A much different F4U Corsair

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by gjs238, Sep 27, 2013.

  1. gjs238

    gjs238 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    1) Would the F4U been better off using a smaller diameter 4-blade prop and a straight wing?

    2) Would the F4U fuel tank and cockpit locations have been better off in the original XF4U-1 configuration?
    Would 4 50 cal MG's have been sufficient? Or British 20mm cannon.
     
  2. Capt. Vick

    Capt. Vick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    7,914
    Likes Received:
    639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Long Island, New York
    Magic eight ball sssssssaaaaaaayyyyyyyysssss...crap...ask again later...
     
  3. meatloaf109

    meatloaf109 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2012
    Messages:
    6,688
    Likes Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Occupation:
    plumbing "pro" at Lowes in Franklin N.C.
    Location:
    north carolina
    Tee! Friggin' Hee!!!
    Guffah!!!
     
  4. GregP

    GregP Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Likes Received:
    853
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Electrical Engineer, Aircraft Restoration
    Location:
    Rancho Cucamonga, California, U.S.A.
  5. OldSkeptic

    OldSkeptic Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2010
    Messages:
    509
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Do that then it isn't ... a Corsair it is a different plane entirely, sort of more like a Bearcat perhaps?
     
  6. pattle

    pattle Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Why did the Corsair have gull wings? didn't this have something to do with prop length?
     
  7. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    444
    Trophy Points:
    83
  8. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,539
    Likes Received:
    949
    Trophy Points:
    113
    #8 stona, Sep 28, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2013
    Big propeller (13'4") and U/C legs not too long and flimsy (for carrier operation) equals a gull wing compromise.

    The image posted (edit: linked to above) is of the radial engine version of the Tornado (HG641) fitted with a Centaurus IV. It was taken at Langley in November 1942. The geometry of the wing is similar to the Typhoon and Tempest so you could argue that Hawkers did more than experiment with it. Photographs are deceptive due to the shape of the wing. The anhedral is only 1 degree on the section from the fuselage to the outer wing.

    Cheers

    Steve
     
  9. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    444
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Not mucha better fighter, but maybe a more could be churned out in the equal time? The 'waving' of the central wing section does seem like it needed more time effort to build vs. a straight one, as found in Hellcat? We can note that Grumman was producing more F6Fs than Vought, Godyear and Brewster (okay, I know...) F4Us.
    The wing of the Hellcat weighted some 5% less, while being of ~6% more area - so our new Corsair might save 200 lbs (10 % of the wing weight) with straight wing?

    The front cockpit would mean better over-nose view - the plane is easier to land on the carrier, hence it's earlier in the action both from USN and RN carriers?

    For most (all?) of the Axis hardware, 4 HMGs were sufficient. Justifying a 2000 HP fighter with 4 HMGs might've been quite a task :)
    2 cannons + 2 HMGs maybe?
     
  10. vinnye

    vinnye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Maths teacher
    Location:
    Barnsley, UK
    It may have been possible to use a 5 bladed propellor - a number of aircraft went down this route when their engine hp increased.
    Maybe it would have looked like a Sea Fury?
     
  11. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,539
    Likes Received:
    949
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not with you there at all :)
    Steve
     
  12. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    444
    Trophy Points:
    83
    :)

    Sea Fury was using 12' 9" prop, vs. 13'4" of the F4U, vs. 12'2" of the early P-47 props ('toothpick'), and vs. 13' prop of the later P-47Ds (wide chord, or 'paddle blade'). Not sure whether the F4U prop might be also called 'paddle blade'?
    Not sure about Tempest II prop dimensions.

    temp.jpg
     
  13. vinnye

    vinnye Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    Maths teacher
    Location:
    Barnsley, UK
    So the Sea Fury had a 5 bladed prop of 12' 9" and the F4U had a 3 bladed prop of 13' 4".
    That is only a difference of 7" - far less than I would have anticipated!
     
  14. syscom3

    syscom3 Pacific Historian

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    12,631
    Likes Received:
    309
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    I think that the angle that the wings attached to the fuselage due to the "gull" design decreased drag considerably.

    I might be wrong, so correct me.
     
  15. swampyankee

    swampyankee Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2013
    Messages:
    549
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    It made fairing the wings easier. As to whether it significantly reduced drag vs a properly faired ungulled wing, the answer is maybe, but I think that that was much more of an after-the-fact justification than a design consideration. The gull wing was driven by a desire to reduce landing gear length while maximizing propeller diameter.
     
  16. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,539
    Likes Received:
    949
    Trophy Points:
    113
    #16 stona, Sep 29, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2013
    Can't find the specification but it was four bladed and appears very similar to the De Havilland Hydromatic propeller fitted to other versions of the Tempest.

    The Hawker F.2/43 Fury prototype also had a four blade propeller.

    Edit: It may be that the Tempest II had a slightly smaller (12'9") Rotol propeller.....not sure.

    Cheers

    Steve
     
  17. Aozora

    Aozora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,011
    Likes Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    63
    According to 4+ Publications (unfortunately now out of print) Hawker Tempest - Publications - 4+ publications the Tempest II propeller was a Rotol and was indeed 12' 9" (3.886 m): Tempest V and VI 14' (4.267 m) de Havilland or Rotol.
     
  18. stona

    stona Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    7,539
    Likes Received:
    949
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks, that makes sense. I knew the Tempest V (and tropicalized VI) had the 14' propeller but forgot to put it in my post which may have been confusing as I didn't specify what the 12'9" Rotol on the Tempest II was smaller than :)
    Cheers
    Steve
     
  19. Shortround6

    Shortround6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,782
    Likes Received:
    802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired Firefighter
    Location:
    Central Florida Highlands
    4 and 5 blade propellers were not sitting on the shelf ready to be produced and used as needed in 1940-41-42.

    You can scale up a 3 blade hub drawings to a larger size fairly easily (and perhaps use some tooling) but a 4 blade hub is going to require more work ( and I believe even the 4 blade prop on the B-26 was about 12 ft in diameter).

    Some of the these early props were dealing with 2000hp max. Some of the end of war or post war props were dealing with 2600-2800hp.
     
  20. tomo pauk

    tomo pauk Creator of Interesting Threads

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    444
    Trophy Points:
    83
    The B-26 was outfitted with a 4 blade prop, so that item was actually available when 1941 begun. The 1st B-26s were produced in Feb 1941, the 1st unit received it in the same month.
    The later B-26s used the 13 ft 6 in diameter prop, I was not able to find the dimensions for the prop installed in early B-26s.
     
Loading...

Share This Page