Does anybody know if Corsairs or Hellcats ever engaged Bf-109's or Fw-190's?
If so, what were the results?
History Club
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Military history and past events only. Rants or inflamitory comments will be removed.
Hosted by Frank Amato
Corsairs against Luftwaffe?
LuckyBlunder
Member Since: February 02, 2006
entire network: 273 Posts
KitMaker Network: 107 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 - 05:23 PM UTC
armouredcharmer
Member Since: June 09, 2009
entire network: 670 Posts
KitMaker Network: 70 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 - 06:20 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Does anybody know if Corsairs or Hellcats ever engaged Bf-109's or Fw-190's?
If so, what were the results?
IIRC Hellcats of the Royal Navy did duel with FW 190`s,this was the first time that lend-lease (american) aircraft scored victories against the luftwaffe with The Hellcat`s coming out on top.
If any one can elaborate further Please do.
mmeier
Member Since: October 22, 2008
entire network: 1,280 Posts
KitMaker Network: 213 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 - 07:01 AM UTC
F4F Wildcats (British name Martlet) where active against the germans and downed some german planes see here. Those should be the "first to score" given the timeframe
The Hellcat (Gannet) came later in two batches (1943 and 1944). They did participate in operations against Norway and fought german fighters there. See here
The Hellcat (Gannet) came later in two batches (1943 and 1944). They did participate in operations against Norway and fought german fighters there. See here
markvs
Member Since: December 23, 2005
entire network: 70 Posts
KitMaker Network: 19 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 - 09:46 PM UTC
they were certainly there, as the us didn't want them , ( too dangerous) at first so they gave the to the brits to sort out the problems.
So they must have been in theatre and as such presumably conducted ops against other aircraft?
So they must have been in theatre and as such presumably conducted ops against other aircraft?
casailor
Member Since: June 22, 2007
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 09:06 AM UTC
They weren't given to the Brits to sort out the problems. They were made available to the Brits since the US Navy didn't want them. Vought worked out the visibility and landing-bounce problems fairly quickly after they failed the initial deck trials, but by then the Navy had decided to standardize on the Hellcat. The only modification the Brits made was to bob the wingtips so they would fit in the lower clearence of the Brit carrier hangers.
That being said, I don't know of any combat between Corsairs and German fighters. I think that the Corsair would have been very effective against the 109 and 190. It would have been faster, more agile and faster climbing and diving.
That being said, I don't know of any combat between Corsairs and German fighters. I think that the Corsair would have been very effective against the 109 and 190. It would have been faster, more agile and faster climbing and diving.
trickymissfit
Member Since: October 03, 2007
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 06:07 PM UTC
Quoted Text
They weren't given to the Brits to sort out the problems. They were made available to the Brits since the US Navy didn't want them. Vought worked out the visibility and landing-bounce problems fairly quickly after they failed the initial deck trials, but by then the Navy had decided to standardize on the Hellcat. The only modification the Brits made was to bob the wingtips so they would fit in the lower clearence of the Brit carrier hangers.
That being said, I don't know of any combat between Corsairs and German fighters. I think that the Corsair would have been very effective against the 109 and 190. It would have been faster, more agile and faster climbing and diving.
I don't know about what you said in your post! My ex wife's uncle worked at Freeman Field right after WWII, and he had a different story. And there's little doubt that a TA152H would have ate up a Corsair in everyway. Maybe an A-8.
gary
russamotto
Member Since: December 14, 2007
entire network: 3,389 Posts
KitMaker Network: 625 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 - 06:39 PM UTC
F6F-5 Hellcats of VOF-1, flying off of CVE-72, USS Tulagi, August 1944. Ens. A.R. Wood and E. W. Olszewski claimed 4 kills against German aircraft. Don't know what they shot down. I believe this was while providing cover for the landings in Southern France.
collin26
Member Since: March 24, 2007
entire network: 317 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 03:09 AM UTC
I am a huge fan of the Corsair but.......It is my humble opinion that the Corsair would not have faired well against the 190 series...the later D9 and TA-152 in particular. These aircraft had outstanding high altitude flight characteristics. I am no expert but it's seems like the corsair was not intended for higher altitudes. I guess it all comes down to venue and pilot anyway.
As mentioned before, the brits modified the corsairs and had a considerable number of them, I don't see why they would not have seen combat. Is it possible that they tangled with 109's or 109 A8's in the Med?
As mentioned before, the brits modified the corsairs and had a considerable number of them, I don't see why they would not have seen combat. Is it possible that they tangled with 109's or 109 A8's in the Med?
Frenchy
Member Since: December 02, 2002
entire network: 12,719 Posts
KitMaker Network: 69 Posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 04:46 AM UTC
collin26
Member Since: March 24, 2007
entire network: 317 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 06:34 AM UTC
Excelent input Frenchy. That sheds a whole bunch of light on this question!
trickymissfit
Member Since: October 03, 2007
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
Posted: Friday, May 07, 2010 - 05:55 PM UTC
considering that is a 1941 era plane compaired to a 1944 era plane. Why not do the D-9 compairison? They found out at Freeman Field that the ME109K4 was an equale match for anything we had when pilots were equale. They also found out that a Mustang was in trouble when it met a D-9. I don't think they flew any TA152's down there, but for some odd reason every few years they show up with metal detectors looking for parts to fit a TA 152H down there. My wife's Uncle Raymond worked at Freeman Field, and witnessed much of the flying back in the day.
gary
jowady
Member Since: June 12, 2006
entire network: 1,027 Posts
KitMaker Network: 115 Posts
entire network: 1,027 Posts
KitMaker Network: 115 Posts
Posted: Saturday, May 08, 2010 - 07:01 AM UTC
Quoted Text
they were certainly there, as the us didn't want them , ( too dangerous) at first so they gave the to the brits to sort out the problems.
So they must have been in theatre and as such presumably conducted ops against other aircraft?
When the US Navy turned down the Corsair as a carrier based fighter it was used to great effect by the US Marines as well as IIRC a couple of Navy shore based squadrons.
LuckyBlunder
Member Since: February 02, 2006
entire network: 273 Posts
KitMaker Network: 107 Posts
Posted: Sunday, May 09, 2010 - 08:46 PM UTC
Excellent replies. Frenchy, that paper on the test flying was great.
Looking at it from a design-for-need problem, it seems that we may be looking at the differences in in design of an airplane intended to fight high altitude bombers vs airplanes intended for dogfighting this was touched on the the report)
One aspect that hasn't been mentioned is that both the US planes where carrier planes and therefore carried heavier and more robust airframe and several hundred pounds of arresting gear that wasn't required in the FW or Me. I am surprised that they were more manuverable than the FW.
In any case, I've got a better picture of things now - Thanks guys.
Looking at it from a design-for-need problem, it seems that we may be looking at the differences in in design of an airplane intended to fight high altitude bombers vs airplanes intended for dogfighting this was touched on the the report)
One aspect that hasn't been mentioned is that both the US planes where carrier planes and therefore carried heavier and more robust airframe and several hundred pounds of arresting gear that wasn't required in the FW or Me. I am surprised that they were more manuverable than the FW.
In any case, I've got a better picture of things now - Thanks guys.
Delta-Papa
Member Since: October 27, 2009
entire network: 69 Posts
KitMaker Network: 22 Posts
Posted: Sunday, May 09, 2010 - 09:08 PM UTC
Not 100% on topic, interesting none the less 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1274292/Buried-Welsh-beach-60-years-World-War-II-fighter-emerged-seas.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1274292/Buried-Welsh-beach-60-years-World-War-II-fighter-emerged-seas.html
Rubicon
Member Since: February 18, 2009
entire network: 125 Posts
KitMaker Network: 13 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - 01:31 PM UTC
The Corsair was on U.S. Carriers by late 44.
Some flown by USMC squadrons, because with the Kamikaze threat they needed more fighters.
The Corsair would do just fine fighting the 190s series.
If you want to give it a try there is a flightsim called Aceshigh.
www.hitechcreations.com you can get a free two week trial for online play. The flight models are very accurate, far more so then games like IL2. The creators only use actual flight test documents for the models.
The F4U handles all the 190s just fine. Even the very early -1s without the improved canopy and raised cockpit.
The only real advantage the 190 has is firepower and a slight roll rate advantage.
The main reason it did not make it onto Carriers earlier in the war was NOT due to its problems, it was due to the Navy not having any spare parts in the pipeline, VF-17 was going to take them to combat and they were fully CV qualified on them, but the Navy due to the supply problem told them they would have to switch to the F6f or go shore based.
This is all documented in many references, like Corsair the F4u in WW2, by Barret Tillman and Corsair aces of WW2 by Mark Sterling.
Also look into Whistling death by Boone Guyton and The Scull and crossbones squadron VF-17 in WW2.
Some flown by USMC squadrons, because with the Kamikaze threat they needed more fighters.
The Corsair would do just fine fighting the 190s series.
If you want to give it a try there is a flightsim called Aceshigh.
www.hitechcreations.com you can get a free two week trial for online play. The flight models are very accurate, far more so then games like IL2. The creators only use actual flight test documents for the models.
The F4U handles all the 190s just fine. Even the very early -1s without the improved canopy and raised cockpit.
The only real advantage the 190 has is firepower and a slight roll rate advantage.
The main reason it did not make it onto Carriers earlier in the war was NOT due to its problems, it was due to the Navy not having any spare parts in the pipeline, VF-17 was going to take them to combat and they were fully CV qualified on them, but the Navy due to the supply problem told them they would have to switch to the F6f or go shore based.
This is all documented in many references, like Corsair the F4u in WW2, by Barret Tillman and Corsair aces of WW2 by Mark Sterling.
Also look into Whistling death by Boone Guyton and The Scull and crossbones squadron VF-17 in WW2.
trickymissfit
Member Since: October 03, 2007
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
entire network: 1,388 Posts
KitMaker Network: 31 Posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 - 04:12 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The Corsair was on U.S. Carriers by late 44.
Some flown by USMC squadrons, because with the Kamikaze threat they needed more fighters.
The Corsair would do just fine fighting the 190s series.
If you want to give it a try there is a flightsim called Aceshigh.
www.hitechcreations.com you can get a free two week trial for online play. The flight models are very accurate, far more so then games like IL2. The creators only use actual flight test documents for the models.
The F4U handles all the 190s just fine. Even the very early -1s without the improved canopy and raised cockpit.
The only real advantage the 190 has is firepower and a slight roll rate advantage.
The main reason it did not make it onto Carriers earlier in the war was NOT due to its problems, it was due to the Navy not having any spare parts in the pipeline, VF-17 was going to take them to combat and they were fully CV qualified on them, but the Navy due to the supply problem told them they would have to switch to the F6f or go shore based.
This is all documented in many references, like Corsair the F4u in WW2, by Barret Tillman and Corsair aces of WW2 by Mark Sterling.
Also look into Whistling death by Boone Guyton and The Scull and crossbones squadron VF-17 in WW2.
one more time: with equale pilots and a full combat load out; the D-9 would own any Navy fighter that saw service in WWII. A TA 152 would have turned the dog fight into something very ugly. But to take this a step deeper; the later MK. Spitfires would have done better than the Corsair
gary
mmeier
Member Since: October 22, 2008
entire network: 1,280 Posts
KitMaker Network: 213 Posts
Posted: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 - 12:41 AM UTC
@LuckyBlunder
The FW190 was designed as a "multi purpose" plane that could also do ground attacks. This resulted in the plane carrying quite a bit of armor, quite likely compensating for the weight of the arrestor gear
The FW190 was designed as a "multi purpose" plane that could also do ground attacks. This resulted in the plane carrying quite a bit of armor, quite likely compensating for the weight of the arrestor gear
casailor
Member Since: June 22, 2007
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 12:56 PM UTC
If you match a 1941 FW190 agains a 1941 Corsair, the corsair would be faster, faster climbing and at low and medium altitude more agile. At high altitude, the FW190 would be faster climbing, but still slower and the F4U could always disengage by diving. The P47 was successful againd FW190s and Me109s by using its advantages, higher speed and roll rate and the F4U was faster than an early moodel P47. If you want to put up a Corsair against a TA152 or FW190D, You would go to a FG1 which would be much faster and more agile at any altitude. You have to compare apples to apples. Also the 30MM cannons on the TA154 and FW190 were short ranged and slow firing, not very effective against agile fighters They were both high altitude bomber interceptors, not designed for fighter to fighter combat.
casailor
Member Since: June 22, 2007
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
entire network: 165 Posts
KitMaker Network: 56 Posts
Posted: Saturday, May 29, 2010 - 07:36 PM UTC
It would have been interesting to see a fight between the Dora and an F8F. The production runs were about the same, and they were close to being conyemporarys. One thing that jumped out to me about the test flights was that the Corsair and the Hellcat were both about two tons heavier than the FW190 as tested. Even at that they were equal or better in everything but climb rate at low to medium altitude which was the arena they were designed to fight in. Also, if I read the specs right the Corsair tested had the skinny, three bladed prop, not the paddle blade four blade late prop. Based onthe performance gain of the P47 with the same engine, prop configeration the speed and climb rate would have been substantionally increased.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 KitMaker Network and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.