'So If You Were Going Into A 1v1 Combat Situation...'

[Panther_99FS]

Would you want to be flying an F6F-5 Hellcat or Fw 190A-5 Butcherbird :ques:

[MudMarine]

Would you want to be flying an F6F-5 Hellcat or Fw 190A-5 Butcherbird :ques:

Either!:icon_lol: Actually the Kitty! Takes more damage and keeps ticking! I also like 6 .50 cals!

[Panther_99FS]

If memory serves correct,
The British shot down a couple of Focke-Wulfs with Hellcats....

(Then again, my memory might not be correct) :kilroy:

[Pips]

I've always had a soft spot for the F6F (thanks to Barrett Tillman and his excellent series of books :)), but in a fight I'd choose the Fw190. Fast, best roll rate around, four kick-ass cannon and very rugged.

Yep, the F6F did have a run in with Me109's and Fw190's Occurred on 8 May 1944 off the coast of Norway. F6F's from No. 800 Squadron were escorting Barracuda's and were bounced by a mix of 109's and 190's. Two F6F's and four Barracuda's went down for two Germans - one 109 and one 190.

[CodyValkyrie]

Probably the FW-190. It isn't bound by the restrictions of carrier ops and from what I understand more maneuverable.

[Shane Olguin]

Fw-190. MUCH heavier armament, much greater speed. The only thing it lacks is the ability to turn with the Hellcat due to its higher wing loading. The speed diferential is the most telling aspect of the fight. The 190 can disengage at will whereas the Hellcat cannot.

[MudMarine]

The most telling aspect in air to air combat is experience and agression. Know when to fight or run........both planes are excellent.

[CodyValkyrie]

Mud is right naturally, but if I was going on the merits of the plane alone, I still say FW190 any day.

Still love that radial on the F6F though... Classic lines baby!

[Piglet]

If I had to fly the Fw-190, I would fight in the vertical, and tuning fight if in the Hellcat. The Hellcat can be horsed around quite a bit, while the FW had nasty stall departures, but nothing can match it's half-roll and dive.
Both had radials, so both bled energy faster than inline engine flighters.
Overall pilot skill would decide, just too close to call.
Now gimme a FW-190-D9....

[MudMarine]

Any good Hellkitty pilot wouldn't get into a turn and burn. I'd just zoom and boom! Only fight on YOUR terms! Ask the greatest fighter pilot ever, Eric Hartmann, he only shot when everything was to his advantage.

[fliger747]

If you are in a fair fight, you already made your first mistake.

Different airplanes for different theaters. Out over the Pacific, without the Hellcat's fuel reserves, the FW could be at a real tactical disadvantage. Close to base, both with adequate fuel and ammo, perhaps an advantage to the FW. But the 190 wouldn't have been worth much of anything employed in the drive across the Pacific.

Winkle Brown comes to a similar conclusion. Rating the F6F as about the best naval fighter ever and perhaps the most significant fighter of WWII (at least in the Pacific).

T.

[Pips]

Different airplanes for different theaters.


So true. In the Pacific the F6F held decided advantages in speed, climb, numbers and hitting power over it's most common opponent, the Type 0 fighter. Whereas the short legged Fw190 would have been limited in scope.

In Europe though the F6F would have been eaten by both the Me109 and the Fw190. None of it's advantages in the Pacific translate to Europe, leaving it at a decided disadvantage. Especially so given that fights often took place at greater altitudes, for which the mid-altitude designed F6F wasn't necessarily suited to.

Now the P-51 transcended all theatres in all conditions. It truly was the greatest fighter of that era.

[GT182]

Fliger747 and Pips are both spot on. ;)

An Me-109G4 would be a good match too.

[Bjoern]

Fw-190A5.

My first choice would be a 109G-10 though.

[Warrant]

Fw-190A5.

My first choice would be a 109G-10 though.


Second that :cost1:

[Antoninus]

The Fw-190A5, simply because it's faster and can outclimb the Hellcat. Thus I can always try to run away if the situation becomes critical.

B.t.w. There is a "Report of comparative combat evaluation of Fw-190A5/U4 airplane" from early 1944 available. The US Nayv tested a captured Fw 190 against new F4U-1D and F6F-3 planes. Very interesting read.

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id90.htm

[Killbilly]

The Fw-190A5, simply because it's faster and can outclimb the Hellcat. Thus I can always try to run away if the situation becomes critical.

B.t.w. There is a "Report of comparative combat evaluation of Fw-190A5/U4 airplane" from early 1944 available. The US Nayv tested a captured Fw 190 against new F4U-1D and F6F-3 planes. Very interesting read.

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id90.htm


Wow. That was a very interesting read. Thanks, Antoninus!

It also confirmed my suspicions that the Hellcat would be preferable. Yes, the 190 has the climb and dive advantage (which makes it an excellent boom-and-zoom fighter), but the advantage is not marked enough to offset the far superior maneuverability of the F6F. The 190 may be able to bug out if things got dicey, but given experienced pilots and no advantage for either pilot at the outset, I think the Hellcat is more likely to get the kill.

[Mathias]

The Fw190 in that report has obvious problems with it's ailerons, supposedly from repair or missadjustment.
The mentiond aileron reversal is a solid hint as no other test be it German or British mentions any such behaviour.
"Stall without warning" is another hint, this happens only with bad ailerons on the Fw190. Properly adjusted Fw190 ailerons give a warning before the stall.
Those sort of field mock tests are to be taken with a grain of salt anyway. Familiarity with enemy equipment is one point.