Talk:F4F-4/@comment-174.111.200.191-20161120024313/@comment-174.111.200.191-20161120035929

"The Wildcat was outclassed by the Mitsubishi A6M2&3 in most areas with the only benefit to the wildcat was numbers."

Typical overstatement. The Wildcat was outclassed by the Zero in handling, but outclassed it decisively in durability. If you made a fast tank with a big gun that couldn't take a hit, most people would recognize that as not a very good tank compared to a slightly less agile tank that could take a hit. There were also esoteric advantages a wildcat pilot could use against a Zero if he had altitude, such as dive rate and roll rate.

"The only reason that wildcat pilots were able to hold off against A6Ms was because of the buddy system (i.e. Thatch Weave)."

Which was enabled by superior logistics on the ground and in the air. It wasn't an accident, but the result of training to the Wildcat's strengths. If the Wildcat were not a match for the Zero, there would be no tactics that could bridge that gap. However, it was.

The Zero would not have been able to use the Thach Weave because the Zero could not afford to suffer an enemy on its tail. It also couldn't communicate effectively with other zeroes.

The Zero was, for all its strengths, an extraordinarily fragile machine compared to the Wildcat. This fragility was offset only by the skill of its operators. Once that skill was attrited, any average Wildcat squadron could meet them on even terms, or better.

"If it were not for the amount of aircraft in the air the Japanese could have relied on their superior aircraft and pilots to claim air superiority throughout the war."

Not true. Japan was not able to sweep the skies of Wildcats over Guadalcanal when Henderson field was running on hope and duct tape. Once Wildcat tactics matured and the extreme skill of the early aviators was attrited, numbers were no proof against Wildcats.

Because the Wildcat was a warplane and the Zero was an acrobat.