Hellcat and Zero Dogfight Demonstration

[A2C]

Have you seen this before?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wli-FazriFs

[Randy Haskin]

Looks like some airplanes tail-chasing around at an airshow.

[Holedigger]

No one in their right mind would really push their 65 year old vintage AC in a "Hard" dogfight scenario, just not a smart thing to do, especially at an airshow, down low with the place packed with people. OK, having said that....how many pilots here HAVE pushed their vintage birds up against the edge of the flight envelope (on purpose) and lived to tell the tale? Even at 65, many warbirds today are probably in better operating condition that many were back in theater, but with a million + bird, I would imagine that most baby their AC Most of the time. It is prudent!

[Holedigger]

Grrrrrrrr....computer weirdness strikes again, double post!!!

[tom d. friedman]

i know that dogfight scenarios at air shows is eye candy for the crowd, & it's fun to watch, but realistically with guns & armor plate removed for fuel efficiency purposes the staged fight is not really that accurate. i'm not a party pooper, but i'm biased because i like originality.

[evanflys]

I saw them do that at the Pacifica Coast Dream Machines. I thought it was pretty cool.
It's probably Jason and Ken from the CAF. I interviewed them about the differences in the planes:
http://evanflys.com/zero_vs_hellcat

Evan

[Randy Haskin]

with guns & armor plate removed for fuel efficiency purposes the staged fight is not really that accurate.

While it's true that weight has a significant impact on aircraft energy during a fight, that's not really a player in this case IMHO. A dogfight between two "empty" fighters would inscribe approximately the same lines across the sky as a dogfight between the same two fighters fully loaded.

The tail-chasing that we see in the movies and airshows is *not* dogfighting. Most of what you see in "historical" air-to-air footage isn't really dogfighting either.

Remember...what you see in gun camera footage are the people who got killed. Those are the people who are executing *bad* maneuvering. The guys who maneuvered *well* didn't end up in the footage that you see.

What is depicted in the movies is terrible, too. I think we've discussed this here on WIX before, but the fact is that dogfighting is very difficult to capture on screen realistically because it's small airplanes turning in (relatively) big circles. I can't say that I've really ever seen a dogfight depicted in the movies or television realistically, either.

Dogfighting hasn't changed substantially since WWI. The basic maneuvers are essentially the same, and the method of besting your opponent still (generally) involves being stabilized behind him with the ability to employ a weapon.

So, a dogfight generally looks like a series of high G, descending circles. Sometimes those circles are in the vertical or oblique plane of motion. Sometimes the opponents are flying the same circle, sometimes they are flying two different circles. Sometimes the circles change every 180 or 360 degrees.

Naturally, also, there are "slash and run" attacks. Or, there are attacks where one guy sneaks up on another and a kill is achieved with very little maneuvering at all. I'd hazard a guess that this probably accounts for most aerial victories, but that's just a guess. In the fog of war, it certainly happens more frequently than anyone would like to admit, even today.

Regardless, what dogfighting does not look like are passes back and forth across a showline with one directly behind another, then followed by 180 degree turns at either end of the airfield. If that were the case, the dogfight would be over rather quickly. The minute one aircraft rolled out, and the other was able to get a gun solution on him, -bam-, you'd have the end of your dogfight.

Here's a YouTube video of a typical short-range BFM engagement in the T-38C:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m56TD6_m5s

Again, the basic mechanics haven't changed since Rickenbacker. Jets are faster, have more thrust, the turns are bigger, the Gs are higher...but the hi yo-yos and low yo-yos and scissors and the like are exactly the same as they've always been.

[Nathan]

I am going to guess and say that most kills during WWII where from hit and run rather then turning in and out ,upside down, combat.

Would this be a correct opinion, anyone?

[corsair166b]

I always think back to that sequence in the movie 'Midway' where the kid in the Wildcat is being pounced by Zeros and his squadron commander screams over the intercom "Roll out Ted!!! Climb! Climb!!" just before he turns into a human torch....I've always thought it was bad advice vs. Zeros regarding the 'climb' part as we all know that Zeros were far better at climbing than the portly Grumman, but that it could dive like a brick...

Not relevant....much....to the conversation....just saying...

Mark

[Warbird Kid]

Enjoyed the performance. Didn't really enjoy the announcer. Dunno, more music/sound effects and a little less info would be good to space out the time.

[A2C]

If you watch the video closely, you can clearly see the advantage of the Hellcat. Overall, it had an edge on rate of climb, and acceleration, yet at the same time at speeds above 250 mph or so it could out turn the Zero. This was demonstrated to some degree in this video clip

I would like to see the Zero at a lower speed against the Hellcat doing one of those tight zoom climb turns which were hard for the allied planes to match.