FW 190A vs Hellcat and Corsair

[syscom3]

And the Bearcat had short legs...

It was designed for a whole different mission. It wasn't intended for offensive roles, only for point defense of the fleet.

The USN had that luxury because of having so many carriers available, a mix of Bearcats, Tigercats, Hellcats and Corsairs could be maintained (if the war had lasted a few months longer).

 

[lesofprimus]

Agreed sys...

 

[R Leonard]

(the LW had test the FW 190A as a torpedo bomber 1942)

So what, the USN did the same with the F6F.

Just because one has a successful experiment does not equate to operational realities.

Rich

 

[R Leonard]

I believe that there were encounters between FAA Hellcats and FWs but I can't find my reference on that yet.

The only fighter-to-fighter FAA F6F action took place in May 1944. On 8 May, F6F's from the Fleet Air Arm's No. 800 Squadron (Lieut. Comdr. SJ Hall, DSC, RN), off HMS Emperor, while escorting a flight of Barracudas was attacked by a mixed group of Me-109's and FW-190's. Two F6F's were lost, one, probably, to anti-aircraft fire (one source indicates that both F6Fs were lost in a mid-air collision, not to any German fire of any kind); the German losses were claimed as 2 Me-109's and one FW-190. The FW-190 was claimed by Sub-Lieut. Ritchie. Available Luftwaffe loss listings show three Me-109Gs lost in this action, werk# 14697 (Ofw. Kurt), 10347 (Uffz. Brettin), and unknown # (Fw. Horst). On the Luftwaffe side, Uffz. Hallstick claimed two F6Fs and Lieut. Prenzler claimed one.

Rich

 

[renrich]

Thank you, Rich, for your post I thought that I knew that I had read of a Hellcat-FW encounter somewhere. In spite of all the technical stuff online and in books about this fighter and that fighter, I believe that all the premier fighters were adequate at least in a one v one or in furball against one another except for one incontravertible fact! The fighter had to have the range to be there! Given the ability to be in the fight, it was probably the pilot's skill as to who would survive, that and maybe Lady Luck.

 

[SlickDriver]

The Mustang, Corsair and Hellcat all carried 6 .50 Cals. The Mustang certainly could and did manage to deal with the Fw.190 and I am sure that the Corsair and Hellcat would do at least as well.

 

[renrich]

Agree!

 

[DonL]

Sorry Guys,

but that a Mustang could match with a FW 190A very well was at high altitudes!

A F4U4 could also match with a FW 190A very well, because the F4U4 was equal to a Mustang at high altitudes!

But I don't think that a F4U1D and a Hellcat was equal to a Mustang! They would have much more problems with a FW 190A than the two other aircrafts!

 

[SoD Stitch]

Personally I dont think the undercarriage on the 190 would have been suitable for carrier landings. Its narrow track would have made pitching deck landings very interesting.

"Narrow track"? The -190 had a wider track than the 109, but it was very stalky.

The landing gear on the -190 would have definitely needed to be redesigned to be stronger, which probably would've necessitated a thicker wing.

A better candidate for a carrier-based aircraft would probably have been an Me-110/410 derivitive with folding wings, if for no other reason than the fact that you would have two engines rather than one (all US Navy fighters, save one, have had two engines since 1960); better over-water safety.

 

[syscom3]

"Narrow track"? The -190 had a wider track than the 109, but it was very stalky.

The landing gear on the -190 would have definitely needed to be redesigned to be stronger, which probably would've necessitated a thicker wing.

A better candidate for a carrier-based aircraft would probably have been an Me-110/410 derivitive with folding wings, if for no other reason than the fact that you would have two engines rather than one (all US Navy fighters, save one, have had two engines since 1960); better over-water safety.

The hypothetical -110 naval fighter would have been chewed up by even a Wildcat, let alone a Hellcat or Corsair.

Better for the Germans to redesign the -190 for carrier operations, or design a naval fighter from scratch.

 

[Maharg]

In the 30's the Germans did start construction on an Aircraft Carrier the Graf Zeppelin, it was never completed. It was to have a complement of 50 aircraft - 10 Messerschmitt Bf109 fighters, 20 Junkers Ju87 dive bombers and 20 Fieseler Fi167 torpedo bombers. German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin

German Carrier-Based Aircraft This is very interesting.

 

[R Leonard]

Awww gee, do I have to drag out my standard trashing of the Graf Zeppelin concept?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

There is a thread dedicated to the Graf Zeppelin....

 

[renrich]

In my handy dandy, 1942 original "Janes" the Graf Zeppelin is shown to be complete whereas her sister Peter Strasser was believed to be incomplete. GZ was 19250 tons, about same size as Yorktown, 32 kts, 16-5.9s(what for) 10-4.1s(not enough), 22-37mm, 40ac.

 

[syscom3]

In my handy dandy, 1942 original "Janes" the Graf Zeppelin is shown to be complete whereas her sister Peter Strasser was believed to be incomplete. GZ was 19250 tons, about same size as Yorktown, 32 kts, 16-5.9s(what for) 10-4.1s(not enough), 22-37mm, 40ac.

As many aircraft as the Independence class light carriers.

 

[otftch]

Structure asides.I think it would have fared well against the Hellcat but the Corsair would have eaten it up.
Ed

 

[R Leonard]

In my handy dandy, 1942 original "Janes" the Graf Zeppelin is shown to be complete whereas her sister Peter Strasser was believed to be incomplete. GZ was 19250 tons, about same size as Yorktown, 32 kts, 16-5.9s(what for) 10-4.1s(not enough), 22-37mm, 40ac.

Funny, my handy-dandy original 1942 Janes also pointedly notes 40 aircraft as the complement (less than half of the Yorktown class). It also does not appear to actually claim the GZ is complete. It says, if I may quote:
"Sides appear to be armoured for two-thirds of length amidships, and to a lesser extent as far as bow, which is of bulbous form. Will have island superstructure on starboard side. One of these aircraft carriers was photographed from the air fitting out alongside a quay in the Naval Dockyard at Kiel, in July, 1940, whence she is believed to have proceeded to Gdynia. P. Strasser does not appear to have been completed."

I read "Will have island superstructure on starboard side" and "fitting out" to mean incomplete. Nowhere does my Janes say that GZ is complete.

Oh and all those 5.9's? Look at the hull casemates pictured in the Janes. Eight of them are single mount, single purpose, casemates . . . ideal for banging away at approaching RN destroyers.

Rich

 

[renrich]

Well, I inferred that GZ was complete because they said PS was not, wrong inferrence? although fitting out would not take long to complete and the photograph taken from the air in 1940 was taken at Kiel where she then proceeded to Gydnia. Would not that mean that she had finished fitting out? Her 5.9s remind me of the 8 inchers on Lex and Sara. My favorite uncle's first ship was Sara in the 30s. Anyway, if the GZ had to bang away at DDs with the 5.9s she is in deep dodo, more 4.1s would seem to make more sense. My handy dandy "Janes" original is getting so old, I am afraid to open it. I have been poring over it for more than 30 years and it is fascinating. I have a handy dandy not original "Janes" 1945 and it appears you are right, Rich, the war losses section says that GZ (incomplete) was found in wrecked and waterlogged condition at Stettin, April, 1945. Also PS seemed never to have reached launching stage. Is it possible that equipment may have been scavenged off of GZ? Just goes to show you about intelligence information. WMDs anyone?

 

[R Leonard]

Great minds . . . I've a "not original" 1945, too, which I looked at, but decided not to mention since it was an outcome of which we already knew. I know what you mean about the shape of the 1942. Mine's in pretty bad shape from first my brothers, then my, poring over it through the years. My mother gave it to my father for his January 1943 birthday.

Rich

 

[Glider]

The GZ reached about 90% completion but in some ways was an outdated design. To equip a carrier with 16 x 5.9 is a massive waste of weight and crew.