Wildcat during the Battle of Britain

[pinehilljoe]

I know the F4F production missed the time frame of the Battle Britain by 6 to 12 months for operational squadrons. But how would the F4F-3 Wildcat/Martlet 1 have fared alongside the Hurricane I and Spitfire II during the Battle?

 

[swampyankee]

Against the German bombers, not too badly. Against the Bf109, about as well as the P-36.

 

[tomo pauk]

About good/bad as Hurricane.

 

[Shortround6]

how would the F4F-3 Wildcat/Martlet 1 have fared

Slightly different airplanes.

However both would have four .50 cal guns firing at 600rpm (at best) with a MV of about 2500fps. There is NO incendiary ammunition in the summer of 1940.

Marlet I has the Wright Cyclone R-1820 engine with two speed single stage supercharger with 1000hp at 13,500ft (?) in high gear. There is no extra boost or WEP or anything else authorized and in fact that 1000hp is at 2500rpm which is the take-off max rpm.

F4F-3 WIldcat has the P&W R-1830 engine with two stage multi speed supercharger which was good for 1000hp at 19,000ft or so.

Martlet I might be down to 880-900hp by the time it got to 19,000ft??
This is with no RAM.

 

[PAT303]

Against the German bombers, not too badly. Against the Bf109, about as well as the P-36.

The Wildcat wouldn't climb fast enough to reach them and be fast enough to catch them, as posted above the .50's don't have a reliable feed mechanism and jam under G, they don't have effective AP, no incendiary, no HE, just a barely good enough daytime tracer and low velocity cup and core ball ammunition.

 

[nuuumannn]

Depends on where you put them. Remember, the Battle of Britain wasn't just fought over the south coast of England. German bombing raids over the north and far west of the UK often went unescorted by fighters and never with Bf 109s because of their range. I'm pretty certain an F4F could tackle a Bf 110 escort. Fighter Command needed fighters and what it did with them counted. The two Defiant squadrons had mild success (more enemy fighters shot down by Defiants than Definats shot down by enemy fighters - and that's taking into account over claiming and post war research), but their reputation got them taken out of the battle because of losses suffered in the month of August. They would have been better served in the north of England and Scotland where, perhaps their reputation might not have fared as badly as it did, simply because there were no single-seat fighter escorts. The same with any aircraft that couldn't match the Bf 109, and the numbers they were deployed in. Having weaker fighters in the north and west could free up the better fighters for the south.

 

[R Leonard]

First enemy plane shot down by a Martlet, yea, any F4F at all, was a Ju-88 over Scotland in December 1940.

 

[PAT303]

First enemy plane shot down by a Martlet, yea, any F4F at all, was a Ju-88 over Scotland in December 1940.

The Finns had success with the Brewster Buffalo too but no one is suggesting that they were an effective front line fighter, on any front.

 

[PAT303]

Depends on where you put them.

Wouldn't matter were you put them, A&AEE rated their speed at 290mph and climb under 2,000fpm, they would be as useless as P40's in the BoB. Over England, as long as they stay above 200mph and 15,000ft the Luftwaffe bombers would almost be immune to attack.

 

[PAT303]

I'm pretty certain an F4F could tackle a Bf 110 escort

Going off the spec's, the Bf 110 cruising speed is approx 15mph higher than the Martlet's max speed, the Bf's could bounce the Martlet's all day using superior speed and height.

 

[GrauGeist]

Going off the spec's, the Bf 110 cruising speed is approx 15mph higher than the Martlet's max speed, the Bf's could bounce the Martlet's all day using superior speed and height.

None of the Bf110's cruising speeds (even at 20,000 feet) were faster than the F4F/Martlet's max.
Be sure you're looking at the early Bf110 and not the G series.

 

[nuuumannn]

Wouldn't matter were you put them, A&AEE rated their speed at 290mph and climb under 2,000fpm, they would be as useless as P40's in the BoB. Over England, as long as they stay above 200mph and 15,000ft the Luftwaffe bombers would almost be immune to attack.

So, if you were planning on defending your country against attack and you had F4Fs, would you just leave them on the ground and just give up? No! You'd use them and the most sensible way of doing that would be getting them in a situation where their assets could be put to use. The RAF had Gladiators, Defiants and Blenheims tackling the Luftwaffe. They used whatever they could to defend the country. The Royal Navy used the Roc! If the Wildcats were there, they'd use them and find an advantage.

 

[nuuumannn]

Going off the spec's, the Bf 110 cruising speed is approx 15mph higher than the Martlet's max speed, the Bf's could bounce the Martlet's all day using superior speed and height.

Yet Wildcats were considered inferior to the A6M but plenty of A6Ms were shot down by pilots flying Wildcats. Heck, even Defiants and Gladiators shot Bf 109s down. The world is full of paradoxes...

 

[Greyman]

The low speed and climb would be very large issues -- but to the point Shortround continually tries to get across, the 1940 .5-inch Browning situation is not the same as the 1945 situation:

Cherry-picked from various A&AEE trials:

The gunnery installation of the Grumman aircraft received from the U.S.A. was not in a fit state to go straight to Fighter Squadrons. ... Certain features which are criticised in this report are not peculiar to the Grumman and may also be found in other American aircraft being supplied now or in the future. This applies particularly to .5" gun mountings and the STIA sight. Moreover, in view of the unreliable performance of the .5" Browning gun in its present form, it is essential that wherever it is installed, manual or pneumatic recocking gear should be fitted.

---

From these trials it is concluded that the functioning of the Colt .5" (export type) gun, at high altitude or even at a temperature of only -11°C is unreliable. As these guns are unreliable even at low altitudes and the Grumman gun heating system is quite ineffective, this conclusion is not surprising.

---

An immediate and comprehensive series of ground trials with the export type .5" gun is required. Judging by its performance during the trials in the Grumman aircraft at this Establishment, it is not a fit or suitable weapon for Service use in its present state. If the gun is to be used in quantity, it is considered vital that modifications should be introduced as soon as possible, as was necessary with the original .303" Browning, to ensure that the .5" gun functioning is brought up to the same standard and reliability as this gun has now attained.

---

I would like to record here a conversation I had at Boscombe Down with Commander Boone of the American Navy who was present for a time during the ground trials of the Grumman aircraft at the butts. He apparently knew in America they had had very similar troubles with these guns and remarked that no doubt we had experienced the guns jumping off their mountings etc. We also inquired if any trials had been done with the Brewster aircraft as it was known that the .5" guns in the fuselage would not lift the ammunition in the ammunition box if any G was experienced while the aircraft was manoeuvring.

He went on to say that they had to take every precaution during their firing trials and any high altitude firing together with violent manoeuvring of the aircraft was not allowed on the grounds of safety. Consequently their trials consisted of steady dives at ground targets and it was only within the last few months that they were beginning to find out their installation troubles.

Their instructions to their Aircraft Firms with regard to installing the guns had been based on ground trials and subsequently the effect of G on the gun and ammunition has been overlooked.

From the above conversation it would appear that we may be in for a pack of trouble in some of the aircraft coming from America ...

Captain Adams, R.D.Arm.1(a)
4 Nov 40

 

[PAT303]

So, if you were planning on defending your country against attack and you had F4Fs, would you just leave them on the ground and just give up?

Lucky for the British they had Hurricanes and Spitfires, if they used F4F's the pilots would do nothing more than watch the Luftwaffe bombers flying above them.

 

[PAT303]

Yet Wildcats were considered inferior to the A6M but plenty of A6Ms were shot down by pilots flying Wildcats. Heck, even Defiants and Gladiators shot Bf 109s down. The world is full of paradoxes...

Your argument is silly, the air war over England was fought at high altitudes, over 20,000 on average and many over 30,000ft, even the Hurricane struggled at times.

 

[PAT303]

None of the Bf110's cruising speeds (even at 20,000 feet) were faster than the F4F/Martlet's max.
Be sure you're looking at the early Bf110 and not the G series.

My error, just looked at the BoB site and it lists the 110 cruising speed at 250mph and top speed 350mph and time to 20,000ft of 9.2 minutes, the Martlet's top speed is 290mph and time to 20,000ft of 12.5 minutes, you are never going to catch a 110 if he doesn't want to be.

 

[Admiral Beez]

The Finns had success with the Brewster Buffalo too but no one is suggesting that they were an effective front line fighter, on any front.

The Finns and their Buffaloes were fighting a lot of uncompetitive Soviet aircraft, like the I-15 biplane. I would not want to use either the Buffalo or early Wildcat to intercept Ju-88, Do-17 or He-111 escorted by Bf-109. Both fighters are too slow, too underarmed. Against the plodding Ju-87 and Do-18 ASR they'd be fine, not sure about the Bf-110.

If Britain has Martlets in summer 1940 I'd want them all allocated to the FAA, not RAF Fighter Command. They'd be a good replacement for the Sea Gladiator and (in the fighter role) the Skua. Early FAA Martlet introduction may also kibosh the two-seat fighter plans. Once folding wings and better engines are available, surviving Martlets can be retrofitted. And, if Martlets are somehow available in quantity to Britain in summer 1940 we can assume Grumman has been churning them out since mid 1939, so Britain can consider licensing production at CC&F instead of Hurricanes.

 

[pbehn]

It would probably do OK outside the range of single engine fighters and its range would be useful, but it is another "type" and one that couldn't be rotated in and out of Kent.

 

[PAT303]

The RAF had the two best fighters in the world available to take on the Luftwaffe during the BoB, anything else would have ended in defeat, end of story.