GregP
Major
I'll go back to the start of this one. According to the pilots we see every month at the Planes of Fame, the Hellcat DID break the back of the Japanese because, for the first time, we had a plane that could out-climb the Zero and almost turn with it even when the Zero was at it's best turn rate. If the Zero was NOT at its best turn rate, the Hellcat could turn with or out-turn the Zero.
This does NOTHING to diminish the accomplishments of the F4F and P-38 pilots who went before the Hellcat, but they did NOT wipe out all the Japanese Navy's best pilots. Many were still there even through the end of the war. Just not as many as they started with. You could not convince Boyington or others I spoke with they were shot down by rookies.
When the Hellcat arrived, it was faster than the Zero, could out-accelerate it, out-climb it, was adequately armed, had pilots that were well-trained even if not quite hard-bitten veterans, and could linger to the point that fuel was not an issue in combat for either side. That last means both sides could stand and fight or run away if possible. It wasn't like the Germans over the UK where they had only a few minutes before they had to leave or run out of fuel on the way home. Also, the US Navy tended for fly in groups of 4 or 8 (one or two flights), much as the Japanese did, and most of the engagements were of the 4 vs. 4, 4 vs. 8, or 8 vs. 8 variety where neither side was really outnumbered so badly that many had a great chance of escape if only by virtue of the sheer number of targets in the sky. Instead, the targets were few enough that a good, solid dogfight was the order of the day a LOT of the time versus the ETO.
This put the Japanese at a distinct disadvantage for the first time since the Hellcat was a MUCH better dogfighter than either the P-38 or the F4F. The Hellcat was a VERY good fighter and would have acquitted itself well anywhere. In a dogfight, top speed is not important. What IS important is maneuverability, acceleration, behavior around stall, and armament. Top speed is great for getting into or out of a fight, and for catching up to a target fleeing without regard to anyone following, but is NOT an important dogfight variable otherwise. That from veterans, not from me. I have heard that from maybe 30 WWII pilots who fought in the PTO. The guys who loved top speed were ETO guys who could dive on someone from 25,000 feet or who were chasing Bf 109s and Fw 190s that dived through the bomber formations from above. Not from guys flying Hellcats at 3,500 feet on combat air patrol around a carrier task force. The PTO was a much lower-altitude war than the ETO because the ocean has very few mountains sticking up out of it. And ... if your engine got quiet, altitude wasn't usually going to allow you land on a carrier. It was usually ditch or nylon letdown time regardless of altitude.
Many in here will disagree, but I go with the guys who were there and flew the planes. ALL the pilots who fly them LOVE the Hellcat for it's handling and forgiving characteristics at all speeds. As the old saying goes, "Ask the guy who flies one!"
At warbird gatherings where veterans show up, the Hellcat gets a LOT of respect.
This does NOTHING to diminish the accomplishments of the F4F and P-38 pilots who went before the Hellcat, but they did NOT wipe out all the Japanese Navy's best pilots. Many were still there even through the end of the war. Just not as many as they started with. You could not convince Boyington or others I spoke with they were shot down by rookies.
When the Hellcat arrived, it was faster than the Zero, could out-accelerate it, out-climb it, was adequately armed, had pilots that were well-trained even if not quite hard-bitten veterans, and could linger to the point that fuel was not an issue in combat for either side. That last means both sides could stand and fight or run away if possible. It wasn't like the Germans over the UK where they had only a few minutes before they had to leave or run out of fuel on the way home. Also, the US Navy tended for fly in groups of 4 or 8 (one or two flights), much as the Japanese did, and most of the engagements were of the 4 vs. 4, 4 vs. 8, or 8 vs. 8 variety where neither side was really outnumbered so badly that many had a great chance of escape if only by virtue of the sheer number of targets in the sky. Instead, the targets were few enough that a good, solid dogfight was the order of the day a LOT of the time versus the ETO.
This put the Japanese at a distinct disadvantage for the first time since the Hellcat was a MUCH better dogfighter than either the P-38 or the F4F. The Hellcat was a VERY good fighter and would have acquitted itself well anywhere. In a dogfight, top speed is not important. What IS important is maneuverability, acceleration, behavior around stall, and armament. Top speed is great for getting into or out of a fight, and for catching up to a target fleeing without regard to anyone following, but is NOT an important dogfight variable otherwise. That from veterans, not from me. I have heard that from maybe 30 WWII pilots who fought in the PTO. The guys who loved top speed were ETO guys who could dive on someone from 25,000 feet or who were chasing Bf 109s and Fw 190s that dived through the bomber formations from above. Not from guys flying Hellcats at 3,500 feet on combat air patrol around a carrier task force. The PTO was a much lower-altitude war than the ETO because the ocean has very few mountains sticking up out of it. And ... if your engine got quiet, altitude wasn't usually going to allow you land on a carrier. It was usually ditch or nylon letdown time regardless of altitude.
Many in here will disagree, but I go with the guys who were there and flew the planes. ALL the pilots who fly them LOVE the Hellcat for it's handling and forgiving characteristics at all speeds. As the old saying goes, "Ask the guy who flies one!"
At warbird gatherings where veterans show up, the Hellcat gets a LOT of respect.