Corsair VS Spitfire

[GregP]

The Corsair has a lot of diehard fans, for good reason. It is rugged, suitable for harsh conditions, was designed for carrier use from the start. and has a LOT of good characteristics combined with a few bad ones, like visibility over the nose.

The Spitfire has a lot of diehard fans and has a lot of great characteristics combined with a few bad ones, like fragility and short range.

As I said earlier, they are two greats that would seem to NOT be considered generally as substitutes for one another, as Navies rarely "got along" with "Air Forces." They were, after all, competing for the same funding. It's fun to think about, but I bet these two would very rarely be in the same sky.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

Except in the FAA. (RN, not US!)

 

[Milosh]

What taildragger had good visibility over the nose?

 

[Shortround6]

There were a few

very few

 

[Milosh]

I noticed you be in Florida S6, stay safe.

 

[Shortround6]

Thank you

 

[Peter Gunn]

By definition, long range for F4U is intermediate for P-51, P47N and P-38J/L

Was there ever going to be a Corsair model that could have done long range escort? Also wouldn't it have to have a redesign for the altitudes the 8th AF operated at? To me it's a great performer low down and close to home, but the bombers, and by extension, the Luftwaffe had to play right in the Mustangs wheelhouse, so I have never seen how the F4U was ever going to do the P-51s job.

 

[tomo pauk]

I noticed you be in Florida S6, stay safe.

Indeed. Both you, Peter and other folks.

 

[drgondog]

Was there ever going to be a Corsair model that could have done long range escort? Also wouldn't it have to have a redesign for the altitudes the 8th AF operated at? To me it's a great performer low down and close to home, but the bombers, and by extension, the Luftwaffe had to play right in the Mustangs wheelhouse, so I have never seen how the F4U was ever going to do the P-51s job.

IMO - Not as well as P-47D. The Peak internal Fuel of 361 gallons with unprotected wing cells would have delivered more range than the P-47D until D-25. That said, the high altitude performance was well short of the earlier D-11 through D-23 with Paddle Blade and WI for WEP combined with turbo supercharger at 20K + feet, and decreased in comparison to the P-47D as altitude increased.

The Power available for the F4U-1 R2800-8W for MP maxed at 1650HP@21K, down to 1400@25K;
WEP 1975HP at 17K and downhill from there. At 25K WEP HP~1400HP and at 30K ~ 1300HP

The Power available for the P-47D-11 R2800-63 for MP at 2000HP up to 25K; MP= 1890 at 30K;
WEP 2300HP at 27K down to 2100HP at 30K.

The difference in HP available in both MP between the F4U-1 and P-47D-11 in January 1944 at 21K was 350HP, 25K was 600HP at MP and 900HP at 30K. Greater difference at WEP/Combat Power.

HUGE difference for air combat maneuvering at 8th AF escort altitudes..

Short answer - No.

if F4U-4 added 130 gallons of internal fuel to restore F-4U-1 capability, range increases to that of the P-47D-25 operational in June 1944, but 25K and above performance still not on par with a P-47D-25 at escort altitudes - and far shorter Combat Radius than P-51B/D and P-38J/L.. with increased internal fuel available to them in January, 1944.. But first combat for F4U-4 was April 1945.


The F4U-4 was probably superior under 28K vs all the late P-47D but a.) Combat radius greatly diminished below even the P-47C which had 305 gallons internal fuel vs 234 internal for the F4U-4, and b.) far too late to even serve medium range escort legs that P-47D-1 through -23 were capable of.

If I could get actual flight test validation for Combat Radius development for F4U above 20K I would probably insert the comparison in my new book.

 

[tomo pauk]

IMO - Not as well as P-47D. The Peak internal Fuel of 361 gallons with unprotected wing cells would have delivered more range than the P-47D until D-25. That said, the high altitude performance was well short of the earlier D-11 through D-23 with Paddle Blade and WI for WEP combined with turbo supercharger at 20K + feet and decreased as altitude increased.

The Power available for the F4U-1 R2800-8W for MP maxed at 1650HP@21K, down to 1400@25K;
WEP 1975HP at 17K and downhill from there. At 25K WEP HP~1400HP and at 30K ~ 1300HP

The Power available for the P-47D-11 R2800-63 for MP at 2000HP up to 25K; MP= 1890 at 30K;
WEP 2300HP at 27K down to 2100HP at 30K.

The difference in HP available in both MP between the F4U-1 and P-47D-11 in January 1944 at 21K was 350HP, 25K was 600HP at MP and 900HP at 30K. Greater difference at WEP/Combat Power.

HUGE difference for air combat maneuvering at 8th AF escort altitudes..

Short answer - No.
....

Bill - at least two questions if you don't mind. 1st - what equivalent of horsepower was available to the F4U-1 in form of the exhaust thrust at, say, 25000 ft? Then - perhaps it will be better if we compare US fighter vs. German opposition, not vs. other US fighters?

Granted, extra internal fuel is needed for the Corsair if we want to make a real LR fighter out of it.

 

[drgondog]

Bill - at least two questions if you don't mind. 1st - what equivalent of horsepower was available to the F4U-1 in form of the exhaust thrust at, say, 25000 ft? Then - perhaps it will be better if we compare US fighter vs. German opposition, not vs. other US fighters?

Granted, extra internal fuel is needed for the Corsair if we want to make a real LR fighter out of it.

Tomo - exhaust thrust as a %HP was typically in the 10-13% range of THP by calculation as f(HP), prop efficiency and Velocity - for ESTIMATES.

The approach to compare against Bf 109G-5, G-6, G-6/AS and FW 190A7/8 is certainly useful for better comparison values.

That said, the question "How would it have performed as 8th AF BC escort draws the comparisons to altitudes between 20K and 30K for most initial clashes.

The P-47D-11 out rolled the F4U-1 at medium high speed, out dived it, and was faster at altitude. I suspect that with the Delta Power Available advantage, the P-47D had (even considering the lower W/L of the F4U-1), would enable better climb and turn at those altitudes also.

It follows that the P-47D-11 was a superior platform vs the LW fighters as it was superior to the F4U-1 as a bomber escort in the ETO.

 

[Peter Gunn]

drgondog - So from an aerodynamic standpoint, if the F4U-1 was outfitted with the P-47D-11's R2800-63 engine and not the R2800-8W, would performance (not range) be up to 8th AF operational standards? Basically able to meet Luftwaffe day fighters on even or better terms? Or would serious modification be needed for the install.

I know it's only speculation and I'm not asking you to have to run calculations or anything, just a general what if to satisfy my uninformed (read dumb) question. Thanks.

As an aside, I have always favored the P-47 as the better overall aircraft, but curiosity gets the better of me sometimes.

And personally, I have never thought the F4U-XXX was ever going to do the Mustangs job. Even in Korea, as I recall, JoeB once posted loss rates for both and the surprise was that the "rugged" Corsair suffered almost as much as the "delicate" Mustang in the CAS role.

 

[Peter Gunn]

Indeed. Both you, Peter and other folks.

Thank you Tomo, we'll do our best.

 

[pbehn]

Thank you Tomo, we'll do our best.

You will be comforted to hear Richard Branson is hunkering down in his wine cellar. Good luck.

 

[Peter Gunn]

You will be comforted to hear Richard Branson is hunkering down in his wine cellar. Good luck.

Well THAT makes me feel better.

 

[drgondog]

drgondog - So from an aerodynamic standpoint, if the F4U-1 was outfitted with the P-47D-11's R2800-63 engine and not the R2800-8W, would performance (not range) be up to 8th AF operational standards? Basically able to meet Luftwaffe day fighters on even or better terms? Or would serious modification be needed for the install.

I know it's only speculation and I'm not asking you to have to run calculations or anything, just a general what if to satisfy my uninformed (read dumb) question. Thanks.

As an aside, I have always favored the P-47 as the better overall aircraft, but curiosity gets the better of me sometimes.

And personally, I have never thought the F4U-XXX was ever going to do the Mustangs job. Even in Korea, as I recall, JoeB once posted loss rates for both and the surprise was that the "rugged" Corsair suffered almost as much as the "delicate" Mustang in the CAS role.

First the Parasite Drag of the P-47 was lower than the F4U, which at high speed would trump the lower Induced drag of the F4U wing. So, between 20 and 30K, the P-47 has an aerodynamic advantage which translates to an advantage, combined with greater Power Available Delta, in range and acceleration and climb.

Second, the F4U optimum cruising speed in miles/gallon should be lower than for the P-47D at 20 to 30K. I Have NOT seen proof of the comparison, however. Pure speculation on my part based on published 15,000 values for the F4U vs P-47C-2.


You have to jam the ducting under the cockpit, and insert the Turbo supercharger aft of the cockpit to make the -63 work better than the -21 (or 8W). So yes, serious mods required.

Yes, the loss per sortie between the P-51D and the F4U were within a 1/10 %.

 

[CORSNING]

SR & Pete,
My older sister of 66 yrs is down there in Arcadia. I am counting
on you boys to help keep her safe. May God be with you all.

Jeff

 

[CORSNING]

Corsair vs Spitfire and now Thunderbolt?
You say tomato, I say tomato, passion fruit and watermelon!
What?, Jeff

PS: Apples to apples my @$$.

 

[pbehn]

Well THAT makes me feel better.

I don't wish ill on anyone and hope damage is minimal, although the news at the moment looks bad. However if Mr Branson s private island was made uninhabitable and cut off from the world with him on it for a decade I would re assess my belief in God.

Back on topic if the Spitfire is in conflict with the Corsair does the Corsair have to give up the Malcolm hood?

 

[Shortround6]

Exhaust thrust on the F4U is going to be on the low side.

Picture of model but gives the idea.

real plane

some of those cylinders had a looong way to go to reach the outlet. And outlets are not only angled but cut away.

as opposed to the exhausts on a B-25

short, individual and directing the exhaust thrust in the right direction. Added to the frontal areas though.