# Bearcat Vs Seafury



## comiso90 (Jun 12, 2009)

Bearcat:


General characteristics

* Length: 28 ft 3 in (8.61 m)
* Wingspan: 35 ft 10 in (10.92 m)
* Height: 13 ft 10 in (4.21 m)
* Empty weight: 7,650 lb (3,207 kg)
* Loaded weight: 10,200 lb (4,627 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 13,460 lb (6,105 kg)

Performance

* Maximum speed: 455 mph (405 kn, 750 km/h)
* Range: 1,105 mi (1,778 km)
* Service ceiling: 40,800 ft (12,436 m)
* Rate of climb: 6,300 ft/min (32.0 m/s)

Armament

* Guns: 4 × 20 mm (.79 in) M3 cannon
* Rockets: 4× 5 in (127 mm) unguided rockets
* Bombs: 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs


Seafury


General characteristics

* Crew: One
* Length: 34 ft 8 in (10.6 m)
* Wingspan: 38 ft 4¾ in (11.7 m)
* Height: 16 ft 1 in (4.9 m)
* Wing area: 280 ft² (26 m²)
* Empty weight: 9,240 lb (4,190 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 12,500 lb (5,670 kg)
* Powerplant: 1× Bristol Centaurus XVIIC 18-cylinder twin-row radial engine, 2,480 hp (1,850 kW)

Performance

* Maximum speed: 460 mph (740 km/h) at 18,000 ft (5,500 m)
* Cruise speed: 390 mph (625 km/h)
* Range: 700 mi (1,127 km) with internal fuel; 1,040 mi (1,675 km) with two drop tanks
* Service ceiling: 35,800 ft (10,900 m)
* Rate of climb: 30,000 ft (9,200 m) in 10.8 minutes
* Wing loading: 44.6 lb/ft² (161.2 kg/m²)
* Power/mass: 0.198 hp/lb (441 W/kg)

Armament

* Guns: 4 × 20 mm (.79 in) Hispano Mk V cannon
* Rockets: 12× 3 in (76.2 mm) rockets or
* Bombs: 2,000 lb (907 kg) of bombs

info from wiki

.


----------



## renrich (Jun 12, 2009)

Comis, Those are interesting figures you posted on the Sea Fury and Bearcat. What is also interesting is that if you compare those numbers with those of the F4U5, the last version of a design going back to 1938, the numbers of the Fury and Bearcat are mostly eclipsed.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 12, 2009)

They're just from wiki... if you have better figures... please post.

I think the 2 planes look similar. it is interesting about the corsair but I'm not trying to determine the best piston engine fighter... 

.


----------



## renrich (Jun 12, 2009)

Comis, just like with all AC discussed on this forum, I am sure there are all kinds of numbers that can be quoted on both Bearcat and Sea Fury. It seems clear though from the ones you quoted that both planes were optimised for lower level performance. I do know that the Bearcat was designed as a fleet defense fighter to operate off of small carriers. I only brought up the F4U5 because I think it is remarkable that it's performance numbers, given the age of it's initial design, compare favorably to two late war designs that are cutting edge prop plane models.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 12, 2009)

Yeah... the corsair was amazing but the lines of the sea fury and bearcat looked "next generation".

for me, as far as looks go, the difference between the Corsair and the Bearcat is a leap tantamount to the F-15 and F-22.

.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jun 12, 2009)

IMHO if you are looking for pure fighter, I would say Bearcat. If you are looking for a fighter/bomber, then Sea Fury


----------



## renrich (Jun 13, 2009)

Well, they are "next generation" and both beautiful air planes. I do have a book written by a naval aviator who flew Bearcats operationally and he loved the airplane for it's "hot rod" qualities but admitted that the Corsair was a better gunnery airplane because of better control harmony. If you ever have a chance to pick up "80 Knots to Mach Two" by Richard Linnekin, do yourself a favor and get it. Anyone who enjoys this forum will like the book and learn something too.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 13, 2009)

Neither the Bearcat or Seafury had a service life long enough to expose many warts... or am I wrong?


I'm a big fan of the Corsair but it's glass jaw... oil cooler... is more than an operational idiosyncrasy. It was a real weakness.

I wonder what true pacific combat would have told us about the BC?

.


----------



## mlsco (Jun 14, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> Neither the Bearcat or Seafury had a service life long enough to expose many warts... or am I wrong?
> 
> 
> I'm a big fan of the Corsair but it's glass jaw... oil cooler... is more than an operational idiosyncrasy. It was a real weakness.
> ...



How to define "true" Pacific combat seems tough to me. If the Bearcat was deployed 6-12 months earlier, it still would have faced a depleted Japanese pilot corps and a significant number of outdated (A6M) opponents. And it was not much configured for ground support a la Corsair, was it?


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 14, 2009)

mlsco said:


> How to define "true" Pacific combat seems tough to me. If the Bearcat was deployed 6-12 months earlier, it still would have faced a depleted Japanese pilot corps and a significant number of outdated (A6M) opponents. And it was not much configured for ground support a la Corsair, was it?



Two muscle bitches struggling for power!

If u had to buy 1000, which would u buy?


----------



## Marcel (Jun 14, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> Neither the Bearcat or Seafury had a service life long enough to expose many warts... or am I wrong?
> 
> 
> I'm a big fan of the Corsair but it's glass jaw... oil cooler... is more than an operational idiosyncrasy. It was a real weakness.
> ...



We had the seafury flying of our carrier Karel Doorman from 1949 to 1956.


----------



## Glider (Jun 14, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> Two muscle bitches struggling for power!
> 
> If u had to buy 1000, which would u buy?



If only for the flexibility, the Sea Fury


----------



## mlsco (Jun 14, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> Two muscle bitches struggling for power!
> 
> If u had to buy 1000, which would u buy?



Just replace every FM2 and F6F order with a Bearcat and keep the same number of Corsairs for ground attack. It seems fair to say that there were enough resources to support having two airplanes. 

Now if you limit me to one, that's tough. The Sea Fury idea sounds good for flexibility, since it way oversteps my knowledge of the F8F airframe to say it could have been hardened to carry the extra ordinance for ground attack and been as survivable. 

History shows the latter idea wouldn't have lasted anyway, though: the AD-1 wasn't far behind and hung around considerably longer than either...


----------



## renrich (Jun 15, 2009)

The Bearcat and Corsair fought for the French in Indo-China and the Corsair fought in Algeria and Suez, I believe. The last Corsairs manufactured were F4U7s for the French Navy. I may be wrong but the infamous oil cooler in the Corsair was either protected or relocated in the F4U7. Did the Sea Fury ever have any significant service in wartime? I believe it would have been a better air to ground performer than the Bearcat. The time for piston engine fighters was pretty much over by the time these two were operational. An interesting point about Bearcat was that, to save weight, the brakes were so small that the engine could not be run up to full power on the ground, before takeoff.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 15, 2009)

Marcel said:


> We had the seafury flying of our carrier Karel Doorman from 1949 to 1956.




I didn't know the Dutch ever had a carrier... 

great photo


----------



## Glider (Jun 15, 2009)

If I remember correctly the Sea Fury served in the Korean war and one lucky soul got a Mig 15 in one. Will check it out and let you know if I am wrong.

They also served in the Bay of Pigs fiasco, on the Cuban side.


----------



## Catch22 (Jun 15, 2009)

I believe you're correct Glider.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 15, 2009)

So did a Skyraider..

.


----------



## Catch22 (Jun 15, 2009)

That I didn't know. I know a F4U-5 got one, and the Sea Fury. I can't think of anything else.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 15, 2009)

Yeah a Seafury took out a Mig-15 on 8 August 1952. The pilot was Lieutenant Peter "Hoagy" Carmichae of thel Royal Navy.

I think overall, I will have to go with the Seafury. I think it was a better design and more adaptable.


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Jun 15, 2009)

It's a close one Comiso. 

Good pick.


----------



## Marcel (Jun 15, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> I didn't know the Dutch ever had a carrier...
> 
> great photo



You'd be surptised, we even had two, both build by the British  It was a time that the Dutch still pretended to be a major colonial power. Sadly they were mistaken. By the time the realised this, they sold the Karel Doorman to Argentina, where it became involved in the Falkland war, fighting the British who build her in the first place.


----------



## Stitch (Jun 15, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> So did a Skyraider..
> 
> .



I think that was in Vietnam.


----------



## Catch22 (Jun 15, 2009)

According to Wiki they shot down two MiGs in Vietnam.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 15, 2009)

Soundbreaker Welch? said:


> It's a close one Comiso.
> 
> Good pick.



Thx but it may be the most useless poll this forum has ever done! 

i was just curious to see if there was a clear winner..


----------



## pbfoot (Jun 15, 2009)

Iraqi Furies were doing ground support against the Kurds in 64 and remained on strength til about 80 when they became airfield decoys for the Iraqi AF in their war against Iran


----------



## Gnomey (Jun 15, 2009)

I think I will go for the Sea Fury here. Both are excellent aircraft but I think the versatility of the Sea Fury is key here. It is almost as good as the Bearcat in the pure fighter role whilst also being a very good fighter bomber.


----------



## JoeB (Jun 15, 2009)

renrich said:


> The Bearcat and Corsair fought for the French in Indo-China and the Corsair fought in Algeria and Suez, I believe. The last Corsairs manufactured were F4U7s for the French Navy. I may be wrong but the infamous oil cooler in the Corsair was either protected or relocated in the F4U7. Did the Sea Fury ever have any significant service in wartime?


The F4U-7 was essentially the AU-1 (F4U-6) with the F4U-4's medium/high altitude optimized engine substituted for the AU-1's low altitude optimized one. So it had the same location of oil cooler behind the engine as AU-1. The Aeronavale also operated surplus USMC AU-1's in Indochina after the Korean War.

The Sea Fury was used by every RN and RAN carrier group in Korea except the first deployment by HMS Triumph whose 800 sdn operated Seafire Mk.47's (Griffon powered, counter-rotating props). The Sea Fury is probably best know for its credited victory against a MiG-15 August 9 1952 (the PLAAF credited several victories over Sea Furies that day, and one Sea Fury was forced to belly land on a UN island after being hit by a MiG, they mention no MiG losses). But, the overwhelming majority of missions were mundane interdiction strikes in southwestern NK, exactly the same type missions flown by USMC F4U's in their operations from CVE's and CVL's off the west coast of Korea. The US and RN/RAN light carriers would usually alternate operating one at a time in that area, while the bigger US carriers operated off the east coast for the most part. The Marine sdns would also rotate between carrier deployments and land based operations from SK; the Sea Furies just operated from their carriers. I don't know of figures comparing the loss rate per sorties to the F4U, but it would presumably have been lower due to the F4U's well known elevated loss rate to AA, for a radial piston fighter. Two whole books on this are "With the Carriers in Korea" by Landsdowne (the better one) and "Furies and Fireflies over Korea" by Thomas (not as good), but neither give total sortie or loss statistics. It seems a few dozen Sea Furies were lost in Korea, compared to few 100 F4U's lost in Korea; but of course there were a lot more F4U's so there's no direct comparison there.

The figures given in Landsdowne's books for individual patrols show that Sea Furies generally carried a pair of 500# bombs off the light carriers, though theoretically capable of carrying 1000#'ers. F4U's also often carried only 500#'ers off small carriers.

Joe

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## tomo pauk (Jun 16, 2009)

Joe, your posts are the example for all of us how to make a post 

Sea Fury gets my vote.


----------



## Yerger (Jun 17, 2009)

both great designs, these days both seen in unlimited air racing.

But always had a spot for the Sea Fury so she got my vote


----------

