PDA

View Full Version : Corsair, the real story



huggy87
08-21-2008, 10:30 PM
Interesting read

Chance Vought F4U-4 Corsair

The Facts Tell The Whole Story

Since the end of the Second World War, there has raged a continuous
debate over which was the best overall fighter aircraft to emerge from
the conflict. This debate shows no sign of abating to this day. From the
school boys of the mid nineteen forties to the aviation scholars of the
1990's, P-51 advocates argue their case with Spitfire men and Lightning
defenders, and so goes the debate forever..........

Or, does it?

While these debates certainly do not lack for passion, they frequently
lack accurate analysis of the aircraft in question. There is some solid
evidence that strongly supports the argument that the Chance Vought
F4U-4 Corsair was the finest all around fighter of the war. Certainly it
qualifies as the best fighter/bomber.

The F4U-4 arrived in combat early in 1945. Ther efore, it had only about
six months to establish its combat record against the Japanese. However,
the big fighter remained in service throughout the Korean War, where
along with the F4U-5, it gained a sterling reputation for delivering
ordnance with great accuracy. Indeed, the Corsair earned the respect of
enemy pilots flying the MiG-15. Vought's Corsair was a fighter that
could not be treated lightly. In a turning fight below 350 knots, the
MiG pilot could find himself in <<image002.jpg>> big trouble very
quickly.

Chance Vought's F4U-4 came about as a development of the F4U-4XA, which
was first flown in early April 1944. It was fitted with an up-rated
Pratt & Whitney R2800-18W or -42W engine. This powerplant developed
2,450 bhp with water injection. It was also fitted with a four blade
hydromatic propeller which provided the necessary efficiency to utilize
the greater power. The carburetor inlet was moved from the wing root
leading edge to a duct located und er the engine. The exhaust stacks had
to be re-routed as a result. Armament remained the same as the F4U-1,
with six .50 caliber Browning MGs. The limited production F4U-4B was
armed with four M3 20mm cannon. Under-wing load capability was
substantial. Up to three 1,000 lb. bombs along with eight 5 inch rockets
could be carried. Reportedly, it was not unusual to rig the F4U-4 with
as much as 6,000 lbs of ordnance. Apparently the robust structure of the
Corsair could bear these loads without undue wear and tear on the
airframe. Almost certainly, such overloaded Corsairs did not operate
from carrier decks, but exclusively from shore bases.

Let's compare the F4U-4 to its earlier sibling, the F4U-1 so that we can
clearly see the improvements made.

Maximum speed:
F4U-1: 417 mph @ 19,900 ft.
F4U-4: 446 mph @ 26,200 ft.

The -4 displays a 29 mph speed advantage, but more importantly, does it
at a considerably greater altitude. The F4U-4 is actually 10 mph faster
than the P-51D at the Mustang's best altitude.

Rate of climb:
F4U-1: 3,250 ft/min.
F4U-4: 4,170 ft/min.

While the -4 has a more powerful engine, it also weighs more than the
F4U-1. This marked increase in climb rate can be attributed to the more
efficient 4 blade propeller as well as the higher power of the up-rated
powerplant. The increase moves the Corsair into stellar company with
fighters such as the P-38L and the F7F Tigercat. The F4U-4 climbs at a
rate 20% better than the P-51D.

There is little doubt that the Corsair was likely the greatest load
carrying fighter of its era. There is little to compare to it except
perhaps late-war models of the P-47, which still fall somewhat short in
maximum load.

We now get to the more subjective aspects of the -4's performance.
Rating a fighter's flight characteristics is never without pitfalls.
What one pilot feels is too stiff, another might describe as firm or
secure. As a r esult, opinions may vary. However, empirical data is
certainly the most valuable in determining a fighter's overall
performance. The tangible things such as cockpit layout and visibility
are also important, as are the intangible things such as confidence in
the airframe to get the pilot home. I will do my best to present the
subjective data in an unbiased manner.

In terms of maneuverability, all models of the Corsair were first rate.
The F4U-4 was better than the F4U-1 series. Why? More power and better
performance in the vertical regime. Very few fighters, even pure
fighters such as the Yak-3 could hang with an -4 maneuvering in the
vertical. Its terrific climbing ability combined with very light and
sensitive controls made for a hard fighter to beat anytime the fight
went vertical.

Ease of flight.The Corsair was much less a handful than the P-51 when
flown into an accelerated stall, although it was by no means as
forgiving as the F6F Hellcat. Torque roll was no wors e than most of its
high power contemporaries.

The F4U also rolled well. When rolling in conjunction with powerplant
torque, in other words, rolling left, it was among the very fastest
rolling fighters of the war. In the inventory of American fighters, only
the P-47N rolled faster, and only by 6 degrees/second.

In level flight acceleration the F4U-4 gained speed at about 2.4
mph/sec, the P-51D accelerated at about 2.2 mph/sec. The F4U-1 could not
keep up with either, accelerating at only 1.5 mph/sec. The real drag
racer of American WWII fighters was the P-38L. It gained speed at 2.8
mph/sec. All acceleration data was compiled at 10-15,000 ft at Mil.
power settings.

Turning to dive acceleration, we find the F4U-4 and Mustang in a near
dead heat. Both the P-47D and P-38L easily out distance the Corsair and
P-51D in a dive. Still, these two accelerate better than the opposition
from Japan and Germany. Moreover, both the Corsair and the Mustang have
relatively high critical Mach numbers allowing them to attain very high
speeds in prolonged dives before running into compressibility
difficulty. With the exception of early model P-38's, it was almost
always a mistake to attempt to evade American fighters by trying to dive
away. This goes for early war fighters as well, such as the P-40 and F4F
Wildcat.

There is one story recorded by a Luftwaffe pilot who, while flying a
Bf-109F over North Africa tangled with several FAA Martlets (the British
name for the F4F). Finding himself alone with a Martlet on his tail, he
elected to half roll into a steep dive to shake off the slow flying
carrier fighter. Hurtling down in a screaming dive, the German looked
over his shoulder and was stunned to see the Martlet (Wildcat) closing
with guns blazing. Pulling back on the stick, under heavy G loading, the
German eased into a zoom climb. The F4F was still with him firing
bursts. As the speed bled down, the Bf-109 began to pull away in a
steady rate climb. Had the Brit been a better shot, the German was
certain he would have been shot down. He had underestimated the diving
ability of the American fighter. Indeed, many of his comrades would do
the same over Europe and not be as fortunate as he.

When we look at the turn rates of WWII fighters we stumble upon several
factors that determine how well a fighter can turn. Aside from the
technical aspects such as wing area and wing loading, we find that some
fighters are far more maneuverable at low speeds than at higher
velocities. This was very common with Japanese designs. At speeds above
250 mph, the A6M Zero and the Ki-43 Hayabusa (Oscar) could not roll
worth a nickel. But at 150 mph, they were two of the most dangerous
fighters ever to take wing. It did not take long for Allied pilots to
learn to avoid low speed turning duels with the Japanese. Once this rule
was established, the light weight dogfighters were hopelessly outclassed
by the much faster opposition.

Over Europ e, things were somewhat different. The Luftwaffe flew fast,
heavily armed aircraft that were not especially suited to low speed
turning fights. The Allies had in their inventory the Spitfire, which
was very adept at turning fights. The Americans had the P-47, P-38 and
P-51. All of which were very fast and at least a match for the German
fighters in maneuverability. Especially the P-38 which could out-turn
anything the Luftwaffe had and could give the Spitfire pilot pause to
consider his own mortality. With the exception of these last two, there
was nothing in western Europe that could hang with the F4U-4. Even when
including the Soviets, only the Yak-3 could hope to survive a one on one
with the Corsair. To do so, the Yak would have to expertly flown.
Furthermore, the Yak-3 was strictly a low to medium altitude fighter.
Above 20,000 ft its power dropped off rapidly, as did its
maneuverability. The Yak-3 in question had better be powered by the
Klimov M107A engine and not the low ou tput M105. Otherwise, the speed
difference is too great to overcome.

So, perhaps now is a good time to summarize the performance of the
F4U-4. Let's compar <<image004.jpg>> e it to the aircraft generally
believed to be the best all-around fighter of World War Two, the North
American P-51D Mustang.

Speed: The -4 was about 10 mph faster than the P-51D at the altitude
where the Mustang developed it's highest speed.
Advantage: F4U-4

Climb: The -4 Corsair was a remarkable climber despite its size and
weight. It could out-climb the Mustang by nearly 800 fpm.
Advantage: F4U-4

Maneuverability: The F4U-4 was one of the very best. According to
Jeffrey Ethell: "Of all World War II fighters, the Corsair was probably
the finest in air-to-air combat for a balance of maneuverability and
responsiveness. The -4, the last wartime version is considered by many
pilots who have flown the entire line to be the best of them all....."
Indeed, the F4U-4 had few, if any equals at the business of ACM (air
combat maneuvering).
Advantage: F4U-4

Armament: Equipped with either six .50 caliber machine guns or four 20mm
cannons, the -4 had more than adequate firepower to destroy any
aircraft. It was the premier load carrying single engine fighter of the
war. It could get airborne with bomb loads exceeding that of some twin
engine medium bombers.
Advantage: F4U-4

Survivability: There was no other single engine fighter flown during the
war that could absorb greater battle damage than the Corsair and still
get home. Even the USAAF admitted that the F4U was a more rugged
airframe than the tank-like P-47 Thunderbolt. That is a remarkable
admission. The big Pratt & Whitney radial engine would continue to run
and make power despite have one or more cylinders shot off. The P-51D,
on the other hand, could be brought down by a single rifle bullet
anywhere in the cooling system.
Advantage: F4U-4

Useful range: The F4U-4 had r oughly the same radius of action as the
Republic P-47D-25-RE, which flew escort missions deep into Germany as
far as Berlin (the P-47D-25-RE had 100 gallons of additional internal
fuel capacity). Yet, the P-51D still maintained a big edge in endurance.
Advantage: P-51D

Ease of flight: Despite gaining the nickname of "Ensign Eliminator", the
F4U series tendency to roll under torque was no more difficult to handle
than any other high powered fighter of the era. Some who have flown both
the Corsair and the Mustang state without hesitation that the P-51
exhibited a greater propensity to roll on its back than did the F4U.
Moreover, the Corsair was a far more forgiving aircraft when entering a
stall. Although it would drop its right wing abruptly, the aircraft gave
plenty of advanced warning of an impending stall by entering a
pronounced buffeting about 6-7 mph before the wing dropped. The P-51,
however, gave no warning of an impending stall. When it did stall, it
was with a to tal loss of pilot control, rolling inverted with a severe
aileron snatch. Recovery usually used up 500 ft or more of altitude. It
was not uncommon for Mustangs to spin out of tight turns during
dogfights. The F4U could also be flown at speeds more than 30 mph slower
than that at which the Mustang stalled. In other words, the P-51 could
not hope to follow a Corsair in a low speed turning fight.
Advantage: F4U-4

Outward Visibility: The Corsair provided for very good visibility from
the cockpit. However, few if any WWII fighters offered the pilot a
better view than the P-51D. The earlier P-51B was inferior to the F4U.
Nonetheless, it was the D model that made up the bulk of Mustang
production.
Advantage: P-51D

Finally there is an area in which the P-51 cannot compete at all. The
F4U was designed to operate from an aircraft carrier. What this provides
for is a utility that is unmatched by the better land based fighters of
WWII. The ability to operate at sea or from shore can never be
over-valued.
Obvious advantage: F4U-4

In conclusion, it would be hard, no, impossible to dismiss the F4U-4 as
the leading candidate for the "best fighter/bomber of WWII". Furtherm
<<image005.jpg>> ore, there is strong evidence that it very well may be
the best piston engine fighter (to see combat) period. Certainly,
everyone can agree on this: The F4U-4 Corsair was at the pinnacle of
WWII piston engine technology and performance. When people debate the
relative merits of the great fighter aircraft of WWII, they would be
remiss in not acknowledging the F4U-4 as one of the very best, and in
the educated opinion of many, "the best" fighter aircraft to fly into
combat in World War II.



Return To Main Page <http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/index.html>


RESOURCES:
Barrett Tillman, Corsair : The F4U in World War II and Korea.
Pilots Manual for F4U Corsair.
Various notes taken from Jeffery Ethell books and articles.
Pilots Manual for the P-51D.


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

huggy87
08-21-2008, 10:30 PM
Interesting read

Chance Vought F4U-4 Corsair

The Facts Tell The Whole Story

Since the end of the Second World War, there has raged a continuous
debate over which was the best overall fighter aircraft to emerge from
the conflict. This debate shows no sign of abating to this day. From the
school boys of the mid nineteen forties to the aviation scholars of the
1990's, P-51 advocates argue their case with Spitfire men and Lightning
defenders, and so goes the debate forever..........

Or, does it?

While these debates certainly do not lack for passion, they frequently
lack accurate analysis of the aircraft in question. There is some solid
evidence that strongly supports the argument that the Chance Vought
F4U-4 Corsair was the finest all around fighter of the war. Certainly it
qualifies as the best fighter/bomber.

The F4U-4 arrived in combat early in 1945. Ther efore, it had only about
six months to establish its combat record against the Japanese. However,
the big fighter remained in service throughout the Korean War, where
along with the F4U-5, it gained a sterling reputation for delivering
ordnance with great accuracy. Indeed, the Corsair earned the respect of
enemy pilots flying the MiG-15. Vought's Corsair was a fighter that
could not be treated lightly. In a turning fight below 350 knots, the
MiG pilot could find himself in &lt;&lt;image002.jpg&gt;&gt; big trouble very
quickly.

Chance Vought's F4U-4 came about as a development of the F4U-4XA, which
was first flown in early April 1944. It was fitted with an up-rated
Pratt & Whitney R2800-18W or -42W engine. This powerplant developed
2,450 bhp with water injection. It was also fitted with a four blade
hydromatic propeller which provided the necessary efficiency to utilize
the greater power. The carburetor inlet was moved from the wing root
leading edge to a duct located und er the engine. The exhaust stacks had
to be re-routed as a result. Armament remained the same as the F4U-1,
with six .50 caliber Browning MGs. The limited production F4U-4B was
armed with four M3 20mm cannon. Under-wing load capability was
substantial. Up to three 1,000 lb. bombs along with eight 5 inch rockets
could be carried. Reportedly, it was not unusual to rig the F4U-4 with
as much as 6,000 lbs of ordnance. Apparently the robust structure of the
Corsair could bear these loads without undue wear and tear on the
airframe. Almost certainly, such overloaded Corsairs did not operate
from carrier decks, but exclusively from shore bases.

Let's compare the F4U-4 to its earlier sibling, the F4U-1 so that we can
clearly see the improvements made.

Maximum speed:
F4U-1: 417 mph @ 19,900 ft.
F4U-4: 446 mph @ 26,200 ft.

The -4 displays a 29 mph speed advantage, but more importantly, does it
at a considerably greater altitude. The F4U-4 is actually 10 mph faster
than the P-51D at the Mustang's best altitude.

Rate of climb:
F4U-1: 3,250 ft/min.
F4U-4: 4,170 ft/min.

While the -4 has a more powerful engine, it also weighs more than the
F4U-1. This marked increase in climb rate can be attributed to the more
efficient 4 blade propeller as well as the higher power of the up-rated
powerplant. The increase moves the Corsair into stellar company with
fighters such as the P-38L and the F7F Tigercat. The F4U-4 climbs at a
rate 20% better than the P-51D.

There is little doubt that the Corsair was likely the greatest load
carrying fighter of its era. There is little to compare to it except
perhaps late-war models of the P-47, which still fall somewhat short in
maximum load.

We now get to the more subjective aspects of the -4's performance.
Rating a fighter's flight characteristics is never without pitfalls.
What one pilot feels is too stiff, another might describe as firm or
secure. As a r esult, opinions may vary. However, empirical data is
certainly the most valuable in determining a fighter's overall
performance. The tangible things such as cockpit layout and visibility
are also important, as are the intangible things such as confidence in
the airframe to get the pilot home. I will do my best to present the
subjective data in an unbiased manner.

In terms of maneuverability, all models of the Corsair were first rate.
The F4U-4 was better than the F4U-1 series. Why? More power and better
performance in the vertical regime. Very few fighters, even pure
fighters such as the Yak-3 could hang with an -4 maneuvering in the
vertical. Its terrific climbing ability combined with very light and
sensitive controls made for a hard fighter to beat anytime the fight
went vertical.

Ease of flight.The Corsair was much less a handful than the P-51 when
flown into an accelerated stall, although it was by no means as
forgiving as the F6F Hellcat. Torque roll was no wors e than most of its
high power contemporaries.

The F4U also rolled well. When rolling in conjunction with powerplant
torque, in other words, rolling left, it was among the very fastest
rolling fighters of the war. In the inventory of American fighters, only
the P-47N rolled faster, and only by 6 degrees/second.

In level flight acceleration the F4U-4 gained speed at about 2.4
mph/sec, the P-51D accelerated at about 2.2 mph/sec. The F4U-1 could not
keep up with either, accelerating at only 1.5 mph/sec. The real drag
racer of American WWII fighters was the P-38L. It gained speed at 2.8
mph/sec. All acceleration data was compiled at 10-15,000 ft at Mil.
power settings.

Turning to dive acceleration, we find the F4U-4 and Mustang in a near
dead heat. Both the P-47D and P-38L easily out distance the Corsair and
P-51D in a dive. Still, these two accelerate better than the opposition
from Japan and Germany. Moreover, both the Corsair and the Mustang have
relatively high critical Mach numbers allowing them to attain very high
speeds in prolonged dives before running into compressibility
difficulty. With the exception of early model P-38's, it was almost
always a mistake to attempt to evade American fighters by trying to dive
away. This goes for early war fighters as well, such as the P-40 and F4F
Wildcat.

There is one story recorded by a Luftwaffe pilot who, while flying a
Bf-109F over North Africa tangled with several FAA Martlets (the British
name for the F4F). Finding himself alone with a Martlet on his tail, he
elected to half roll into a steep dive to shake off the slow flying
carrier fighter. Hurtling down in a screaming dive, the German looked
over his shoulder and was stunned to see the Martlet (Wildcat) closing
with guns blazing. Pulling back on the stick, under heavy G loading, the
German eased into a zoom climb. The F4F was still with him firing
bursts. As the speed bled down, the Bf-109 began to pull away in a
steady rate climb. Had the Brit been a better shot, the German was
certain he would have been shot down. He had underestimated the diving
ability of the American fighter. Indeed, many of his comrades would do
the same over Europe and not be as fortunate as he.

When we look at the turn rates of WWII fighters we stumble upon several
factors that determine how well a fighter can turn. Aside from the
technical aspects such as wing area and wing loading, we find that some
fighters are far more maneuverable at low speeds than at higher
velocities. This was very common with Japanese designs. At speeds above
250 mph, the A6M Zero and the Ki-43 Hayabusa (Oscar) could not roll
worth a nickel. But at 150 mph, they were two of the most dangerous
fighters ever to take wing. It did not take long for Allied pilots to
learn to avoid low speed turning duels with the Japanese. Once this rule
was established, the light weight dogfighters were hopelessly outclassed
by the much faster opposition.

Over Europ e, things were somewhat different. The Luftwaffe flew fast,
heavily armed aircraft that were not especially suited to low speed
turning fights. The Allies had in their inventory the Spitfire, which
was very adept at turning fights. The Americans had the P-47, P-38 and
P-51. All of which were very fast and at least a match for the German
fighters in maneuverability. Especially the P-38 which could out-turn
anything the Luftwaffe had and could give the Spitfire pilot pause to
consider his own mortality. With the exception of these last two, there
was nothing in western Europe that could hang with the F4U-4. Even when
including the Soviets, only the Yak-3 could hope to survive a one on one
with the Corsair. To do so, the Yak would have to expertly flown.
Furthermore, the Yak-3 was strictly a low to medium altitude fighter.
Above 20,000 ft its power dropped off rapidly, as did its
maneuverability. The Yak-3 in question had better be powered by the
Klimov M107A engine and not the low ou tput M105. Otherwise, the speed
difference is too great to overcome.

So, perhaps now is a good time to summarize the performance of the
F4U-4. Let's compar &lt;&lt;image004.jpg&gt;&gt; e it to the aircraft generally
believed to be the best all-around fighter of World War Two, the North
American P-51D Mustang.

Speed: The -4 was about 10 mph faster than the P-51D at the altitude
where the Mustang developed it's highest speed.
Advantage: F4U-4

Climb: The -4 Corsair was a remarkable climber despite its size and
weight. It could out-climb the Mustang by nearly 800 fpm.
Advantage: F4U-4

Maneuverability: The F4U-4 was one of the very best. According to
Jeffrey Ethell: "Of all World War II fighters, the Corsair was probably
the finest in air-to-air combat for a balance of maneuverability and
responsiveness. The -4, the last wartime version is considered by many
pilots who have flown the entire line to be the best of them all....."
Indeed, the F4U-4 had few, if any equals at the business of ACM (air
combat maneuvering).
Advantage: F4U-4

Armament: Equipped with either six .50 caliber machine guns or four 20mm
cannons, the -4 had more than adequate firepower to destroy any
aircraft. It was the premier load carrying single engine fighter of the
war. It could get airborne with bomb loads exceeding that of some twin
engine medium bombers.
Advantage: F4U-4

Survivability: There was no other single engine fighter flown during the
war that could absorb greater battle damage than the Corsair and still
get home. Even the USAAF admitted that the F4U was a more rugged
airframe than the tank-like P-47 Thunderbolt. That is a remarkable
admission. The big Pratt & Whitney radial engine would continue to run
and make power despite have one or more cylinders shot off. The P-51D,
on the other hand, could be brought down by a single rifle bullet
anywhere in the cooling system.
Advantage: F4U-4

Useful range: The F4U-4 had r oughly the same radius of action as the
Republic P-47D-25-RE, which flew escort missions deep into Germany as
far as Berlin (the P-47D-25-RE had 100 gallons of additional internal
fuel capacity). Yet, the P-51D still maintained a big edge in endurance.
Advantage: P-51D

Ease of flight: Despite gaining the nickname of "Ensign Eliminator", the
F4U series tendency to roll under torque was no more difficult to handle
than any other high powered fighter of the era. Some who have flown both
the Corsair and the Mustang state without hesitation that the P-51
exhibited a greater propensity to roll on its back than did the F4U.
Moreover, the Corsair was a far more forgiving aircraft when entering a
stall. Although it would drop its right wing abruptly, the aircraft gave
plenty of advanced warning of an impending stall by entering a
pronounced buffeting about 6-7 mph before the wing dropped. The P-51,
however, gave no warning of an impending stall. When it did stall, it
was with a to tal loss of pilot control, rolling inverted with a severe
aileron snatch. Recovery usually used up 500 ft or more of altitude. It
was not uncommon for Mustangs to spin out of tight turns during
dogfights. The F4U could also be flown at speeds more than 30 mph slower
than that at which the Mustang stalled. In other words, the P-51 could
not hope to follow a Corsair in a low speed turning fight.
Advantage: F4U-4

Outward Visibility: The Corsair provided for very good visibility from
the cockpit. However, few if any WWII fighters offered the pilot a
better view than the P-51D. The earlier P-51B was inferior to the F4U.
Nonetheless, it was the D model that made up the bulk of Mustang
production.
Advantage: P-51D

Finally there is an area in which the P-51 cannot compete at all. The
F4U was designed to operate from an aircraft carrier. What this provides
for is a utility that is unmatched by the better land based fighters of
WWII. The ability to operate at sea or from shore can never be
over-valued.
Obvious advantage: F4U-4

In conclusion, it would be hard, no, impossible to dismiss the F4U-4 as
the leading candidate for the "best fighter/bomber of WWII". Furtherm
&lt;&lt;image005.jpg&gt;&gt; ore, there is strong evidence that it very well may be
the best piston engine fighter (to see combat) period. Certainly,
everyone can agree on this: The F4U-4 Corsair was at the pinnacle of
WWII piston engine technology and performance. When people debate the
relative merits of the great fighter aircraft of WWII, they would be
remiss in not acknowledging the F4U-4 as one of the very best, and in
the educated opinion of many, "the best" fighter aircraft to fly into
combat in World War II.



Return To Main Page &lt;http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/index.html&gt;


RESOURCES:
Barrett Tillman, Corsair : The F4U in World War II and Korea.
Pilots Manual for F4U Corsair.
Various notes taken from Jeffery Ethell books and articles.
Pilots Manual for the P-51D.


Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

HayateAce
08-21-2008, 11:20 PM
50-pager.

The IL2 Corsair has its CoG in the #%$$*&^! tailwheel, so it's not much use.

staticline1
08-22-2008, 12:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
50-pager.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know, this forum seems to have lost much of its fire lately and the zoo looks like it moved over to the 1C forums. Hmm... maybe the mods had something to do with it giveing us what we want or some have just left for other forums or hobbies, can't say for sure. Anyone else notice that?

With that I'll say 10 pages at best.

Do agree with you on the COG though.

Chevy350
08-22-2008, 12:42 AM
i would love to fly that plane you talk about, but it seems like in the game the corsair is inferior to ALOT of other planes. including the mustang

DaddyAck
08-23-2008, 01:31 AM
I for sure had fun eating F4Us up with a N1K in Zeke Vs. Wildcat over Hyperloby the other day. 4 x 20mm makes short work out of them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Now if you want to fly a F4U in a sim that has it modelled to dogfight with anything chect out it's FM in AHII. In that sim the F4U-1a is one of the top competetors for CV launched rides. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

R_Target
08-23-2008, 08:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Survivability: There was no other single engine fighter flown during the
war that could absorb greater battle damage than the Corsair and still
get home. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This opinion is not shared by the USN. From Naval Aviation Combat Statistics, WWII; notes to aerial combat data:

http://i35.tinypic.com/10mtum9.jpg

Aaron_GT
08-23-2008, 01:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The earlier P-51B was inferior to the F4U. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Even with a Malcomn Hood?

p51srule
08-23-2008, 02:45 PM
ok lets say the p51 was the best fighter in europe and the F4u was the best fighter in the pacific.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Kocur_
08-23-2008, 02:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The F4U-4 is actually 10 mph faster
than the P-51D at the Mustang's best altitude.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what is surprising in a plane with an 1945 engine (ie. 1945 version) being faster than a plane with 1943 engine? How about comparing F-4U-4 with P-51H, huh?

M_Gunz
08-23-2008, 02:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by staticline1:
this forum seems to have lost much of its fire lately and the zoo looks like it moved over to the 1C forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's the use of pursuing an agenda here?

M_Gunz
08-23-2008, 03:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kocur_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The F4U-4 is actually 10 mph faster
than the P-51D at the Mustang's best altitude.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what is surprising in a plane with an 1945 engine (ie. 1945 version) being faster than a plane with 1943 engine? How about comparing F-4U-4 with P-51H, huh? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1, you saved me typing that

ditto with the acceleration in level flight comparison which btw is very simplified as given

wags94
08-23-2008, 03:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p51srule:
ok lets say the p51 was the best fighter in europe and the F4u was the best fighter in the pacific.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Both the P-51 and the F4U-4 were used in the Pacific Campaign. I think there was a very limited used the the Corsair in Europe. I'm not sure though.

luftluuver
08-23-2008, 03:32 PM
Got to see Michael Potter's F4U to-day at an aviation day held at the Aviation Museum. This was its 1st public appearance. Did a fly by than came around and did 2 touch and goes before finally landing. Couldn't have a good look at it as Dad (86yrs) was getting tired and had to take him home.

It was painted up as Hammy Gray's a/c when he won the VC.
http://www.navalandmilitarymuseum.org/resource_pages/heroes/gray.html

Besides the F4U, Potter had his Spit, P-51, Hurricane and Stagger Wing there. There must have been about 40 other a/c, besides some old cars and military equipment.

Aaron_GT
08-23-2008, 03:41 PM
The Corsair was used by the FAA, most famously flying top cover for one of the raids on the Tirpitz. Although interestingly for the first carrier attack on Tokyo (after Doolittle) the FAA chose to use Fireflies rather than Corsairs, but that might represent a concern with single pilot navigation over the range of the attack in 1945. Whilst the Firefly could loft an impressive 16 rockets its typical lift capacity and speed were well under that of the F4U (much less powerful engine in a larger plane).

idonno
08-23-2008, 03:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
The IL2 Corsair has its CoG in the #%$$*&^! tailwheel, so it's not much use. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? I get a lot of great use from the Corsair. I guess I'm just not flying it correctly.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DaddyAck:
I for sure had fun eating F4Us up with a N1K in Zeke Vs. Wildcat over Hyperloby the other day. 4 x 20mm makes short work out of them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Now if you want to fly a F4U in a sim that has it modelled to dogfight with anything chect out it's FM in AHII. In that sim the F4U-1a is one of the top competetors for CV launched rides. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because AHII has arcade FM's.

Most people on Zeke's like to turn fight on the deck with the F4U, so it's no surprise you were eating them up with an N1K. I've done the same myself, but if it's flown correctly, especially at altitude, it's a different story.

The Corsair, even as modeled in IL2 is a very good airplane.

thefruitbat
08-23-2008, 04:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by huggy87:

Since the end of the Second World War, there has raged a continuous
debate over which was the best overall fighter aircraft to emerge from
the conflict. This debate shows no sign of abating to this day. From the
school boys of the mid nineteen forties to the aviation scholars of the
1990's, P-51 advocates argue their case with Spitfire men and Lightning
defenders, and so goes the debate forever..........

Or, does it?

While these debates certainly do not lack for passion, they frequently
lack accurate analysis of the aircraft in question. There is some solid
evidence that strongly supports the argument that the Chance Vought
F4U-4 Corsair was the finest all around fighter of the war. Certainly it
qualifies as the best fighter/bomber. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree fighter/bomber of WWII, fighter no, see below.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p51srule:
ok lets say the p51 was the best fighter in europe and the F4u was the best fighter in the pacific.

P51srule http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Haha, thats funny, since the P51 wasn't even the best fighter the USAF had in Europe, and certainly wasn't the best fighter to come out of WWII, lol

The best three fighters that came out of WWII that saw combat and scored kills, are clearly the me262, he162a, and the meteor. P80 is arguably the best fighter to come out of WWII, but although flying some combat missions, never scored any victories, ground or air to my knowledge. me262 and he162a both scored air to air victories, meteor scored air to air vs V1's, no fighters to my knowledge, but plenty on ground attack missions.

It's pretty undeniable, though i guess someone will try, look at any modern day airforce. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

cheers fruitbat

LovroSL
08-23-2008, 04:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by staticline1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
50-pager.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know, this forum seems to have lost much of its fire lately and the zoo looks like it moved over to the 1C forums. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
ekhem- 109 slats http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Blindman-
08-23-2008, 04:07 PM
Give me a Corsair any day (in this game the F4U-1C, but I would love to try the F4U-4B). The P-51 is simply over glorified IMHO.

Keeping the Corsair in production for 7 years past the end of the war and being used in many airforces into the 60's must mean something.

DaddyAck
08-23-2008, 08:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by idonno:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
The IL2 Corsair has its CoG in the #%$$*&^! tailwheel, so it's not much use. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? I get a lot of great use from the Corsair. I guess I'm just not flying it correctly.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DaddyAck:
I for sure had fun eating F4Us up with a N1K in Zeke Vs. Wildcat over Hyperloby the other day. 4 x 20mm makes short work out of them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Now if you want to fly a F4U in a sim that has it modelled to dogfight with anything chect out it's FM in AHII. In that sim the F4U-1a is one of the top competetors for CV launched rides. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's because AHII has arcade FM's.

Most people on Zeke's like to turn fight on the deck with the F4U, so it's no surprise you were eating them up with an N1K. I've done the same myself, but if it's flown correctly, especially at altitude, it's a different story.

The Corsair, even as modeled in IL2 is a very good airplane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, I know! The Coursair is a beastly aircraft both in real life and in IL2. But, that being said it has to be flown in the style that begets it's sucess and not in the weeds turning circles with Zekes and n1ks...

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-23-2008, 09:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In level flight acceleration the F4U-4 gained speed at about 2.4
mph/sec, the P-51D accelerated at about 2.2 mph/sec. The F4U-1 could not
keep up with either, accelerating at only 1.5 mph/sec. The real drag
racer of American WWII fighters was the P-38L. It gained speed at 2.8
mph/sec. All acceleration data was compiled at 10-15,000 ft at Mil.
power settings. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats the first time I have seen acceleration numbers posted for any aircraft. It has always seemed to be a mystery. Any actual data or charts to base these claims?

S!

wags94
08-23-2008, 11:59 PM
Honestly, I think the Spitfire is the best fighter of WW2.

HayateAce
08-24-2008, 01:32 AM
Nyet, comrade.

http://www.yakuk.com/img/yak3-7.jpg

b2spirita
08-24-2008, 02:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Americans had the P-47, P-38 and
P-51. All of which were very fast and at least a match for the German
fighters in maneuverability. Especially the P-38 which could out-turn
anything the Luftwaffe had and could give the Spitfire pilot pause to
consider his own mortality. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


eh?