FM-2 Wildcat performance

[MaxGunz]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Those are VERY cool fighters for sure

The Wildcat can be fun too. It's definitely not going to reach the performance levels of those fighters that replaced it (with good reason) but I am curious if the FM-2 is performing at the level that it should or if it's been shortchanged a bit?

I wish it had HVAR's like they were equipped with. Would make for some better strike mission options.

Do you have any speed at alt data for the FM-2? I am guessing, 'no'.

Maybe the prop is different too, optimized for climb instead of speed?
Or some other difference?

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

Do you have any speed at alt data for the FM-2? I am guessing, 'no'.

Maybe the prop is different too, optimized for climb instead of speed?
Or some other difference?

Trying to find something on that. Sometimes if I ask questions then I suddenly find it on my own... so far not this time. Trying to see if I can get the basic critical altitude speed and power information.

The FM-2 had some extra juice over the regular Wildcat and comments suggest that it was noticeably quicker in the climb and a better turner but the in-game version I notice very little.

Not sure if the prop is different too. You might be right...optimized for climb. Or even something extra just to get it off the escort carrier decks?

[JtD]

For a first impression:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/fm-2.html

Manual states 2600 rpm / 50" low blower, 52" high blower for WEP.

[MaxGunz]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...6169-level.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/f4f.html

It looks like the FM-2 should be faster than the F4F-3 at 14000 ft.

[K_Freddie]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/f4f.html

Surprised to see that it had a telescope sight.. were these ever useful ?

[JtD]

In fighter aircraft of late 1930 they were still state of the art, however, they were soon to be replaced by electric gunsights, which were far better. This is also true for the F4F-3, only the first couple of aircraft were ever fitted with telescope sights. Apparently telescope sights were considered better than iron rings, though.

Speaking of very early F4F-3's, the first two F4F-3 came with a different armament of 2x.303+2x.50, the .303 being installed in the fuselage, the .50 in the wings. One of them is 1845, tested alongside 1848 which is seen in the picture. 1848 would be the fifth F4F-3 to be made, and was written off on March 23rd, 1942, after a crash landing on the Hornet.

[IceFire]

Aha... http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4f/fm-2.html

Same website. FM-2 performance information. It seems the FM-2 gets back what the F4F-4 lost. Seems like IL-2's performance numbers are pretty damn accurate for the FM-2. The F4F-4 might be a little on the fast side. F4F-3 seems about right too.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by JtD

In fighter aircraft of late 1930 they were still state of the art, however, they were soon to be replaced by electric gunsights, which were far better. This is also true for the F4F-3, only the first couple of aircraft were ever fitted with telescope sights. Apparently telescope sights were considered better than iron rings, though.

Speaking of very early F4F-3's, the first two F4F-3 came with a different armament of 2x.303+2x.50, the .303 being installed in the fuselage, the .50 in the wings. One of them is 1845, tested alongside 1848 which is seen in the picture. 1848 would be the fifth F4F-3 to be made, and was written off on March 23rd, 1942, after a crash landing on the Hornet.

That's interesting about the armament. I've never heard of that configuration before!