Corsair and Hellcat vs Bf 109 and Fw 190

[Escuadrilla Azul]

Find this video about the F4U and F6F versus the Bf 109 and the Fw 190:



Interesting.

 

[SaparotRob]

I never knew the Corsair did NOT have self sealing wing tanks but rather a CO2 system.

 

[tommayer]

Find this video about the F4U and F6F versus the Bf 109 and the Fw 190:



Interesting.

Glad you posted this vid here. Greg does first rate work, I think.

 

[tomo pauk]

Greg does very detailed videos, unfortunately he sometimes misses out on details, or makes flat-out mistakes.
Time for me doing nitpicking on this video.
- Corsair's intercoolers were in fuselage, not in wings
- 1st US 1-engined fighter capable beating 400 mph mark was probably P-47, if not P-51
- the engine-stage supercharger was not a 'neutral supercharger' - the 'neutral' setting meant that auxiliary S/C is disengaged (settings of the aux S/C being 'neutral', 'low' and 'high')
- effect of the captured Zero to the design of Hellcat is overblown; the 2nd Hellcat prototype flew before the 'Akutan Zero' was recovered, let alone tested
- at min 12:18, the XF4U-1 is referred as a late model Corsair in the video; it even states 'XF4U-1' at the tail

This is all before 13th minute mark.

We've had a small discussion about his other videos before, here for example is about the P-51 vs. Fw 190, where he flatly stated that Merlin became great once it gotten the American-inspired supercharger, and other flag-waving stuff. Or where he claims that P-47 was good to do the 500++ mile escort job already in 1943 on another video, tryng to point the finger on the UK-based AAF brass for gross incompetence or whatnot. Or that Bf 109K-4 was faster than Merlin Mustang because the K-4 had MW-50. Or that one should just spin the impeller faster to gain altitude performance in leaps and bounds.

So as above: videos are detailed - the P-47 and Fw 190 videos are both numerous and detailed, and the Fw 190 'speed secret' is excellent - but one should IMO be open-minded with them, to put it that way.

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

Greg does very detailed videos, unfortunately he sometimes misses out on details, or makes flat-out mistakes.
Time for me doing nitpicking on this video.
- Corsair's intercoolers were in fuselage, not in wings
- 1st US 1-engined fighter capable beating 400 mph mark was probably P-47, if not P-51
- the engine-stage supercharger was not a 'neutral supercharger' - the 'neutral' setting meant that auxiliary S/C is disengaged (settings of the aux S/C being 'neutral', 'low' and 'high')
- effect of the captured Zero to the design of Hellcat is overblown; the 2nd Hellcat prototype flew before the 'Akutan Zero' was recovered, let alone tested
- at min 12:18, the XF4U-1 is referred as a late model Corsair in the video; it even states 'XF4U-1' at the tail

This is all before 13th minute mark.

We've had a small discussion about his other videos before, here for example is about the P-51 vs. Fw 190, where he flatly stated that Merlin became great once it gotten the American-inspired supercharger, and other flag-waving stuff. Or where he claims that P-47 was good to do the 500++ mile escort job already in 1943 on another video, tryng to point the finger on the UK-based AAF brass for gross incompetence or whatnot. Or that Bf 109K-4 was faster than Merlin Mustang because the K-4 had MW-50. Or that one should just spin the impeller faster to gain altitude performance in leaps and bounds.

So as above: videos are detailed - the P-47 and Fw 190 videos are both numerous and detailed, and the Fw 190 'speed secret' is excellent - but one should IMO be open-minded with them, to put it that way.

Thanks for the remarks. It was just the first Greg's video that I ever see, so never know that he thinks P-47 could had performed escort duties for over 500 miles in 1943.

For the Corsair coolers in the wing root I unterstood oil coolers, but sure was my bad de since watch the video doing other things and not playing full attention.

For the first USA +400mph fighter, thought was the P-39, as someone said somewhere in the forum .

Sure I put a grain of salt in this video about some statements altough think, overall, Greg do a good job explaining its conclusiones.

 

[Gnomey]

Good one!

 

[swampyankee]

The F4U prototype did demonstrate 400 mph.

 

[tomo pauk]

The F4U prototype did demonstrate 400 mph.

Seems like it was under 380 mph per this. The R-2800-4 have had ~150 HP less than the -8.

 

[Zipper730]

I was actually just about to start a discussion on this, except that somebody already did. There did seem to be some errors in his analysis such as the fact that the F4U, if I remember right, was slower in roll than the FW-190. That said, I'm not sure how much slower, but it's probably somewhere on this forum.

I'm curious if the dive-speeds for the F6F were remotely accurate: I'm surprised it would dive faster than the F4U

 

[DarrenW]

I'm curious if the dive-speeds for the F6F were remotely accurate: I'm surprised it would dive faster than the F4U

It depends on what aspect of dive performance you are discussing. When just looking at out-right maximum dive speed, the Hellcat had an advantage over the Corsair at pretty much any altitude. The fabric panels on the outer wing sections of the Corsair were probably one factor which attributed to these speed limitations.

For instance, up to 10,000 feet the F6F-3 had a 25 knot higher maximum dive (415 knots vs. 390 knots). This is indicated airspeed of course and unfortunately the correction charts in the pilot manuals do not go that high. However, of the two the F6F-3 had more negative instrument error so this would not have helped the F4U-1's speed deficit in a dive.

FWIW the F6F-5 had an even greater dive speed than the F6F-3 model (the amount dependent on whether or not it had the most up to date modifications).

Now if you were discussing overall control throughout the dive, most would give the nod to the Corsair, especially when it's landing gear was deployed as a speed brake. Same with acceleration, as the narrower fuselage and somewhat smaller wing of the Vought product would definitely aid it while gathering speed in a dive.

BTW, Greg definitely referred to the pilot manuals while making this video.

 

[DarrenW]

.....the F4U, if I remember right, was slower in roll than the FW-190. That said, I'm not sure how much slower, but it's probably somewhere on this forum.

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that the FW-190 could out-roll an F4U-1 under any circumstance (the German plane had a sharp drop off in roll performance after about 255 mph IAS) .

Furthermore, the comparative trials between the two conducted by the U.S. Navy may have had something to do with Greg's understanding of their respective roll performance:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/ptr-1107.pdf

 

[XBe02Drvr]

For the first USA +400mph fighter, thought was the P-39, as someone said somewhere in the forum .

This has already been hashed over here, ad nauseum. The P39 prototype claimed 400mph, but proof is lacking, and no P39 in combat trim could sustain that speed in level flight. There are several threads here on this topic, which can provide some rather entertaining reading.

 

[CORSNING]

Setup for export to the Soviet Union.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/p-39q-25-1400.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39Q-30-1400.jpg
As sent from the factory, both versions could manage 400 mph in
June 1944.

 

[pbehn]

I personally haven't seen much information on F4U roll rates (other than spotty numbers at certain speeds). The comparative trials between the two conducted by the U.S. Navy may have had something to do with Greg's understanding of their respective roll performance:

View attachment 615200

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/ptr-1107.pdf

Seems to be discussing roll in terms of carrier operations.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Setup for export to the Soviet Union.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/p-39q-25-1400.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39Q-30-1400.jpg
As sent from the factory, both versions could manage 400 mph in
June 1944.

True enough, out of the factory (which isn't combat trim), those two could briefly nudge 400 mph in WEP, but that's not sustaining.

 

[Escuadrilla Azul]

This has already been hashed over here, ad nauseum. The P39 prototype claimed 400mph, but proof is lacking, and no P39 in combat trim could sustain that speed in level flight. There are several threads here on this topic, which can provide some rather entertaining reading.

I was trying to be ironic, but it doesn't play as good on written word as in spoken language.

 

[davparlr]

Setup for export to the Soviet Union.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/p-39q-25-1400.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39Q-30-1400.jpg
As sent from the factory, both versions could manage 400 mph in
June 1944.

Neither of these charts indicate who ran the test nor do they identify a tail number of the aircraft performing the test. This always indicates to me that they are engineering calculations only and is not proof of the actual performance of the air vehicle, and is usually optimistic in order to convince the military buyer to support the program. If the contract has a requirement, say top speed of 400 mph, the engineering estimates are not likely to say, hey it will only go 396 mph. Easy to do by legally manipulating variables.

 

[CORSNING]

The following is just an enlightening FYI and has no bearing on the topic of this
thread. I should also add, that I am in agreement with Wes, that no combat ready
(even fresh out of the box) P-39 could sustain 400 mph in level flight. Sustained
(prolonged) flight being the key word.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-39/P-39C_40-2990_PHQ-M-19-1297-A.pdf

Furthermore, the aircraft of discussion; F4U-1/-1A, F6F-3, Fw 190A-5 & Bf 109G-6, I do
not believe (at this time) that any of the thread discussion aircraft were capable of
sustaining 400 mph for any great lengths of time either.

What I have on roll rate:
Fw 190A-5: 123 deg/sec @150mph, 149 deg/sec. @200, 160 deg/sec. @250,
84 deg/sec @ 275 mph.
Bf 109G-6: I do not have figures for this aircraft. I have read it was similar to the
Merlin powered Mustangs: ( 50 deg/s @150, 66 deg/s @200, 81 deg/s @ 250,
86 deg/sec @ 275 mph. )
F4U-1 (-1D): 70 deg/s @150mph, 84 deg/s @200, (79 deg/s @250), (86 deg/s
@275 mph.)
F6F-3: 52 deg/sec @150 mph, 69 deg/s @200, 77 deg/s @250, 73 deg/s @275.

1 October 1940: The rebuilt XF4U-1 airplane attains a speed of 404 mph during a
flight from Stratford to Hartford, Connecticut. It is claimed to be the first US
fighter to exceed 400 mph.

 

[CORSNING]

FYI: Turn times:
F4U-1/-1A: 19.5 seconds/4,000 m.
F6F-3: 20 seconds/4,000 m. (slower but tighter than F4U-1)
Fw 190A-5: 21-22 sec./1,000 m. also listed as 22.6 sec. Fw-190A-6: 24 sec./4,000m.
Bf 109G-6: 21-22 sec./1,000 m. (smaller circle/slower speed than Fw), 21.8/4,000 m.

 

[P-39 Expert]

True enough, out of the factory (which isn't combat trim), those two could briefly nudge 400 mph in WEP, but that's not sustaining.

No WW2 fighter could sustain it's top speed, max power was limited to 1-15 minutes depending on the engine.