Which is better, A-6M Zero or the F4U Corsair

[Soren]

actually it's not, it's speed wasn't the only thing that makes the corsair better......

Yes it was !

If the Corsair only was as fast as the Zero, the Zero would make mince meat of the Corsair !

Because the Corsair was much faster, it slaughtered the Zero which could do nothing but turn circles and try avoiding getting hit. The Corsair simply B&Z'ed the Zero to death, and there was nothing the Zero could do about it.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

so you really think that speed is the only reason the corsair is better than the zero..........

 

[Soren]

so you really think that speed is the only reason the corsair is better than the zero..........

Please tell me, what would the Corsair do against a Zero if it couldnt outrun or outclimb it ?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Outdive it and defeat it in the "zoom," just like the P-40 did

 

[Soren]

Outdive it and defeat it in the "zoom," just like the P-40 did

I think we can agree that the P-40 wasnt superior to the Zero, now can't we ?

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

not sure to be honest.........

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Outdive it and defeat it in the "zoom," just like the P-40 did

I think we can agree that the P-40 wasnt superior to the Zero, now can't we ?

Oh agreed, but through tactics and pilot training it held its own until better aircraft came along.

 

[Soren]

Outdive it and defeat it in the "zoom," just like the P-40 did

I think we can agree that the P-40 wasnt superior to the Zero, now can't we ?

Oh agreed, but through tactics and pilot training it held its own until better aircraft came along.

Absolutely, but the same would be true for the Corsair then.

If the Corsair didnt have its much superior speed, then it was inferior to the Zero.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

If the Corsair didnt have its much superior speed, then it was inferior to the Zero.

I think you might of had a "Bent wing P-40 with a more durable engine that was able to land on a carrier."

 

[dinos7]

wouldnt the hellcat be better than the corsiar?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

wouldnt the hellcat be better than the corsiar?

If they had the same top speed - I think so!

 

[evangilder]

The Corsair could sustain hits much better than the Zero as well. Self-sealing fuel tanks and armor plate may not win a battle, but they sure help you to survive one.

 

[plan_D]

Everything on the Corsair was better than the Zero except low speed turn-rate.

 

[superunknown]

I don't like these "which aircraft was better" threads, if your a good enough pilot in a sub-standard aircraft, you can easily beat a sub-standard pilot in a good aircraft.
In this case however from a personal point of view, I would have rather flown a Corsair than a Zero.

 

[plan_D]

That's because the Corsair was just better than the Zero, end of story. I think anyone with a bit of sense would have rather taken the Corsair into battle.

 

[Nonskimmer]

Bang on D! It was a tough, powerful aircraft. Period. Self-sealing tanks and all that, too. Compare that to the kite that was the Zero and of course it's the better plane. Exceptional pilots could make the most of the Zero, but plane for plane the Corsair is the clear winner. A no brainer.

 

[trackend]

I think just about everyone one on this thread feels the same Zero great plane in it's day but a dead duck up against the F4U.

 

[plan_D]

I will not bang on, NS, and you can't make me.

 

[Nonskimmer]

Well, can't knock a guy for tryin'.

 

[Smokey]

There is one disadvantage to the corsairs tough heavy construction. Saburo Sakai says that he and his comrades regularly got the corsairs to follow them down in a dive at low altitude, then pulled up at the last minute. The heavier corsairs could'nt pull out of the dive in time, and flew into the ground, Star Wars style. Of course, this depended on the corsair pilots being relatively inexperienced with the limits of their machine.