

The ability to turn a tight circle is only significant if the enemy plays the low speed horizontal turnfight game - US pilots did not.

Exactly, and thats what the U.S. pilots learned and utilized. (Why do you think the Japanees lost airsuperiorty ? They had all the most maneuverable planes, but not the right tactics !)

Rate of roll is always critical and can make up for turn rate in many instances. By 230 IAS the Zero rate of roll was so bad that it was totally outclassed by every opponent, and this only got worse with additional speed.

Yes its 'Roll rate', I agree and always have ! But it 'Could' roll even at 340mph Thats my point !

I really don't understand your point here. You seem to be agreeing with me that the roll rate of the Zero was horrible at even moderate speeds. ????

No, but its roll rate nomatter what speed was never phenomenal, it was 'good' at slow speeds and 'enough' at moderate speeds.

Also, the low speed "turn-n-burn" fight was a fools fight. When engaged in such combat, you are a sitting duck for any other enemy plane that might come along. Come play Fighter Ace sometime and see - it happens all the time - you are turn fighting with an enemy on the deck, maybe even gaining the advantage, when one of his mates comes along at twice your speed and blasts the hell out of you.

A Turn 'n' Burn dogfight with the Zeke even at high speed would be foolish Sure the Zeke's ailerons would get stiff at high speed, but its elevators wouldnt at all, and it could just keep on turning until it was on the enemy fighter's tail. (If the Enemy fighter chose to keep on the 'Dogfight', wich is exactly what Spitfire pilots did when they first met the Zero, and it proved fatal )

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

you have to be incredibly stupid or very brave to enter any form of turning fight with a zero.............

 

[cheddar cheese]

What about a Milk-turning fight? I dont think Zero's can make milk turn very quick...

 

[Anonymous]

you have to be incredibly stupid or very brave to enter any form of turning fight with a zero.............

That's not really true. As long as you maintain 300 mph in your turn you are quite safe. If the Zero tries to keep its nose pointed at you, it will loose ground, and if it keeps trying, it will end up turning a very tight circle and loosing all its E, at which time the opponent has a very easy kill.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

you have to be incredibly stupid or very brave to enter any form of turning fight with a zero.............

That's not really true. As long as you maintain 300 mph in your turn you are quite safe. If the Zero tries to keep its nose pointed at you, it will loose ground, and if it keeps trying, it will end up turning a very tight circle and loosing all its E, at which time the opponent has a very easy kill.

No ! Because the Zero is a very slow E bleeder, thanks to its low wingloading So the Zero will have no problem in following you in a turn at 300mph, unless you start making fast rolling maneuvers wich the Zero can't follow at 300mph !

Lunatic i hope your not using a computer-game for evaluating aircraft perfomance ! The real thing is 'very' much different

 

[Anonymous]

you have to be incredibly stupid or very brave to enter any form of turning fight with a zero.............

That's not really true. As long as you maintain 300 mph in your turn you are quite safe. If the Zero tries to keep its nose pointed at you, it will loose ground, and if it keeps trying, it will end up turning a very tight circle and loosing all its E, at which time the opponent has a very easy kill.

No ! Because the Zero is a very slow E bleeder, thanks to its low wingloading So the Zero will have no problem in following you in a turn at 300mph, unless you start making fast rolling maneuvers wich the Zero can't follow at 300mph !

Lunatic i hope your not using a computer-game for evaluating aircraft perfomance ! The real thing is 'very' much different

LOL - computer games tend to allow unrealistic E retention, especially in turns. In a computer game the Zero likely could turn to keep its nose pointed at the enemy without loosing energy. But in real life...

Think about it. The Corsair pulls away from the Zero and from a safe distance executes a 300+ mph slow turn. It now comes back and maybe even takes a long range shot at the Zero but stays out of the Zero's gun range. To hold its nose to the Corsair the Zero must now execute a very hard turn, bleeding speed. The Corsair can easily do a hi yo-yo turn and come back with almost its full speed where the Zero's speed is depleted.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

Lunatic do you know what the Zero's stall speed is ? Its 'very' low !!
The Zero is a slow E bleeder, one of the slowest !

Btw i know the topics title is "Corsair vs Zero", but we were currently talking about Zero vs Spitfire ! And the Spitfire wont just pull away!

 

[Anonymous]

Lunatic do you know what the Zero's stall speed is ? Its 'very' low !!
The Zero is a slow E bleeder, one of the slowest !

Btw i know the topics title is "Corsair vs Zero", but we were currently talking about Zero vs Spitfire ! And the Spitfire wont just pull away!

Do you know the difference between a stall and an accelerated stall?

What does the low stall speed of the Zero matter? I agree if it went slow enough it could keep its nose pointed at the enemy, but at such speed it would be helpless.

And at high speed the Zero was poor at retaining E. The large wings act like a brake and the small engine cannot pull it through the turns at speed. Low wingloading is a huge advantage in a slow turn-n-burn fight, but it is not in a fast E fight.

Consider the following definition of Compressibility, which refers specifically to the issues for the Spitfire, Bf109, and the Zero (and the P-38 prior to this excerpt):

Compressibility
...
A similar problem effected some models of the Supermarine Spitfire. At high speeds the ailerons could apply more torque than the Spitfire's thin wings could handle, and the entire wing would twist in the opposite direction. This meant that the plane would roll in the direction opposite to what the pilot expected, and led to a number of accidents. This wasn't noticed until later model Spitfires like the Mk.IX started to appear, because earlier models weren't fast enough. This was solved by adding considerable strength to the wings, and was wholely cured when the Mk.XIV was introduced.

The Messerschmitt Bf 109 and Mitsubishi Zero had the exact opposite problem, the controls were too weak. At higher speeds the pilot simply couldn't move the controls because there was too much airflow over the control surfaces. The planes would become difficult to manoeuvre, and at high enough speeds even less manoeuvrable aircraft could out-turn them.

Finally, another common problem that fits into this category is flutter. At some speeds the airflow over the control surfaces will become turbulent, and the controls will start to flutter. If the speed of the fluttering is close to a harmonic of the control's movement, the resonance could break the control off completely. This was a serious problem on the Zero. When they first encountered problems with the poor control at high speed they addressed it with a new style of control surface with more power. However this introduced a new resonant mode, and a number of planes disappeared before this was discovered.
http://www.answers.com/topic/compressibility

=S=

Lunatic

 

[Soren]

Low wingloading is great for slow-moderate Turn 'n' Burn dogfights and sure it would act like a brake when it turns in high speed, but thats what makes it turn so damn tight

And the reason less maneuverable plane could outturn a Zero at high speeds, was because the Zero could barely roll at high speeds !

If in a Hellcat wich can make some pretty nasty turns itself You'd just have to hold the speed above 300mph, and the Zero wouldnt have much chance of surviving !

At all speeds over 200KTS the Hellcat could outturn any 'USAAF' fighter

 

[rolandkk]

Okay, so tell me.....did the Corsair have a 3-blade or a 4-blade prop, The picture at the top of this thread says 3-blade prop but actually shows a 4-blade prop......

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Okay, so tell me.....did the Corsair have a 3-blade or a 4-blade prop, The picture at the top of this thread says 3-blade prop but actually shows a 4-blade prop......

Depends on the model.......

 

[R Leonard]

Both.
3 blade - F4U-1, F4U-1C, F4U-1D, F4U-2, FG-1, FG-1D
4 blade - F4U-4, F4U-4B, F4U-4P, F4U-5, F4U-5N, F4U-5P, AU-1, F2G-1 F2G-2

Rich

 

[Lucky13]

If the F2G-1 F2G-2 had seen service, which would be the closest axis rival in performance? Would there be anyone?

 

[renrich]

Actually the F2G was not much if any faster than the F4U 4 except had a slightly better rate of climb.

 

[Lucky13]

Really? Even with that HUGE engine?!

 

[renrich]

F4U4-Vmax 446 mph @ 26200 ft, rate of climb 3870 fpm, F2G1D-Vmax 435 mph, rate of climb 4400fpm, the F2G could touch 399 mph at sea level whereas the F4U4 could do 380 mph at sea level. Incidently, that 380 mph at sea level for the 4 was the fastest of all US ww2 production fighters in "normal" trim.

 

[Jackson]

tell me if this a repeat..

I will delete it