View Full Version : F4U-1A Corsair SL Speed

12-15-2004, 07:07 PM
I found the problem with the Corsair I think.

On the Crimea map, at noon, with turbulence and wind turned off (which, IIRC is "standard" testing procedure), I managed 572kph (true) at 12m.

That's 355.424322 miles per hour at Sea Level.

This was in neutral blower and 120% mix with rads closed. I started at 1000m over land, cut power, dove to about 50ft, switched to no pit view, and once my speed was down to about 170ish (mph), I hit 120% mix and firewalled it. That speed (of 572kph) was attained before the overheat message came up.

The best speed I've ever seen listed anywhere for the F4U-1A is 319mph at SL. But I've seen it as low as 316mph at SL.

So the reason that it picks up speed like a modern jet fighter when you dip the nose about 1 degree below the horizon. And also why it retains E like a UFO - It's way too fast.

I'm kinda surprised I haven't seen this mentioned around here.

If my source info is wrong, please correct and point me to better info. But I have a hard time believing the 1A could reach 355mph at SL under it's own power.

12-15-2004, 07:18 PM
Corsair Speed and climb got corrected with the last patch and it is now very good modelled....
Your Speeds are Normal Power,Hellcat was a much slower Plane than the Corsair. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif
Only thing where maybe work is needed by Maddox Games is in Speed and Climb of early Corsair I and model it without Water/Alcohol injection and 2000PS so that it could be used as F4U-1


12-15-2004, 07:29 PM
Rgr that. I just did some general dogfighting tests in the hellcat. Relative to the corsair it seems spot on.Corsair V Hellcat (http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id59.htm)

DDT I think your figures are with ordinance/or external drop tank.

12-15-2004, 07:34 PM
well, i got 316 sl and 417 at 19,900 (6065metres)

i think 1D corsair should be faster than it actully is ingame...

12-15-2004, 08:00 PM
Agree completely with this post.

Please increase the F4U top speed and lessen the ridiculous E bleed.

Thanks Oleg.

12-15-2004, 08:01 PM
p1ngu - interesting - how did you test? I've never gotten a speed that slow in the corsair

12-15-2004, 08:37 PM
i didnt test at all, i simply failed to add "in my aircraft cutaways book it states"
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

bombs and stuff do slow corsair and others down alot now also

12-15-2004, 08:43 PM

hm shows something else, notice higher alt speeds
5-7k area

12-15-2004, 08:44 PM
all corsairs are teh same in il2, non cliped atleast

12-15-2004, 09:01 PM
did a quick test, i cant trim so its dead level, always up or down abit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif (i use kb)
wep, 120%mix, and closed rads, and u could sustain 570ish easily


notice speed, and i think thats full travel :O
corsair has huge rudder for low speed handling, but should get **** at high speeds?

12-15-2004, 09:10 PM
oops, il2c supports orig poster
9kph too fast at its best altitude, which is also wrong

skychimp and others have graphs and tests...
if there the same, no reason to have 1a AND 1d ?
apart from loadouts?

12-15-2004, 09:13 PM
Just ran multiple tests - alt was arount 150 feet. At 98% power I got 336mph - 110%/Wep 358. These figures seems spot on to me and are very consistent.
Tested the Hellcat awhile back and it was also spot on.

12-15-2004, 10:03 PM
p1ngu666, how do you get a gunsight pipper like that for the corsair?

I haven't seen that on my installation of PF http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

12-16-2004, 04:20 AM
I got her up ta 573km/TAS. I don't mind though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

12-16-2004, 04:29 AM
how fast is the F4U-1A is supposed to be at SL ?
i always got her to 573-580 something like that (but with wind and suff)

12-16-2004, 06:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
Agree completely with this post.

Please increase the F4U top speed and lessen the ridiculous E bleed.

Thanks Oleg. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

you mean the non existent E-bleed?

Come one.. it almost does not bleed energy if you move your stick gently and keep your tail up with rudder.

It only does bleed a lot of energy if you push it to a skid move.

12-16-2004, 06:15 AM
well, as you are testing the Corsair performances.

are there any performance differneces betwenn all the Corsair variants in game ?
IL2compare says no (the clipped UK ones are only a very little bit faster). but i do not trust this programm in total

12-16-2004, 08:18 AM
Blacksheep - check the chart in the thread for correct speeds. Corsair seems to be within a few mph of matching published reports exactly. I'd say theres not much to complain about.

Worth noting the corsair was very clean aerodynamically and should definitely retain energy better than the hellcat - in fact it outperformed the B mustang in all regimes except dive accel and max speed above 25,000 feet. It is cleaner and lighter than the hellcat with only slightly higher wing loading - in simm the hellcat turns quite a bit better than the corsair - but accelerates and climbs slower, retains e less efficiently and is not as fast. You could argue degree - but all those things were true in RL. In the flyoff report - a5/f6f/f4u the corsair is said to roll 'about the same' as the 190 - so you could try to argue the roll is undermodeled. I don't have roll rate figures so I don't know.

Based on everything I've been able to dig up I'd say the Corsair and hellcat are modeled with remarkable accuracy. Against late war japanese planes in the hellcat you have to rely on turn more - since you cannot run away. That or maintain really superior e position - because it does not accel as well as the corsair, p38, mustang etc. you need to give yourself more breathing room.

What the Corsair needs is more enemies - J2m and N1k1 flyable will do nicely

12-16-2004, 09:11 AM
That chart does not mention sub-type, merely F4U-1. It is also from 1944 and says it supercedes charts from '43.

As the 1C was a 45 combat aircraft, it's probably not that. And it wouldn't make much sense for it to be the actual 1 (birdcage), or even 1A since if it were, there would be no need to supercede the data.

It would seem that it's the 1D (a 1944 aircraft) they are talking about, which was faster than the 1A at SL.

Pingu and I must have access to much of the same data because we both see the same speeds for the 1A which are drastically different than those achievable in game.

Also of interest is that the all the Corsairs have the same FM.

Information I've found for the 1D lists a SL top speed of 578kph. Which is 359mph and is what is listed in that chart posted here, and also inline with what one can get in the game.

It would seem that we have the 1D FM for the 1A.

Now I do admit that I am not a "Corsair guy", so I'm not stating that I have all the right data. Please do refer me to better if it's wrong. More background on that posted chart would be interesting too. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I am also curious about the guns. They are better than most 50s. Hell, even the heavy, stable Jug with 2 more guns has less effectivness than the Corsair. It's very odd. There is virtually no spread and very little drop off on the Corsairs bullet pattern, even under mild G load.

12-16-2004, 10:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
.................................................. ......Also of interest is that the all the Corsairs have the same FM.

.................. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

booring, isnt it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
espacially that the loadoutoption differences a<re also not correct ( datas from SkyChimp!) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

such a nice and important plane such bad done(dodnt mean the FM , just the differences betwenn the planevariants)

12-16-2004, 10:11 AM

Many (most?) F4U-1A's received water injection kits as well as broad chord prop's beginning in early '44- at least VF-17 did. WI may have been incorporated into the -1A production line at some point, but I'm not sure. With WI and the new prop, -1A's should have virtually identical top speeds as -1D's.

And, no matter how you slice it, the Corsair should be substantially faster and retain energy better than the Hellcat.

12-16-2004, 10:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:

Many (most?) F4U-1A's received water injection kits as well as broad chord prop's beginning in early '44- at least VF-17 did. WI may have been incorporated into the -1A production line at some point, but I'm not sure. With WI and the new prop, -1A's should have virtually identical top speeds as -1D's.

And, no matter how you slice it, the Corsair should be substantially faster and retain energy better than the Hellcat. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

so, a F4U-1 Birdcage and without WaterInjection would realy fitthe familie.
wondering who had the idea to put that CorsairMk.I (with the 3Dmodel needed for F4U-1 )in ?!?!?!
BPF used "only" CorsairMk.II and IV so far i remember

12-16-2004, 12:09 PM
The chart came from the link provided by Nagual. Although it doesn't say the subtype it is most likely the F4U1 (birdcage/A) as there are seperate charts available for the F4U1 and F4U1-D/C.

I have seen charts listing the F6F-5 topspeed as 399 mph, but the official charts (available at that link) list 380mph for the F6F5. I would certainly have no complaints if the topspeeds were boosted slightly but according to official charts it is spot on. I also find the F6F doesn't loose energy much worse than most other aircraft, it was quite a heavy aircraft and not exceptionaly fast in 1943 and certainly not in 1944. Against the midwar Japanese fighters it is superior due to higher speed but against the midwar LW fighters it does not have that luxury. It is certainly very manouverable and can hold its own against the best contempory turnfighters but unless you are fighting only midwar Japanese fighters running away is most certainly not an option.

12-16-2004, 01:30 PM

edit, thats the mk1 birdcage
fastest of the lot, i guess http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

12-16-2004, 01:43 PM
What I find the most peculiar is the Corsair's ability to glide.

I was practicing carrier landings in a dogfight server with the F4U-1D. Clear weather, non-moving, short US escort carrier, the small ones.

I remember chopping the throttle and dropping the flaps, and my speed SLOWLY dies off as I descended in to land. Often enough, I would be going too fast still and had to do a go-around.

Meanwhile, compare it to the Hellcat's glide in. Chop the throttle on the Hellcat, and it drops like a brick.

Funny thing is, the Hellcat only weighs about 500-600 pounds more. It may not be as aerodynamically pure as the Corsair, perhaps, but the effect seems rather dramatic. The Hellcat also has a larger wing (about 30 square feet more, something like this)

Again, this may all just be me, all of this is subjective conjecture, sharing my basic perspective in the hopes others would give their impressions as well.

I try to specify when I'm being scientific and when I am not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

12-16-2004, 05:07 PM
Theres a famous film of a Corsair trying to land on a dirt airstrip - it has so much lift that it just floats along - the guy could not get the wheels to touch down. The Hellcat - in addition to not having this problem - decelerates faster due to being less aerodynamic - it's way easier to land on carriers. In fact the difficulties with landing corsairs on carriers - which include the above, poor over the nose visibility and bouncy landing gear - kept them from being implemented on carriers until the Brits showed us it could be done.

12-16-2004, 05:18 PM
Err...the Hellcat has more lift. That's why it stalls at a lower speed, has better low speed handling, and can turn better.

As Gunner stated, a couple hundred pounds isn't enough to explain what we see in the game, or is being suggested by some.

Regarding your list of carrier drawbacks, you are right, but(!) the Corsair has BETTER vis in this game than the Hellcat, independent of the axle grease on the wind screen. I hope people don't try to claim that *that* is right.

Pingu - very interesting, and disturbing find. R-2800-8 engine. The birdcage is slower than the Hellcat in every source I can find too BTW (at SL at least, haven't been paying attention to top speed at best alt). And the R-2800-8W only had 50 more HP in the Corsair over the R-2800-10W in the Hellcat. Probably due to the ram air of the Corsair.

One thing that troubles me is that, even if the numbers match someone's non-specific charts, they don't reconcile with the reports of the test pilots and others.

Believe it or not, I do like the Corsair. But what we have is ridiculous in more ways than one, even if it's not speed, but, we don't even have a clear consensus on that.

Interesting thread so far. Hopefully it stays this way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

12-16-2004, 06:31 PM
Here's the chart from the P-51B Versus F4U comparison. Shows a SL speed of 365mph for the F4U-1A.

In the report, the F4U-1 was cleaned up and sealed. But the F4U-1A had a "POOR" finish representative of a production plane after moderate service:


12-16-2004, 07:35 PM
chimp, does the 316 19 mph specs we have are for early ones without water injection and other bits and bobs?

ifso, when did they get the upgrades to water?

personnaly, id like to have a corsair thats slower, to give us more than 1 corsair fm, and also to help balance with IJN A fighters...

before ameriwhiners flame me, ud still have the other fullspec corsairs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

12-16-2004, 07:35 PM
Too bad the differences are hardly simulated. This reminds me of the Spit CW roll rates. No diff except 5mph for CW Spits. That sucks. The Corsairs should be modified like this:

F4U-1A: remove WEP (up to the 800somethingth it didn't have WEP) and maybe add a F4U-1A late copy with WEP still present. Remove any loadout except the ones that use the single center rack.
F4U-1C: Loadouts like 1A then.
F4U-1D: Just keep it.
C Mk I: Rename it to F4U-1, give her an US default skin and remove all loadouts, add wing rack loadouts. It could just have some small bombs, dunno which (100 or 250lb). They were mounted somewhere near the guns. And remove WEP.
C Mk II: Treat like F4U-1A. It could need some better roll rate though.
C Mk IV: Keep it. Roll rate stuff.

12-16-2004, 08:03 PM
hmm did faa/raf use the birdcage much? i really dont know much about the corsair http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

but ya, willeys plane sounds good to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

12-16-2004, 08:06 PM
The 316MPH DDT refers to may be actually 316KNOTS. 316kts = 363mph. Depending on the source, specs for Navy planes are sometimes given in MPHF or KNOTS. Sometimes, BuAer documents will use both.

12-16-2004, 08:25 PM
Nice to be famous and all Chimp but, Pingu referred to the same thing. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

12-16-2004, 11:03 PM
Only in training squadrons. All Stateside, I believe.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
hmm did faa/raf use the birdcage much? i really dont know much about the corsair http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

but ya, willeys plane sounds good to me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

12-17-2004, 04:19 AM
Chimp wrote:
"Here's the chart from the P-51B Versus F4U comparison. Shows a SL speed of 365mph for the F4U-1A."

This was only shown in that one test, though. Other USN Board of Aeronautics tests show only 359 with water injection and no stores, which is pretty much spot on what we get in the game to within about 3 or 4 mph, which is close enough for me.

12-17-2004, 08:22 AM
DDT - the lift anomaly I referred to is an historical fact - I believe it occurred full-flaps and in ground effect. The Hellcat does have more lift of course - but - as far as I know - did not experience this same thing. I read speculation somewhere it may have been caused by the combination of huge flaps and the odd shape of the wings.

I don't like the windshield thing either - but I find the hellcat much easier to plop down on a carrier than the corsair.

I'd like to see the sources for the 316/319 SL speed - so we could determine under what circumstances - it is also true that airspeed for the Corsair is very often given in Knots. P1ngu cited 319 and 417 at alt however - and it seems unlikely we'd see a figure of 417k for the corsair. However - the lowest speed in the chart Kurtz provided appears to be with external fuel - others I've seen include rockets and drop tanks.

12-17-2004, 08:28 AM
btw, the birdcage being a smidge faster is ok if it has same engine/prop, lower drag canopy (slightly)

anyways, accordin to il2c, 100% power (no wep) 535 kph = 332.433588 mph
its roughly 535 area, anyways http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

does anyone have any tests on a nonwatered corsair? And where they used anywhere in combat?

12-17-2004, 08:44 AM
oks, my aircraft anatomy world war 2 (aka cutaways book) gives

and 417 at 19,900ft
316 at SL

ential climb of 881 per min

"aircraft of world war 2" gives max spped of 417 at 19,900ft

"fighters 1939-45 attack and training aircraft" gives 417 at 19,900 too

both have no sl speed btw.

also has amusing thing about il2 "by early 43 the 2 seat il2 was scoring heavily even against german 109s. and with masterly understatement the official trails report declared that it could "be introduced with the advantage into ground attack units".
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
the book is from the 60's mind, cold war info rocks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

12-17-2004, 08:49 AM
Here is a test under normal power with 1 drop tank - maybe this is where the lower SL speeds are coming from. P1ngu - the chart listed earlier in this thread lists max without wep as about 350mph - this would be max - sans wep. The 100% speed also seems perfect. The only way to test 110% without wep is to let it run out I guess.

So - In summary
Corsair is faster
Corsair accelerates faster
Corsair retains e better
Corsair rolls better at speed
Corsair climbs better
Hellcat turns better - esp slow
Hellcat Handles better slow

Sea level speed tests show the Corsair to be virtually spot on with published reports. All above impressions correspond with published reports. Other than BlitzpigDDTs acknowleged dislike for the corsair - due to it's popularity - it appears it may have one of the most accurate FMs in the simm.

Now - has anybody actually gotten a p38 to hit 590kph at sea level?

Normal power with drop tank (http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id66.htm)

12-17-2004, 08:58 AM
570 for the J accordin to il2c http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

12-17-2004, 09:57 AM
The C Mk.I isn't even clipped so it wouldn't fit in the british carrier decks.

http://www.ubisoft.de/smileys/3.gif Huch K├┬Ârsche!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

12-17-2004, 10:04 AM
Full names all of a sudden. People get formal when they get uppity. Stuff it.

The differences are exaggerated. Pilot reports abound that say there is "little to choose" between the Vought and Grumman. Not so here. When it comes to acceleration and speed retention, the Hellcat has been made worse vega pulling a drag chute, but everyone says it's ok. There's a 22 page thread crying for an even more ridiculous upgrade, but the attempt to start a campaign to clean the Hellcat's glass struggled to make it to 2 pages. No surprise people think the difference is ok.

And BTW Nagaul, forget about the glass. The Corsair in this game has been given better over the nose visibility than the Hellcat. Don't think about the greased glass. Has nothing to do with it. The Corsair is EASIER to land on a carrier because you can SEE the **** thing more easily under all circumstances. This flies in the face of history, but, it's ok, it's the Corsair afterall.

I'd like to see you explain why top speeds aren't top speeds. Running a non-o/d 5 speed car to the top of 4th gear isn't top speed. Likewise, pushing the pedal 90% of the way down (physical travel, like "100%" to "110%") isn't top speed. Top speed is the absolute maximum the vehicle can attian under it's own power, and that means all of it.

I still haven't seen anyone bother to wonder why the 6 50s on it are better than the 8 50s on the Jug or the 6 50s on anything else. Rather interesting that.

This place...... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif unbeleivable.

12-17-2004, 10:46 AM
That would depend on which pilot http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If you want I can dredge up accounts that offer other viewpoints regarding the Corsair and Hellcat.
Alot of it is what you are used to.

I thought we'd shown the top speed is dead on. The docs list tops speeds under different conditions - normal (100%) military (110%) and wep (110%+water). They also show these speeds in differing configurations (drop tank - none - ammo etc.)

Don't agree on your view argument. I was able to plunk the f6f down safe and sound first try - took about 30 in the corsair

12-17-2004, 04:29 PM
Corsair Bleed-off comaprisons from another perspective...

The bleed-off in the Corsair has been drasticaly improved in the latest patches. The initial release of the game restricted Carrier Brake speeds in BSS carrier ops to 220MPH. Any faster than that while braking at the bow, and you would never get the speed down enough by the time you reached the round-down.

Since the release of 3.01, the bleed-off is much more manageable. Our carrier ops now have a max speed inbound for the carrier brake as high as 300 mph. Braking at the bow, deploying flaps and gear below 250mph bleeds the Corsair down very nicely by the time you reach the abeam position. At the start of the arched turn from the abeam position, bleed-off is completly manageable all the way in to the short groove final while crossing the round-down at 100mph. It is now easily achievable to set the hook at 90mph after flaring past the round-down.

There is nothing wrong with the Corsairs bleed-off anymore folks. Carrier ops has the most restrictive parameters required to shoot a "PROPER" carrier approach. The current flight model meets them quite accurately now.

Ping on the 190 Bleed-off before you look towards this plane anymore. ;-)


12-17-2004, 06:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
Nice to be famous and all Chimp but, Pingu referred to the same thing. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I figured if you heard it twice, it might take.