Corsair VS Spitfire

[RCAFson]

How did the Firefly compare to the FR47 for landing accidents.

The Firefly FR1 stalled at 63 knots [showing the advantages of it's F-Y flaps] versus 71 for the Seafire 47 and this would have been advantageous on a slow carrier. However, I don't have sortie loss and damage rates for the two types whilst they operated from HMS Triumph off Korea. I do know, from one source, that the Seafire squadron flew 360 sorties.

I don't know the maximum speed of Triumph off Korea but it was likely less than 20 knots. HMS Theseus which replaced Triumph was only capable of 22 knots, which declined during her period of operations.

 

[Timppa]

The Firefly FR1 stalled at 63 knots [showing the advantages of it's F-Y flaps] versus 71 for the Seafire 47 and this would have been advantageous on a slow carrier. However, I don't have sortie loss and damage rates for the two types whilst they operated from HMS Triumph off Korea. I do know, from one source, that the Seafire squadron flew 360 sorties.

I don't know the maximum speed of Triumph off Korea but it was likely less than 20 knots. HMS Theseus which replaced Triumph was only capable of 22 knots, which declined during her period of operations.

Corsair I-IV stalling speed was 76 knots (per Pilot's Notes). AFAIK they did operate from escort carriers (max. speed 15 to 20 knots).

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Corsair I-IV stalling speed was 76 knots (per Pilot's Notes). AFAIK they did operate from escort carriers (max. speed 15 to 20 knots).

Hey, wait a minute! Corsairs on jeep carriers? That could get ugly real quick. I'd like to see sources on that one. In all my years of looking at WWII photos I've never seen one of Corsairs on a jeep. It was tight enough for FM2s and TBMs, and their approach speed handling was much less tricky than the F4U. My uncle flew TBMs ("Turkeys" he called them) off jeeps sub hunting in the Atlantic. He said the Turkey had the best handling at the slowest speed of any plane in the fleet. He carrier qualed in a TBM on a converted paddle wheel steamboat on Lake Michigan. The jeep carrier seemed like a step up to a "real" ship.
Cheers,
Wes

 

[RCAFson]

Hey, wait a minute! Corsairs on jeep carriers? That could get ugly real quick. I'd like to see sources on that one. In all my years of looking at WWII photos I've never seen one of Corsairs on a jeep. It was tight enough for FM2s and TBMs, and their approach speed handling was much less tricky than the F4U. My uncle flew TBMs ("Turkeys" he called them) off jeeps sub hunting in the Atlantic. He said the Turkey had the best handling at the slowest speed of any plane in the fleet. He carrier qualed in a TBM on a converted paddle wheel steamboat on Lake Michigan. The jeep carrier seemed like a step up to a "real" ship.
Cheers,
Wes

Corsair I-IV stalling speed was 76 knots (per Pilot's Notes). AFAIK they did operate from escort carriers (max. speed 15 to 20 knots).

Corsairs did operate from escort carriers and when they did they had the same problem as Seafires, namely wrinkling of airframes from the stress of low carrier speed landings:

During the following four days of carrier refresher
landings, 46 pilots were qualified with a total of 260 landings.,
Considerable trouble was experienced with wrinkling of fuselage
and stub wings of the FG-1D aircreft. While it is believed that
several landings were hard due to the planes being brought in
somewhat high and to the pitching of the vessel, no abnormally hard
landings were observed, and a basic design weakness is indicated.
Complete R.U.D.M.'s on this condition have been prepared with the
assistance of manufacturers' representatives and Naval technical
Officers who were aboard as observers.
USS Vella Gulf War Diary May 1945

​

But by 1945 the US was cranking out F4U and variants by the hundreds every month and writing off aircraft was just accepted as par for the course.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Corsairs did operate from escort carriers and when they did they had the same problem as Seafires, namely wrinkling of airframes from the stress of low carrier speed landings:

I stand corrected, and thanks for the info. And who do we have to thank for this foolishness? Wouldn't you know; Marines! Go for broke, and to hell with the casualties.
Cheers,
Wes

 

[pbehn]

Which plane was easier to control at stall speeds?

 

[parsifal]

Here is a list I found on corsair accidents in USN service

F4U Corsair USN Accident Reports

There are a lot of accidents from aircraft based on USN CVEs. American CVEs could have up to 6 F4Us attached, which is a small percentage of the numbers afloat, but just glancing at the list there seem to be an awful lot based on CVEs and aircraft transports (which is what the majority of CVEs were used for).

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Which plane was easier to control at stall speeds?

It surely wasn't the Corsair!
Cheers,
Wes

 

[Razgriz1]

Got two reports to show you all. One on the Corsair, other on the Spitfire.

(http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u-1-detail-specification.pdf)

When this report said high speed, did it mean indicated airspeed or true airspeed?

(Spitfire Mk VB W.3134 Report)

What power setting did the mkv spitfire use to achieve a climb of 3250ft/min (normal, military etc...)?

Also, what the main difference between Military & WEP?

 

[wuzak]

Got two reports to show you all. One on the Corsair, other on the Spitfire.

(http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u-1-detail-specification.pdf)

When this report said high speed, did it mean indicated airspeed or true airspeed?

True Air Speed

(Spitfire Mk VB W.3134 Report)

What power setting did the mkv spitfire use to achieve a climb of 3250ft/min (normal, military etc...)?

+9psi boost.

At that time that was the 1/2 hour emergency rating. There was also a 3 minute emergency (and take-off) rating of +12psi boost.

Also, what the main difference between Military & WEP?

Boost.

The boost was controlled by the throttle, either manually or automatically.

A supercharger designed to operate at a certain altitude could provide more boost than the engine could cope with. To compensate for this, the throttle was closed to the point where the desired boost level is obtained. Then, as altitude increased the throttle was opened to maintain the boost pressure. The altitude where the throttle is fully open is termed the critical altitude or full throttle altitude (FTH). Above this altitude the boost, and power, fell off.

With WEP the throttle was opened more, and the critical/full throttle altitude was lower for WEP than military.

 

[Shortround6]

What power setting did the mkv spitfire use to achieve a climb of 3250ft/min (normal, military etc...)?

Also, what the main difference between Military & WEP?

The Spitfire was using "continuous climb" rating, Usually a 30 min to 1 hour rating, For the Merlin 45 this was 1200hp at 16,000ft and a bit less below that as the throttle had to be partially shut at lower altitudes to keep from over boosting.

Military rating is an American rating and was usually comparable to take-off power. For a good part of the war it was a 5 minute rating but some engines had it raised to 15 minutes part way through the war.
Military power was also the power the engine made at it's best altitude with the throttle wide open. Any higher and the thinner air caused the power to drop. Any lower and the throttle had to be closed to prevent over boosting and damage to the engine.
The US of Military power did not require any extra maintenance procedures. WEP came into use (American) in late 1942 and 43 (depending on engine) and was achieved by opening the throttle below the best altitude (or Full Throttle Height /FTL ) or critical altitude. However the throttles were often fitted with tell tales (wires) which when broken signaled ground crew to perform extra maintenance checks. ALL use of WEP was to be noted in long books to determine adjustments to the engines overhaul life.

The Spitfire V was allowed to use 3000rpm and 12lbs boost in combat normal. at some point after this test. as a 5 minute rating and was finally allowed to use 3000rpm and 16lbs of boost (for 3 minutes) as the British equivalent of WEP. However the engine could only hold 16lbs to 11,000ft.
horsepower was 1515 though.

You might want to look at this test:

Spitfire Mk V AA.878 Report

and please note it was done about 2 months before the Corsair first saw combat.

 

[grampi]

^^^ What he said.

Besides, although your mileage may vary, I'd take the P-51B/C D or H any day over the F4U, but that's just my opinion.

Me too!

 

[buffnut453]

The Spitfire was using "continuous climb" rating, Usually a 30 min to 1 hour rating, For the Merlin 45 this was 1200hp at 16,000ft and a bit less below that as the throttle had to be partially shut at lower altitudes to keep from over boosting.

Military rating is an American rating and was usually comparable to take-off power. For a good part of the war it was a 5 minute rating but some engines had it raised to 15 minutes part way through the war.
Military power was also the power the engine made at it's best altitude with the throttle wide open. Any higher and the thinner air caused the power to drop. Any lower and the throttle had to be closed to prevent over boosting and damage to the engine.
The US of Military power did not require any extra maintenance procedures. WEP came into use (American) in late 1942 and 43 (depending on engine) and was achieved by opening the throttle below the best altitude (or Full Throttle Height /FTL ) or critical altitude. However the throttles were often fitted with tell tales (wires) which when broken signaled ground crew to perform extra maintenance checks. ALL use of WEP was to be noted in long books to determine adjustments to the engines overhaul life.

The Spitfire V was allowed to use 3000rpm and 12lbs boost in combat normal. at some point after this test. as a 5 minute rating and was finally allowed to use 3000rpm and 16lbs of boost (for 3 minutes) as the British equivalent of WEP. However the engine could only hold 16lbs to 11,000ft.
horsepower was 1515 though.

You might want to look at this test:

Spitfire Mk V AA.878 Report

and please note it was done about 2 months before the Corsair first saw combat.

This is interesting stuff but by the time the Corsair first saw combat, the Spit MkV had largely been replaced by the MkIX fitted with the Merlin 61 or 63. I'd be interested to know how those engines compared with your figures for the earlier Merlin 45 fitted to the Spit MkV.

 

[parsifal]

Actually the fairest comparison in terms of the timeline is the spitfire XIV and the corsair, since continual references are being made to the later marks of the corsair.

 

[Shortround6]

Actually the fairest comparison in terms of the timeline is the spitfire XIV and the corsair, since continual references are being made to the later marks of the corsair.

I agree that trying to find comparable models of both types time wise is a bit difficult and the MK V is certainly not it. The MK IX is much closer but still roughly 6 months ahead of the F4U-1. The MK XIV being about a year late.

Confusing things is the different dates that both planes were allowed to use higher power settings than they were first used with. The Corsairs may have been in service for a year before water injection being fitted?

 

[CORSNING]

FYI, to the best of my knowledge (at this time).
A/C - engine - operational date.
Spit 9 - Merlin 61/+15 - July 42
F4U-1 - R-2000-8/54" - Sept. 42
Spit F.9 - Merlin 63/+18 - Feb. 43
Spit LF 9 - Merlin 66/+18 - Mar. 43
Spit 12 - Griffon III/+15 - Apr. 43
Spit 8 - Merlin 61&63/+16 - Jun. 43
Spit 12 - Griffon IV/+15 - Jul. 43
F4U-1A - R-2800 - 8/54"? - Oct. 43
Spit 14 - Griffon 65/+18 - Jan. 44
F4U-1A - R-2800-8w/60" - Jan. 44
Spit LF 9 - Merlin 66/+25 - May 44 (100/150 fuel)
Spit HF 9 - Merlin 70/+25 - May 44 (100/150 fuel)
Spit 14 - Griffon 65/+21 - Jun/Jul. 44? (100/150 fuel)
F4U-1D - R-2800-8w/60" - Jan. 45
Spit 21 - Griffon 61/+21 - Apr. 45 (100/150 fuel)
F4U-1C - R-2800-8w/60" - Apr. 45
F4U-4 - R-2800-18w/60"? - May 45

 

[wuzak]

It looks like the Spitfire XIV was operation from February or March 1944. July 1944 saw the introduction of 150 grade fuel and +21psi boost, engine modifications for operational aircraft starting that month.

Edit: Oops, missed the boost entries in your list and the Spitfire XIV listed as operational in January 1944.

 

[Shortround6]

FYI, to the best of my knowledge (at this time).
A/C - engine - operational date.
F4U-1 - R-2000-8/54" - Sept. 42

a minor quibble and also points to the problem the US had, While F4U-1s may have been issued to a squadron on Sept of 1942, the 1st squadron into "service" was not actually declared "operational" until Dec? and that was somewhat hurriedly so they could be shipped to the South Pacific. They arrived at the end of Jan 1943 and first combat operation was 14th Feb 1943.

The Navy also had a single squadron during the fall of 1942 but that squadron was working out the problems with carrier landings and was not actually an "operational squadron". Remember that if any of these two squadrons had experienced pilots their last aircraft was very likely to be an F4F, unlike most Spitfire IX squadrons were at least some of the pilots had flown Spitfire Vs. Some for mechanics/riggers/fitters. A good ground crewman can work on anything but he is going to faster doing something for the 5 or 6 time than doing the same "job" on a new airplane the 1st or 2nd time.

 

[Peter Gunn]

Bah! What's all this Corsair/Spitfire... Firefly nonsense? Apparently I have been remiss in my duties hijacking threads like this to talk of the Mustang instead. Well, I'll let this one slide... Carry on.

 

[buffnut453]

Well if it's not you chuntering about P-51s it's Terry prattling about F4Fs!