Most Overrated aircraft of WWII.....?

[buffnut453]

The other problem with the advantages/disadvantages listings is that it doesn't specify a timeframe. In late 41/early 42 the Wildcat didn't have armour or self-sealing tanks (at least not at front-line units). Similarly, the A6M was eventually fitted with armour and self-sealing tanks.

Which version of the Wildcat is being compared with which variant of Zero, and when?

 

[pinsog]

The other problem with the advantages/disadvantages listings is that it doesn't specify a timeframe. In late 41/early 42 the Wildcat didn't have armour or self-sealing tanks (at least not at front-line units). Similarly, the A6M was eventually fitted with armour and self-sealing tanks.

Which version of the Wildcat is being compared with which variant of Zero, and when?

According to The First Team, the F4F-3 pilots at Coral Sea didn't think they gave up anything in climb or speed and had better protection and firepower (I was surprised by this but that's what the book said). The F4F-4 gained several hundred pounds, couldn't climb, was slower etc. If I had been a Wildcat pilot at Guadalcanal and they told me "if a Zero gets on your tail just jink up and down until he runs out of bullets or someone shoots him off your tail" I would have asked for a transfer!!!

If I had to fight a Zero 1 on 1 in 1942 my choices would have been:
1. FW190
2. P38, of course we had about 20 at the time
3. B17, no bombs, plenty of fuel at 30,000 feet, pin the throttle and run like the wind

 

[Shortround6]

Again, please, please
Please, Please,
Be sure you are comparing the SAME Zeros.
Between the A6M2 and the A6M3's
You had 2 different engines.
A big wing with no trim tabs,
A short wing with no trim tabs.
A long wing with trim tabs.
You had the original fuel tanks,
You had the small tank/s with the new engine
Any you ended with the new engine plus wing tanks giving as or more range than the A6M2.

Perhaps someone who is better with Japanese engines can help us out.
The A6M2 used a single speed supercharger with best power just under 15,000ft.
I personally don't think you are going to get much, if any, over boost at higher altitudes than that although it may work at lower altitudes.
The 2 speed supercharger offers more scope for overboosting.
With over 150 more HP it didn't seem to offer much improved performance but that may be due to the test pilots not using the over boost
None of these engines used water injection like later Zeros got and none of them used much in the way of exhaust thrust.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Counting only Zeroes, that's a 14:10 ratio (or 1.3:1, which is a figure I came across and cited earlier). Meaning that in terms of simple effectiveness, the Wildcat was at least as good as the Zero.

It shows that but this is a lot lower than the almost 6:1 believed to be the victory ratio against the Zero.

 

[NTGray]

Ah, nothing like a spirited discussion. Yes, time frame and "which version of the plane?" does matter, and answering that in detail would require pretty much a battle-by-battle accounting. My list is only a gross generalization, quickly compiled, primarily intended to answer the charge that anybody thinks that maneuverability was the Zero's only advantage. It wasn't. But on balance, the Wildcat had some crucial advantages itself. Having a working radio was actually a pretty big deal that a lot of people (most?) are unaware of.

If I recall, the F4F-4 was the version that first incorporated armor, but the dash 3 planes were retrofitted as quickly as they could get 'er done, and that process began in September 1941. I don't know how quickly they completed the job.

As for the charge that the results of training and tactics should not be credited to the airframe, there is some justice to that, but the tactics would not have worked with a plane that simply did not have any redeeming qualities. For example, I doubt that even Jimmy Thach could have figured out a way to beat Zeroes with Buffaloes. (I could be wrong, but that's my guess.)

As for the Zero's roll rate, some people seem to think that things just HAPPEN beyond a certain threshold or amount of time. Like that a Zero simply couldn't roll if was going 1mph above some magic number. My source said that roll rate began to fall off above 180 knots, which is actually 207mph, but that is only a gross generality. It may be more fair to say that at 300mph (which would be easily achieved during a diving attack) the Zero's ailerons were very, very difficult to move. The Wildcat's apparently were not (or at least not to anything like the same degree). So, at high speeds that's a Wildcat advantage. (Both planes had a top speed in level flight of about 330mph.)

 

[NTGray]

It shows that but this is a lot lower than the almost 6:1 believed to be the victory ratio against the Zero.

The 6:1 figure is claimed to be the ratio by the end of the Guadalcanal campaign. Without an explicit statement to the contrary, I assume that means the ratio during those later days, meaning maybe a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio overall. But my assumption may be mistaken.

 

[GrauGeist]

Just an observation, but if the A6M was so poor at handling at any reasonable speed, then why was the "Thach Weave" developed for F4F pilots?

It was not an offensive manouver...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The 6:1 figure is claimed to be the ratio by the end of the Guadalcanal campaign. Without an explicit statement to the contrary, I assume that means the ratio during those later days, meaning maybe a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio overall. But my assumption may be mistaken.

But I still think that's against ALL aircraft, not just Zeros.

 

[Shortround6]

The other problem with the advantages/disadvantages listings is that it doesn't specify a timeframe. In late 41/early 42 the Wildcat didn't have armour or self-sealing tanks (at least not at front-line units). Similarly, the A6M was eventually fitted with armour and self-sealing tanks.

Which version of the Wildcat is being compared with which variant of Zero, and when?

the difference was several years.
I don't believe ANY F4F-4 (Martlet may be different?) left the factory without armor or protected tanks.
In 1941 Grumman built 323 Wildcats and Martlets. 5 of them were F4F-4, 107 of them were F4F-3s.
To this you can add 103 F4Fs and Martlets built in 1940.
In Dec 1941 the Navy and Marines had 181 F4F-3s and 65 F4F-3A's

Some of the F4F-3s and F4F-3A's had been built without armor and protected tanks.
By June 1942 any F4F-3s still aboard carriers were being transferred to shore bases.

In fact at Midway,
the Yorktown had 25 F4F-4s with VF-3
The Enterprise had 27 F4F-4s with VF-6
The Hornet had 29 F4F-4s with VF-8

Zeros don't get armor until 1944?

 

[Vincenzo]

The 6:1 figure is claimed to be the ratio by the end of the Guadalcanal campaign. Without an explicit statement to the contrary, I assume that means the ratio during those later days, meaning maybe a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio overall. But my assumption may be mistaken.

the overall ratio in the Guadalcanal campaign, and i've already posted it, it's 1.1:1 in the Zero:Wildcat

 

[tomo pauk]

The A6M2 used a single speed supercharger with best power just under 15,000ft.
I personally don't think you are going to get much, if any, over boost at higher altitudes than that although it may work at lower altitudes.
The 2 speed supercharger offers more scope for overboosting.
With over 150 more HP it didn't seem to offer much improved performance but that may be due to the test pilots not using the over boost
None of these engines used water injection like later Zeros got and none of them used much in the way of exhaust thrust.

The 150 HP surplus was at low altitudes, much due to having the low speed gearing added, that sucked less power from the engine. At high altitudes, it was perhaps 50 HP advantage for the 2-speed type? Gain in speed was there, some 20 km/h. Another 10 km/h was gained later with better layout of exhaust stacks.
I'm not sure that water injection equipment was ever used on the Zero.

 

[SaparotRob]

I have become more aware of the DO NOT EXCEED speed. I probably first heard of it when reading about the P-38. Greg, of Greg's Planes, Trains and Automobiles or Something, brought up that the F4F didn't have a "do not exceed" speed. I assume that's because so much of the Wildcat's structure was of railway bridge components.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I have become more aware of the DO NOT EXCEED speed. I probably first heard of it when reading about the P-38. Greg, of Greg's Planes, Trains and Automobiles or Something, brought up that the F4F didn't have a "do not exceed" speed. I assume that's because so much of the Wildcat's structure was of railway bridge components.

Every aircraft will have a DO NOT EXCEED speed, to include an F4F. It is shown in flight manuals as VNE and is usually indicted as a red line on airspeed indicators. It is the speed at which structural damage to the airframe can occur if abrupt maneuvers are attempted or if flown in turbulent air. Even though we know the F4F was built like a tank, given the right circumstances, you can bend or break the airframe.

Back in WW2 some parameters like VNE were sometimes not indicted in the flight manual or marked on the airspeed indicator

 

[NTGray]

But I still think that's against ALL aircraft, not just Zeros.

All I can do is quote a source that appears to be reliable. If it isn't reliable, or if he said "Zero" but meant "all Japanese planes," that's a different story. But here it is again:

"By the end of the Battle for Guadalcanal on February 3rd, 1943, records show that Navy and Marine Corps aviators shot down 5.9 Zeros for every Wildcat lost. When the Japanese surrendered in September 1945, the Wildcat to Zero exchange ratio had increased to 6.9 to one."

He very specifically says "Wildcat" and "Zeroes." But he does not say whether the ratios are supposed to be for that specific time period, or cumulative up to that point (which would make the "time period" ratios even higher to balance out the lower ratios early in the war). As I stated earlier, I am assuming he means for that particular time period.

Wildcat vs. Zero – Resetting the Record

Conventional wisdom says that the performance of the Mitsubishi A6M Zero-Sen (Zero) was far superior to the Grumman F4F Wildcat. However, if that is truly the c

marcliebman.com

 

[FLYBOYJ]

All I can do is quote a source that appears to be reliable. If it isn't reliable, or if he said "Zero" but meant "all Japanese planes," that's a different story. But here it is again:

"By the end of the Battle for Guadalcanal on February 3rd, 1943, records show that Navy and Marine Corps aviators shot down 5.9 Zeros for every Wildcat lost. When the Japanese surrendered in September 1945, the Wildcat to Zero exchange ratio had increased to 6.9 to one."

He very specifically says "Wildcat" and "Zeroes." But he does not say whether the ratios are supposed to be for that specific time period, or cumulative up to that point (which would make the "time period" ratios even higher to balance out the lower ratios early in the war). As I stated earlier, I am assuming he means for that particular time period.

Wildcat vs. Zero – Resetting the Record

Conventional wisdom says that the performance of the Mitsubishi A6M Zero-Sen (Zero) was far superior to the Grumman F4F Wildcat. However, if that is truly the c

marcliebman.com

A distinguished career, but I'd prefer to see the actual combat reports bounced against data from the Japanese. I think a source like "The First Team" is more reliable.

 

[NTGray]

A distinguished career, but I'd prefer to see the actual combat reports bounced against data from the Japanese. I think a source like "The First Team" is more reliable.

Oh, I would love to see actual numbers from somewhere; I have a calculator and know how to use it!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I found one article that describes air battles on 13 May and 16 June, 1943 -

A second Japanese series of five raids occurred between 13 May and 16 June. The first three produced losses of 19 Zeros for 10 American fighters. But on 16 June, another huge Guadalcanal strike by 70 Zeros escorting 24 Vals ran into a buzz saw. In exchange for six American fighters and five pilots, the Japanese lost 15 Zeros and 13 Vals. It marked the final major air battle over Guadalcanal.

North from Guadalcanal

Guadalcanal had only been the beginning. Now it was time to slug it out up the Solomons to the Japanese stronghold of Rabaul.

www.usni.org

I see this "snapshot" showing about 2.5:1 assuming all Wildcats lost were to Zeros and not by any of the Val's gunners.

 

[NTGray]

I doubt that even Jimmy Thach could have figured out a way to beat Zeroes with Buffaloes. (I could be wrong, but that's my guess.)

This just in:
It turns out (according to a Quora source that I kinda think probably is reliable) that the aircraft with the highest kill ratio of any WW2 plane is. . .the Buffalo! 26:1 kill ratio! I did not know or even suspect that.
Of course that was by Finnish pilots flying against various Soviet planes, but still. . .the Buffalo?? Wow!
Oh, one caveat: the Buffalo is technically #2, because the actual #1 is the P-61 Black Widow, which shot down 127 aircraft to ZERO losses. But of course the radar-guided night fighter had a bit of an unfair advantage, giving the Buffalo the highest "real" ("fair") ratio.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I have become more aware of the DO NOT EXCEED speed. I probably first heard of it when reading about the P-38. Greg, of Greg's Planes, Trains and Automobiles or Something, brought up that the F4F didn't have a "do not exceed" speed. I assume that's because so much of the Wildcat's structure was of railway bridge components.

Grumman iron.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

This just in:
It turns out (according to a Quora source that I kinda think probably is reliable) that the aircraft with the highest kill ratio of any WW2 plane is. . .the Buffalo! I did not know or even suspect that.
Of course that was against various Soviet planes, but still. . .the Buffalo?? Wow!
Oh, one caveat: the Buffalo is technically #2, because the actual #1 is the P-61 Black Widow, which shot down 127 aircraft to ZERO losses. But of course the radar-guided night fighter had a bit of an unfair advantage, giving the Buffalo the highest "real" ("fair") ratio.

Now that I believe is true