Well, the moment of understanding has come that one can compare in different ways. You can wholesale, as in OBM, you can differently. Yes, all these "AK versus M-16" are eternal, but still, some personalized comparisons make sense. Although in this case, I'm not even sure why I brought it to the judgment of those who read and understand. I did not deliberately make a huge article, sorting everything out to the cog, but let's try.
In the material about the Corsair, I touched on such an interesting point that two very similar, but at the same time completely different carrier-based fighters were simultaneously working in the US Marine Corps and Naval Aviation.
These are the F4U Corsair from Chance Vout and the F6F Hellcat from Grumman.
The aircraft are more than worthy of both comparison and memory, since they made a huge contribution to the air war in the Pacific Ocean.
And the reason for this was the F4F "Wildcat", which became obsolete as rapidly as the Japanese modernized their main A6M "Zero" deck.
And since the Japanese achieved certain success in this, the "Wild Cats" at the beginning of 1943 had nothing to catch. Opposing the "Zero" American pilots was becoming a problem, so the situation required a radical change.
It was planned that the "Wild Cat" would be replaced by the "Corsair", but fine-tuning the latter took so long, there were so many shortcomings that it was decided to create a new fighter based on the "Wild Cat" by "Grumman" as a temporary measure until the appearance of the "Corsair".
But it turned out that the F6F was so successful that its production not only did not stop after the appearance of the "Corsairs", but continued until 1949. It was the most massive American naval aviation fighter during World War II. A total of 12,274 aircraft were produced.
"Corsairs" were produced a little more, 12,571 units, but the production of the F4U continued right up to 1952, no wonder that so many riveted. The plane was definitely worth it.
Let's first go through the flight characteristics of two aircraft.
Engine
Both aircraft were powered by a Pratt Whitney R-2800 engine.
The Corsair received a modification of the Pratt Whitney R-2800-18W with a capacity of 2100 hp.
Hellcat - Pratt Whitney R-2800-10W Double Wasp with 2000 hp.
Small, but the advantage of the "Corsair". In fact, these 100 hp. Is an abyss. By the standards of that time, this was not just a lot, it was a lot.
Speed
The maximum speed of the Hellcat was 644 km / h, the Corsair at an altitude of over 4000 m accelerated to 717 km / h, below its speed was 595 km / h.
We can say that it is roughly equal.
The practical range of the "Corsair" is 1617 km, the "Hellcat" - 2092 km.
Practical ceiling. Corsair - 12,650 m, Hellcat - 10,900 m.
Climb rate. Corsair - 1180 m / min, Hellcat - 1032 m / min.
Empty weight / takeoff weight. Corsair - 4175/5634, Hellcat - 4152/5662.
Obviously, with approximately the same mass, the 100 "horses" of the Corsair gave the aircraft some advantage over its colleague in terms of speed and altitude. But his gluttony was also higher, which affected the range of the "Corsair".
But the range still could not be compared with the "Zero", which had a practical range of 3000 kilometers.
Armament
It was standard: 6 wing-mounted Browning machine guns of 12, 7-mm caliber with 400 rounds of ammunition per barrel.
The Corsair could also "grab" two 454 kg bombs or eight HVAR 127 mm missiles, and the Hellcat three 454 kg bombs or two 298 mm Tiny Tim missiles or six HVAR missiles.
Seems like the planes are similar, right? And why did the Americans toil with frank foolishness, releasing this pair?
In fact, the top three, because the F2G from Goodyear was not actually a deckboat, its wings did not fold.
But yes, why did it happen? The pairs FW.190 / Bf.109 and La-5 / Yak-9 are understandable, different engines, different tactics of use. And here?
And here, too, there are nuances.
The "cat" was simpler. Much easier, and, from production to combat use. It could just fly and fight. He forgave many mistakes, he, one might say, was a versatile aircraft.
In general, many call the F6F universal, but they call it because it does almost everything well, but in no area does it show quite impressive abilities. Yes, he did everything that was required: he escorted, searched, shot down, stormed, worked at night, and so on. And he was quite good, until the new Japanese aircraft came near the end of the war.
With the Ki-84, Ki-100 and N1K1-J, the Hellcat was struggling. But these were already fighters of a different generation, of a different formation, which surpassed the F6F in everything.
As an example, they cite the battle of the famous Japanese ace Tetsuzo Iwamoto, who on the Kawanishi N1K1-J "Siden-kai" fighter single-handedly entered the battle with six "Hellkats" and destroyed four of them. I do not consider this fight indicative and textbook, since there is absolutely no data on the level of training of American pilots. Agree, if these were young pilots who were sent on patrol (this was in August 1945), then they would have interfered with themselves more and helped Iwamoto to arrange a massacre. Which he, in fact, did, after which he calmly went home.
But Iwamoto was one of the best pilots in Japan (84 wins).
But "Le Corsaire" was a completely different song. Abusive. It was noted that the plane does not forgive mistakes in piloting at all. The statistics can be found in the article about the "Corsair", actually beat on the ground and decks more than the Japanese shot down.
But until the very end of the war, "Corsair" calmly went out against all Japanese innovations, especially the aircraft of the ground part of the Air Force. And he won.
However, the Corsair was not for everyone's plane. Difficult to fly, difficult to master, in battle it became a deadly weapon. The problem is that quite a lot of events had to take place up to this point.
If you give examples and analogies, the Hellcat is a Kalashnikov assault rifle. Simple, stress-free, trouble-free, and so on. Any pilot could master it, master it and go into battle. It is not for nothing that the F6F was called the “factory of the aces”.
The only question is who to fight against.
I would compare the Corsair to something like this … like the FN F2000 or our AN-64 Abakan. It is difficult, peculiar, but if you understand the essence - if you are not omnipotent, then you are very dangerous with such a weapon.
It is very difficult to say which of the two carrier-based fighters was better. That is why I put the question to a vote, it’s even interesting what the readers will say, since the cars are different and similar at the same time.
