PDA

View Full Version : wich plane p-51 or F4u-1d



fordfan25
04-17-2005, 07:13 PM
i cant seem to make up my mind. aginst german 109 and 190's i kinda like the hog. its as fast give or take a pinch but can out turn them.

aginst japan type planes "lets face it KI84Cs" i kinda go with the stang. resone is that nether the stang nor the hog will out turn one and those super nuck cannons will insta kill both the hog and stang so the durabilty of the hog as well as its manuverbilty is gone to wast. how ever the stang has alot better energy retaning abilty in shallow dives as well as right after steep ones. also it does not seem to over heat as fast. and even when it does over heat it retains the speed after throttling down better than the hog.

whats your guys take?

EnGaurde
04-17-2005, 07:51 PM
mustang for straight line fighting.

though i dont fly allied planes.

corsairs, OTOH, will give a ki84 a run for its money turnwise, and speed too if not caught slow to begin with.

i recall one notable mission in my trusty Ki i turned three mustangs into the drink, right down on the deck ie trails in the water, hanging on full power flaps down turning. They all stalled, and swam.

noone got shots off, pretty evenly matched although i would have eventually got them by the way things were going.

But i wouldna tried it on the corsair.

3.JG51_BigBear
04-17-2005, 07:52 PM
Mustang. Better visibility and I don't have to deal with the super charger and fuel mixture.

Wilburnator
04-17-2005, 07:54 PM
I prefer the Mustang. And I strongly disagree that the Corsair out turns the 109.

Atomic_Marten
04-17-2005, 08:29 PM
P51 for me. Very manouverable plane in all terms. Fast also. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

I have seen some guys in their F4U-1Cs doing miracles against me in KI84B, (on my big surprise some of them actually outmanouvered me on higher alts -- initial equal Es). But still, P51 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

fordfan25
04-17-2005, 08:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wilburnator:
I prefer the Mustang. And I strongly disagree that the Corsair out turns the 109. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol only one way to find out http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

seriosly though i dont even have problem with 109s in a p51. i cant count the times in warclouds that id get into a turn fight with a 109 and eather get on his 6 or wed be dead locked untill eather he gave up and extended or one of his buddys got me. not saying im anything great just that in the stang and in a turn fight low iv NEVER been out turned one on one. well i take that back i have stalled a time or two but that was my fault not the plane's. and i have no trouble turning a hog slower and tighter than a stang.

Atomic_Marten
04-17-2005, 08:48 PM
That is ok, about you outturning Bf109 in P51, but remember that if you do that regularly, you will virtually die. A lot.

And AFAIK, P51 have no extra 'edge' in turning with Bf109Gs, on medium low speeds, so if he drag you on more than 3 turns, your energy will worn off and then you are in trouble if you don't outturn him. On high speed P51 will outturn anything.

fordfan25
04-17-2005, 08:57 PM
yea i heard the AM. i dont know what kinda 109s i have so much luck in turn fights. maby Ks or the Gs but honstly its tougher in a p51. and to be honst most of the time its a dead draw.the stang seems to just drop outa the air in a more agrisive way than the hog. i find i have alot more time to lightn up un the stick with the hog "yea sounds sick hu lol" . it normaly ends with a 2nd or 3rd 109 or 190 hiting me with those magic guns and tearing off a wing.

VW-IceFire
04-17-2005, 10:05 PM
Tough choice. The F4U is tougher and meaner than the Mustang but the Mustang has alot of qualities that make it a better fighter. Less management problems, tighter guns, better view and better E-retention.

If its ground pounding there's no question but I don't think thats whats being asked here.

BTW: On the 109 turn thing, both the Mustang and Corsair out turn the 109 at 400kph plus. In that speed range both can get the lead for a quick burst. But not in a sustained circle.

Atomic_Marten
04-18-2005, 12:01 AM
Yeah fordfan, in F4U low speed turning is somewhat 'easier' than P51 --I must say that this is my subjective view, I can easily be wrong on this one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif (I presume that we are talkin about turn-or-die low speed turns with Bf109). I didn't fly F4U for quite a while, but my impression on the matter is that. P51 will suddenly go to stall in slow speed, and often you wont get outta it on time.
IIRC P51 is better turner than F4U from medium to high speed, difference being greater with speed+.

Also Ice, you must notice that no 109 flyer with sane mind would go into straight horizontal turn (if not forced low speed on deck -- most smart ones would give up and throttle up if possible by then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) fight with F4U/P51. They will instead try to drag you into some kind of close stall-turning, with nose up and down in turns, tryin to force snap-shot, where Bf109 is very good plane (G6/AS maybe being the greatest in this regard of late war Bf109s).

After all being said, IMHO still P51 as first American fighter http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. Not to mention cockpit visibility, rear view in F4U is obstructed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Badsight.
04-18-2005, 01:56 AM
i like the P-51 against Messers much more than the F4U

raisen
04-18-2005, 03:20 AM
Did any historical encounters occur between 109's and corsairs ? Not a question that I know the answer to, but not many I suspect.

Theoretically that huge engine and high speed/energy is bound to give it an advantage against 109's at least, if not the FW190.

I would imagine that the 'sairs armament, which appears to be better compromise in terms of rate of fire, hitting power, and even layout - guns grouped tightly, low in each wing - should be easier to get hits.

Raisen

VW-IceFire
04-18-2005, 07:41 AM
Atomic...cheers man, good flying with you the other day. You're right...a smart 109 flyer is going to make it tough against a Corsair pilot by leveraging his planes advantages against the Corsairs weaknesses. But 109 pilots are like Spitfire pilots...there's tons of them and very few of them are really knowledgeable about their aircraft.

I'm more of a FW190 guy myself but I respect the 109 and Spitfire pilots when they fly them in a capable manner. Thats when things become dangerous.

As for Corsair VS 109...the attacks on the Tirpitz were carried out by Fleet Air Arm aircraft. The mix was Wildcats (or Marlets), Hellcats, and Corsairs from Royal Navy carriers. They tangled with 109s and 190s...to my knowledge, during those engagements the Corsairs won handily shooting down a bunch of 109s and a few 190s.

Corsair VS FW190 is an interesting comparison...the FW190 has it beat in acceleration and climb but the Corsair is more balanced with a decent turn for its size.

Asgeir_Strips
04-18-2005, 07:56 AM
If i had the F4U-4 I would have taken the F4U-4 Over the 'Stang ANYTIME...

There was a topic about the Stang vs F4U-4 Here somewhere, and the F4U-4 Was SUPERIOR to the stang in practically every aspect of flight and combat...

And i trust air cooled engines a lot more than water cooled engines..

One stray shot from a Me-109 or Fw-190 into the Stangs radiator, and your engine's gone....

I think the only asset the stang has in comparison to the F4U is the Gyro sight, but i think the F4U-4 Got the Gyro sight as well...


Final conclusion: I'll go for the Corsair if it was available

Asgeir_Strips
04-18-2005, 08:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Atomic...cheers man, good flying with you the other day. You're right...a smart 109 flyer is going to make it tough against a Corsair pilot by leveraging his planes advantages against the Corsairs weaknesses. But 109 pilots are like Spitfire pilots...there's tons of them and very few of them are really knowledgeable about their aircraft.

I'm more of a FW190 guy myself but I respect the 109 and Spitfire pilots when they fly them in a capable manner. Thats when things become dangerous.

As for Corsair VS 109...the attacks on the Tirpitz were carried out by Fleet Air Arm aircraft. The mix was Wildcats (or Marlets), Hellcats, and Corsairs from Royal Navy carriers. They tangled with 109s and 190s...to my knowledge, during those engagements the Corsairs won handily shooting down a bunch of 109s and a few 190s.

Corsair VS FW190 is an interesting comparison...the FW190 has it beat in acceleration and climb but the Corsair is more balanced with a decent turn for its size. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you read the article on the fw-190 in Flight Journal? German fighters special i think..

The corsair and Hellcat could outmaneuver the Fw190 as the Zero Could outmaneuver any US fighter...


So maneuvers like Split-S , Immelmann, Loop etc is VERY effective of shaking off the fw190, because the "würger" had a large turn radius...

Infact, i consider the "würger" more as an interceptor/fighter bomber than a pure fighter really... Because of its good armor protection on some models, they are really well suited for head on attacks on large bomber formations with mk 108 cannon pods etc...

VW-IceFire
04-18-2005, 08:19 AM
I've read that article yes. Great article...however, they had a Jabo variant of the FW190 which they tried to turn into a fighter version (with removal of some things and balast to simulate others).

The overall impression is true...but its not quite a Zero to American fighter comparison http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But the Corsair and Hellcat do hold a number of cards...just not all of them.

VFA-195 Snacky
04-18-2005, 01:01 PM
Corsair.

I tend to rip wings off of Mustangs too much. Corsair can handle whatever beating I give it.

fordfan25
04-18-2005, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Asgeir_Strips:
If i had the F4U-4 I would have taken the F4U-4 Over the 'Stang ANYTIME...

There was a topic about the Stang vs F4U-4 Here somewhere, and the F4U-4 Was SUPERIOR to the stang in practically every aspect of flight and combat...

And i trust air cooled engines a lot more than water cooled engines..

One stray shot from a Me-109 or Fw-190 into the Stangs radiator, and your engine's gone....

I think the only asset the stang has in comparison to the F4U is the Gyro sight, but i think the F4U-4 Got the Gyro sight as well...


Final conclusion: I'll go for the Corsair if it was available <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


yea -4 id take every time over the stang we have now. but if we also had the p51-H well ...i dont know. to bad were not lucky like the Japo and german pilots and have our top stuff hu.

Maple_Tiger
04-18-2005, 02:50 PM
I'll take the Stang any day over the Corsair.


P-51 won the war. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

p1ngu666
04-18-2005, 04:10 PM
-4 looks ******ed tho.

CRSutton
04-18-2005, 04:29 PM
Depends on if you got to land on a carrier or not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

fordfan25
04-18-2005, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CRSutton:
Depends on if you got to land on a carrier or not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
\

LOL i know. in that case its a stang for me every time http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

AlmightyTallest
04-18-2005, 06:09 PM
Corsair every time for me, though my brother would vote for the P-51 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Depends on your fighting style I guess.

I tend to either take a few rounds from ground fire or enemy aircraft and I'm rough on my planes... The Corsair is able to take the abuse from me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and c'mon pingu, the -4 isn't ugly at all, it's a thing of beauty, especially when you see the performance it has over the -1 Corsairs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

fordfan25
04-18-2005, 08:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
Corsair every time for me, though my brother would vote for the P-51 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Depends on your fighting style I guess.

I tend to either take a few rounds from ground fire or enemy aircraft and I'm rough on my planes... The Corsair is able to take the abuse from me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and c'mon pingu, the -4 isn't ugly at all, it's a thing of beauty, especially when you see the performance it has over the -1 Corsairs http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

my thoughts as well. to bad the -4 was not made in numbers and had seen combat........wait.....

p1ngu666
04-18-2005, 10:43 PM
the chin bulges ruin it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif
i know its uber, but it looks ******ed, sorry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

i like the normal ones we have tho, there nice. very aggressive and imposing plane irl http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BigKahuna_GS
04-19-2005, 01:40 AM
S!

C'mon Pling be nice http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

She looks like a bueaty to me :

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Corsair2.jpg
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.


http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4u4spl3.jpg



____

Asgeir_Strips
04-19-2005, 11:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
-4 looks ******ed tho. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://home.att.net/~Historyworld/F4U-4.jpg

Look at this beauty! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

FA_Whisky
04-19-2005, 12:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Both of those types obviously exceeded all Bf109 variants in performance, including the 'K'. The Mustang was unmatched in altitude performance, while the Yak-9U was champion in rate of climb and maneuverability."
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To bad its not like this in the game......... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

AlmightyTallest
04-19-2005, 05:12 PM
lol, well it must be an American mindset. Take a corsair, then add chin scoops and large radiators and to many of us that spells extra horsepower http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aesthetics has nothing to do with it, the performance of the -4 is what makes it a thing of beauty, though I like the way they look myself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I know how you feel fordfan, I find it funny how people are happy about the Do-335 and always validate it with the fact that about 30 were made before the war ended. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif We had at least 4,000 F4U-4's made at least 300 20mm Cannon Armed F4U-4's as well and -4's were being delivered in October 1944.

It's fustrating I know. I have nothing against the Do-335 being included and I'm sure it will be interesting to fly, but many of us wanted at least one American 1945 carrier based plane, or the P-47N to round things out more.

What's done is done I guess.

fordfan25
04-19-2005, 05:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AlmightyTallest:
lol, well it must be an American mindset. Take a corsair, then add chin scoops and large radiators and to many of us that spells extra horsepower http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aesthetics has nothing to do with it, the performance of the -4 is what makes it a thing of beauty, though I like the way they look myself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I know how you feel fordfan, I find it funny how people are happy about the Do-335 and always validate it with the fact that about 30 were made before the war ended. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif We had at least 4,000 F4U-4's made at least 300 20mm Cannon Armed F4U-4's as well and -4's were being delivered in October 1944.

It's fustrating I know. I have nothing against the Do-335 being included and I'm sure it will be interesting to fly, but many of us wanted at least one American 1945 carrier based plane, or the P-47N to round things out more.

What's done is done I guess. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


yea thats what iv been saying. im never mean to attack the rare and "uber" german and Japo fighters but its just plain out unfair and unhistoricle to find them in high numbers ect ect when we dont have any of ours wich in the case's of the -4 and p47N were built in high numbers to compete with. how hard would it be to just take the same moddles of the -4 and even p47 and just douplacate it and add the extra performnce. id ecept the 1D moddle as a -4. no need to build a new moddle. even the **** pits.sure it would not be realistic in a visual way but i know i could deal. and if any one didnt like it just dont fly it. and to step around the lawyer trade mark stuff just call it the F4u-1super'sair lol.

sorry to rant.

Slickun
04-19-2005, 07:29 PM
-4 superior in every way to the Mustang? Not so, not so.

The question was the -1 anyway.

fordfan25
04-19-2005, 09:23 PM
well p51 was still better for long range escort. but the -4 was faster tougher more manuverble and had the same wepons. afaik

JR_Greenhorn
04-19-2005, 10:17 PM
fordfan25, you can't use the "Super Corsair" moniker for the F4U-4; the F2G already owns that moniker.

By the way, why does nobody care about the F2G?

AlmightyTallest
04-20-2005, 06:59 AM
It's not that no one cares, I find the F2G a facinating aircraft myself.

I think the problem is that in the context of Pacific Fighters it didn't get into battle, and although it's performance and climb rate were incredible at low altitude, most of the performance was already able to be matched with the F4U-4. If I recall correctly the F2G didn't have a two stage supercharger? But the F4U-4 did? That may have been the reason for the performance drop off of the F2G at higher altitudes. Just my guess though.

That bubble canopy and a 3,000 hp engine was a great addition though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Slickun
04-20-2005, 08:17 AM
well p51 was still better for long range escort. but the -4 was faster tougher more manuverble and had the same wepons. afaik

Slick replies:
Ranges so close as to be a wash.

Faster? Depends on the altitude and P-51 type we're talking about. And the boost available. I've been reading some accounts of Pacific Mustangs operating at higher boost levels than the European models in order to get off the runway with the huge drop tanks. This explains why some pubs I have list the D's top end as 446, not the famous 437 we're used to seeing. And, we all know the B and C models went 450, according to the Navy itself. Speed was basically a wash.

Tougher? Gotta go with the Corsair. A very very tough bird indeed. No question on this one. Corsair guys will tell you it was "tougher" than the Jug.

More maneuverable? Depends. You talking about turning or rolling? Roll rate is basically a wash. Did the Corsair have a dealy on the leading edge of the right wing to aid in carrier landings? If it does, then it suffers badly in low speed maneuverability when compared to non-modified Corsairs. Both types had outstanding high speed maneuverability, and had provisions for G-Suits.

Dive? The Corsair was NOT a good diving platform. It accelerated slowly and had a lower critical mach than the P-51.

Zoom? Well, the P-51 was a great zooming machine. I know it could outzoom the -1's. -4's could outzoom the P-47D's. P-47N's could out zoom the -4's. P-51's could outzoom the P-47N's. According to my Pop, anyway.

According to America's 100,000 the -4's accelerated slower than the P-51.

Firepower? Same, except the -4's with 20mm are better. The Corsairs could also tote a huge bomb load.

Don't have climb figures here, but I'm betting the -4 was better, as the P-51's was mediocre at best.

Visibility? One look at the -4's loooong nose, and one can readily see that pulling lead and shooting in a dogfight would be problematic.

To me, it works like this. The Mustang was a "better" plane than the Corsair up to the -4 version. At this point the Corsair became a match, an outcome totally depending on pilot skill and altitude.

Throw in a P-51H and it changes again. Of course, it looks like no H's actually got into combat, whilst -4's were there in numbers.

Just my take on things.

fordfan25
04-20-2005, 10:19 AM
every thing iv read said the -4 dive was faster as was its ecelaration and climb rate. ill see if i can find one of the web sites again.

Slickun
04-20-2005, 10:31 AM
"America's 100,000" rates the Corsair as being a mediocre diving machine. It's critical mach number is kind of middle of the pack amongst US planes.

To prove the Corsair outdove the Mustang you are going to have to prove it could also outdive the P-47.

The same book is the source for my contention about the acceleration of the two types. The P-51 was out-accelerated only by the late mark P-38's and the P-47M, and that by narrow margins.

I most assuredly agree about sustained climb. The P-51 was mediocre in early 1944, poor by 1945.