Shortround6
Major General
Speed it up how?
There were something like 600-800 changes between the prototype and the Production planes.
Then look at how fast P & W built the engines.
1930s/40s: no 2-engined fighters as-designed
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
There were something like 600-800 changes between the prototype and the Production planes.
Then look at how fast P & W built the engines.
but with no p47 that means more for the corsair
The P-47 provided the AAF with a needed long-range escort fighter. I doubt that's gonna wash. It's worth remembering that over 15,000 P-47s were built, more than there were F4Us. That's a lot of aircraft not being built that were desperately needed. With the F6F in service, is the need for the F4U as pressing?
i think so i think the corsair is the better foghter and deserved more resources
You think? You're gonna have to do better than "I think". The F4U was a shipboard naval fighter, the P-47 was a land-based army fighter. The two have different roles and responsibilities. Aircraft procurement was handled independently between the branches of the armed forces.
look the numbers up the corsair performed well and was aremed well (at least the cannon variant ) i will assure you adpat the corsair was the better choice
Shortround6
Major General
Somewhat different engines.
A lot of the P-47 engines were made by Ford. Ford never built a two stage supercharged engine.
On the other hand, Nash-Kelvinator never made an engine without a 2 stage supercharger.
The R-2800s may not have been quite as interchangeable as people think.
P-47 carried 305 gallons of internal fuel to start with and later carried 370 gallons, all in protected tanks.
Corsair never carried more than 237 gallons in protected tanks. Corsairs ability to cruise at 25,000ft at 210IAS is a bit suspect.
Both are rather critical to the escort mission over Europe.
but if the p47 wasnt made they design the corsair for both the naval and land wars
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
That's a simplistic view of a very complicated process.
Shortround6
Major General
Where do you put another 100 gallons of fuel in the Corsair?
Where do you put the turbo charger for needed high altitude performance?
Turbo includes the bigger inter coolers and ducting.
There are a number of threads on the site that go into this.
i dont know im not a designer im just saying the corsair would fill the gap with no p47 or p38 is sercive
wuzak
Captain
Great - 1941 Spitfire V performance in 1943!
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
XF4U-3 (F4U with turbosupercharger)
"http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/XF4U-3_Corsair_PD_-_17_December_1942.pdf"
"http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/XF4U-3_Corsair_PD_-_17_December_1942.pdf"
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Done in 1944 and the three prototypes proved to be more trouble than it was worth...
And I'll assure you it's not. The P-47 was ordered by the AAF and was one of the top three USAAF fighters of WW2. The AAF heads are simply not going to accept a navy aircraft that the navy itself is having difficulty with rather than an aircraft that is ready to go without the same issues, in late 1942 when the P-47 enters service. Granted, some of the issues are to do with carrier qualifications, but by comparison, the P-47's entry into service was far less troublesome.
The next problem is, who is going to build these land-based F4Us to fulfil the AAF's needs? Republic Aviation? So, why would they build another firm's designs when they could do their own that was better suited to what the AAF wants?
Your argument is simplistic and devoid of context. It's not so easy to simply make comparisons and expect them to stick. As has been said in another thread, a what-if has to have some historical context and grounding in reality, otherwise, why limit yourself to F4Us, why not bring in the F-14 in 1942? The Final Countdown, anyone?
It's an interesting concept but let's not forget that in the same timespan the USAAF are beginning to see the value of the Mustang built for the British and by early to mid-1943 the P-51 is in service with the USAAF. The F4U would have to be combat-ready before then, as the P-47 was. If there was no P-47 I'm pretty sure the USAAF would examine the potential of the Mustang before the F4U.
ThomasP
Senior Master Sergeant
The following is a mish-mash of info from several sources.
The first prototype was the XF4U-3A. It was converted from F4U-1A BuNo.17516, with the turbo-supercharger being enclosed in a large fairing under the fuselage. The XP-2800-16 engine fitted was one of the new 'C' series. The turbocharger fairing was so large that it eliminated the catapult attachment points, but this was of no consequence since the proposed F4U-3 was to be used exclusively by the Marines as a land based fighter. It was flown for the first time in April 1944.
When developmental problems persisted with the XR-2800-16C engine, F4U-1A BuNo. 49664 was fitted with a R-2800-14W engine and became the XF4U-3B. This plane was flown for the first time on 20th September 1944. The XF4U-3B could maintain Normal power from SL to 38,200 ft (no RAM).
F4U-1 BuNo. 02157 was the third aircraft converted. It became the XF4U-3C prototype, but it was subsequently destroyed in a crash and did not participate in the program.
The turbo-supercharger/F4U combination was quite successful, with the XF4U-3B reaching speeds of 480 mph at altitudes near 40,000 feet. BuAer gave an order to Goodyear at the end of 1944 to upgrade 26x FG- 1D to FG-3 Corsair standard based upon the XF4U-3B prototype, but only 13 were completed. The approaching end of the war - along with ongoing technical problems with the turbo-supercharger itself - prevented the F4U-3 from becoming a production variant.
All the following performance figures are for the pre-production FG-3 at 12,830 lbs TOGW with 2x capped pylons, no stores, except ranges with DT(s)
All engine settings are DRY unless otherwise stated
Vmax
Normal_440 mph at 42,600 ft (2600 rpm)
WEP___483 mph at 41,400 ft (2800 rpm WET)
Military_453 mph at 38,400 ft (2800 rpm)
WEP___460 mph at 33,600 ft (2800 rpm)
WEP___363 mph at SL (2800 rpm)
ROC
Normal__800 fpm at 39,000 ft
Military_1840 fpm at 35,800 ft
Normal_2520 fpm at SL
Military_3180 fpm at SL
WEP___4210 fpm at SL
TTH
Normal_14 min 45 sec to 30,000 ft
Military_11 min 15 sec to 30,000 ft
Service Ceiling
Normal_45,600 ft
Range max
1080 miles at 174 mph IAS at 1,500 ft
1575 miles at 173 mph IAS at 1,500 ft with 1x150 USgal DT
1960 miles at 170 mph IAS at 1,500 ft with 2x150 USgal DT (1x DT is SSFT and carried for the entire flight)
Combat Radius (per USN flight profile, outbound cruise at 15,000 ft, return at 1,500 ft, etc)
250 miles with 1x150 USgal DT
545 miles with 2x150 USgal DT (1x DT is SSFT and carried for the entire flight)
The first prototype was the XF4U-3A. It was converted from F4U-1A BuNo.17516, with the turbo-supercharger being enclosed in a large fairing under the fuselage. The XP-2800-16 engine fitted was one of the new 'C' series. The turbocharger fairing was so large that it eliminated the catapult attachment points, but this was of no consequence since the proposed F4U-3 was to be used exclusively by the Marines as a land based fighter. It was flown for the first time in April 1944.
When developmental problems persisted with the XR-2800-16C engine, F4U-1A BuNo. 49664 was fitted with a R-2800-14W engine and became the XF4U-3B. This plane was flown for the first time on 20th September 1944. The XF4U-3B could maintain Normal power from SL to 38,200 ft (no RAM).
F4U-1 BuNo. 02157 was the third aircraft converted. It became the XF4U-3C prototype, but it was subsequently destroyed in a crash and did not participate in the program.
The turbo-supercharger/F4U combination was quite successful, with the XF4U-3B reaching speeds of 480 mph at altitudes near 40,000 feet. BuAer gave an order to Goodyear at the end of 1944 to upgrade 26x FG- 1D to FG-3 Corsair standard based upon the XF4U-3B prototype, but only 13 were completed. The approaching end of the war - along with ongoing technical problems with the turbo-supercharger itself - prevented the F4U-3 from becoming a production variant.
All the following performance figures are for the pre-production FG-3 at 12,830 lbs TOGW with 2x capped pylons, no stores, except ranges with DT(s)
All engine settings are DRY unless otherwise stated
Vmax
Normal_440 mph at 42,600 ft (2600 rpm)
WEP___483 mph at 41,400 ft (2800 rpm WET)
Military_453 mph at 38,400 ft (2800 rpm)
WEP___460 mph at 33,600 ft (2800 rpm)
WEP___363 mph at SL (2800 rpm)
ROC
Normal__800 fpm at 39,000 ft
Military_1840 fpm at 35,800 ft
Normal_2520 fpm at SL
Military_3180 fpm at SL
WEP___4210 fpm at SL
TTH
Normal_14 min 45 sec to 30,000 ft
Military_11 min 15 sec to 30,000 ft
Service Ceiling
Normal_45,600 ft
Range max
1080 miles at 174 mph IAS at 1,500 ft
1575 miles at 173 mph IAS at 1,500 ft with 1x150 USgal DT
1960 miles at 170 mph IAS at 1,500 ft with 2x150 USgal DT (1x DT is SSFT and carried for the entire flight)
Combat Radius (per USN flight profile, outbound cruise at 15,000 ft, return at 1,500 ft, etc)
250 miles with 1x150 USgal DT
545 miles with 2x150 USgal DT (1x DT is SSFT and carried for the entire flight)
Last edited:
Admiral Beez
Major
Clearly.
Shortround6
Major General
As a note to the availability of R-2800 "C" series engines. This was the basic engine used in the P-47 M and N and the engine used in the F4U-4. They didn't start leaving the engine factory doors in more than handfuls until the spring/summer of 1944.
