Would it be an exaggeration to say that the F4F and the early-war Zero/Oscar variants were an even match for each other overall? Pop history seems to be bent on implying that the Wildcat was at a disadvantage overall, but looking at the performance of both planes during Guadalcanal, the Coral Sea, Santa Cruz etc, the amount of A2A kills scored by each side are relatively even. Neither of them seemed to have been able to get a really clear upper hand over the other.
https://chuckhawks.com/1v1_zero_wildcat.htm
>>65504773F4Fs without folding wings were much more nimble than those with them, only the late-war F4Fs with better engines could reach the speeds of the pre-folding F4Fs.with proper tactics the F4F's without folding wings would have an advantage due to generally higher optimal operating altitudes.
>>65504773>>65504876>>65504940If the era in question is pre-1943 (before the F6F Hellcat arrived) the F4F-3 and -4 were not as nimble at lower speeds as the Zero, even though the Wildcat's roll rate was good. A6M, obviously, had a weaker airframe and was more susceptible to machine gun fire but it was a sports car compared to the heavier Wildcat overall in performance (except in diving speed).Yes in terms of the two planes' capabilities and those of each side's pilots they were roughly equally matched at that specific time/place.All of this became moot after 1942 with new training regimes and tactics against Japanese fighter aircraft for USAAF/USN/USMC pilots, and the arrival of more powerful faster aircraft such as the P-47, F4U, and (especially on carriers) F6F.The later war FM-2 Wildcat (as discussed on recent /k/ topic threads) was a several hundred pounds lighter development of the preceding -4 variant with a single-row radial engine that had more power: so it was faster, better handling than early heavier, less powerful Wildcat variants, although only to low and medium altitude which was its restricted performance envelope (that was fine for the small escort carrier CAP and anti-submarine, also some light CAS duties that it performed the final 18 months of the war because the bigger more powerful fighters like F6F were now front line in the allies' Pacific air combat and, in the Atlantic where it was accompanying TBMs from CVEs against submarines, there wasn't a great Luftwaffe air threat post-1943)Here's the Pacific air combat thread 65453205see 65456317Avenger pilot's comparison F4F v. F6F thread 65485278see >>65487239 and >>65487432Earlier Wildcat thread (some discussion of FM-2 variant)https://desuarchive.org/k/65399215(the system wouldn't let me fully embedlink the ^^posts, put a '>>' in front of those numbers)
>>65504996Embed links for these other Wildcat-related threads—Here's the Pacific air combat thread >>65453205see >>65456317Avenger pilot's comparison F4F v. F6F thread >>65485278
>>65505014>Embed links [system won't permit more than 4 in one post]Avenger pilot's comparison F4F v. F6F thread >>65485278see >>65487239 and >>65487432 (contrast of later model FM-2 with earlier Wildcats)
>>65504996>>65505014>Pacific air combat thread >see 65456317 <--INCORRECTWrong "see" post, for that thread.Here is the correct one: >>65465659
>>65505032Correction, again>>65456569
>>65505036>>65505032>>65505020>>65505014>>65504996yeah i made that thread too. thanks for the dumb spam i guess
>>65504773nah, the Zero still had an edge overall. In some fields like sheer operational range it was a pretty large and clear edge.The F4F-3 and 4 weren't nearly as much of an underdog as the documentaries say, but it still wasn't a truly even match; most sane pilots would rather be flying a Zero against one rather than vice versa given the choice. the FM2 was a solid match or superior in essentially all respects, though.
>>65507211All wildcat had to do was stay above zero and wait for it to attempt climbing or dive from the top without getting caught in a turn fight, this is the winning strategy that works even better in groups. Zero can't catch up or turn with you at higher altitudes and can't dive with you so it has to dodge and wait until you stop doing the tactics and expose yourself.FM2 had only recovered the performance F4F-4 lost going from -3 without sacrificing the folding wings which were obviously a massive boon when it comes to the numbers of planes fielded and deployed from a carrier.
>>65507250yes, I know that F4F pilots more or less perfected tactics to maximize their potential against single-engine Japanese fighters even before the F6F came along. that doesn't discount the fact that the A6M was the all-around better performing airframe.
>>65507325It wasn't "all-around better performing airframe" because it couldn't compete against or imitate the winning tactics, no matter how tight it could turn at 100mph.
F4F killed Zeros and if they couldn't they just dived and Zeroes couldn't follow.
>>65507211>FM2 was a solid match or superior in essentially all respectsWrong.First of all (as already referenced in ^^^prior threads) the FM-2 didn't appear on the front lines until late 1943. By that time of the war, later variants of the A6M such as the 5 with bigger guns and armor, had appeared along with the F6F Hellcat on fleet carriers. The front lines of Pacific air combat had already been passed to a next-generation of machines. The FM-2 was a second-line small fighter aircraft deployed (mostly) on CVEs in the anti-submarine escort role; it only served during the final 18 months of World War II. Yes there were FM-2 air combat encounters and aces but that wasn't the FM-2s primary task or combat experience during this closing stage of the war. The FM-2 was several hundred pounds lighter than earlier Wildcats and yes it climbed faster to medium altitude, handled better but: as also explained previously, by late 1943 the 'twisting dogfight' tactics for the allied pilots in the Pacific, flying their new heavier much more powerful and faster fighters, had long ago been discarded. Sure, if it came down to it an FM-2 pilot could choose to turn-n'-burn with some Zero in that kind of lower-altitude dogfight but wouldn't have been the trained doctrine. The FM-2 was also—due to its minimal-weight stripped down design—equipped with just four .50 cal guns in contrast to the 1943-and-later allied naval fighters mostly having six .50s. In a certain way it could be said that the FM-2 was the plane that the 1941-42 Wildcat "ought to" have been back then (for Guadalcanal etc.) but the technology and war overall had moved on; everything and all the machines themselves had likewise cranked another notch, or more, upward.If you want to compare the FM-2 to a pre-1943 A6M Zero and say it's 'superior', fine; but that's alt-history.
>>65507440>Wrong.typical preface to a terrible response
>>65507771>derpThis OP topic is retarded, (You) are a brainlet, and whatever the fuck purpose of posting this on /k/ Catalog was already resolved-answered in several other /k/ discussions of the past few months.
