Corsair VS Spitfire

[wuzak]

I guess the arrangement used by teh Sea Fury, Tempest II and others would provide more exhaust thrust.

Were there any differences in exhaust outlets between F4U-1 and F4U-4?

 

[Shortround6]

ALL F4U s used a system were 3 cylinders went into one outlet (total 6 outlets) but the later ones brought 4 of the outlets up higher to exhaust over the wing. the outlets were more circular and were oriented in more rearward direction.

While not the equal of most V-12 exhaust systems one can guess that this system provided more thrust than the F4U-1 System.

 

[Peter Gunn]

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

PS: Apples to apples my @$$.

It might be apparent by now that I'll use (almost) any thread to find out more about the Mustang...

 

[CORSNING]

 

[GregP]

Thew F4U Corsair had probably the worst visibility over the nose of any WWII fighter (mass produced), but also was the first single-engine fighter to exceed 400 mph in level flight, so the streamlining was very good for the day.

About adding the turbocharger, the F4U's fuselage has a LOT of empty space, and it MIGHT just fit. But the main fuel tank covers the entire fuselage height and width behind the firewall, so you'd lose some fuel IF you added turbo ducting ... bad news for the Corsair's range. I think wing tanks were practical, but you'd also not have the same airframe, for sure.

Not too sure why we're redesigning the Corsair's main mission, but it could be done. The real question in my mind is "why would we do that?" It was so good at what it was designed to do: fleet defense and CAP.

 

[wuzak]

About adding the turbocharger, the F4U's fuselage has a LOT of empty space, and it MIGHT just fit. But the main fuel tank covers the entire fuselage height and width behind the firewall, so you'd lose some fuel IF you added turbo ducting ... bad news for the Corsair's range. I think wing tanks were practical, but you'd also not have the same airframe, for sure.

Not sure that the Corsair fuselage has a lot of empty space.

The XF4U-3 prototype was a turbocharged version, but using an experimental Birmann turbo rather than the normal GE turbo. The project didn't go far, mainly because the turbo had poor reliability.

Not sure that you would need to copy the P-47's system in any case.

 

[GregP]

I'm sure since I've looked inside. They probably put it there for CG purposes. Like I said, major airframe changes. Might have to move the wing.

 

[drgondog]

The primary difference between the two airframes, independent of turbo, was that the F4U had a 5% greater area wing plus the 23015 airfoil was higher drag and CL, than the Republic S-3 wing. The Empty weight of the F4U-1 was 8900 and P-47D 9900.. so the WL of the F4-U for same basic load out was lower. Thus the F4U with same HP available as the P-47 should be slightly more maneuverable..

With 361 gallons of internal fuel of the F4U-1 compared to 305 gallons of P-47D-1 through -23, the WL margin is reduced by approximately 25-30%.

This advantage of F4U-1 reduces as a function of altitude due to the turbo supercharged P-47D maintaining its 2000 (or 2300) HP through 24-25K as the F4U-1 loses comparative HP as function of altitude.

 

[tomo pauk]

Thew F4U Corsair had probably the worst visibility over the nose of any WWII fighter (mass produced), but also was the first single-engine fighter to exceed 400 mph in level flight, so the streamlining was very good for the day.

It was October 1942 when F4U-1 was capable for 400 mph, ie. there was several other fighters that beat the 400 mph mark. XF4U-1 was under 380 mph, at lightest military load:

About adding the turbocharger, the F4U's fuselage has a LOT of empty space, and it MIGHT just fit. But the main fuel tank covers the entire fuselage height and width behind the firewall, so you'd lose some fuel IF you added turbo ducting ... bad news for the Corsair's range. I think wing tanks were practical, but you'd also not have the same airframe, for sure.

The lower half of the fuselage was also pretty much empty space. There was a proposed 2-seat variant that featured two fuel tanks under the cockpit (link), shaped somewhat like at the Fw 190.

Not too sure why we're redesigning the Corsair's main mission, but it could be done. The real question in my mind is "why would we do that?" It was so good at what it was designed to do: fleet defense and CAP.

It was also an excellent fighter bomber, both from CV and land bases.

 

[tomo pauk]

The primary difference between the two airframes, independent of turbo, was that the F4U had a 5% greater area wing plus the 23015 airfoil was higher drag and CL, than the Republic S-3 wing.
....

It was even thicker, the Corsair's wing - 23018 at root. Looks like the P-47C/D was at only 14%.

 

[wuzak]

It was October 1942 when F4U-1 was capable for 400 mph, ie. there was several other fighters that beat the 400 mph mark. XF4U-1 was under 380 mph, at lightest military load

So about the same time as Spitfire IX exceeded 400mph?

Which, I assume, is after the Fw 190A did.

Edit: The speed graph of the XF4U-1 shows the speed increasing beyond the critical altitude, but the graph stops shortly after. Could it have gone over 400mph above that altitude?

Edit 2: According to Wiki the XF4U-1 exceeded 400mph on 1 October 1940

 

[tomo pauk]

So about the same time as Spitfire IX exceeded 400mph?

Which, I assume, is after the Fw 190A did.

And after the Bf 109F-4 and after 109G-1/G-2.

Edit: The speed graph of the XF4U-1 shows the speed increasing beyond the critical altitude, but the graph stops shortly after. Could it have gone over 400mph above that altitude?

Not with the existing 2-stage A-series (X)R-2800-4 - it made less power and at lower RPM than the B-series R-2800-8

Edit 2: According to Wiki the XF4U-1 exceeded 400mph on 1 October 1940

Unfortuantely - Wikipedia quotes tertiary (at best) 'source'. Not just for the Corsair, but also for the P-38 saying it did 400 mph in 1940, even though we read 375 mph on any pre-G version; even the P-39G required deletion of cannon and 2 HMGs and uprated engines to beat 400 mph.
The XP-39 is credited even by the 'America's hundred tousand' for 400 mph, that never achieved.

 

[CORSNING]

And after the Bf 109F-4 and after 109G-1/G-2.

Tomo, where, when & under what conditions did a production Bf 109F-4 reach 400 mph?

 

[CORSNING]

The XP-39 is credited even by the 'America's hundred tousand' for 400 mph, that never achieved.

To the best of my knowledge at this time the P-39N was the first production P-39
to exceed 400 mph in military service. Yes I know its military listed maximum
speed is 397-399 mph. A little special polishing by the crew could take care of
that.
On a fresh out of the box model maybe.

 

[tomo pauk]

Don't know where and under what conditions, however this graph (link) shows the 'flown values' ('Erflogene werte') for the Fw 190 with BMW 801C engine and Bf 109F-4, plus calculated values for the future 109G (widly optimistic in this case, at least for the speed) and Fw 190 with 801D engine. Then there is a comparison test between the 109F-4 and Fw 190A-2 (2 cannons + 2 MGs, BMW 801C) showing up to 20 km/h speed advantage for the F-4 (link, on German) above 4500 m.

The 1st P-39 that went above 400 mph was the stripped-down P-39C (just 2 guns IIRC) and experimental V-1710. 1st combat-worthy P-39 above 400 mph was the P-39Q without gun pods.

 

[GregP]

The Corsair was the first single engine fighter to exceed 400 mph in level flight. The only fighter aircraft to do it before the Corsair was the P-38, but it had two engines. Others surely followed, no question, but first is first.

The XF4U-1 did it on 1 Oct 1940. The P-38 was earlier in 1939, but was a twin.

I've never seen any claim that the Bf 109F could exceed 400 mph (643.9 kph) in level flight until now. The F-model 109 could certainly climb well, and several ace pilots thought it the best of the breed (no argument from me), but it never shows up as quite that fast in anything I have read to date.

 

[tomo pauk]

Post your data, Greg. Not hear-say, data.

 

[dedalos]

Kurfust at his site, provides datas and sources that show the Bf109F4 well over 644km/h

 

[CORSNING]

The 1st P-39 that went above 400 mph was the stripped-down P-39C (just 2 guns IIRC) and experimental V-1710. 1st combat-worthy P-39 above 400 mph was the P-39Q without gun pods.

Thank you Tomo for the information. However my statement said first production P-39. So in a
sense I am to blame. What I meant to say was, "first combat worthy operational P-39".

Kurfust at his site, provides datas and sources that show the Bf109F4 well over 644km/h

Please post such data dedalos. I am not aware of said data.

 

[CORSNING]

I only use official military or (second choice) factory performance
test figures when I post. The Bf.109F-4 was cleared for 1.3 ata
when it was introduced into service. It was later cleared for 1.42
ata in January 1942. From all the sources I have read to date,
they generally point to the maximum speed of 390 mph. at
6,700 m. (21,982 ft.)
I do however know of one testing on 11 July 1942 that recorded
394 mph./6,000 m. using 1.42 ata boosting.

I have not seen any evidence to date that would support the
fact that any fully operational Bf.109F-4 could reach 400 mph
(643.9 km/h) at any altitude.