Grumman F6F "Hellcat"
by last date | by total length | by number


LATEST COMMENTS

29.03.2024 12:12

Mikoyan/Gurevich Ye-8

28.03.2024 13:52

Short S.8/8 Rangoon

27.03.2024 22:04

25.03.2024 18:02

25.03.2024 04:10

22.03.2024 19:36

21.03.2024 23:56

Robin HR.200

21.03.2024 14:54

20.03.2024 19:36

20.03.2024 18:42

20.03.2024 14:05

Blackburn B-101 Beverley

19.03.2024 02:12

18.03.2024 22:06

Supermarine Spitfire

18.03.2024 22:02

Canadair CL-41 "Tutor"

18.03.2024 16:30

Bachem Ba 349 Natter

18.03.2024 14:47

18.03.2024 03:41

Curtiss Eagle

18.03.2024 00:04

17.03.2024 20:30

Junkers Ju 390

17.03.2024 16:34

AIDC Ching-Kuo

17.03.2024 10:52

15.03.2024 23:56

Messerschmitt Me 309

14.03.2024 07:03

Bartel BM.2

14.03.2024 07:02

14.03.2024 07:02

Boeing B-50

14.03.2024 07:02

14.03.2024 07:01

14.03.2024 07:01

Beech Model 2000 Starship

14.03.2024 07:01

Beech Model 18

14.03.2024 07:01


Jean Stravinsky, e-mail, 29.10.2023 05:49

I now see two tests at 60" with Water Injection specified, and the speed is STILL in the 380s... JV 224 and 42633.

P-47s never went higher than 72" with 150 fuel, so the Hellcat at 60" does seem to be at WEP, and it is still slow...

Those big wings had a cost I think.


Jean Stravinsky, e-mail, 29.10.2023 05:43

I overlooked all the circulating F6F tests are at Military Power...

400 mph + does look credible, but it should be noted many interviewed F6F pilots often specify they did not have Water Injection, so that could explain the charts being done at 52"or 60" at most...


Jean Stravinsky, e-mail, 29.10.2023 05:40

It is true the many published figures/charts are all Military Power...

I need to revise some assumptions, as 400 mph + does make sense...


Jean Stravinsky, e-mail, 29.10.2023 05:12

Fastest test of an F6F-5 on record was from No 58310. and peaked at 390 mph at 23 000 ft. It was only above 380 mph TAS between 20 k and 28 k.

375 mph top speed between 16 000 ft. and 26 000 is far more typical.

Over nearly 10 tests, only one outlier is barely 390 at 52", and there are some -3 at 60". 400 MPH is not credible. That being said, only the Frank reached 400, and probably barely.

Contrary to what is often assumed, the Zero rarely turned (preferring the Hineri-Komi or hit and run, as per Navy doctrine), and the Ki-84 probably only turned better in left turns (17-18 seconds), while being about the same in right turns (19-20 seconds).

The Japanese Navy cannons had a slow rate of fire, and even 4 of them on the N1K did not prove enough to kill Hellcats easily. (The N1K was formidable in maneuvering, similar to late Zeroes if not better)

Vertical handling in loops, and its turn rate, made the Hellcat fearsome, though the climb is only better than on the Ki-84 among Japanese types, as the Ki-84 had a too small prop that did not allow a proportional climb rate. Ki-84 climbed no better than a FW-190A in actual Japanese data.


Darren, e-mail, 11.11.2022 21:14

Great article and comments!

Just to add, the 380 mph maximum level speed often quoted for the F6F-5 was with dual bomb racks and six rocket launching hard points. In a "clean" condition the Hellcat could indeed touch 400 mph, but after 1944 it was common to use the Hellcat in the ground attack role so top speed was limited by the racks and hard points. Still, it had enough speed to handle any Japanese fighter, including the Jack, Frank, and George.


Heinkel Wulf, e-mail, 13.03.2018 10:59

I know the Bearcat that came later was more advanced, but I'd honestly prefer the tried and true Hellcat myself, mostly for the roomier and more comfortable cockpit, but also for the longer range. If I'm not mistaken, the Bearcat was mostly intended to be a lightweight interceptor that could operate from small escort carriers that couldn't equip the larger and heavier Hellcats. Aside from that despite having a huge respect for the Bear and being a fan of the design, I can't see the burning need for it, considering how completely the Hellcat mopped the floor. Even against later, much more advanced and powerful aircraft than the Zero, such as the Raiden, Shiden, Hayate, and Goshikisen, it held it's own. Even over Europe, I'd take one over a Mustang or Lightning any day.


Heinkel Wulf, e-mail, 13.03.2018 07:59

I've read that the Hellcat was thanks in large part to having the largest wing of any single engine fighter of the war, Allied or Axis, able to turn with, or even out turn late war models of the Zero. I'm pretty sure the F6F was the only top of the line fighter in the Allied arsenal able to claim such a feat. The F6F-5 was also able to (just) breach the 400mph mark thanks to having a smoother gloss skin compared to the earlier F6F-3. I've heard it's excellent turning ability and slow speed handling cut into it's roll rate compared to other aircraft, but I do know it could still outroll the Zero which was it's most common opposition with ease at high speed. I can imagine how much better the mark five version was once it got cannon and radar. Night fighter par excellence. Most people aren't aware that they even flew in USN colors in the ETO and shot down several German bombers, and I've heard they even mixed it up with 109's and 190's, but I could be wrong. I know the RN Hellcats did, and came out of the fight with favorable results against both types. The corsair was a magnificent aircraft in it's own right, but imho, the Hellcat has by far the best balance of qualities for a carrier aircraft during that time. A true pilots aircraft without doubt. Not hard to see how they achieved such an amazing kill to loss ratio. Like the AAF's P-47, it may not have been as glamorous as the Corsair or Mustang, but it was a tough as nails bare knuckle brawler that did the bulk of the dirty work.


ron, e-mail, 24.07.2017 03:33

If the F6F-5N had the 20mm Hispano Mk II cannon which was improved by the RAF, it was acceptible. If it was just the 20mm Hispano M2 from the USAAF, then it was rejected by the USN for fighters. I concur. The M2 misfired due to a 2cm gap in striking the cartridge. The RAF Mk II version fixed this for the Spitfire, the USAAF would not; not until the 1950s with the M39!
The 20mm Hispano M2, then the M3, then the M24, same problem. Stubborn USAAF Ordinance Dept through 2 wars, that's all!
The RAF had patience but that ran out in 1942. They wanted the US to help supply them Hispano cannons as good as theirs. Not a prayer!


Ron, e-mail, 07.10.2015 06:04

Gary,
The F6F-6 prototype may have gone 417 mph but it's climb was only 3,070 fpm, putting it between the -3 and -5!
I was surprised.
Perhaps they were wise to go with the F8F.
I would have put off the fancy wingtips till later to get the Bearcat into action faster.

The F6F-6 still had no rear view canopy! Most Japanese fighters had it from the start!
If it had the F8F canopy I might favor the F6F-6 to relieve the -5 before the end of WW2.

I like the firepower upgrade too. But I would exchange the M2 Hispano (and even the postwar M3) for the much superior MkII and then MkV Hispano of the RAF! That goes for all US Hispano armed fighters like the F6F-5N, P-38, A-36, and F4U-1C and so on.

The razorback canopy and the unreliable US version of the Hispano 20mm cannon were crying out for upgrade more so than the overdue power improvement for awhile already.
The US Hispano story is an embarassment.


Ron, e-mail, 07.10.2015 04:42

I just recently learned that the survivability of the F6F was far better than the F4U. The unprotected oil tank on the F4U-1 to -4 was toast with a rifle hit!
For this reason, the F6F had a 30% better durability.
I used to think the Corsair was tough, which it was but for that achilles heel.
The losses bear this out, especially on ground support missions. This was not lost on the Japanese like it was on the US brass. This was remedied postwar.
I have newfound respect for the Hellcat.
It doesn't have the vulnerability of the P-47's boost plumbing either. So the F6F may be the best protected US fighter!
Pilots never referred to it as 2 lbs stuffed into a 1 lb bag like P-47N pilots did about their fighter.

OK, so the Grumman was slower but in the Pacific it was fast enough.
Being a solid all-around fighter paid dividends.

Don't forget it gave a good account of itself against the Luftwaffe in limited action too.


Ron Kron, e-mail, 02.04.2015 07:12

For George Townsend : And the takeoff trim was 0-0-3R.Great a/c, fun and forgiving. Cabaniss and Barin Fields 1953.


GARY BEDINGER, 01.04.2015 07:29

GRUMMAN CAME UP WITH A WINNER BACK IN 1942 WHEN THE "HELLCAT" WAS FIRST INTRODUCED TO THE U.S. NAVY IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC DURING WW2.THE "HELLCAT" FLEW AT 380mph AND THE "HELLCAT" COULD CARRY A BOMB LOAD OF 2,000lbs.MTHE U.S. NAVY PILOTS WHO FLEW THE "HELLCAT" LANDED ON THE DECKS OF U.S.NAVY AIRCRAFT CARRIERS ALIVE WHILE FLYING THE F6F "HELLCAT".THERE WAS A HANDFUL, I MEAN A HANDFUL OF F6F "HELLCATS" WHICH COULD FLY AT 400mph BUT THESE "HELLCATS" WERE IN THE TESTING STAGE.WW2 WAS OVER WHEN THE 400mph "HELLCAT" FLEW.THIS WAS THE F6F-6


Ron, e-mail, 17.05.2014 04:13

I would like to hear more about the 2x20 mm, 4x12.5 mm armed F6F. I believe some -5N night fighters at least had that mix.

That reminds me of the A6M5c and A6M7s with roughly equal firepower (many A6M7s were night fighters too).

While the Hispano 20 mm cannons were classed as unreliable by the USN, suplementing them with 4 HMGs seems prudent (in contrast to the 4 Hispanos on the F4U-1C or -4B).

The Hellcat thus would be more likely to jam than the slower Mk4 and faster Mk5 cannons on these A6Ms but they only have 3x13.2 mm MGs vs the 4x12.5 mm MGs for this version of Hellcat.

Of course this is the not to say these are comparable in any other way except maybe in the dark.


Dick Ryan, e-mail, 08.02.2014 06:35

I'm a volunteer at the Yanks Air Museum,Chino,Ca. One of our ongoing restoration projects is an F6F-3 Hellcat. We have a set of alleged -3 wings but the undersides have a difference. One has a series of long, horizontal access panels over the flap actuating rod/assy. The other has a series of smaller(about4x5) access plates. We are trying to determine which is the newer or visa versa. If you can help, contact me at aeroman2@verizon.net.


George Powell, Capt. USN ret, e-mail, 28.12.2013 20:18

Flew the Hellcat during advanced training, circa 1954. Favorite memories: Blowing a jug while flying formation over Corpus Christi Bay and chasing cattle across the King Ranch.


Bob, e-mail, 19.11.2013 01:34

My dad worked as a mechanic on the carrier USS Marcus Island, and he said the Hellcat was terrific. He also said while the Corsair was a real screamer, it was a plumbers nightmare to work on. Hydraulic back ups for everything.


Harold Haskins Capt. USMCR Re, e-mail, 30.10.2013 05:07

Flew this marvelous A/C in ATU-300, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Spring-Summer 1954 . Returned to Pensacola Fla. Carrier
qualified in the Hellcat in early July 1954 .


Ron, e-mail, 24.04.2013 08:32

Hey Steve,
That's a myth.
Sounds good but ... not factual.
Many believe the F6F was designed after capturing a Zero anyway and keep publishing this myth. As the text at the top states, the Hellcat was in the air by June 1942 already.
What matters is that it delivered the same effective combat results as if that myth was true. So chalk it up to poetic license. Quite a work horse wasn't it!


willis E. Vanderberg, e-mail, 01.03.2013 19:21

Just for the record, we had F4U-5N'S aboard the USS Salerno Bay CVE 108 in the early fifties. This was the smallest carrier class built. If the Corsair was so dangerous on carriers we never saw it in our experience.


Chuck, e-mail, 10.11.2012 20:32

My Father became an ACE while flying the F6F-3, station aboard the USS Wasp CV-18. He was in VF-14 "the Iron Angels" and is a plank owner of the Wasp.


Naga, 14.07.2012 01:47

My great grandad had an affinity for this plane. While stationed on Iwo Jima, his line was attacked by a Mitsubishi G4M. The commanding officer told his men to stay in their foxholes, but when a pair of Hellcats teamed up and brought down the Betty, they got up and cheered, with their officer yelling at them to get back in their d*** foxholes.


David Bonnot, e-mail, 22.06.2012 23:46

Stationed at Point Mugu, Ca. 1956/1957 we use the f6f for drones and fired sparrow missles at them. The drones were painted bright red and controlled from another aircraft. Probably in over the year I was at Point Mugu a hundred were distroyed in flight. On one flight, the sparrow missles both missed and the drone lost radio control operation. Heading for downtown Los Angles, the air force was called in with f89 interseptor aircraft. After firing a large number of rockets the f6f finally gave up by running out of fuel and crashing.


Gene L oveland, e-mail, 03.06.2012 22:19

Flew the 1o,ooo Hellcat we received on board the Ticnderoga on two occasions.The cockpit had notes and telephone numbers of every girl who worked on it.I did not follow up. All the The F6's we flew were just great and gave you a feelig of confidence that you were flying the very besy.


George Townsend, e-mail, 08.05.2012 20:56

The F6F Was the Navy Advanced Trainer in Feb 1954 When I graduated at Pensacola. I did my final CARQUAL in The F6F-5.Wonderful airplane. R2800 PW. I loggged about 100 hrs.T/O 54in MP and 2660 RPM. I still remember.


Steve Gorek, e-mail, 18.02.2012 04:39

Don't know if this is true but I believe I read the F6F was the only plane in history designed to combat another aircraft, The Zero. Has anyone ever read this?


Rich, e-mail, 17.02.2012 09:44

Controversy has swirled concerning whether the Grumman F6F Hellcat or the Chance Vought F4U Corsair was the best US Navy fighter of WW II. And, some of that is occurring above. You must know some engineering and considerable history to accurately describe the relationship. I happen to love both fighters.

You will notice, if you check, that radial engines produced much less horsepower only a few years before. Technology advances at the beginning of the war were beginning to promise some amazingly powerful engines. Very powerful engines could only be exploited with large diameter propellers. Grumman and Chance Vought approached this problem very differently. The Corsair came along earlier. To keep the larger prop away from the ground or deck, it was designed with an inverted-gull wing to allow shorter, stouter landing gear for the rigors of carrier landings. Center-of-gravity considerations moved the cockpit further aft. The unfortunate byproduct of this design was that the very long and large nose and the rearward positioning of the pilot caused the carrier deck to be hidden in the last seconds of landing. For a confident, experienced pilot, this was tolerable. But, for inexperienced pilots, the Corsair was a 'killer'.

The Hellcat, on the other hand, put the pilot forward and 'beefed up' the taller landing gear to withstand carrier landings. The Hellcat didn't challenge the inexperienced pilot's abilities. When the Hellcat became available and was deployed, the Corsairs were reassigned to land bases with some Navy but mostly Marine squadrons where landing on airstrips with wide, long runways was the rule and little problem.

Before you think that I'm defending the Hellcat, the Corsair actually had slightly better performance and maneuverability. The Japanese called the Corsair 'Whistling Death' because the oil-cooler intakes in the wing-roots made a distinctive whine during a dive.

Regards, Rich...


Don Parker, e-mail, 25.06.2011 16:40

Flew the F6 at VU 3 in 1958 configured as a drone. Greatest flying time I ever had as the squadron had about 30 of them and putting time on the engines was the only mission. All painted red and in those days there were few if any constraints to just getting in one and going "flying"..........those days will never return !!


r l battersby, e-mail, 02.06.2011 22:23

i operated the f6f drone out of point magu in 54-55 the aircraft is very forgiving in respect to pulling out of almost any attitude you could put it in during takeoff or landing including 90 degree and or inverted takeoff , we flew 4-6 drone ops a day with recovery approx. 60% lots of fun


Klaatu, e-mail, 27.04.2011 04:22

The most effective carrier-based fighter of world War II, period. The Pacific Campaign could never have been won without these aircraft.

Oh yes, I can hear all the Corsair fans disputing that statement already, with their arguments about how much better the F4U performed. The point is, however, that the assertion concerns the most effective CARRIER-BASED fighter, and that title simply has to go the the Hellcat. Boyington and his famous "Black Sheep" Marine aviators were all strictly land-based. The navy finally did deploy F4Us from carriers, but that was only in the last few months of the war, after the Hellcats had already accomplished most of the carrier-based fighting.

Vought first flew the F4U in the spring of 1940 and when, two years later, it still wasn't panning out as a viable carrier-based fighter, the Navy turned to the people at Beth Page, on the other side of Long Island Sound, to come up with an alternative. Grumman designed, built and deployed the F6F in combat in less than 18 months, and all while Vought was still trying to get the bugs out of the F4U. To develop such an outstanding fighter plane in such a short time was a phenomenal achievement by any standards!


C. K. Purcell, e-mail, 26.04.2011 00:11

A good airplane


mark blasco, e-mail, 14.03.2011 22:35

I was just in Maui and dove on a hellcat in about 50ft of water off McGregor point. We heard the pilot survived. Aircraft was in good shape sitting upright on the bottom.


aldol, e-mail, 03.03.2011 17:03

kill ratio against the mistsubishi zero?
19 to 1


B.C., e-mail, 19.02.2011 18:35

Hi Funseekers!..I am finishing up my model aircraft, the F6F, complete with wing armament and radio antenna. This is tge 2nd one, first one was back in the 50's when I was still in H.S. .. This time, as a retired man, I built another wood scale model out of the Guillow box and even hand-crafted the tri-propeller from basswood to give it the authenthic look and painted it blue and yellow, the colors of its carrier usage. Will have photos on Facebook.
It was nice reading all the comments on this fine aircraft.


Ben Beekman, e-mail, 03.02.2011 03:07

This was a truly great airplane! According to William Green's book "Famous Fighters of the Second World War", (Doubleday, 1967), the Hellcat is credited with 4,947 of the 6,477 enemy aircraft claimed to have been destroyed in the air by U.S. Navy carrier pilots. If we add the scores of shore-based Hellcats, the total comes to 5,156 enemy machines, the ratio of kills to losses exceeding nineteen to one! Near the end of the war Grumman equipped a test model, the XF6F-6, with an R-2800-18W P/W 2,450 hp water-injected engine driving a four bladed Hamilton Standard propeller. This test aircraft reached a top speed of 417 mph at 22,000 ft.,the fastest of all Hellcats.


Ray Owen, e-mail, 22.01.2011 03:00

Flew this plane off the carrier Wasp (CV -18).Never had a problem ,unless you count the approx. 3'x3' tip of the wing i left in the Philippines after an attack on a Jap cruiser. Returned about 180 miles and landed aboard ship w/no problem. Love that plane.


Ron, e-mail, 02.01.2011 08:53

It caught my attention when you said night fighter.
I'm curious about the pair of 20 mm cannons mixed with the 4 remaining .50s on early F6F night fighters in the war years.
What was their firing rate and belt composition (AP to HE etc..and respective shell weight and %HE), and any jamming issues? How effective etc...? Any light you can add?


darius, 23.10.2010 15:39

nice plane.igota model rc


Bob Maxwell, e-mail, 19.10.2010 12:06

Bill, Grumman had several plants producing the F6 but the main one was at Bethpage, Long Island, near Farmingdale.


Bill, e-mail, 12.10.2010 16:31

My father was a plant manager for Grumman in N.y. during world war II. I remember going to the field to see Wildcats
& Hellcats. We lived in Stoney Brook, Long Island, NY I can't remember the name of the Plant/Field where he worked?
Anyone might know? Please e-mail me. Thanks, Bill


BobW, 30.09.2010 22:11

Something this article fails to mention, or at least I didn't see was that in 1944 Grumman was turning out one Hellcat per hour - 644 in one month - an aircraft production record which has never been equaled. That's incredible.


John Carver, jr, e-mail, 30.09.2010 04:18

My dad, Jack Carver, callsign "Bird Dog" was with VF-6
aboard the Hancock....he loved the airplane until the day he died...alkways claimed it was the best. He recieved 5 Air Medals...shot down several of the other guys...and was my hero.


Jim Scanlan, e-mail, 14.09.2010 04:15

Fron feb 53 to June 53, I was in MTC-10 (N) Fighter squadron. It had F6F's. We were the last to use F6's. The squadron taught pilots, for night combat. They had installed a Hughs radar on the right wing. I was a parachute rigger, and I filled the planes with oxygen, which inside, on the armour plate, for the pilots. Jim Scanlan


Aaron, e-mail, 12.08.2010 07:19

Woh, I hope I don't get into trouble here. There is quite an elite crowd at this sight. Here goes: The F6F was the perfect aircraft for the USN when it arrived. An easy (by comparison) aircraft to learn to fly and protectively forgiving. Best engine of the war and dependable frame. Hard combination to beat. Can somebody please tell me where the maximum published speed of 380 mph. came from? It's not true. In a USN comparison test against an F4U-1 and FW-190A a F6F-3 with water injection reach a maximum speed of 409 mph. A USN Air Station Performance Test Each 1000th Airplane
(TED No. PTR-2125) report testing a F6F-5 No.58310 they reported a maximum speed of 391 mph. at 23,100 ft. at military power (NOT WAR EMERGENCY). By the way, if they hadn't come up with the Hellcat there would have been a lot of Corsairs at the bottom of the ocean.


Ron, e-mail, 20.05.2010 00:37

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Hellcat had one of the best kill ratios of WW 2.
I know it wasn't as fast as other fighters with the same engine, but it could outmaneuver them.
It's a shame it had a turtle-back for the duration. A teardrop canopy would have been nice in 1944 like most allied fighters. Heck, a Grumman F8F Bearcat in 1944/45 even better! (Better specify the Mk V RAF variant of the Hispano 20-mm cannons, not the unreliable US M2 or M3 variants). Dig that climb rate!


CathyAnne, e-mail, 01.03.2010 09:09

My dad Ens. John W. Burton (eventually Lt. j.g.) was in the Night Fighting Unit VF-3. He flew with Lt. George L. Cassell, Ens. Lewis B. Humphrey, Ens. Clifford S. Tomlinson, and Ens. Carl E. Poston of the Fighting Three of Air Group Three from Oct 1, 1944 to March 1,1945 off the USS Yorktown. I have his Handbook and have been reading about their strikes over Canton, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Okinawa, Formosa, Iwo & Chichi Jima. He is 89 yrs old and still loves air planes. Recently he took his great grandson to EVERGREEN Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, OR just to see the historic fighter planes and the famed Spruce Goose. His stories from WWII are amazing. What a hero we have in our own family. We are so proud.


Recordo, e-mail, 21.02.2010 17:42

Len: I remember in the early '50s seeing you and your pals flying F6fs out of Floyd Bennet in formation up and down the Rockaway peninsula. There was the occasional PBY but to my recollection, no F4Fs, F4Us or F8fs. What a shame that field was closed. My father was in a ferry squadron from 1942-45 tranporting aircraft between New York, Texas and California.


J.W. Walsh, 18.02.2010 18:00

HI LEANN


J.W walsh, 18.02.2010 17:59

Loved this airplane! Came back to the carrier more than once with multiple holes from either Zeke 7.7 mm. machine guns or Jap ack ack. Not good flotation characteristics though. Got shot down at Ishigaki and had to make a water landing. F6F went down in less than 60 seconds and left me swimming out of the cockpit. Rescued by a sub the next day though so all's well that ends well. Best Navy fighter of WWII. My dad was in the war my hole family is !


Len Eisner, e-mail, 01.12.2009 23:58

I joined VF-3 out of operational training in mid 1945 and flew the F6 as George Cassell's wingman; he was the executive officer of the squadron. I truly enjoyed flying that airplane while in the squadron. I left the Navy in 46 to finish college and flew it extensively at Floyd Bennett field in the reserves, sometimes ferrying one to Alameda for overhaul and returning with a rebuilt one. After graduation and return to the service I flew it while waiting for new AM-1s to be delivered to the squadron I was in. Except for the F11F, I would pick the Hellcat as my all time favorite bird.


Charlie Gray, e-mail, 02.11.2009 11:00

During my navy enlistment i was stationed at Point Mugu NAS from 1952-1954, assigned to operations [drones]at the main hangar and worked on the F6F-5K hellcats as a mech. We also had a few F8F bearcats as control aircraft but i much preferred working on the hellcats. What a great aircraft that was, and what a fine group of knowledgeable people i had the privilege of working with at that time.


Mike Granat, e-mail, 19.07.2009 22:40

Flew the aircraft while with Fighting Squadron 3 (VF-3). With end of WW11, VF-3 formed a flight demonstration team (8 aircraft). Aside of normal flight ops, we performed shows to encourage pilot recruitment. Conducted last show at '46 National Air Races, Cleveland, Ohio. A three man team flying the new F8F Bearcat also performed. It was the inaugural act for a new flight demonstration team now known as the Blue Angels


Laurence, e-mail, 29.05.2009 01:39

Even though the wildcat and hellcat look similar quite a few changes were made, 1 of note is the wing being taken from mid fuselage to low.Apparently a few japanese pilots made a similar mistake and paid the price for it especialy in its climb rate.


randy, e-mail, 16.01.2009 23:38

I would like to know if it was radio gear that sat behind the pilot. if so, where can I find some photos?


Ace, e-mail, 27.12.2008 08:26

this plane shot down over 1000 japanese aircraft.watch dogfights the zero killers for its action


Luis, e-mail, 06.09.2008 23:15

It is exactly the same as the original F4F Wildcat with a better engine! Whats the point? They ould at least put in a new simpler design.... But above all a good and deadly plane...


Fred J. Ferrazzano, e-mail, 26.05.2008 15:06

My very favorite propellor driven fighter aircraft of all time having worked for the Grumman "Iron Works" at Bethpage and flying in the fleet with carrier work in the mid 50's.


Don Corzine, 05.05.2008 02:34

Loved this airplane! Came back to the carrier more than once with multiple holes from either Zeke 7.7 mm. machine guns or Jap ack ack. Not good flotation characteristics though. Got shot down at Ishigaki and had to make a water landing. F6F went down in less than 60 seconds and left me swimming out of the cockpit. Rescued by a sub the next day though so all's well that ends well. Best Navy fighter of WWII.




All the World's Rotorcraft


Virtual Aircraft Museum