Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Agree with most of your points, the F4F and Zero are clearly the two best with the fulmar being better than it had a right to be.What's not under question here is the US response to a threat, nor its tactics, which were necessary simply because the F4F was outclassed by the A6M. In hands of powers with less training and resources than the US Navy the differences between the two types would have been more marked. To be fair, the standard of aircraft carrier based fighters between 1940 and 1943 up to when the F6F enters the scene isn't that spectacular, there's the A6M, the F4F, the Brewster Buffalo, the Fairey Fulmar, the Hawker Sea Hurricane, the Gloster Sea Gladiator the Supermarine Seafire I (later Seafires were obviously far more potent), so the A6M looks pretty good compared to its contemporaries.
To really appreciate the capabilities of a weapon it needs to be considered next to the other aircraft in use at the time it was, rather than attempting to compare it to everything else. Obviously the A6M was in service until the very end of the war, so that means it was contemporary to almost every fighter in theatre throughout the war, but to begin with, in the first year when the USA is taking its first steps into the war, the A6M is by far one of the best fighters in theatre.
But if tactics can make the F4F as good as or imo better than the zero than the Zero isn't actually better. In the first year of the war they basically went one for one in fights and that's while the IJN had its best pilots.
In the first year of the war they basically went one for one in fights and that's while the IJN had its best pilots.
I think the Spitfire is over rated because it has those roundel thingies on it...
All better now
View attachment 648477
Close, but if we are talking a world-beater, this is the one!
View attachment 648478
deja vu
Right now I'm reading the book "Jolly Rogers" and how Cmdr Blackburn (Later Admiral) got VF-17 into a top notch unit.Not really. An expert combat pilot flying an inferior aircraft will beat an inexperienced pilot flying a superior aircraft almost every time.
The advantage was the US Navy pilots' training in the face of adversity. Without it, the superiority of the A6M would have been far more apparent.
You're too quick to believe the propaganda that came out of the Philippines intended to offset the disasters at Clark, Iba, et al. None of Buzz Wagner's kills were confirmed.Even the outdated Boeing P-26 Peashooter in the hands of Jesus Villamor and his squadron of the Philippine Army Air Corp managed to shoot down three A6M Zeros and a G3M Betty, but I expect the IJN pilots were a bit overconfident and the PAAC pilots were lucky. Jesús A. Villamor - Wikipedia
View attachment 648389iaster
Right now I'm reading the book "Jolly Rogers" and how Cmdr Blackburn (Later Admiral) got VF-17 into a top notch unit.
Training, training, training...
Pretty obvious when you think we take a year to learn to stand up and another to walk.Right now I'm reading the book "Jolly Rogers" and how Cmdr Blackburn (Later Admiral) got VF-17 into a top notch unit.
Training, training, training....
Thanks for the correction Rich - got him and his brother confused!Good book, BTW. Tommy Blackburn of VF-17 fame, though, retired a Captain. His brother, Paul P Blackburn, retired as a Vice Admiral. I always heard that Tommy, despite his personal problems ( he once told my father that it was good to retire as a Captain as promotion to flag rank would have been one on the Navy' biggest post war mistakes), was a much nicer fellow than his brother.
Pretty obvious when you think we take a year to learn to stand up and another to walk.
This oneThe first year of whose war?
Britain and Germany had been fighting since 1939.
Japan had been fighting since 1937.
Literally never heard anyone say the zero was even close to as capable in dive speedFrom Mikesh in Zero Fighter, "The Zero was superior to the F4F-4 in speed and climb at all altitudes above 1,000 feet, and was superior in service ceiling and range. Close to sea level, with the F4F-4 in neutral blower, the two planes were equal in level speed. In a dive the two planes were equal with the exception that the Zero's engine cut out in pushovers. There was no comparison between the turning circles of the two aircraft due to the relative wing loadings and resultant low stalling speed of the Zero."
This was the result of official testing of the two types at NAS North Island, San Diego in August 1942. Basically, the A6M2 Model 21 had better speed, better climb, better ceiling, better range and tighter turning circle than the F4F-4. Armed with cannon, the A6M was definitely the superior fighter, therefore it was better tactics and training that enabled the US Navy's F4F pilots to overcome the type.
So is your claim that the first year japanese pilots were worse or less trained?Not really. An expert combat pilot flying an inferior aircraft will beat an inexperienced pilot flying a superior aircraft almost every time.
The advantage was the US Navy pilots' training in the face of adversity. Without it, the superiority of the A6M would have been far more apparent.
Literally never heard anyone say the zero was even close to as capable in dive speed