Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
navydataman

US carrier fighter problem

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

9
[TF77V]
Members
14 posts
8,912 battles

A quote from the WOW post:

However, in this historical period, "fire" could be bracketed out because the armaments carried by fighters of the opposing sides were comparable. So, only altitude, speed, and maneuvering remain. Interestingly, "speed" is mentioned in the other two parameters of Pokryshkin's formula. Altitude is the opposite side of speed. By exchanging the kinetic energy of an aircraft for potential energy, we can gain altitude as our speed increases, and vice versa. This "energy exchange" is where the lion's share of combat maneuvering—the third element of the formula— comes from.

 

1) A6M fighter had no decent weapon for shooting through the armor on a Wildcat, Hellcat, or Corsair armor. They had a light gun and a 20mm cannon with low ROF, velocity, and range. The Us planes carried .50 caliber guns that could rip through armor, pilot, and engine block. You've got to be kidding or fooling yourself about guns.

2) Early on is was found that the US fighters were all faster than the Japanese planes, especially in a climb, so we shot the Japanese planes down on one pass and sped away for altitude if we missed, then came back. US fighters did not get into "dogfights" with Japanese fighters. They also used the scissors maneuver to take advantage of the Zekes.. Hellcats had a 13:1 kill ratio on Zeroes. 

3) USA was flying Bearcats and Mustangs from carriers by the end of the war (real airplanes). Not even the alleged A8M could keep up with that.

 

To see 14 Corsairs go up against 15 Japanese fighters with no ships around, and the Corsairs shoot down 1 or 2 while losing all 14 Corsairs is beyond belief. 

On the wikipedia page for the wildcat:

The Japanese ace Saburō Sakai described the Wildcat's capacity to absorb damage:

I had full confidence in my ability to destroy the Grumman and decided to finish off the enemy fighter with only my 7.7 mm machine guns. I turned the 20 mm cannon switch to the "off" position, and closed in. For some strange reason, even after I had poured about five or six hundred rounds of ammunition directly into the Grumman, the airplane did not fall, but kept on flying. I thought this very odd—it had never happened before—and closed the distance between the two airplanes until I could almost reach out and touch the Grumman. To my surprise, the Grumman's rudder and tail were torn to shreds, looking like an old torn piece of rag. With his plane in such condition, no wonder the pilot was unable to continue fighting! A Zero which had taken that many bullets would have been a ball of fire by now.

— Saburo Sakai, Zero[20]
 
 
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
97
Members
427 posts
1,608 battles

The article your refering too is more about post war WWI to well before WWII. the aircraft your talking about weren't even around yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
78
[KSC]
Members
268 posts
4,081 battles

You didn't exactly highlight any real game design problem, only a perceived historicity issue, so I have to ask what exactly is the problem with an arcade game abstracting planes to simple numbers for the sake of general balance? Clicking engagements are entirely RNG and can and will swing either way depending on luck alone, if all captain skills and modules are equal, iChase has a decent video showcasing this.

This isn't to mention that fighter locking should only be done as a last resort or when you have a certain advantage.

And on an unrelated note, no P-51Ds were ever operated from a carrier, F8F-1s, meanwhile, weren't ever used in combat during WWII, with VF-19 only becoming operational in May of 1945.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57
[DUCC]
[DUCC]
Alpha Tester
166 posts
2,686 battles

I too Love American stuff and think it's the best, however you're wrong on some stuff here as although America is the best other countries aren't terrible and shouldn't be discounted as such:

1. first part of this is wrong, the A6M was min-maxed for superiority in Dogfights, had 2 7.7s and 2 20mm which isn't a lackluster armament so in the beginning of the war it stomped US counterpart aircraft. Although I do agree on the fact that the .50s on US aircraft were pretty good

2. the reason US airmen switched over to Boom and Zoom tactics is because early on they found they were loosing handily at the super maneuverable A6M Zero whose pilots had more training from fighting the Chinese over Manchuria

3. with the exception of a 1 off prototype the P-51 did not operate off of Aircraft carriers during World war II is was an Army air force aircraft which required longer airfields for landing and take offs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,249 posts
9,061 battles

Air power on both sides became a decreasing  factor in the second half of the Pacific war as operations shifted to regaining territory and naval power shifted to a support role. By then skilled Japanese pilot ranks were so depleted it didn't really matter what they flew resulting in inevitable kamikaze runs and 'Turkey shoots'.

A6M was always over rated as a defensive fighter. If you cant keep your enemy from turning your carriers into flaming wreckage and defend your beaches from hordes of enemy landing craft what point is a superior turning radius? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,616
[OPRAH]
[OPRAH]
Beta Testers
6,129 posts
16,167 battles

What does any of that have to do with the game? Yes a game not a simulator!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
982 posts

The Wikipedia quote about the Wild Cat I always thought was about a  F6F.

Agree with the other posts. Sorry but OPs points cannot be supported. A lot of Aircraft either had paper designs, actual test aircraft or were flown from Carriers.

P-38 Design.

P-39 test aircraft

P-51Test aircraft

F5F test aircaft

Hurricane - Conversions, test and actual, 

Spitfire - Conversions, Test actual

Mosquito- Test and actual leading to Hornet

But.... Kinda hard to beat a F6F or Zero as you gotta consistently recover a usable aircraft.

P51 and Seafire have stupidly high stall speed. So you really would need wind and a lot of ship speed to recover.  British results with Seafire off Italy are awful. Tail hooks ripped out, crashes. Yet the British Wildcat, Corsair and F6F do a splendid job even from slow escort carriers and no wind during the invasion of Sicily.

 

 

Edited by Toxic_Potato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
353
[H-W-C]
Members
1,271 posts
3,613 battles

That particular article addresses the First World War, where pretty much everyone had one or two machine guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×