F4U-4 Vs FW190 D9

[jugggo]

Looking for opinions on this. As in which aircraft would out perform the other in a 1-on-1. Or any other 190 for that matter. But since I do not know much about 109s 0r 190s I picked the Dora 9.

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

This should have a poll. That would be fun!

Honestly, I'm not sure which to pick. They both had similar frames, and the performance of both was both pretty close.

I'm not sure if the FW 190D was better at high altitude or not.

[beaupower32]

Its a tough tough one, but I would probably give it to the F4U-4 Corsair.

[jugggo]

I know me to since the Corsair is my all time favorite ride

[Bug_racer]

This really is close . Both are great planes . Did they ever go up against each other ? Were any Corsairs delivered to Europe ?

[tomo pauk]

Went for the Corsair.
It could tangle with D-9, plus it was carrier capable and with superior range.

Corsairs were deployed at Europe, one of the tasks being escort mission(s?) against Tirpitz.

[vonmallard]

the Royal Navy operated the F4U in an operation against the Tirpitz in Norway. Haven't seen where any FW's were used against them thou I think a few Me-109's were engaged.

[jugggo]

the Royal Navy operated the F4U in an operation against the Tirpitz in Norway. Haven't seen where any FW's were used against them thou I think a few Me-109's were engaged.

Hmm thats interesting, I wonder if they were as pesky as the A6m's.

[tomo pauk]

Were A6Ms that pesky? Me-109 was much tougher opponent.

[jugggo]

Yeah from what I have read. Since they had the better rate of turning at slower speeds. The Wildcat,Hellcat,Corsair, and P40 had to use their power to their advantage ie Boom and Zoom tactics.

[beaupower32]

Back on topic, Im posting a .pdf that was a trial between the F4U, F6F, and Fw-190 A-4. I know that it isnt the F4U-4 and Fw-190 D-9, but it should give us a Idea on how the two would compair. I got this from WWII Aircraft Performance

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I think as with all of the top fighters you are going to have to break this down into more areas. What conditions are they meeting at such as Altitude? Every aircraft has its optimal area, and the areas that it is weak and strong it.

Bill posted an interesting comparison here a while back from some flight tests a while back, that broke it down through altitude.

[Colin1]

Back on topic, Im posting a .pdf that was a trial between the F4U, F6F, and Fw-190 A-4. I know that it isnt the F4U-4 and Fw-190 D-9

The -4 was a significantly better performer than the -1
it could nudge 450mph (vs around 420mph for the -1, or closer to the performance of the D-9), climbed ferociously and had better combat acceleration than the P-51D. Overall manoeuvrability was excellent though I doubt any naval bird (with folding wings) could follow the 190 in the roll, they were difficult enough to follow anyway.
Notwithstanding that, I think the F4U-4 had enough in other-performance characteristics, gunnery skill levels and tactics to defeat a similar formation of Fw190D-9s at the latter's best altitude, or down on the deck.

[beaupower32]

I know that the -4 was a way better aircraft then the -1. I posted it to give a general idea of how the later aircraft might compair to each other.

[mike526mp]

someone posted this site and comparison above, i'll post it again,

F4U Performance Trials

From what i read the FW-190 was not a very good airplane in any form (i do think it is one of the best looking airplanes if that is of any coselation), unreliable, had a good roll rate, but probably the worst turning radius of just about anything, and had a habit of stalling in tight turns. the F4U and F6F were found to be much more manuaverable than the FW-190..

as quoted from the above link from pilots that flew them both in side by side test, "It is not equal to either the F4U or F6F in combat. All pilots agreed the F4U or F6F would be prefered in actual combat operations."

just about everything we had was a better fighter.