Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
By definition, long range for F4U is intermediate for P-51, P47N and P-38J/L
I noticed you be in Florida S6, stay safe.
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.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 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.
....
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.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.
Indeed. Both you, Peter and other folks.
You will be comforted to hear Richard Branson is hunkering down in his wine cellar. Good luck.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.
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.
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.Well THAT makes me feel better.