Corsair vs. Hellcat (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

wegman58 -> Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 5:01:00 PM)

Early 1944, I just had an encounter with the remnants of the IJN carrier force. I was underwhelmed with the performance of my Hellcats. Would I have done better with Corsairs?

I have some marine squadrons and enough to transition a squadron or two to Corsairs (the 2nd generation, NOT the ones without tailhooks).

Just wondering if it would be worth the effort.



GetAssista -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 5:46:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wegman58
Would I have done better with Corsairs?

Yes. Much faster, more manoeuvrable, better durability while the same firepower. What's not to like?



spence -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 6:44:31 PM)

While a more advanced model (F4U-4?), the Corsair continued in service into the Korean War. The F6F was relegated to training/replaced almost immediately following the war by the F8F.



rockmedic109 -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 7:20:57 PM)

Check your replacement rates. If you do not have enough to replace losses, you will need to keep on using the Hellcats. If you're not getting good results with the Hellcats, make sure your pilots are good. Send the worse pilots back to the pool and request a veteran.



Canoerebel -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 7:43:16 PM)

Hellcats in escort roles are toast - especially against good LBA fighters. Generally, Hellcats only do well in CAP roles against enemy fighters serving as escorts.



wegman58 -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 8:01:13 PM)

Thank you all.



Anachro -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 8:19:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hellcats in escort roles are toast - especially against good LBA fighters. Generally, Hellcats only do well in CAP roles against enemy fighters serving as escorts.


Pray for me when I face John's carrier-capable Jacks and Georges.



geofflambert -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/23/2019 11:56:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro


quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Hellcats in escort roles are toast - especially against good LBA fighters. Generally, Hellcats only do well in CAP roles against enemy fighters serving as escorts.


Pray for me when I face John's carried-capable Jacks and Georges.



Is that some kind of mod? Jacks and Georges are capable of being carried, is that what you mean?



JeffroK -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/24/2019 1:03:07 AM)

A little handle behind the cockpit.



rustysi -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/24/2019 5:44:35 PM)

quote:

Pray for me when I face John's carried-capable Jacks and Georges.


Unless playing a mod, these aircraft aren't CV capable.



Anachro -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/24/2019 6:44:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Pray for me when I face John's carried-capable Jacks and Georges.


Unless playing a mod, these aircraft aren't CV capable.


This is John's BTS mod and yes they are carrier-capable in it. [:D][8D]



Macclan5 -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/25/2019 2:35:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Pray for me when I face John's carried-capable Jacks and Georges.


Unless playing a mod, these aircraft aren't CV capable.


This is John's BTS mod and yes they are carrier-capable in it. [:D][8D]


Are ME 262 also Carrier Capable ? Or rather the Nakajima Kikka ?

I would assume so...

[8D]



Canoerebel -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/25/2019 2:44:41 PM)

In one of my early games vs. John III (probably a WitP match, not AE), he had a mod in which he'd made Jacks carrier capable. Apparently a lively discussion erupted in his AAR, for he ultimately decided not to deploy them on carriers in the game. Something must've changed since then?



GetAssista -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/25/2019 4:18:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Something must've changed since then?

Progress! Japanese scientists have worked around the clock and finally found a solution [:)]



RangerJoe -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/26/2019 2:37:17 AM)

Nope, maybe they can take off from the carrier but not land on the carrier . . .



BillBrown -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/26/2019 3:00:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

Pray for me when I face John's carried-capable Jacks and Georges.


Unless playing a mod, these aircraft aren't CV capable.


This is John's BTS mod and yes they are carrier-capable in it. [:D][8D]


I am in the same boat. I took on a BTSL 5.4 game and then realized that both the Jack and George
are carrier capable. This means that the USN will never have a carrier fighter that is equal or better
the the IJN.



Cavalry Corp -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (2/28/2019 3:36:38 PM)

In my game of RA 7.9 the Japanese player accelerated the second-generation George which is on his CV and produced in vast numbers. Even at the beginning of 1944 I do not really want to face his carriers. The George has also very much slow the advance of the allies on the ground and it manages to get bombers through to ships quite easily.



Big B -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 3:18:11 AM)

The F6F Hellcat under-performs in this game, especially compared to the F4U Corsair.
Both were excellent types for their era.
But the Hellcat did not earn the highest kill ratio of any fighter in the PTO for nothing.

The Hellcat was a bit lighter, with a larger wing, and lower wing loading - along with Better High-Altitude performance than the F4U, with the same engine-supercharger combo, and horsepower.
The game mechanics short the Hellcat in regards to it's true performance envelope, and in the stock game the Hellcats top speed is shortened - it was only about 20mph slower in top speed over most models, but more maneuverable, better altitude performance, and an easier carrier operated fighter - with about The Lowest maintenance requirements of the war.
The US Navy and Marines kept the F4U after the war because more development was done later as a fighter-bomber...when Fighters were transitioned to jets, but that is no reflection on either's WW2 record and performance in the Day-Fighter role.

EDIT: Remember the Marines got the Corsair first...before the Navy.
The Marines then and now - ALWAYS get the cast-offs...it has never changed.
Now ask yourself - Why did the Navy cast off the Corsair in favor of the Hellcat?



HansBolter -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 12:04:55 PM)

Wasn't it primarily deck performance issues that caused the Navy to choose the Hellcat over the Corsair?

The large prop, effecting the angle at which the aircraft sat at on deck, and the far to the rear set cockpit of the Corsair made pilot visibility while maneuvering on deck a challenge.




Gewehr_43 -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 1:35:05 PM)

I noticed this too. I was so excited to start getting the Hellcat in numbers, but when I put them on a fighter sweep over a Japanese base with A6M3s, they got cut to ribbons. My pilots were at a 77 experience level, so they weren't novices by any stretch.



IdahoNYer -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 4:12:46 PM)

Even with DBB-C mod, Hellcat seems to underperform. Still seems to do well against the various Zero models, but not as well as I "think" it should, based on its history. But then again, in the actual war, the Hellcat was up against a much depleted pilot pool - poorly trained for the most part. In WiTP, the pilots the Hellcats face in the game are usually equal to their opponents.

Still, Corsair is superior, and its a good day when the -1A appears to be able to get it on CVs! 36 Hellcats with 12 Corsairs is mighty fine mix for US CVs in '44!!



HansBolter -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 4:56:47 PM)

36 of each is an even better mix in '45.



Anachro -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/7/2019 4:59:40 PM)

@Big B Does you mod attempt to address the under-powered nature of the Hellcat in stock/DBB-C?



Big B -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/9/2019 3:35:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

@Big B Does you mod attempt to address the under-powered nature of the Hellcat in stock/DBB-C?


Yes, it's faster than stock (speeds taken from US Navy performance tests here) and more maneuverable - but still based on the same universal maneuver formulas for all aircraft in the game.



Saturn V -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/10/2019 6:37:07 AM)

In terms of the performance characteristics in-game, below are some figures from the game, if I'm remembering them correctly. These may not quite be the right models for the time period given in the opening post, but hopefully the comparison might still be helpful.

F6F-5 Hellcat
Max. speed: 380 mph
Cruise speed: 200 mph
Ceiling: 37,300 ft
Climb: 2,980 ft/min
Radius: 255 nm
Extended radius: 320 nm
Range: 820 nm
Maneuver rating by altitude band:
below 10,000 ft: 19
10,000–15,000 ft: 19
16,000–20,000 ft: 19
21,000–31,000 ft: 19
above 32,000 ft: 16

F4U-1D Corsair
Max. speed: 425 mph
Cruise speed: 182 mph
Ceiling: 39,300 ft
Climb: 3,120 ft/min
Radius: 220 nm
Extended radius: 275 nm
Range: 705 nm
Maneuver rating by altitude band:
below 10,000 ft: 19
10,000–15,000 ft: 19
16,000–20,000 ft: 19
21,000–31,000 ft: 17
above 32,000 ft: 13


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Wasn't it primarily deck performance issues that caused the Navy to choose the Hellcat over the Corsair?

The large prop, effecting the angle at which the aircraft sat at on deck, and the far to the rear set cockpit of the Corsair made pilot visibility while maneuvering on deck a challenge.

As I recall, there were three main issues: (1) poor visibility over the nose during carrier landing approaches; (2) too much bounce in the gear upon landing; (3) a propensity to enter a spin when stalling at low speed. All of these issues were eventually rectified and the fighter entered service on USN carriers. (The RN had already been using it successfully aboard its carriers for some time before that.)



AndrewNguyen1984 -> RE: Corsair vs. Hellcat (3/10/2019 10:20:47 PM)

Were there any database updates in the game to try and address the issue and put a better match on the Hellcat's performance. If so, can these be used for the standard databases for the stock scenarios.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.827881