Corsair and Hellcat Vs. Bf 109 and Fw 190
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- Could the F4U Corsair and or the F6F Hellcat have fought and won again the Luftwaffe's Bf 109 and Fw 190? We will compare speeds, climb rates, dive speed, maneuverability and more.
If they could have competed, why didn't the USAAF use them? While we are looking at this we will take a look at Equivalent Airspeed or EAS, and learn some surprising facts about the Brewster Buffalo, facts I'm quite sure have never been on youtube before.
The Official auto and Air Fan Store is Here!
gregs-airplane...
Please support the channel:
/ gregsairplanesandautom...
Paypal: mistydawne2010@yahoo.com
My P-47 video on Mach numbers: • P-47 Thunderbolt Pt. 2...
Ryan Szimanski's awesome video about the Scharnhorst in which he talks about Naval Armor strategies: • Scharnhorst If you like naval stuff, you don't want to miss any of Ryan's videos.
A lot of people have commented that the Hellcat's design had nothing to do with encounters with the Zero, or study of the Akutan Zero. I disagree. Here are my supporting facts:
1. The Akutan Zero was recovered and shipped to Seattle where it arrived on August 1st 1942.
2. Data about the plane was transmitted to Grumman and others as soon as possible. From the book The Grumman Story " After careful study, Roy Grumman decided that he could match or surpass the Zero in most respects, except in range, without sacrificing pilot armor, self-sealing tanks and fuselage structure. The new F6F Hellcat would compensate for the extra weight with additional power."
3. The Akutan Zero was repaired and first flew in US hands on Sept. 20th 1942, but they had been studying it since they got it.
4. The first production Hellcat first flew on Oct. 2nd 1942.
5. The following statement is on Wikipedia, with multiple sources to back it up "This first Double Wasp-equipped Hellcat airframe, bearing Bauer serial number 02982, first flew on 30 July 1942. The F6F-3 subtype had been designed with specific "Wildcat vs Zero" input from Battle of the Coral Sea and Battle of Midway veteran F4F pilots such as Jim Flatley and Jimmy Thach, respectively, among several others, obtained during a meeting with Grumman Vice President Jake Swirbul at Pearl Harbor on 23 June 1942, with the first production F6F-3 making its first flight just over three months later, on October 3, 1942"
The bottom line is that Grumman had been designing the Hellcat before the Wildcat's met Zero's but made huge changes to it based on reports from the War. The biggest change was the switch from the R-2600 to the R-2800, which was huge, and they were very clear that this was based on "specific Wildcat vs. Zero" input from the war. Furthermore, we know that Grumman had studied the Zero and while I doubt any major changes came from the study of the Akutan Zero specifically, having the ability to study it was a huge advantage. Even if they made no changes to the Hellcat at that point, which is unlikely, it still helped by letting them know they were on the right track.
Roger B. Taney. When I say almost nobody knows who he is, I'm referring to the man, not the actions of the supreme court while he was there. Yes, he delivered a famous pro slavery verdict. This terrible decision was a 7-2 vote essentially in favor of slavery. My point is that the man, not the history of slavery is an obscure foot note, and if anything, changing the name of the ship is causing him to be more well known.
Here is my evidence for this. At the time my video came out there were only about a half dozen youtube videos about Roger B. Taney. Of those, many have been up for years and have only a few dozen views, some have a few hundred. The video that has the most has been up for 8 years and has about 3500 views, that's it. Type in Robert E. Lee and there are countless videos, many with hundreds of thousands of views. So by youtube standards, Taney the man is a historical footnote.
That doesn't' mean that the civil war or slavery are footnotes. There is an obvious difference. Just because someone has heard of the civil war doesn't mean they know the key players, let along the key players before the war. If you ask 1000 people in the US if they have heard of the US Civil war, nearly all will say yes. If you ask 1000 people who Jefferson Davis was, you might get 100 who get that correct. If you ask 1000 people at random who Roger B. Taney was, I would be shocked if you got five who know who he is.
Yet all the sudden we have all these virtue signaling keyboard crusaders typing from their products made by forced labor claiming that they knew all about Taney, and have been on some anti-Taney crusade all along. I'm calling BS. How many have comments on youtube with the name Taney in them prior to this video? Probably none.
![[กูเพิ่งซื้อมึงปิดหนี] 20 นาที ผมรีวิวเกมที่แย่ที่สุดในโลก CONCORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XhC-3q3Ii7I/mqdefault.jpg)
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | ตัวตึง! ปากกล้า! ท้ารบ! "ทนายไพศาล เรืองฤทธิ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pU3dXTsaBVc/mqdefault.jpg)
Greg: This is the level of detail that I have sought all my life (aged 67).
Give me the numbers!
"Greetings, this is greg"
Those 4 words make my day.
Every time.
Keep the content coming, Greg. I absolutely love the long format videos. Detail is king.
Yep, time spent on his videos is more well spent than most TH-cam Aviation Videos, Documentaries and aviation magazines.
Funnily enough I was reading about the test about a month ago in the German Flugzeug Classic special Issue on the FW-190. (One of a few, I think it was the issue on the A-6, which includes the early G and F versions.)
Reminds me I need to send him some of their stuff on the A-4 and the outside intakes, which were used, just very rarely and sadly were not followed up.
Start a gay relationship with a Greg.
The performance difference can also be largely be explained by the larger propeller props...You can see the effect on PC fans...A 120mm fan is more efficient than a 80mm fan spinning faster at pushing are because the blades are covering a larger volume of air on a 120mm.
Exactly.
Great point about the 109 being considered the most produced fighter because all the subtypes were counted as the same type, unlike the Yaks. That had never occurred to me before.
Hi Gort, thanks.
My Dad was a VMF-121 Corsair pilot on Peleliu and was carrier rated. He had some time flying Hellcats as well. He greatly preferred flying the Corsair over the Hellcat.
Hi John, that's quite an accomplishment for your dad.
John Buchman --My Dad was an infantry Marine on Peleliu (5th Marines), and was mighty glad that the Corsairs were in the fight. The close air support was impressive and deadly, in a physical setting so tight that spent shell casings fell on he and the other friendlies.
@@cardinalRGI believe that was the site of the shortest air-ground missions with Corsairs taking off from a newly captured airstrips that was still taking fire, barely going wheels up when it was time to drop ordnance on Japanese positions loop around, land, and do it again. My guess is, any of those Marine pilots would have loved an AU-1 about then cannons, rockets, 4400lb payload, and the short distance they were flying anyways would have more than made up for the 240mph top speed.
Make no mistake. Had the Hellcat or Cosair regularly gone up against the Germans, they would have had further development. But they `only` had to overpower the Japanese who were outclassed in every aviation term. Not to say it was easy, but `sufficient` was enough.
@@simonevans8979 that's an irrelevant observation. 1) those adaptations would take development and testing time, as Greg mentioned, 2) by 1944 the Germans were losing the attrition war, they couldn't rollout in significant numbers the great planes they had designed. Think Me 262, 163, Arado 234, even Dornier 335, Heinkel 219. By 1945 US engineers were still lagging behind. Hence the race against the Soviets to snatch German engineers for their space programs. The only area where the US was leading by and large, is nuclear physics and the A-bomb. People say it's because the most notable scientists in the field were Jews, foremost of whom was Heisenberg. Otherwise they would have led in that field as well.
I'm from Germany and I have several HOBBY MASTER 1/48 scale models of FW190 BF 109 and a CORSAIR standing by each other. And it is kind of spooky listening to your awesome podcast while at the same time watching those planes. I can't tell how much I enjoy your work. Without bias simply pure truth. Thank you for your time and effort to make those podcasts.
I sell diecast models. The hobby master models are excellent! Just wish they'd produce larger runs...
In a way 1/48 is the optimal scale. It's small enough to fit on any shelf, but large enough to see details like exhaust stacks and even cockpit gauges.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles I’m currently building a 1/48 scale FW 190 A-5 as we speak, and I can confirm about the right size for details.
@@RadMax8this is one of the model's that I have from hobby master.
www.hobbymastercollector.com/HA7424.html
It's maybe a lame excuse but I'm to shakey to build it by my own ok I don't have the patience anymore too. 1 to 48 is simply awesome. Hope that your model will be awesome.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles 1/72 is nice but 1/48 gives a better perspective of the size. As I wrote having those aircraft side by side I realized it much better than watching at a picture how big or actually giant for example the P47 really was. The Me 109 G in comparison to the P47D is simple a wtf moment. And you can really see it if you have them side by side. I remember reading Günther Rall biography when he visited the Luftwaffe Unit Zirkus Rosarius that had captured allied aircraft. He wrote that sitting in the cockpit of the P47 was something special. No german fighter had so much room in the cocktip like the P47. Till I bought the model's I really didn't understand why he was so impressed. Now I get it.
About that one engagement on 1:14:00, I managed to get a look at the FAA after-action report and a translation of the Luftwaffe after-action report on May 8, 1944 over Norway. I agree that we probably can't draw much in the way of conclusions about it, since the after-action reports more or less show us how unfamiliar each side was with how to handle the other's aircraft (for the FAA) and the other's aircraft in general (for the Luftwaffe). Still, it is pretty interesting to see how each side reacted. The dogfight was between Fleet Air Arm Hellcats from No. 800 Sqn, HMS Emperor, and JG5, which was operating a majority of Bf 109Gs and a minority of Fw 190As. JG5's after-action report survives in addition to 800 Sqn's, so we actually do know what happened and there was only one over-claim, which we'll get to later.
Using both reports, a flight of Bf 109Gs got the drop on half a dozen Hellcats, destroying one almost immediately. However, the Bf 109G pilots made a fairly serious blunder and tried out-diving the Hellcats. Two of four 109Gs quickly went down, confirmed by both 800 Sqn and JG5. One further 109G reported "light damage", with the aircraft flying in the number two position undamaged. However, that's not where things end.
The flight of Bf 109Gs was clearly beaten, which was witnessed by a flight of Fw 190As. They in turn dove on the Hellcats, with altitude being a genuine advantage (as opposed to a pretty bad mistake) since the FAA had pursued the Bf 109Gs downward. JG5's pilots hit and severely damaged at least two Hellcats (with one of these being likely mistaken for a kill and the other, which was almost certainly the second Hellcat lost, being damaged by Flak as well), but, possibly owing to the Fw 190A pilots' unfamiliarity with the type, one of the Hellcats actually climbed to meet the Fw 190As, destroying one and severely damaging another. This surprised the Fw 190A pilots, who--again, flying the entire Luftwaffe's first encounter with the Hellcat--did not expect an aircraft that had been mostly diving at the 109Gs to climb after them. Apparently, both sides gave each other enough of a bloody nose that following the two Fw 190A engagements, the FAA and Luftwaffe broke off.
The only discrepancy as far as over-claims when comparing after-action reports is the Luftwaffe claiming a third Hellcat, which, as I stated, is one I believe the Fw 190A pilots believe they got. At least one Hellcat had been engaging a Bf 109G and landed more or less shot to pieces after breaking off that pursuit, and I have a hunch it may have been this aircraft the Fw 190A pilots believe they got.
Also, the erasing history bit on the USCGC Taney is a disgrace.
That's a good one! Thanks for sharing the history.
@@dusk6159 Happy to share what I know!
Great comment! If I may ask, what happened with the USCGC taney?
@@alexboccaccio5431 Thanks! Unfortunately, to my knowledge, she’s still not officially the Taney. C’mon people. The ship redeemed the name quite well…
thank you
Greg is an even bigger geek on these subjects than I am. He presents detailed and accurate data. I loved it.
The Buffalo at 550mph will forever haunt my dreams
That answers some questions I’ve always had over Finlands best ace and his success in that plane.
@@jadedengineer B-239E was lighter with a more powerful engine than the F2A-1! Kill ratio across all of the Finnish Brewsters ("Flying Beer Bottles") was 32 kills to 1 loss!!!!
@@damienmaynard8892 Brewster was too hard to say for those day Finns who does not use letter like B.
So there are it's nicknames:
Ryysteri, Perse Tynnyri (=arse barrel) 😄
It's a much better plane than it's given credit for. It just tended to operate in contexts that were... unfavorable...
There's only so much you can do when you have rookie pilots with no early warning, lousy airfields, and no spare parts and are fighting battle hardened veterans who outnumber you 4-1.
Always enjoy your videos!
I am not a pilot, but a native german speaker so here is the translation of the two notes at 29:18:
Left: "Speed with consideration for the error of the speed indicator due to compressibility"
right: "Speed without consideration for error of the speed indicator due to compressibility"
So this appears to be left: EAS, right: either IAS or CAS. Unfortunately, it is not apparent to me whether the right one contains any other error corrections and I can't really make out the equations in the parentheses. Maybe they can give you more information. I would also point out that after the war many of the aviation standards used in the german language might have changed due to international standardization.
Don't hesitate if you have any questions or other questions regarding translations.
dude you are awesome to offer translation services for this channel :)
Appreciate your help and translation.
Geez, there almost needs to be a separate video detailing the differences in all the variants of all the aircraft involved. This can’t be easy work Greg, you’re doing a good job :)
Lots work went into seeking any advantage by all sizes for hence the mods
That's sides not size
I would not play WW2 Aircraft Trivial Pursuit for money against Greg.
@@jefferynelson oh, that sounds like a lot of fun, but for money would be insane
Every aircraft made in WW2 has so many variants and sub variants it'll make your head spin, could you imagine the logistics of having to keep track of all the different parts for them?
I'll bet the maintenance people drank a lot.
I can't wait for an in-depth discussion on the Bearcat.
Tigercat! 😁
That sounds sweet. I like the look of them.
@@astealthyfellow4795 And the sound!
ooooooooooo-YEAH!!! Be great if compared the Bearcat vs. the Hawker Sea Fury. Here's an 'incentive'... th-cam.com/video/RKj_Pknm3wk/w-d-xo.html
The bearcat was designed as a lighter weight substitute for the F6F and F4U. Intended to be deployed on the escort and light carriers.
this video is so exhaustively researched it's more like a lecture on the subject than a simple youtube video, genuinely feel like i'm back at Uni!
The little things incorporated to tell you alot!
Not to to mention that fun lecture you actually want to hear and pay attention to every bit of the lecture
Enjoyable to listen to, well researched and thought provoking as ever. Thank you for making and posting.
Hi Greg, I re-visted this video after watching your newest video on the Ki-84. You did an awesome job overall with the bulk of the content being accurate and presented in the right context. However, I just want to clarify a couple details, even though this shouldn't change the conclusions you eventually arrived at in the video.
First, the data presented in the NACA roll chart for the F6F-3 is actually a modified version with spring-tab ailerons, which gave it a roll performance similar to the F6F-5. The original ailerons had a higher peak rate by up to 10 deg/sec @ 260 mph, but rates fell off rapidly after this point, eventually being some 30 deg/sec slower at 400 mph than rates achieved with spring-tab ailerons. This information can be found in NACA report L5C23 which is downloadable from the NASA website.
Secondly, the Corsair didn't have provisions for two external wing tanks until the advent of the F4U-1D sub-variant, this being sometime during the spring of 1944 (however, the first 300 could only carry one wing drop tank as the other pylon was used exclusively for bombs). The early F4U-1A only had provisions for a single centerline drop tank.
The Hellcat was different, as there is a well-known photograph of Cdr James Flatley of CVAG-5 flying an F6F-3 with both wing and centerline tanks during the Hellcat's combat debut on August 31, 1943. So it was capable of carrying three external drop tanks months before the Corsair.
I mention all of this because It seems like you were concerned with only discussing the performance of the various aircraft within the context of 1943.
Again, I know this doesn't change anything concerning the outcome of your analysis but I felt they were details still worth bringing to your attention. I look forward to enjoying more of your excellent content!
Getting back to my previous reply about Hellcats fighting the Luftwaffe.
I had to eat supper.I'm baaacckkk!!
While the CorsIar only saw service with the Navy and Marines in the pacific as well as the Royal New Zealand Air Force in WWII,the Fleet Air Arm used both the Corsair and Hellcat in both theaters in WW2.
They replaced the Blackburn Skua and Roc in Frontline Carrier Service after 1943.
They still used the Sea Hurricane as well as the Superarine Seafire until the end of the war.
In fact,the FAA still used the Seafire until the end of the Korean War.
If you can find a copy of Aviation History from 2021,there's a cover story about it.
I know this isn't a new upload, but I just wanted to say that I appreciate that you don't treat your subscribers as though they are idiots. And for people who are just tuning in, you make it clear that it's their responsibility to get up to speed. Your channel is like taking a course in aviation with everything put into context. The only problem is that after absorbing the wealth of knowledge that you impart it's very difficult not to see the deficiencies and shortcomings of other popular content creators. As a mechanic I appreciate the effort you make to educate people. People are lazy unfortunately and don't want to think too hard. But for those who have a love of learning and appreciate real knowledge and attention to detail on aviation and history you have no peers.
theres no replacement for positive manifold pressure
^In addition to copious quantities of ADI.
It's a great day when i see a new video from Greg's Airlines being released. Such amazing content
Gregs airlines don always deliver on time but when thy deliver it is always worth the wait
We always love the cost analysis you do, that is an often overlooked factor when comparing planes.
Yes, that surprised me too. I had never imagined such ordinary, sensible, things were important in war. Now we imagine how serious it is to have the same name as a former slaver.
At least John Newton has escaped so far.
These are very educational videos illuminating topics we rarely think of properly. Certainly not in a place where we needed to get up and at them, for all of 90 minutes.
I love the p-47 way more than the p-51, but ya can't argue the 51 was much cheaper and much better on gas.
@@robmarsh6668 Same
@@robmarsh6668 When I read this comment, all I could think about was some old-school suburban dad in a wood paneled station wagon ranting about the values of practicality. Lol “You kids might not realize it now, but when you grow up you’ll see it’s a much more sensible choice! The retail savings are first class, and don’t even get me started on the gas mileage!” Except we’re talking about Warbirds instead of Edsels. 😂
@@catsooey these darn kids today!
My father was duty officer of VF-81 on the Wasp, which flew F6F-5s on the Wasp so I’ve read a bunch about them. I believe Grumman built the plane as an OJT fighter with plenty of armor to give young pilots a second chance.
I greatly appreciate the enormous depth of detail and knowledge of your report. The Corsair is a personal favourite. I had hoped that the Royal Navy's Fleet Air Arm Corsairs would have engaged in combat the Luftwaffe's counterparts. But, history is truth made prose.
A suggestion for a future presentation: How would the Lockheed P-38 "Lightning" USAAF Fighter and the Grumman F7F "Tigercat" U.S. Navy Carrier-based Fighter have compared in both performance and combat?
Fantastic documentary. The ease of maintenance is a big factor on aircraft carriers. That is so true. But still - the F4U is such a beast. The range, the speed, the load-out.
And thanks for mentioning the armor protection layout of the Navy fighters. I have never heard of that before. That and the lovely chosen pictures. I really enjoy watching your videos.
Thanks. I try to use pictures that are rarely seen.
Your relaxed and polished voice make listening to these quite enjoyable. Sometimes I lay here in bed just listening to the information that comes through you verbally and gives me insight into your comforting personality and mind. As a broken down old Vietnam Vet I thank you for the peace you have given me during these last days I have.
I sure hope Greg reads this amazing comment. Wishing you many blessings, Db. I hope you find comfort and peace knowing that God loves you and is watching over you.
@@christopherg9806 Thank you
Thank you for making these
You're welcome Ryan.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles My dad and I love your videos, he especially appreciates your passionate defense of the P-47.
@@sylvesterstewart868 Sounds like I would like your dad.
@@sylvesterstewart868 Virtually the same comment goes for me.
I love your entire P-47 series, too. I've watched it several times over. Were I a fighter pilot in WWII I'd have probably wanted to be assigned one. The P-38 is a close second. Speaking of which...have you done a video on the Lightning?
Ouh 1:41! Every time a see an early FW190 i really have to say: What a nice looking, straight design and style. Still today awesome!
Taney crew here. That's her in my thumbnail from the stern in the North Atlantic, taken with my Kodak. WHEC stands for Coast Guard ship (W) - High Endurance Cutter HEC. Coast guard aircraft use H for aircraft as in the HH3-F helicopter or the HU-25A Falcon Fan Jet. H being the aircraft and U for utility. We could get on scene quick at t/s .85 mach, depressurize and open the drop hatch making a bombing run with pumps, flares and marker beacon as well as using loud speaker system located in the hell hole door! Don't know how audible it was below two Garret ATF's! I spent 2 years onboard Taney in the early 80's and weathered Hurricane Jeanne Nov. 1980. Greg, Taney served in Korea and Vietnam and then Weather stations maintaining Doppler Radar cover before all the satellites took over. She kept working and never stopped. She is responsible for saving many lives that surely would have been lost at sea or land. While I was onboard we pulled dozens of people from the water or sinking vessel. The Taney is the embodiment of the USCG and it is shameful that they have struck HER Name from the stern and record. I glad it bothered you because it burns my ass everyday and always will. What a disgraceful act against this National Historic Landmark and her service to this country.
Thanks for your awesome comment. The name change obviously bothers me as well. A few commenters here support the name change, but they are in the minority by a huge margin.
Greg, you are the very best at these deep dives, and I appreciate your compassion. It comes through. Peace!
Dang! This has got the best channel on YT for this kind of stuff!
So well done Greg. I look forward to all of your videos, please do not shy away from adding even more details and deep dives, that's what really makes it interesting. Thanks!!
I just love every one of your videos, I go back and look at your charts and relisten to get the details I missed on the 1st few listens. I consider you a treasure.
I was a navigator at sea, hold a degree in shipping and had a shoreside sailing career buying & operating ships. You are the FIRST non-maritime type in my lifetime that correctly stated the difference between a boat and a ship. This is a gripe among many in the "invisible" industry, one that puts 90% of everything you see in your room, IN that room! Thank you Sir!
Golden rule = A ship can carry a boat, but a boat can't carry a ship. ⚓
And every ship can become a submarine, once.
As always, fascinating and full of information. On Roger Taney, he is actually quite notorious in history, for authoring the Dred Scott decision (and arm-twisting a number of colleagues on the Supreme Court to support him, and co-ordinating the ruling with the President-Elect James Buchanan) which was one of the factors which led pretty directly to the Civil War. I know a lot of folks these days don't study history, or not very closely, but Taney deserves to be remembered because of his awful ruling. I for one know how you feel about these constant interruptions from people trying to re-write history, and I would argue that it's important to keep the name precisely because of Taney's notoriety. Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it, so to speak.
Absolutely stellar video. Thank you so much.
My pop flew both planes (WW2 and Korea). Aboard USS Cabot (CVL28) during WW2, he spent many hours filleting (tear dropping) the heads of the universal rivers on his Hellcat towards the end of reducing drag/increasing airspeed. Anything for an advantage and I’d guess to also kill boredom between CAPs and sorties. He did this using shoe wax, naphtha and a butter knife from the Officers Mess. As well, he bribed aircraft handlers to tip and shake his Hellcat when his centerline auxiliary tank was being fueled. This allowed every cubic inch of space to be filled with fuel. His fear of the Japanese paled in comparison to his fear of sharks.
Wow, that's really interesting. I wonder if other Hellcat pilots did the same. I suspect they did.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles I’m pretty sure he learned the fueling trick from more experienced fliers or the fuelers. He told me that as the Hellcat’s advantages over most enemy aircraft became evident and as that number of enemy aircraft began to wane and the Hellcat’s role evolved away from that of ranging fleet defense to that of ‘dump truck’ (his words, not mine), fewer and fewer external fuel tanks were simply ejected as a matter of course once emptied. He once shared with me how unremarkable the difference between flying the F6F with or without the tank, or an array of external ordnance, actually was. This characteristic is a notable difference between the Hellcat and the Corsair, which he maintained lacked good control surface authority across most iterations of it and throughout it’s service life and anything and everything it carried altered its trim.
When I was a lad in the 60’s, among my my dad’s other duties at NAS Twin Cities was the role of Special Services Officer. He saw fit to acquire and keep maintained one (late model) F4U for recreational flying. A nicety for old timers like himself and something fun for the A4 community to blow off steam doing after Sunday mass while the kids swam. Even then, the plane retained it’s reputation as one requiring maximum attention to operate safely. Especially on the ramp (wing walkers) and through transitional flight phases near the deck.
As for the rivet thing, I got the impression that profiling those was something he came up with himself. I know this... on the rare occasion someone else ended up flying 7, (his assigned plane) it irritated him greatly but as a JG he had no practical or technical say over who flew what plane. The matter of aviators having a plane which was their ‘own’ so to speak was not steadfast or always a decided matter aboard CVLs as there simply wasn’t the space for a slew of replacement AC or the abundance personnel to maintain the level of readiness squadrons benefitted aboard the larger carriers. Once Cabot’s Air Groups transitioned to being comprised solely of Hellcats, naturally the likely readiness of any one particular fighter increased. This is to be expected when every spare part aboard is for the same type of aircraft and a reason why virtually no carriers had more than one issue of fighter at a time. As you correctly pointed out in your (again, very well done) video, despite sharing the same power plant (P&W R2800), the differing quick change modules for the Hellcat and the Corsair rendered them completely incompatible with one another.
Another reason he wanted to fly his ‘Zebra 7’ is that he had the convergence range of that plane’s Browning’s recalibrated to his liking. Then of course there was the photo of my mom taped above the clock on his instrument panel.
UK Royal Navy deployed both Hellcat and Corsair on RN Fleet and Escort Carriers, there were attacks on Tirpitz when it was skulking in a Norwegian Fyord and they encountered Ms 109s and FW190s who defended Tirpitz
The RN Corsairs never fought 109s or 190s. Hellcats did, but I think on only one occasion.
I have to say, I facepalmed at the "race version was faster" argument. Oh, Internet, never change.
Wait....so you mean to say if I have (which I do) a 1200 horsepower 93 mustang notchback drag (race) car, it's not fair to compare it to the bone stock 93 mustang notchback I drive on the street? Huh, who would have ever thought that.....🤔
He also have to take a look at the fact that if the hellcat and Corsair were in Europe they would have been modified for land use no folding wings or arrester the hook
That would have saved a lot of weight and improved performance
@@jamesricker3997 the Corsair was even faster than the Mustang and it shared the same engine with the Hellcat & Thunderbolt...also the Corsair & Hellcat being built for carrier landings it made them tougher....
@@jamesricker3997 I think they wouldn't have gone to that length to be honest, or do you have examples in mind where that happened? Arrestor hook removal, I could see maybe; take out the folding wing mechanism and replace by something simpler that still can take up the entire wing load in combat - I don't think so.
Did anyone besides me notice that the "Red 57" bird shown during the race trim portion was NOT an F6F Hellcat, but an F8F Bearcat?
I play my airplane games with altitude in metric so the numbers on the German charts seem intuitive to me but the American charts I always have to think for a bit as to what something like 5000 feet is roughly in meters. Always appreciate when Greg translates the numbers to metric as well.
On an almost unrelated tangent, the first place I came across “Equivalent Air Speed” is the SR-71. I forget why now, but the aircraft is operated by the pilot on “Knots Equivalent Air Speed”. There is a great interview of Maury Rosenberg who speaks about SR operations in length and their use of KEAS.
I think it’s because it flew so high and so fast that conventional methods of measuring speed that existed at the time didn’t necessarily work properly. Keep in mind that the OFFICIAL speed record for the SR-71 isn’t its actual top speed - it could go even faster than that, but exaxtly how fast remains highly classified (I wouldn’t be surprised if it was close to Mach 4).
@@z3r0_35 Yes that's the likely reason for using KEAS. The rumours of the SR/A-12 family being able to go faster than ~M3.2 I think are largely that. Sure they may have been able to make sprints to 3.3, 3.4 maybe even 3.5 depending upon atmospheric conditions (namely temperatures much lower than ISA),. However, the limiting factor was always the temperatures the J58 could handle internally (like any gas turbine engine). The operational limit that the pilot's flew to was a maximum compressor inlet temperature of 427 deg C. During NASA testing, the engine thrust was increased by 5% at the expense of a 20% shorter turbine life (the life-limiting component in the J58).
Nash license built R-2800s both during WWII and production was restarted during Korea. Later when the portion of the plant used for aero engine production was converted to automotive production the Tool Room* that supported that part of the plant was located in the former test cells where engines** were run up with a full size prop on them. The cells had circular areas where the props ran. Above the bosses desk there was a full color cutaway drawing of the R-2800 with the complete induction system. I've always wondered what happened to it.
*A Tool Room is a machine shop as in Tool and Die Makers. It is not a place where tools are handed out.
**Nash Kelvinator was the largest producer of props in the US during WWII
This feels like Top Gun theoretical class if it were done in the 40s... I love it!
I liked in your earlier Corsair video you mention that the F4u-1 could do a 9G turn and it was listed in the flight manual!
Yes, it's airframe is good to 9Gs, the later manual only gives data to 7Gs as it was sort of a standardized USN maximum rather than an actual structural limit.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles The amusing thing is the USN still has a 7.5G limit for fighters. This is why both the Classic and Super Hornets are limited to 7.5G. Aerodynamically they are easily capable of 9G. Swiss Classic Hornets have some internal structural changes and have their limit set to 9G.
@@dat581 If you max turn performance is around 7G is no point to extend it. Its just better to slow down...
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles the US military equipment is usually much more capable than the official manual says they are
@@jamesricker3997 Gotta leave the room for that cocky kid from Kansas to surprise someone.
Greg you rock, my dad served on LSD 13 during Okinawa, Signalman 2nd class. He was topside all the time. (reloading 20's during air attack) And believing every second a suicide/something would tear them in two. Your research is spot on.
Good one, Greg. I watched it all the way through! I have no real expertise, but nonetheless I tend to be impressed by pilot-friendly designs. Easy to fly, rugged, good armor protection - all these make me an armchair Hellcat fan. And, I believe I have learned from your (and other) videos that the varied conditions from one theatre of war to another bear heavily on how warplanes should be evaluated. Thanks for the enormous amount of work you put into this video.
Nice historical caveat at the end of the video. I understand where you are coming from and can't say I disagree. As usual, a very informative and entertaining video.
Who the hell thumbs down Greg's videos??? I guess good detailed information is too much for simpletons.
The only thumbs down I've ever issued have been on what I consider to be uneducated, stupid "fanboy" comments. NEVER on Greg's hard work he presents in such an intelligent manner.
I assure you it doesn't bother me. I'm not at all trying to make a channel for everybody. I am trying to appeal to the types who want to learn more detailed information, like the concept of EAS and Mach numbers. There are plenty of channels that gloss over this stuff, and they do well, and I think that's great, more power too them, but it's not my thing.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Don't go changing Greg.
Wooo, USCG Taney! I live near Baltimore and I've visited the Taney multiple times. I love her simple lines and her cool story.
Sad that our history is being removed by sensitive people, she'll always be the Taney to me.
Who is erasing our history and how?
Justice Taney was the author of the Dred Scott decision that is perhaps the most despicable opinion to come from the SCOTUS. This name is infamous in Maryland, where I live, and rightly so. It made the civil war significantly more likely, and provided an appalling justification for denying African Americans treatment as human beings. I love your careful scholarship, but you should consider that the Germans do not retain monuments to the authors of the crimes in their terrible past, nor should we.
@@markhaigney816 GFYS.
One other comment: I do voice over work professionally and I really enjoy your conversational delivery. Rather than the stilted narration of most TH-cam presenters (many of whom pronounce the word "a" as AY, rather than correctly saying UH... so annoying!), you sound like you're just sitting in my living room having an extemporaneous chat. That's SO much better than listening to a lecture read off of a script.
My father has been in magazines for many model builds(mostly german), but this brings me back to my young days watching Black Sheep Squadron with my dad. I loved that wing. We were stationed at Charleston back then when he was a LT in navy.
When history is Erased, no one will know to NOT repeat those mistakes. History is a effective Guide on what NOT To Do, & should be taught, remembered & respected Worts & all for the lessons that it can teach.
I agree absolutely.
US history is taking a beating, to say the least.
Unfortunately People want to try the same failure again believing that there is something "special" about themselves and they can't fail. So they have to erase or "adjust" history to suit their need to fool people into going along with it yet again.
And President Trump started the 1776 commission to CORRECTLY teach U.S. history, That was one of the first items President Biden cancelled his first day.......
What does this have to do with the video?
Swoop... would you have expected anything less from our recently erected Socialists? I heard on the news today that one of the first EOs he signed is to allow gender dysfunctional students to compete in any interscholastic sport they choose to conform with the gender they PREFER to be, not their biological/genetic gender. And I know all the cultural anthropologists are screaming that gender is all in one's mind...
I never would have thought a Brewster Buffalo could hold balls that big in such a small cockpit!
Very well done. I look forward to every new video you do. On another note, the erasure of history does not mean it didn't happen but does make possible for it to happen again.
Great point, I think it makes it a lot easier to happen again.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles Greg if you're reading this:
Maybe create a video comparing the Dornier Pfeil "push-pull" fighter and the De Havilland Hornet. The WW2 Hornet design was cancelled because it couldn't be in service by D-Day, but dusted-off after the war when the Royal Navy needed a long-range strike-fighter.
Greg’s channel is so much better than the Discovery Channel ever was.
Great Video. I think your commentary on the USCG Taney excellemt and sensible.
Be cool to see some Italian planes thrown into the mix sometime too (G55-S, RE2005, C.205, etc)
Oh yes! There's much written about German vs British vs American vs Japanese, but few seem to recognise that there were other countries flying around in their own designs at the time. :-)
Especially the reggiane and it's relation to the p47.
@@TheAngelobarker What relation? I do know that the Re.2000 was basically a modified, partly licensed copy of the P-35 (the P-47’s predecessor), but I don’t know of any relation to the P-47 directly.
the Italians....never lacked courage in pilots. they lacked high performing engines, and the aircraft were lightly armed. but the designs....freaking sweet!
@@thedeathwobblechannel6539 Italy's armed forces can best be described as great men equipped with guns ranging from subpar but serviceable to among the best in their class...led by dogshit officers and hamstrung by incompetent bureaucrats, corrupt politicians, and a lack of heavy industry to support it all. Put Italian troops under foreign command though, and they'll pull off miracles.
My 1973 RAAF Squadron technical officer - former pilot flew Mustangs in Korea. He said when they did practice air combat tactics against the RNZAF Corsairs they would lose because they could not sustain the energy manoeuvring capability of the more powerful Corsair. No chance against the RAN Sea Furies later on..
Yeah, Mustang has to be history's most over-rated plane. It had great range, and speed. The wrong plane to choose for CAS in Korea. They should have used the P47.
Excellent and thorough as always. As for your last point, spot on.
Smart comment at the end about the ship 🚢
We’ll done 👍🏻
This was a great video. Thank you, Greg. I appreciate the work you put into making these videos. The information you've compiled and shared is First Class. I appreciate the deep dive into stats with charts. It amplifies understanding. I also appreciate your endcap to the video. I would appreciate our collective history of the Nation being preserved, thank you. Personally, I'll only ask once.
Thanks in advance Greg.. you put together the most interesting videos.
Thanks for touching a bit with the Yaks Greg. Another nice episode
I like the Yaks, I think they are beautiful.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles the Yak-3P is my favorite WW2 airplane to look at. I enjoy flying it in War Thunder on realistic battles. Low altitude fighter with all kinds of energy with top of the line climb rate. The G55-S is another beautiful bird too. The mustang looks okay. But as far as design goes the planes with the Vs have my heart. The i-225 looks astounding as well, but they only made a small handful to propose filling the interceptor role
I’d love a video specific to the Hellcat. The F6F had a very interesting and unique flap system!
Retired Coastie here. W was the Naval designation for the Coast Guard, HEC stood for High Endurance Cutter, and the 37 was the hull number. Put all that together and you get WHEC-37. And I agree, the “renaming” makes no sense to me.
Really enjoy the channel!
Thanks. I also learned that "coastie" is a word.
Thank You Greg. After thinking about this topic for many years it's interesting to hear it put forth in the studied way that you have. Your thorough research and well-organized presentation is much appreciated and enjoyed.
Outstanding presentation! I have wondered about this for years and the answer is made very clear. Thank you!
You are a true blessing to us audience. Thank you for your efforts and time you take to make these talks for us!
Thanks very much for this, Greg. I've been waiting and hoping you'd get around to the Hellcat. I could bore everyone, including Greg, with a lengthy essay. I've been reading about Hellcats and Corsairs for about half a century, though my own military flight experience is limited to 20 minutes in the front seat of a T-6, a revelation to a non-pilot. My Dad flew both planes - a combat tour in 1944 in the F6F (he flew both the -3 and the -5) with VF-19 aboard the USS Lexington, and 9 months of training in 1945 in the F4U-4 with VBF-150. 600 hours in the Hellcat, 500 hours in the Corsair. Let me say the Brewster pilot testing the Buffalo's dive characteristics must have had nerves of steel -550 mph in a Buffalo seems insane.
The comparison(s) between / among the 4 planes were really interesting. The air war in the Pacific was very different from the air war in Europe, and the differences in fighter planes reflects that - I'm not surprised that Greg's research turned up few instances of either Corsairs or Hellcats engaging Luftwaffe fighters. To keep this short, I won't comment on Greg's expertise regarding climb, dive and turn performance except to say that the F4U and F6F came out better in the comparisons than I anticipated. It's worth noting that the F6F had the largest wing of any single-engine WW2 fighter, and I'm sure that has a lot to do with its turn performance, low stall speed, and top speed. The F6F was renowned, during the war, for being - in relative terms - easy to maintain, and its flight availability was at or near the top of any WW2 fighter, whether land or carrier-based - usually 90% or better. Designed to be forgiving for a fighter plane, Grumman built the F6F that way on purpose. Paraphrasing a description of the time, it was "Built by shoe salesmen [i.e. nonprofessionals] to be flown by shoe salesmen [i.e., nonprofessionals]." I was glad to see you bring up the issue of cost. The Hellcat was, at least in relative terms, a true bargain in terms of "bang for the buck."
One reason why range would have been an issue for Navy fighters in Europe is that task force commanders in the Pacific went to some trouble to put the carriers within 250 miles or so of their intended target(s), and the Hellcat, especially, was built with that in mind. That said, use of the 150-gallon centerline drop tank on the Hellcat became so common that I've read it came to be considered standard equipment. Whether Grumman thought the same I can't say.
I'm not usually bothered by political correctness, but in this instance, I think Greg is spot-on regarding the re-naming of the Coast Guard cutter. I taught history for 30 years, and while Taney was not an admirable man, history is full of such people, and they can't all be erased, nor should they be. For those whose interest in WW2 fighters is more casual, 90 minutes may be more than they'd like, but I've been a WW2 fighter plane geek most of my life, so I didn't mind the length.
Another thing with the Hellcat it was designed for relative ease of production and assembly. As I understand it once past the cowl there are no compound curves on the airframe.
Ray, is it just me, or have you also noticed that the wing planform of the F6F appears to be virtually identical to that of the TBF/M, other than in actual size?
From a distance at certain angles the Hellcat and Avenger look a lot alike, especially the wing.
Awesome post Ray. Thanks.
@@GregsAirplanesandAutomobiles I don't know who the lead designer was for either plane, but there's definitely a strong family resemblance.
Wow I loved your one more thing! I have to say I am a black man (half but still have heritage and family that are) but more so I’m an American and I agree that renaming the Tanney is just really disrespectful to those that fought and died in her midst. I’ve never even heard of Tanney the person but have heard of this ship being a sort of war history buff myself. Very well said brother. Keep up the great work!
Jeremy, you are a true American.
Amen, regarding your spot on comments about the USCGC Taney W 37. Changing history is a bad joke.
Memorializing and remembering are not the same thing. Paying honors to people tends to result in glossing over controversial parts of their history, rather than remembering it.
For example, for all the bitching about removing statues of Lee, his defenders completely overlook that he himself was against being memorialized in such a way. Statues and names are used to honor people, not remember them.
Frankly I’m not surprised the Brewster Buffalo can drop like a stone.
Yeah, I was wondering if that 'dive speed' was really 'falling speed'?
Regarding the removal of USCGC Taney name from the ship. 100% agree with your view on this. History is history. It's happened and is a Fact of Life. If it's upsetting then learn from it. Point being, move on.
One of the most valuable channels on YT. Million subs soon!
Thank you for all your hard work... A labor of love.. It is amazing how close all the mentioned aircrafts actually are
My old school grades for history and English were very good, my grades for math and science quite the opposite. If I had to take engineering, mathematics, or physics courses again, I would pray that my teachers would be just like Greg. What a great instructor he must be!
Great, great stuff, Greg. Just wonderful information and so well presented. Thanks so much for all the great work. Look forward to your work. You never disappoint! Happy to be a supporter!
Liking before I even watch because of the sheer genius of the comparison :-)
It is not a new idea, the earliest similar though much less comprehensive numbers wise comparison I found was in Eric Brown's 1988 Duels in the Sky. Brown had a one tremendous advantage over Greg in comparing and evaluating these aircraft - he flew them all as an RN test pilot and combat pilot in the war. I like Greg's comparison better but I realize that comparing them is not a new stroke of genius idea.
@@vicnighthorse Brown did not like the Corsair, and keep in mind the two US navy evaluations of the FW-190A are the most ridiculous in all history, and were even contested by the British RAE during wartime, as the US evaluations were so poor they failed even to detect correctly the FW-190A superior rate of roll, the easiest of all features to observe... I won't even go how they concluded the FW-190A was a specialized point defence interceptor, despite its low climb rate... The most abyssmal evaluation of an aircraft in history I tell you, beyond even the Russian evaluations of the P-47 as "not a fighter", pegging it as having an absurd 27 seconds turn time... Luftwaffe KG 200 was far more serious: "the p-47 out-turns our Bf-109g" Yes the razorback certainly did, if you read combat reports, and was slightly out-turned by the FW-190A... That being said, both the Corsair and F6F would have been dangerous opponents to german types, as the war turned increasingly away from hit and run and more towards horizontal turn fighting by 1945.
Thanks again Greg. As a lifelong history buff a Greg video is a perfect escape (for me) from this silly world we now inhabit.
Outstanding video. Nice to see someone go beyond the flat numbers and understand just what made the Hellcat such an excellent choice for its time.
The more I read and hear about the ME/BF-109, the more impressed I become with Willie's iconic little creation. Dollar for dollar and pound for pound, it is probably in it's own category of effectiveness with respect to military procurement and resource-allocation.
@Harli Baron There are definitely a few things that could've been "refined" like the funky change in toe-in as the tail wheel came up, or the welder's helmet/canopy. A simple 2-position linkage device in the landing gear scissor and an ugly Malcolm hood could've saved a lot of fledgling pilots...but Willie and the RLM ain't as smart as me. Adding guns and ammo diminishes the massive benefit gained from a lower fighting weight. The 109 was a bantam despite it's enormous DB605 engine. That said...I wonder if up-armour could've been fitted into the wing roots, with the rounds firing thru small holes in the spars and landing gear mounts.
Would love to see an analysis on how the Tigercat and Bearcat would have done against late-war Japanese fighters and bombers
That is one of the greatest topics and great what if analysis.
Or at least to me, I've considered it very interesting for a couple of years now.
Was the f7f and the f8f built to compliment each other?
Yes, add the P-51H and maybe even the F4U-5 for good measure
F7F & F8F > Whatever else is misfortunate enough to lack turbojet propulsion.
"Just one more thing..." Reminded me of Detective Columbo. Excellent video. Thank you.
Hmm, I wonder if that's where I got it. If so, I wasn't conscious of it at the time, but I did watch the show as a kid.
Great video Greg! This was a fun topic that was far ranging and covered a lot of ground. Nicely done!
I was missing this chanel in my life
Keep the videos coming. They are well worth the wait, so do not feel rushed to produce. Quality over quantity.
I agree with you about the Coast Guard cutter. That's a shame. Hard to believe it's come to this.
I never knew I wanted to watch this.
I enjoyed this retrospective of the aircraft.
I also completely agree with your opinion of the USS Tanney
It's clear that while Grumman had initiated the design of the Hellcat before the extensive encounters with the Zero, the insights from pilots and the analysis of the Akutan Zero were significant. These provided valuable information that informed adjustments in the Hellcat's design, particularly in power output to handle extra weight without compromising on defensive features.
What a tremendous amount of information to absorb to be able to get a more realistic picture of these airplanes' comparative strengths. Great job!
CO Tom Blackburn's "Jolly Rogers" book on VF-17, who flew Corsairs, gives accounts of winning mock dogfights with P-51s and of fighting with Japanese Tonys (Ki-61) which performed and were armed similarly to mid-war Bf-109s. The Tonys were very dangerous opponents that were not easy to shoot down or escape. However the Corsairs were not facing them at high altitudes like the conflict in Europe required. Most of these battles were well below 20,000 ft and often on or near the deck.
VMF-214 also faced them.
I recall reading an account, years ago, of a Corsair tangling with a Japanese fighter above 40,000 ft altitude when its guns stopped either from lack of ammunition or freezing. I don't remember which.
In any event, the Corsair pilot racked up a victory by using his propeller to chew off his opponent's tail surfaces. Said Corsair pilot then made it back on board his home carrier. I'm sure his mount required considerable reconditioning, at least in the nose area.
Escort wasn't the only mission in the ETO. Typhoons, Beufighters, B-25s, and B-26s all fought at lower altitudes. Plus let's not forget the med as well
Now of we want to get into what ifs you could imagine an F4U with fixed wings and a modified fuel system with longer range. As well as a fixed wing F6F with lighter armor and water injection which would be a turning monster.
@@rhondohslade : I recall that account, except that it was a Japanese photo recon plane.
Thanks for enlightening the true capabilities of these aircrafts
GREAT TOPIC!
THANK YOU GREG!
This brought back memories of a "what if" book w an FW-190 and F4U on the cover.
Amazing how full of information your historical aircraft videos are. Shared your channel to a lot of War Thunder players who have interest in historical aircraft.
Thanks Greg, This was very entertaining to listen to and watch. I must admit the Mark Hanna comments about the 51 did put a smile on my face. Always a pleasure, especially since you refuse to subscribe to "Alternate Facts". I do remember reading, not only did the FAA teach the U.S. Navy how to Carrier land the F4U, but I also thought {if I remember correctly} the FAA also trimmed 8" off each wingtip of the F4U. Not for performance, but to be able to fit the F4U below deck. Thanks for the show
I hope your wife maintains her patience with you and us... great stuff, greg, really good, and thought provoking
Wife doesn't like the time I spend on this, but when she gets her teespring money or Patreon money, she asks when the next video is coming out. Women.
Thank you Greg for research and comparisons of these fine aircraft. WW11 was a crucible of engineering and technology on all levels. My Father served in the Pacific Theater and his take on the aircraft of the day was they were all fast, bad, "killing machines" He loved aviation and flying seen from the birth of of it all. Shame that warfare has been the sole driving force for great technological breakthroughs in our lives. Keep up the good work man, James Smith.
War has always been a hotbed for technological innovation .
Another excellent and informative video.
Thankyou for all your efforts.
It's very appreciated by me and I'm sure many more.
I have listened to this at least 15 times. This is my favourite channel. Il2 sturmovik video game in vr ROCKS
This channel rocks. I've seen a lot of good military history channels, and Military Aviation History for example gives an excellent overview of a lot of really cool subjects.. but sometimes I wanted more, I wanted to be able to ask "why" and dive down a couple layers into the real technical details of how all this stuff worked, and until I found your channel, I hadn't seen that anywhere. Keep up the awesome work.
Ive often wondered about the " What if?" Possibility of the Hellcat/Corsair vs. BF109/FW190 scenario? Thanks Greg...
Fantastic Greg!
One thought about the German aircraft weapons, I imagine they were more optomised for bomber interception by that stage of the war, thus bigger target could compensate for the lower rate of fire.
Also, that buffalo test pilot would likely have some hair raising stories!
In regards to German guns, yes they were optimizing for bombers.
Aye, compared to 20mm MG 151 gun, 30mm MK 108 gun had 1/3rd of fire time and 2/3rd of velocity of previous gun. This obviously made it harder to score a hit. As war progressed, fighters would have additional 30mm gunpods fitted to them, to increase volume of fire and thus kill probability with accurate burst, and small fighter like Bf 109 tend to not take such weight increase kindly.
"Sturmbocks" Fw 190As, a German final answer to B-17 plague, were unable to dogfight at all, due to being weighted down by unprecedenced amount of guns and armor added to them in order to enter B-17 formation, score a kill, and make it out alive. They required Bf 109 escort that would distract bomber escort, so "Sturm" squadron can get close.
@@kireta21 Absolute corrrect! The first Target of the German fighters were the Bombers. Often they get order to deny dogfights and concentrate only on the Bombers, as if it was so easy! Ok, we all know, Goering was an absolute Idiot.
Often I have to laugh when remember this little movie here on youtube. It was a mixed Animation, showing an Attack of German fighters on a B17 Formation. There is one scene in, a headon attack of a P51 against a Me262. During they shoot on each other, you can see little wholes perforate the canopy of the P51 beside the american Pilot. The Me262 has only 4 MK 108, Kaliber 30 mm in the Nose, nothing else. And Idon´t believe they make this littlte wholes!
They also tried to use the 50-mm-Canon MK 214 A in the Me262, but only two were built.
Not really optimized for bombers, but following a different approach do delivering damage to the enemy. The "original" 20mm Mauser MG-151/20 was the successor to the earlier MG-FF, which was also 20mm.
And this armament was designed to go against *everything*, including - and most prominently - against fighters. The MG-151 was used with the early 109 F variants, while the MG-FF was used in the E variants. At that time, dedicated armament against bombers was not used. You had a choice if ammunition types and the way you would put the different ammo-types in your belts was driven by the mission at hand. Mineshells were actually used against "all things flying" with considerable success.
The MK-108 is a different story. It was developed by Rheinmetall early in 1940 by the companies own initiative. The Nazi leadership dismissed the weapon initially and Rheinmetall was actually ordered to seize development multiple times until the end of 1941.
You'd be mistaken to call the MK-108 an "anti-bomber-gun". It was used as such and with considerable success, but it followed the predominant theory in Germany at the time, that a few bullets on target with enough "effect" would be sufficient to down any plane.
Yes, the MK-108 had a slower rate of fire (650rpm .vs. almost 800), but not by much. The muzzle-velocity dropped from 800m/s to 530m/s (both mineshells). But the "destructive output" of the MK-108 was far greater. The 20mm mineshell had a projectile of 92g weight with a filling of 20g explosives. Compare that to the 330g projectile weight with a filling of 85g explosives. Therefore, the "amount of destructive power per second" is far greater with the MK-108 compared to the MG-151. All while the MK-108 only weight a mere 15kg more but was less than 1/3 the lenght of the MG-151. It was a very compact weapon designed to be fittet in an aerodynamically favourable way (no pertruding barrels..) in a plane. Actually, the MK-108 was a very capable and successful weapon against fighters.
What actually killed the Luftwaffe over Germany was the abuse of planes in anti-bomber roles. The "fighters" against the bombers were loaded with weapons (including gun pods) and comparatively heavily armored. Which was Ok, as long as the USAF approached without escorts. Right up to the point when the escort fighters appeared, the Luftwaffe was actually so successful against the USAF, that they even considered suspending daylight bombing on multiple occasions.
However, when the light, fast and purposefully optimized USAF fighters appeared, they not only came in numbers far outmatching the Luftwaffe, but also as a big suprise. The Luftwaffe simply was not anticipating escort fighters with that performance and range. And they failed to adapt quickly. This is why the USAF escorts shot down the comparatively slow and sluggish anti-bomber planes rapidly in large numbers.
That ultimately sealed the fate of the Luftwaffe in the defense role.
@@virtualinfinity6280 Very nice comment, even though the 30mm cannons were mounted on fighters with the bomber threat in mind. For fighter vs fighter combat the 20mm were already more than adequate.
Some early F6F-5s had the rear windows found on the -3. Look at David McCampbell's Minsi III for an example.
Seriously though man, thanks for the vid. I enjoyed it.
Incredible amount of research..Thank you so much. I hope you know how much we enjoy these videos.
Your final assessment of the Taney is spot on, which is why we are currently in such domestic conflict with those so easily offended.
You're right. I'm concerned about it too.
What is there to find offence at?