- Thread starter
- #21
Vassili Zaitzev
Master Sergeant
No offense on the 109, but Id take the F4F.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That it did, but again I've seen information to state the F4F-3 was actually more maneuverable than the Me-109E.Soren said:The maneuverability of these aircraft was roughly the same, while the 109 enjoyed a tremendous speed and climb advantage.
loomaluftwaffe said:it was better at the PTO cause the good pilots were dying faster than the newbies could gain experience
and good planes came out late
it spoke of the F4F being more maneuvable and having a greater dive speed (becuase of it's weight?)
Agree, they did have an excellent kill ratio in the Pacific late in the war becuase there were little skilled pilots to challenge them...Soren said:Yeah, and I guess you'd choose a Zero over a F4U-4 Corsair as-well ?? I thought not
The FM-2 has a pathetic climb rate, a pathetic energy retention and last but not least a VERY slow top speed. It was no match for the fighters roaming the skies in the ETO by 45.
loomaluftwaffe said:anyways the F4F would have been pathetic in ETO, I think they will be hacked up alot worse than shortly after Pearl Harbor
Yeah, and I guess you'd choose a Zero over a F4U-4 Corsair as-well ?? I thought not