🧥 Have you always wanted a distinctive and authentic leather flying jacket? Check out the fantastic range from Legendary USA here: calibanrising.com/flying-jacket/

my father was a corsair pilot. he would say 'never get in a dogfight with a zero. make one pass and keep going'

Both the F4F and the P-40 seem to never get the credit they deserve for the great work they did in the first half of the war.

The Zero is beautiful and a testament to form and function. The Wildcat was utilitarian and overbuilt . If I wanted to be an Ace, I would want the Zero. If I wanted to survive the war, I’d take the Wildcat. Dogfighting is all about understanding your strengths and weaknesses and fighting within those parameters.

My mother's sister's husband, my uncle, was a naval fighter pilot in the Pacific. He said they the pilots were told, "We can get more planes but pilots are hard to come by." They were taught to use the strengths of the planes they flew, better pilot armor, stronger construction, self sealing fuel tanks. God, how little did we appreciate him and them. How ordinary it all seemed, the Zero throttle stick, the photos, the stories. A controlled crash landing on a flat ship in the middle of the world's largest ocean at night....

There were three Allied fighters that started behind but fought the entire war with success. The F4F, the P-40, and the Hurricane. Each of them was outclassed by their opposition throughout the war but when flown by pilots who knew their aircraft and flew them to their strengths they more than held their own. When not flown to their strengths their pilots died. None of them could turn with the A6M or the bF109 but when flown as "zoom and boom" diving attacks they performed exceptionally well. The British pilots who were ordered to dog fight the Zeros in their P-40s died. Those who followed the Flying Tigers model of climbing to altitude and diving thru the Japanese formations had quite a bit of success. These planes fought in all theaters for the duration of the war. They were never the best but they were the best available at the time. The Hurricane turned back the Luftwaffe during the blitz (there simply were not enough Spits to turn the tide), the P-40s helped save China and provided air cover for the African invasion, and the Wildcats turned the tide at Midway and helped save the fleet at the Battle of Samar while the P-40 helped hold Australia. To my mind, the Zero's short comings negated its advantages when faced with pilots who were not new to combat.

Great video. Another point to remember is that not every Japanese fighter plane was a Zero. Probably half of the planes identified in wartime reports as Zeros were actually the very similar looking Ki-43 Hayabusa (Oscar) army fighter. Of course, if they were operating from a carrier they were Zeros.

I would always pick the F4F Wildcat instead of the Mitsubishi A6M Zero. Armor plate, self sealing fuel tanks; a radio that works. Neither the A6M Zero or the Nakajima Ki 43 Hayabusa fighter could take any punishment from fifty caliber machine gun bullets, while the Wildcat was designed to absorb punishment and keep flying.

The Zero's pilots actually used the guns more and it's a damn good aid. With dogfights going on that quickly, the Japanese pilots knew that their cannons can be pretty lacklusture in some fights thus to ensure that every shot hits, they'll do what most tank crews do by "ranging" their targets. The more experienced pilot would just flip the switch and pick the MG, fire it upon a target plane and if it connects for more than 1sec, flip the "killswitch" and unleash the cannons on the target to guarantee a sure-kill. That helps them save cannon ammo instead of lobbing cannon rounds into the unknown and wasting it. The US pilots opting to fire 2 less guns with switches, that I don't know but I do know that the US pilots DID try to not use the other 2 guns by asking their armament crew to not load the other 2 guns but instead lengthen the ammo belt for the other 4 MGs which left the 2 outer MGs inert. Speaking of tactics, one of the most famous move the Zero pilots pulled on F4F pilots was the "parallel climb" and it was also advocated by the legendary Saburo Sakai himself. What this does is that as the Zeros are lighter and all of them have a better climbing rate than the Wildcats, they can just climb like mad before it hits its low stall speed whereas the heavier F4F would stall quicker during a speedy climb. So Zero pilots would often zoom onto an F4F and instead of dogfighting it just tip the nose very steeply and starts climbing, baiting the F4F pilots to chase after it with a climb of it's own. As it gets higher and steeper, the heavier F4F would feel the gravitational pull sucking the power out of its engine and then just deadfalls once it stalls, giving the Japanese pilot a chance to just flip the Zero over, latch onto the now falling F4F and shoot it like it's a fish in a barrel. This tactic was used constantly from Coral Sea to Guadacanal and all the way to Midway till the more powerful F6F Hellcat came about where this tactic doesn't work on the Hellcats anymore.

55:47 On the matter of training. Training is vital, but even the best-trained pilot still needs to acquire experience to be truly effective in air combat. This is where the heavily protected Wildcat and later Allied combat aircraft with similar levels of protection built into their designs became decisive. Whereas a rookie American pilot flying a Wildcat had at least long odds of surviving a losing confrontation with a Zero pilot, a rookie Zero pilot had virtually no chance at all of surviving a losing encounter with a Wildcat. The Wildcat pilot had a slim but nevertheless appreciable chance of making it back to his carrier where his mistakes could be analyzed and lessons taken that could make him a much more formidable opponent in future missions. Even if the American pilot had to bail out or ditch there remained a slim yet nevertheless real possibility of his survival, which increased considerably as the war progressed as the Allies developed ever-improving means of search and rescue. In contrast, the IJN hardly ever recovered a lost pilot. The USN probably captured more downed Japanese pilots than the IJN ever recovered. There's a story attributed to an AA gunner aboard the Yamato who survived that ship's destruction on 7 April 1945. During the height of the battle, a damaged American warplane ditched within sight of the Japanese gunner. At least one flyer got out and was floating nearby in his tiny one-man raft. The gunner thought, well, he's doomed. But barely a minute later an American flying boat landed and rescued the downed airman, all within easy range of the Yamato's 25mm guns. The gunner was dumbfounded by this display of reckless courage and devotion on the part of the flying boat's crew because he knew his own navy would never take such a risk for one man.

Ever since I was a preteen, the F4F Wildcat was a favorite. Later at work a coworker who knew my interest in scale modeling and history of the subject asked me to find information on his relative. This relative was John Lucius Smith the commander of VMF 223 in the Cactus Air Force. Smith was overshadowed by his charismatic subordinate, Marion Carl even though Smith had the higher tally of victories and is considered an architect of the tactics used against the Japanese. Both Smith and Carl were honored with the Navy Cross and Medal of Honor alongside Joe Foss. Scale model companies still confused the markings, as Smith usually flew number “2” and Carl his “lucky 13”. Both are attributed to Carl by these companies.

Great analysis! One point that most people miss is that during the Guadalcanal campaign the Zero needed an external tank to get to the Henderson and back. That external tank could not be jettisoned! This limited the maneuverability of the Zero to a certain degree. It helped even the odds between the Wildcat. Keep up the good work!

If it was a looks based competition, the zero every time. Like another person said, in a one vs one, I'd take the zero, in large battle, the wildcat. I like the idea of possibly making it home after taking a few hits.

The Wildcat and a well-trained wingman for me. Captain Foss had some thoughts on the topic: “We have a saying up at Guadalcanal, if you’re alone and you meet a Zero, run like hell because you’re outnumbered.” “When you find yourself all alone out there, head for home. (…) Look, when I was all alone, I scooted for home. I’m still around. The guys who fought themselves are dead”. Cpt. Joseph Foss, USMC, in speach to the RAAF 1st wing pilots, Sydney, December 1942.

The F4F is probably my favorite warbird of all time, I’m a bit biased so you know my choice! I made a few videos about them myself, great work sir

“One Zero against one Grumman is not an even fight, but with mutual support two Grummans are worth between four and five Zeros, and so on up.” -- Major Joseph N. Renner, Wildcat pilot and a veteran of Guadalcanal.

Another aspect of pilot skill was the US policy of withdrawing veteran pilots from combat to train new pilots and squadrons. These new pilots had the benefit of learning the most successful combat tactics from the men who used (or even developed) them. The Japanese kept their veterans in the front line squadrons to provide on the job mentoring of new replacement pilots. As the war progressed and more of these veterans were lost, the basic combat savyness of new Japanese pilots was noticeably lower than that of a new squadrons of American pilots.

Great video, covered everything. Tactics, armament, plane specs, training, really well researched, thanks!

What a great presentation of two of the most iconic WW2 fighters, so glad I found your channel! Please do more of these Vs. videos!! Subscribed and shared brother! Looking forward to all of your future content ! God bless

After all that information, I think I'd still choose the Sptifire^^ No seriously, I'm glad to not have to fly any of them (in anger), my grandfather flew a 109 in the med and tho he loved talking about flying those things, he didn't really like to talk about the combat part and I get why. I'm just utterly, utterly grateful to be born 45 years after the war and especially after the third reich... That said: This video was amazing! Thank you for making it and to answer your question properly, in combat, I'd rather be in the Grumman but if I could just own one of those and fly it around, definitely the zero, it's beautiful, maybe even more so than a spit or mustang. But when people shoot at me, yeah, give me the grumman. please!

Thoroughly entertained for an hour. I learned a ton. Subscribed. Thanks

On the topic of the zeros 7.7 mm at 750 m/s and the the canon 670m/s. This would make aiming for a pilot difficult to switch between and usless if fired together unless the target was right ahead. If you needed to lead the the moving target this would present a challange. If the target was only 200 meters away the 7.7 mm would hit 20 m before the cannons. This could mean that with 7.7 mm you may lead the target by 10 m and with the cannon 15 m lead would be needed.

At low altitude, take a Zero. Higher up, F4F. They’re both excellent airplanes, and each have strengths and weaknesses. I don’t think either is superior to the other overall, but their different characteristics mean that the circumstances of the fight will determine which plane has the advantage.

I'll take the Wilcat. One overlooked issue pointed out in Eric Beregud's Fire in the Sky is the probability that the Wildcat will perform closer to spec than the Zero. The F4F benefited from service by techs far better trained and with a superior parts pipeline. Another critical factor is US radios being far more reliable than Japanese models, making teamwork easier. Most US fighters could out maneuver the A6M at speeds over 250 or so mph (not easy to maintain!). Throw in more effective firepower and protection, which pretty much rounds out the list.

One thing overlooked in the Thach Weave discussion was he got Lt O Hare to help him , but Cdr Thach had modified his Wildcat's throttle by using wire to only allow it to go so far, Lt O Hare s Wildcat was full capacity throttle. It was done to mimic a Zero vs Wildcat performance parameter

I would pick the Wildcat. It had armour and self sealing fuel tanks with the Zero having neither.

"The aircraft had nothing to do with our victory! Give the enemy our planes! We will take theirs and we will still win!" General Chenault of the Flying Tigers

Despite so many such videos on the F4F and A6M, your rendition was very comprehensive and enjoyable, a worthy addition to the pantheon of this history. Well done.

It really depends on the settings , in a neutral environment and 1vs1 engagement the Zero is the better choice. In the grand scheme of the war the wildcat might be better but a lot of the factors that make it "better" dont really have sth to do with the aircraft itself (better production facilities,pilot training etc.) As a pilot, the grand scheme might not be as important to you whereas individual engagements do. Its the same when people argue the sherman is better than the panther or tiger because bigger production numbers, better range etc.: Yes ,you might be able to field more of them but as a tank commander whos right then and there on the battlefield, which one would you rather be sitting in? Thats why my pick has to be the zero. It is the better offensive weapon and if you know what you´re doing, you can dance around almost anything in the sky while making sure you dont get hit.

Decades after the war, when arcane Japanese operational records were finally being translated and made available in the West, historians could finally make objective comparisons of actual losses of Japanese and American fighters during 1942. From what I've read, the F4F had a slight survival advantage against the Zero of about 1.32 to 1. Not as significant as later American fighters, but enough to demonstrate that when the Wildcat's strengths when properly exploited, the plane could hold its own against the Zero.

Thank you for the long and comprehensive video, very well done.

Regarding the two different guns. The main factor is the muzzle velocity. A fast muzzle velocity round needs less lead on the moving target to hit it. A slow velocity round needs more lead than the fast round or it will miss because the target has gone. The difference between an arrow and a bullet for example. So you have a huge challenge to get both the guns to hit whatever the gun sight is aimed at. You could set up the guns on the ground to hit a static target but that is not going to help you in the air. Of course if you are heading straight at a bomber then less of an issue. As the range increases then you start to have to compensate for gravity as the slow round would start to fall away before the fast round.

Love these videos, pretty underrated. I would personally choose the wildcat (i'm just a bit of a freeaboo)

Good presentation! Solid 'A' Follows fundemental principles of competition/combat: know yourself; know your opponent; stay alive until you can 'hit' when it will do the most damage; And "Just because you know what they are doing, doesn't mean you know HOW they are doing it!": details are important!

Our relative flew the SBD, then switched to fighters in the FM-2, finally to his favorite "horse", the Corsair. He loved it.

Something that may be fascinating to consider: Imagine a US Navy fighter squadron, but outfitted with Zeros. Being able to exploit the most maneuverable aircraft of the war while also having superior gunnery skills and fighting tactics would probably make that squadron the single most frightening thing to go up against in the world. For that reason, I'd probably take the Zero. That being said, it's a glass cannon, while the F4F is much sturdier. It's definitely an intriguing thought experiment though. The Zero was a thorn in the Navy's side, even after the arrival of superior aircraft in the pacific, like the Corsair and Hellcat

Just gonna add in that a big reason why the Japanese didn't go with a .50"/12.7mm MG was that their 12.7mm rounds were based the Italian Breda 12.7x81mm, which had very poor ballistics as compared to .50 BMG (12.7x99m), or to most rifle-caliber rounds. 12.7x81 was over 100 meters per second slower than .50 BMG had shorter range, steeper muzzle drop, and a lighter projectile (decreasing both it's penetration, and it's ability to carry explosive or incendiary filler), while the Ho-103 machinegun had similar weight to aircraft-mounted M2 machineguns (or even to the type 99 20mm cannons). The Japanese 12.7mm had only slightly better ballistics than their 20mm, it suffered from most of the same problems in range and accuracy, so it wouldn't have bridged the gap between the accuracy of rifle-caliber MGs, and the power of cannons. The US leaned heavily on their .50 caliber guns because .50 BMG is an exceptional round, not because 12.7mm is a particularly good caliber. The bullet has no appreciable drop at 500m, retains it's velocity exceptionally well, and has exceptional accuracy, all of which make the gun easier to aim and longer-ranged than most WWII aircraft armament. It's a round which is still used in sniper rifles (and the M2 machinegun could be used in single-shot mode as a sniper weapon) and still considered one of the best rounds for long range shooting. Since the gun didn't need any adjustment in elevation to hit at WWII engagement ranges, it was easier to use for less-skilled pilots.

While Thatch was working out the Weave all Wildcat pilots were working out switching from the Vic to the Pair of Pairs as recommended by reports from Europe. No small feat in that the fighter division went from 6 to 4 so like what are those two other guys going to do now? This shows their level of training that these pilots were able to make this major tactical change literally on the fly. The RAF took years to drop the Vic which looked good on paper but failed in practice. The Japanese never dropped the Vic but their version of it was so loose our guys didn’t know that they were flying any formation at all. So, to answer your question Wildcat Vs Zero: Regardless of what you fly, if you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck.

Very well done. I remember a documentary on the F4F Wildcat vs. the A6M Zero-Sen comparing some of the capabilities and weakness of each that included commentary by some current F-18 jocks. The F-18 jocks were really down on the Wildcat. Quoting one, "If you were in a Wildcat and encountered a Zero all you could do is run." One should realize where their knowledge ends and their ignorance begins. John Lundstrom in his book "The First Team" is the best resource I have encountered on this subject. After an exhaustive review of encounters of Wildcats and Zeros he concluded that the outcome favored the Wildcat. It wasn't a runaway like the F6F Hellcat but it was a significant difference. In addition those with experience like Jimmy Thach admonished to never try to run from a Zero. As to the advantage of arming the Wildcat exclusively with one caliber of weapon vs. the Zero with both 30 cal and 20 mm - the issue is not exclusively range. The two different calibers create two different firing solutions mainly due to bullet drop. A high velocity light bullet will have a flatter trajectory than a heaver low velocity bullet. The latter will have more significant bullet drop at a distance. You need to aim higher with a slow heavy bullet at a given distance. Finally, another significant advantage, that should not be ignored, to the Wildcat was discovered when Koga's Zero was recovered in the Aleutians after the battle of Midway. Tests demonstrated that at higher speeds the Zero's ailerons would lose responsiveness and even lock up. This problem was addressed but the Japanese but never eliminated. Wildcat and P-40 pilots were then advised that they could dog fight (to a degree) a Zero if they kept their speed up. Or at least out roll the Zero at high speed and escape. Oh, and by the way I would pick the F4F.

Fysa the muzzle velocity issue was gone by the A6M3 with the later Type 99s. It was only about half the difference that the late war Luftwaffe had with the MK 108 as well so it's debatable how much it mattered.

Excellent review, seems like a Dance Macabre prefectied thorough repetition. Thanks

One of the things that is rarely talked about is the training of USN naval pilots prior to WW II. Navy and Marine fighter pilots were actually taught deflection shooting as a matter of course, which was not done by the USAAC at that time. The British did use deflection shooting to a certain extent, as did the Germans and the Japanese, but it was mandatory in the USN. And this helped The First Team, as they were called, to be able to keep par with the superior speed and maneuverability of the Zero and the combat experience of the IJN fighter pilots. The Zeros were so lightly built because the Japanese fighter pilots wanted speed and maneuverability over everything else. It penalized them very seriously once the US naval pilots learned the weak points of the Zero. The fixed-wing Grumman F4F-3 Wildcat was the first to encounter the Zero in the days just after Pearl Harbor during the hit-and-strikes against Japanese-held island bases. By the time of Coral Sea and then Midway tactics had been developed by Commander John S Thach to counter the Zero's advantages. His Beam Defense Maneuver, later called The Thach Weave, enabled pilots working in a 2 plane section to be able to cover each other's tails during a Japanese attack. The Wildcat's tough construction and the addition of armor plate for the pilot and self-sealing fuel tanks helped many pilots survive what could have been deadly. Historian John Lundstrom has written a two-volume story called The First Team that chronicles those early days of the war.

Great video!! Extensive background and insightful comments. Thank you!!!

Your analysis kept me glued to my monitor on a subject I already understood pretty well for years! You are an excellent speaker, just as I'm a lousy writer! ;-( I've played with flight sims since long ago and most flight modeling by the game designers made both of these planes behave as described by history. The Zero is very light to the touch but the plane flames if you just look at it wrong! The Wildcat is just the opposite! It's interesting to me that when in a game, flying a Wildcat, and not too concerned about being shot down (or up for that matter), I'll tend to quit using 'boom and zoom' tactics and invariably go down in flames trying to turn with a Zero! When flying a Zero, I'll get into a turning fight and still get shot up (or down) in a hurry! Hmm, maybe it's me and not the plane's fault??? Nah, never!!!!!!

Very well done. You have a knack for speaking about potentially dry information and making it interesting. I always thought the 'cats' always looked unfinished. Seems the wing tips should have been addressed. Rounded tips allow for less drag and higher speeds. The square seems to allow for faster rate of climb. Here is an old study from the 30s doing a rudimentary search on the web: Stall Speed Max. Speed Rate of Climb Square ..... 55.5 mph 146.3 mph 1136 ft/min Round ...... 57.7 148.0 1107 ft/min Hoerner .... 56.5 145.6 1126 ft/min

The F4F did a great job. Anyone other than me read The First Team?

Great video and intelligent commentary. A reminder that technology, in the typical case, only takes you so far. So much of the outcome depends on the pilot's skill, experience, and other circumstances, such as the respective objectives and whether they play to the advantage or disadvantage of the combatants and their aircraft. Japan and Germany eventually lost their best pilots and were unable to replace them, in contrast to the allies that vastly outpaced the Axis powers in the number of aircraft produced, the ability to introduce improved and innovative aircraft, deploy them to the theater of war quickly, and most of all, to replace lost personnel with well-trained pilots.

Discussing the specs, you said the range of the Zero was 'a hundred and ten miles' when the figure showed 1010. Thoroughly enjoyed the video. Having read Saburo Sakai's book several times I was under the impression the F4F was a lame fighter. This comparison rather refutes that impression. So thank you.

If I'm by myself, I'd want a Zero. if with at least one fellow pilot, the Wildcat. As a long time student of US Navy, Marine, and Army Air Force tactics and strategies in the Pacific, I applaud this overall excellent video. I once intended to write a book on major contributions to WW II by native Arkansans (i.e., guys from Arkansas - the three major figures were going to be Jimmie Thach, Paul "Pappy" Gunn [who initiated the conversion of planes like the A-20 and B-25 into heavily armed ground attack planes by installing 4-8 forward firing 50 cal machine guns or even cannons, which led to planes like the B-25H and B-25J], and, in Europe, Footsie Britt, who won more major medals for heroism than any other American soldier in WW II [Audie Murphy won more medals overall, but not more of the very highest]). Illness interfered with the completion of the project, but I had completed my research on Thach and Gunn. I get upset sometimes because of the lack of credit that both Thach and especially Jimmy Flatley receive for their contributions in the war. Flatley is snubbed, I think, partly because when he and Thach were rewriting the fighter pilot flight manual immediately before the war, nearly all of Thach's suggestions won out over Flatley's (for instance, Thach wanted the Navy to stop using 3 plane units in combat, instead of going to 2 plane units; upon reflection, Flatley conceded that Thach's suggestion had merit, and they jointly recommended transitioning to 2 plane units, so that a 6 plane formation had 3 2-plane units, rather than 3 2-plane units). Also, Flatley achieved few aerial victories in the war, while Thach became an ace in limited aerial combat, most of it at Midway. Steve Ewing wrote a marvelous trilogy about US Navy pilots, devoted to Thach, Flatley, and Butch O'Hare respectively. I highly recommend all three books, along with the very best books that I know of on air combat in the Pacific, John Lundstrum's THE FIRST TEAM (a reference to a starting five on a basketball team, with Thach as team captain and Flatley and Butch O'Hare additional starters) and THE FIRST TEAM AND GUADALCANAL (on John Smith, Joe Foss, Marion Carl, Joe Bauer, and the like). BTW, Foss and the others had not only read Flatley's paper, but talked personally with Thach after Midway. The reason was that until Midway it was thought to be impossible to dog fight a Zero, yet Thach and two rookie pilots, using the Weave for the first time, fought between 15 and 30 Zeroes for over half an hour, all three Americans surviving, shooting down at least 4 Japanese planes (Thach had 3 Zeroes explode after hitting them while one of the rookies had one victory - in fact, Thach kept a running total of planes he managed to significantly damage by making a mark on his pant leg, but stopped at six when he realized there was no point, since he was almost certainly about to die; he did go on to damage several more Japanese planes, so that he did major damage to around 10 to 12 Zeroes, but given the desperate dog fight, neither he nor his rookies were able to confirm if any of those other planes crashed), and keeping the sky clear for the dive bombers when they arrived 15 minutes after the last torpedo plane left the area, one of the major factors in the US winning Midway. I would like to focus on one point the video made that is of the utmost importance: aerial gunnery. Thach had long been a major proponent of deflection shooting, something not emphasized in the IJN. Growing up in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, Thach had been an avid hunter, especially ducks. The idea was to use a shotgun to lead a duck, hitting it were it would be, not where it was at the moment you pull the trigger. In teaching pilots how to shoot, he greatly preferred pilots who had grown up hunting, so that they had some aptitude for leading the target, which is what deflection shooting is. Navy brass had the idea of planes flying behind the enemy, shooting long bursts into an enemy plane. Thach wanted his pilots, however, to shoot at enemy planes the way you would a duck. Not a long burst, but a one-second burst that would be not unlike firing a shot gun. With 30 seconds of burst time (with the F4F-3), he insisted that pilots harbor their ammunition, tapping the firing button instead of holding it down. How effective this was for him at Midway can be seen in the fact that while he hit a dozen Japanese planes while flying an F4F-4 (and 18 seconds of burst time), he still had ammo when the dive bombers arrived, though he suspected he was about to run out, and was already telling his wing man that they were going to need to swap places soon. The massive limitation on this otherwise excellent gunnery philosophy is that the Navy was so underfunded in the Thirties and until late 1940, Thach and Flatley and the pilots they commanded had virtually no ammunition with which to practice. So they had cameras inserted in the wings. After dog fighting or shooting drills, they would take the film and examine it carefully, critiquing various pilots in their techniques. So while they had fired very few bullets going into combat in WW II, they had extensive practice shooting using film. It is important to realize that nearly every Navy pilot who would go on to distinction as combat pilots in WW II was a student of Thach and Flatley or O'Hare, including David McCampbell and Alex Vraciu. I do want to add that I think one detail in the video was incorrect. It is said near the end that the Zero and Wildcat was still battling for supremacy at the end of 1942. In fact, after Midway, the Wildcat enjoyed a significant kill ratio over the Zero. Prior to Midway, the Zero had a kill ratio advantage, but after Midway pilots had both Flatley's summary of the advantages of the Wildcat over the Zero and Thach's Weave tactics (which were also adopted by Army pilots in the European theater). During Guadalcanal the Cactus Air Force did extremely well against the Japanese and enjoyed quite an advantage over the Zero. Kind of a coda to the whole video, the US Navy wanted a fighter that would be the Zero in just about everyway, so after Midway, when Thach was reassigned from being the senior fighter pilot in the Pacific to being in charge of training materials for fighter combat training in Jacksonville, Florida (though he spent as much time at Disney Studios in Hollywood - he made, I think, ten training films with Disney for the Navy, while also narrating a couple of more general films for the entire US military - you can find most of these on KZfaq, as well as "Don't Be a Dilbert," starring Bowery Boy Huntz Hall, but narrated by Thach). Anyway, Grumman arranged a meeting with Thach and asked him what they would need to do to have a plane that could completely outperform the Zero. The Hellcat was already in development, but they wanted to start making its successor. Thach emphasized rate of climb above all, and together they theorized that the ideal Zero-killer would have heavy armor for the pilot, would be very lightweight, but would have the largest possible engine. He also said that 4 guns with lots of ammo was better than 6 guns and less. The result was the F8F Bearcat, which was very lightweight, had a massive engine that could take it up to 460 mph, and had in most configurations 4 50 cal guns, though some had cannons instead. Grumman was in the process of delivering the Bearcat (and the Tigercat) when the war ended. In fact, the armed forces were engaged in dramatically overhauling their planes when the war ended, hoping to more or less retire a host of planes prior to invading the Japanese Home Islands.

Were I forced to chose between the A6M and the F4F, hands down I pick the Wildcat. In the Zero one's first mistake is often his last. In the Grumman Ironworks kitten you could recover from a mistake and fight on, even if you had to find a new airplane.

One of my favorite stories is when a top Japanese ace tried his well-honed trick on any Wildcat that tried to follow him straight up into a stall where he would watch them stall first and then zoom down behind them as they fell and shoot them down. He had done this many times but did not know the Navy now had the F 6 F that looked a lot like the F 4 F but had much more power. As the Japanese looked back for the stalling Wildcat, he saw the enemy on his tail as HE stalled. The Hellcat ate his lunch! Good video and thank you for putting it together. I have read about pilots selecting two guns to not fire until the other two ran out of ammo. How they did it I am not sure. Maybe a circuit breaker or fuse? I do know each gun had an electrical solenoid to fire it but I do not know if each one had a CB or fuse.

4 aircrafts I would fly. A6M8 the last zero ever built and the best in terms of upgrades and armaments. The Ki-84 Hei Mainly for the 20mm's and 30mms The P-40 Kitty Hawk as I continue to nickname them. As well as the G-10N1 Fugaku

A possible answer to the number of guns being fired comes from the Vietnam War... an A1E Skyraider (AKA Spad) pilot providing cover on a rescue mission decided that only using 2 of his 4 20mm cannons would allow him to remain on station longer. To achieve this he only charged (armed/loaded) 2 of the guns, later when he used up the ammunition in those guns he charged the other 2. If something similar was done by the earlier Wildcat pilots the could go into combat with say 4 .50 calibers and then later still have 2 remaining.

A wonderfully done video analyzing the pros & cons of both types, as well as tactics & doctrine. Too often training methods are overlooked; this was a key element in negating IJN tactical superiority the first year of the war.

Excellent presentation

If heading into combat, Wildcat hands down: pilot protection and far less likely to burst into flames*. As a pilot, for flying fun, I would still choose the Wildcat over the more agile Zero. Joe Foss loved the Wildcat. He said something to the effect of it was the only (or among the few) aircraft he flew that could take any control input without damage, including a power dive. Most aircraft can be damaged by radical control inputs (or severe turbulence at altitude), but the Wildcat had no limits. When doing crazy maneuvers to avoid cannon fire, that's a great feature. I am biased though, the Wildcat is my favorite aircraft since ~1973. About the outer guns on the F4F-4 - there is no switch; they pulled the breaker or equivalent at that time. That might be in Barrett Tillman's book. I believe some armor and self-sealing tanks were retrofitted to F4F-3s before the war started. I could not find reference and my Wildcat books/materials are not with me, but I am more than 50/50 sure. The F4F-4 has better/more armor for sure.

Hope that he will one day compare the He-111 with the G4M

I grew up playing on Vaught Air grounds, still had a Vaught sign on a wall couple years ago when I was in a New Parking Lot.

It still came down to who bombed who's airfields quicker, who was seen first in the sun and how many flying hours you can survive times flying experience. Cause as its shown in traffic I know the where slow drivers are , where the turn offs that block traffic and a F1 has to stop at the same traffic lights I do if I was sharing the road

you didn't mention the excellent and very destructive 50 cal ammunition , like the M11IAP and the M11 IAPT.

I would wait for the " Hellcat"!

For an insight into the training of the IJN fighter pilots prior to Pearl Harbor, may I recommend the books by Saburo Sakai, a highly successful fighter pilot ace. I read his first book, which I believe is "Samurai" which outlined in excellent detail the regimen each IJN fighter pilot endured from basic military through flight training. He also wrote a second book "Winged Samurai: Saburo Sakai and the Zero Fighter" which may have also addressed his initial and advanced flight training.

I don't know if the mechanism is similar or not to the Zero, but I took this reference from the movie The Eternal Zero and an a latest WW2 themed anime called KanColle 1944 to discuss the firing mechanisms on the Zero. In the Eternal Zero, there was a scene where a Zero vs Zero situation (Instructor vs Subordinate) in the middle of an air battle, the subordinate open fire to his instructor aircraft out of rage with the 7.7mm with it's frontal trigger on the throttle. Unfortunately in this movie I believe there wasn't a single scene where they switched to 20mm cannons and fire it. The second reference I took is from Kancolle 1944, there was a scene where the N1K1 Kyofu (this aircraft shared the same armament loadout with the Zero, 2×7.7mm MGs and 2×20mm cannons) floatplane fighter gun trigger is actually separated for each guns or that was what I believe until I saw this video discussing about a switch between MGs and Cannons on the Zero. The first scene they showed the pilot pulls the frontal trigger and the nose/cowling 7.7mm guns starts firing, and there's a side switch on the throttle where pilots used their thumbs to switch (either it's a gun selector to use 20mm and then fire it with the frontal trigger or it was actually the 20mm trigger itself) and the next scene shows the N1K1 firing it's 20mm cannons. From this 2 reference, and a third one actually from A6M Zero cockpit photos on the internet showing me that there was indeed a side switch on the throttle. The question that left out just like on minute 33:48 is that is the side switch is actually just a gun selector switch to 20mm cannons or is it actually the trigger for the cannon itself?

Another good video. One thing you stated but did not say anything further was the wings where made as one that is very correct but the had a weakness , it could not absorb damage at all it crumble under fire . The other is the time to make the wing was time consuming, in fact Mitsubishi had a hard time reaching production rates for replacement aircraft. It reach its goal in 1945, It matched the production rate of the P40 in 1940! Excellent video like the rest dont worry I like long videos to.

Whenever you see a Zero in an old movie it has raised rivets for days. The filmmakers often used T-38 trainers (Texan) as stand ins for the Zero.

Ill take the wildcat any time. It's got armor and selfsealing gas tanks.

I see you used Pacific Fighter (extention/standalone game from the IL2 1946 game) and i love it. Best game of its time. I played a rufe campaign and a ki61 campain, but i was a preteen and had almost no comprehention of how much i would grow to love WW2 aircraft

I'll take the F4F every time for armor protection, self-sealing fuel tanks, and that battery of .50cal machine guns. Never dogfight a Zero or Oscar one vs one, attack in pairs from altitude advantage. I've noticed the FM-2 Wildcat sounds like a Harley-Davidson motorcycle, which is cool 😎

The FM-2 model was optimized for service on small CVE escort carriers. Produced not by Grumman

I'd go with the Wildcat any day. Thanks for the great video.

spectacular content, very informative really enjoyable. learned a lot

About the weapons ranges. Slower and heavier shell drops much more than a 7,7 bullet does. So they hit on same spot only at distance they were syncronized in. Before and after such distance it came difficult to hit with both weapons on the target. That's why they preferred to shoot with one weapons system at a time. US fighters on the other hand sprayed lethat swarm of bullets that had same ballistic caracteristics. Many guns had so much recoil that no bullet went exactly the same line but the amount of the guns with the high rate of fire made it sure that the air was packed with bullets so it turned the effect to resemble a shotgun shot pattern. Only that shotgun shot is fewer in numbers.

If I have to pick between these 2, Wildcat, but anything in WWII, Hawker Sea Fury, that thing was DBS 1969 of the sky

47:00 Someone needs to do a detailed video biography about Maj. John Smith. He is not nearly as well known as marine aces like Boyington, Foss, Marion Carl, etc.

What source did you use for the 2300-2190 climb rate difference for the F-4F3 v F-4F4?

Great video, thanks man

Captain 'Winky" Brown, who more more types of aircraft than any man who ever lived, had a soft spot for the Wildcat. He preferred it to both the Zero and the Hell cat. Of course, he had two kills in Wildcats.

The FM-2 was built by GM's Eastern Aircraft division, hence the "FM" designation. This variant of the Wildcat was the production version of the Grumman XF4F-6 lightweight model. Also, the FM-2 was not developed for the Close Air Support role, instead, it was developed as a light performing fighter for service aboard the Navy's CVEs.

Hoping to survive the war I choose the Grumman wildcat. Get some altitude with a good Wing man and zoom and boom until Hellcat and Corsair upgrades arrive.

If I'm not mistaken, the overall wartime kill ratio is something like 4:1 in favor of the wildcat. So unless you want a 1 in 4 chance of survival, go Grumman.

I would say that in 1940 the Zero was the best fighter in the world. I maintain that if Goering had a couple of squadrons of Zeroes he would have won the Battle of Britain -- due to their greater range than the Bf 109 and superior maneuverability. They were also almost identically armed as the Bf 109Es. Note that Spitfires in the Pacific War had an abysmal record against the Japanese air forces.

The doctrine taught the American pilots was similar to the doctrine employed by German aces in WWI and WWII and by successful American and Commonwealth pilots over the world. It was the same tactic employed by the Flying Tigers in China. It is basically the same boom and zoom attack that made the Americans champions of Korea. Get above the enemy, dive on him, shoot and dive away. Never try to turn with your enemy. Turning fights might be fun but in the best of circumstances you will give your opponent a chance. Never give your opponent a chance.

Wildcat because it had shorter range. As a lowly truck driver I know how much fatigue from long drives can affect you over time. Especially if you're uncomfortable. So I think I'd rather have a shorter flight into battle and a shorter flight home.

Horikoshi, out loud, "Sure, we can do that!" Horikoshi, in his head, "Escort fighter, interceptor, survivability: pick two."

Excellent! Thank you! Wildcat, on protective armour. My only ever flight was aboard a de Havilland Dragon Rapide. Currently, I "fly" a small, diesel van but try to keep it as close to the ground as possible.

Muzzle velocity can cause aiming issues when firing at high deflection angles because the rounds are not always arriving at the same time. A plane moving at 300mph covers 44ft in one tenth of a second. If your cannon rounds and machine gun rounds are arriving a tenth of a second apart then the plane is no longer there for one of your weapons. The machine gun rounds will slow down faster than the cannon rounds to they will even out few hundred yards out then get further apart as distance is increased. Hard to say if there would have been an issue but I tend to doubt it. Without knowing the ballistic coefficient for the cannon round it is impossible to say.

Great video, my father worked on Wildcats and Hellcats throughout the war and never ceased to extoll their attributes. That being said I would select the Gruman every time. I am a 16,000 hour pilot with no military aviation experience.

Excellent presentation! Obviously two iconic aircraft of war 2 in the Pacific. While I think the Zero is the prettier of the two - I'd take the Wildcat if I could pick my steed! I prefer firepower and protection in a fight any day! And - truth be told, the chunky little Wildcat has its own sexy appeal! Again, awesome video!

The Zero was a beautiful & elegant aircraft, when you had an ace pilot at the controls it was a lethal predator. The F4 was clunky in form but very much and an effective fighter in its own right with the right pilot. The Zero sacrificed a lot of safety for its gracefulness and elegance. The Wildcat was more designed to take a hit and keep going. After the battle of Midway the Zero's reputation would never recover.

Having spent a large number of hours flying both in micro soft's combat flight simulator I can only say that I was much more successful in the zero than the wildcat. Obviously, I don't know how accurate either model was, although I did try to make the experience as realistic and challenging as the simulation allowed. Interestingly, the comments mentioned in the video about the flight characteristics and the pros and cons of each aircraft matched very closely the simulation experience. Perhaps I could have done better in the wildcat if I had used the "boom and zoom" strategy more.

I was in VMA 223, in A4's, in 1981, and was at Clark A/F Base then. Last COPE Thunder Operation, before the volcano ended that Base. Oorah !

Talking about the guns on the Wildcats, whether they were individually safetied. In the book Aces over Japan, a pilot talks about keeping two guns in reserve on his F4F, for the trip back from an escort mission from in the Solomons. Jeff De Blanc was the pilot. Story is called Point of No Return, pg. 92.

What about the Hellcat and Vale? That would be cool to do as well, if you haven't aready.

After reading so many books about the battles in the pacific, I would definitely choose the F4F. It was not the best fighter in most fights, but it would take a beating and most of the time bring their pilots home safely. The Thatch Weave is the tactic that saved the USN aviation early in the war.

I used to fly the IL-2 1946 flight sim. The zero was a hoot to fly because it was so maneuverable, but it was a flying Ronson lighter. I was not good enough to stay out of the guns of the opposing fighters, so I always went back to a Spitfire, which was maneuverable and didn't explode around me as easily.

The wildcat would have been a lot more impressive if they were stripped down to air show trim with no armor or any other weight adding safety measures..like the A6M was.

I'd pick the zero, i feel like i would do better rushing through an ooda loop in a light nimble aircraft with the excess range to be able to not be worried about how long the battle took in regards to fuel useage in max continuous power or overboost. Also of note, i feel like the americans just observed the japanese boom and zoom tactic and adopted it themselves, which with their armored aircraft that was good in a dive, worked better for them than it did for the japanese as it required you to breifly be in the enemys sights while pulling back up to altitude. So not long enough to get the 20mms on target, and being somewhat immune to long range 7.7mm, the wildcat could apply the tactic to better use. Also in a few japanese ace interviews the pilots (who survived) seemed to disregard the 20mm as the bullets dropped like a stream of piss (their words) so they just used the 7.7's and got closer and always aimed for the wing roots.

One on one, you’d be hard pressed to do better than the Zero, the Wildcat doesn’t have much advantage over any aspect of the Zero’s flight capabilities, though I’d argue it’s tougher. In typical combat conditions, I’d have no problem flying an F4F against Zeroes. USN Aviators did fine with them given the right tactics.

excellent video !! looking forward to more ....!! how about 1943 versions of P47 vs FW190

If you are asking about different ammo speed vs weight? If you double the weight of a bullet you will double the kinetic energy, If you double the speed you quadruple the kinetic energy. There are a lot of factors t take in though. The ammo holding together at higher speeds and the ability of gun handling the increased pressure required. I don’t know if this is what you were asking?