F-6F vs F-4U

I go with the F4U as the better all around performer...a lot of other folks listed the main reasons. F6F was built primarily as an air-to-air fighter, not dual roled like the Corsair.

Randolph AFB just had their airshow on the 1st and 2nd of Nov. We flew a 15 ship flyby for the 50th anniversary of the Tweet. As we were getting on the bus to go to Kelly the warbirds were cranking up. The power of the "U" bird was obvious and watching it do low altitude high speed passes was just awesome! Why do I model? Because unfortunately these magnificent flying machines won't be flying forever. When I can show someone a model, and tell them what it was all about, it means something to me, and believe me I can talk about airplanes!

Jim

Ah the Bearcat! What a plane! The Kalamazoo Air Zoo has one that they fly. If you ever get to stand along the fence there and watch it take to the air. . . Wow! The rate of climb for that plane is fabulous. I also wish the Tigercat could have played a role as well.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Trowbridge The "Hose Nose", "Whistling Death", the ol' "Bent Wing Bird". #1-They actually built the airplane around the engine. Although the Japanese at the time didn't really fear the Corsair it was the workhorse that kept the Marines in the fight. Over and out.

You forgot "ensign eliminator" that one was always my favorite.

The Corsair had a bit better performance than the Hellcat, but there were more Hellcats out there. I'd say it's a tie. Now the plane that would have really kicked some butt is the F8F Bearcat, it was just a hair too late.

The "Hose Nose", "Whistling Death", the ol' "Bent Wing Bird". #1-They actually built the airplane around the engine. Although the Japanese at the time didn't really fear the Corsair it was the workhorse that kept the Marines in the fight.

Over and out.

I prefer the F4U also. It was my dad's favorite aircraft and he used to tell me about seeing them when he was in the south pacific in 1945-46. I sure miss talking to him about aircraft. He was an aircraft mechanic in the Marines for a while and worked on SB2C Helldiver's.

Mike

The Corsair is a beautiful aircraft. She has classic lines like a '57Chevy Bel Air.
It looks like the Hellcat has the kind of lines that inspired the '87 Ford Tempo.

Well both have great strengths, but there is something about the Ole Bent Wing Wonder, I'd preffer the F4U not because of it's popularity but for the shear look of a Brut, the F6F is a great plane too and was very rugged but I think the Chance Vought design had more flexability like the F-16 of today's fighters it's small, very manuverable, and fast and is very forgiving on the maintainer

I'm not sure anyone mentioned it, but I always understood that the Corsair was more difficult to fly, especially land. My dad flew F4Fs and Corsairs in WWII and loved them both, but loved the ruggedness of the F4F that got him back to ship, and the beauty of the Corsair. He commented that the Corsair took some "getting used to" and was not a novice pilot's plane. I got the impression the F4F was fun to fly and he would have voted for that!

Matt

Actually, from what I understand, the F6F and F4U had extremely similar performance. This was done by design. The Navy gave Grumman a Corsair and had them make the Hellcat perform similarly, and Chance-Cought got a Hellcat for the same reason. This is detailed in an article by Grumman test pilot, Corky Meyer in an issue of Flight Journal from a year or two ago.

Regards,

-Drew

Hmmm...can I vote for my SBD Dauntless

While it was "Slow But Deadly", it did account for a high number of Japanese kills due to the rear gunner....and did really turn the tide in the Pacific in all of 7 minutes in June of 1942....so that's my pick!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Steve1971 It just goes to show when it comes to beauty nothing else matters. You can say all you want about the F4U but the fact remains the Hellcat was the best fighter in the pacific. Its records and how many ace's it produced proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt. Steve

Hey Steve, I'm not sure I'm following your logic. You can't throw the ace card in as proof of anything, otherwise you would have to start concluding things like, Germans were better pilots than Americans. I respect your opinion but these were both great planes. redknight38's post above is pretty much right on the mark.

Here comes an OPINION:
Best fighter or not, the Hellcat, bless it's heart, was one of the dumpiest, most boring designs of the war, axis or allied. Not quite ugly, but so non-descript and plain, it really never left an impact on me, visually. I've only built one kit, that being the the old 1/48 Monogram offering, and was never inspired to build another.

Of course, this doesn't detract one bit from the gratitude that I have for this great aircraft and the men who flew them for helping win the war, but I'm sure not inspired to model it.

The Corsair, on the other hand, is visually a magnificent design, possessing a dynamic charisma that appealed to me as a young modeler decades ago, and still does to this day. The first Corsair I built was once again the 1/48 Monogram offering, and from there I also built several 1/32 Revell kits, a few Hasegawa kits, and most recently, I bought the 1/32 Trumpeter F4U-4. This aircraft's incredible visual appeal inspired me to build more models of it than any other single aircraft.

Remember, this is all just one man's opinion!

It just goes to show when it comes to beauty nothing else matters. You can say all you want about the F4U but the fact remains the Hellcat was the best fighter in the pacific. Its records and how many ace's it produced proved that beyond a shadow of a doubt.


Steve

oohoohhoohoooohhhhh yeah the F2G. 3000+ horsepower. Just makes you wanna drool.................

I just say I've always liked the bent wing beauty. I think it is fairly safe to say it was a plane that was starting it's useful service life were as the Hellcat played its part but was a dated design. I really liked the F2G, what a monster!

I have an old Jane's Navy Fights book here somewhere that I nicked from the library in highschool, lol.

On the question of which aircraft is better, well, depends on how you want to use it and HOW you used it.

In terms of over-all flight performance, the F4U was faster, had a tighter turn radius (droppings its flaps it could turn with the Seafire and was able to maneuver with the Zero at high speeds), faster acceleration and a better roll rate. It's disadvantages included floating at ground effect when it was about to land, due to the large wing area, and it's infamous flaws when it came to carrier operations: stiff, bouncing oleos on the undercarriage, poor downward visiblity and the unpredictable drop of one wing at low speeds. The US Navy didn't clear it for carrier use until 1945, but the Marines used it from 1943 onwards, and they certainly didn't complain. The Corsair, however, was a 'world beater' with performance that could match any FW-190, P-51, A6M or Spitfire.

The Hellcat, on the other hand, was clearly, the inferior aircraft in terms of flight performance. BUT, it was ridiculously easy to mass-produce, it had greater range, it was easy to land and easy on the pilot. Because of this, it was used more extensively than the Corsair. Of the 6,477 aircraft that the US Navy destroyed in WW2, the Hellcat accounted for a staggering 5,256. Ace Lt. E. Valencia (23 kills) made the famous comment that "These Grummans are beautiful planes. If they could cook, I'd marry one."

To compare, here are some rough stats:

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/aviation/f6f_hellcat.htm

and

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/aviation/f4u_corsair.htm

berny13,

MY favorite, and my fighter-of-preference, is the F4U Corsair. It was in production from 1940 until 1954; it was in use a LOT longer than the Hellcat; and it was just bee-you-tee-ful to look at. I've read all of the articles about how the Hellcat had a greater kill ratio than the Corsair, but I think that might be because the Corsair was used a lot more in the air-to-ground role than the Hellcat. Because of this versatility on the part of the Corsair, the Navy didn't use the Hellcat much after WWII. It didn't even make it to Korea, if I remember correctly. The Corsair was used extensively during, and after, the Korean conflict. If the Hellcat was so much better, it seems that it would've stayed on front-line duty a lot longer than it did.

Incidentally, not that it matters much, but the designations should be F4U & F6F, not F-4U or F-6F. The dashes didn't come into play until 1962, when McNamara decided to go to a common designation system for all military aircraft, and decided to use the USAF system.

Hey Berny,
Well looky looky looky, somebody is one away from a 1000 posts
Congrats my friend....
BTW Beer and wings at Berny's place!!!!
PS so whats on your work bench right now Berny?
Flaps up, Mike

You are correct pixilater. I should have said "which do you prefer"

Butz, it has turned cold here. Today the temp was down to the low 70's. Had to put on a jacket when I went out.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Pixilater I don't really think that the term "better" is aplicable here. They both have different strengths & weaknesses

Thanks Pix, I actually ment to say that but after a long day at the border, it just sounded good at the time. I apologize
Flaps up, Mike

I don't really think that the term "better" is aplicable here. They both have different strengths & weaknesses, something that does not lend itself to comparison. Too many factors to consider "better & worse." You can, however, have a preference. I prefer the looks of a Corsair, and I am amazed by the ruggedness of the "Grumman Iron Works."

Hey Berny,
Long time no chat.. So hows Florida treating ya Expecting the white stuff soon here in good ol Niagara Falls
Anywho good topic. I feel that this is a kind of a hard one. Why you ask, each a/c had there pros and cons. Anybody could go on and on about which one was better than the other and vise versa.
I feel that the pilot was the one that made the a/c what it was/is. I forgot where I had read this but a test pilot said it the best, "if you had the most top of the line fighter plane and a not so top of the line fighter pilot, basically the results will be not so good".
Well I guess you could say I'm playin the 's advocate here
O'well have a good one and a early Happy Thanksgiving.
Flaps up, Mike