F4U Corsair vs P-51 Mustang

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Catch22, Jul 23, 2008.

  1. Catch22

    Catch22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    9,562
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Graphic Designer
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Home Page:
    I did a quick search and couldn't find an existing thread, so...

    Which is the better aircraft? I will not be posting much data as I 1) am not that knowledgable technically, so this should be good and 2) I'm here to learn, and I don't have access to all the resources some of you guys have.

    Personally, I'm partial to the F4U, but this thread is NOT here to choose favourites, but rather to determine which the better plane was and why. Have at 'er!
     
  2. comiso90

    comiso90 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Video and multi-media communications expert
    Location:
    FL
    Ask Honduras and El Salvador. They fought each other and as far as I know the P-51 always came out on top but pilot training and maintenance were huge factors
     
  3. ponsford

    ponsford Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
  4. Catch22

    Catch22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    9,562
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Graphic Designer
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Home Page:
    Wow, the search is brutal on this site I guess. Sorry guys!
     
  5. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Well the other thread is kind of old. (last post in '06, and the essay one is a bit of a different topic)

    Anyway, try using the google search feature, it's usually more helpful for these kind of searches.
    My search: P-51 F4U - Google Search
     
  6. Catch22

    Catch22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2007
    Messages:
    9,562
    Likes Received:
    64
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Graphic Designer
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Home Page:
    Oh yes, that is much better. Thanks again!
     
  7. magnocain

    magnocain Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Corsair wins.
     
  8. comiso90

    comiso90 Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Messages:
    3,672
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Video and multi-media communications expert
    Location:
    FL
    unless you are escorting heavies at high altitude
     
  9. Soundbreaker Welch?

    Soundbreaker Welch? Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Messages:
    1,900
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    Still a student
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    Kinda off topic, but does a game like Il Sturmovik really portray the Mustangs manuverability accurately?

    Or does it hype it up?

    I do like all the stall characteristics in Sturmovik, even though it can be annoying when your plane crashes from too tight a turn. But still, it helps make the planes feel more realistic.

    and again, I know it's just a game.
     
  10. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Which the Corsair was capable of, albeit not quite as good as the P-51. But even in comparison to the lighter P-51B the F4U-1 was comperable in speed and superior in climb up to 24,000 ft with both a/c in comparable loadouts. (configured for similar range)
    http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/p-51b-f4u-1-navycomp.pdf

    The F4U-1 also had superior high-alt performance to contemporary Fw-190's and 109's (except for high alt 109's with GM-1 or DB-603 supercharger).


    Though I haven't seen a cost comparison for the F4U, I'd assume it would be more expensive than the P-51 (though probably a bit cheaper than the P-47) and it would use ~50% more fuel than the P-51.
    But the F4U was much better in other roles, Fighter-Bomber and Dive Bomber (except A-36), strafing: carried much more ammo 6x 400 rpg, compared to 4x 400 or 2x 400 + 4x 265 for the P-51D. (much less for the B/C)
     
  11. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    The turning characteristics in Il-2 (4.07/4.08 -1946-) seem pretty well matched to reality. And the stalls are great, particularly modeling the particular characteristic of different a/c. (including slats, featured on quite a few a/c)

    THe only general (significant) problems I've encountered in performance is that the jets don't seem to accelerate and retain speed properly at altitude.

    The biggest flaw I've found is thatthe damage modeling, while possibly the best of any CFS, doesn't model cooling systems/radiators. (odd since they do model oil coolers and oil tanks)
     
  12. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    In my opinion this discussion is about which models you are comparing and which pilots are flying them and who spots the other first.

    Overall Mission capability - dogfighter, close air support, carrier ops and I would give the edge to Corsair

    Air superiority, long range escort, maybe even high altitude interceptor and I would give the edge to the P-51 and particularly the P-51H over any variant of the F4U.

    The airplane that is most ignored in these discussions is the P51B-15 with Malcom Hood and the 1650-7 engine on 44-1 fuel. Only the P-51H is superior Mustang variant.

    My father got 3-1-1 in the air in his first two weeks in this bird, then converted to a P-51D and got 4-1-1 for the next 10 months. He always had a great affection for acceleration, climb and turn performance in that B-15 over all variants of the P-51D
     
  13. Thorlifter

    Thorlifter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    7,905
    Likes Received:
    189
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    IT Nerd
    Location:
    Dallas, Tx Jubail, Saudi Arabia
    Drgondog,

    What is 3-1-1 and 4-1-1?

    Is it 3 kills, 1 damaged, 1 probable?
     
  14. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    Yes but destroyed-probable-damaged in that order
     
  15. Marshall_Stack

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Missouri
    I would personally rather fly the F4U. Ground attack is usually required and I would rather have the toughness of the Corsair and its radial engine.
     
  16. davparlr

    davparlr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Occupation:
    retired avionics engineer
    Location:
    Southern California
    I certainly agree with this. I selected this aircraft as the one I would most like to fly if I had to fly in WWII, on another thread. This aircraft, at fighter weight of 8500 lbs. could be quite competitive with even the latest German aircraft, besting the Fw-190D-9 at almost all altitudes in speed and probably equal in climb, if the D-9 would have to be lowered to some fighting weight to be competitive. The Bf-109K and the Ta-152H would have to be dealt with carefully as they had some performance edge, although not a lot up to 25k.

    It is also interesting to note that if they had dropped the -9 engine in the B, or even D, performance would have been very near the P-51H, the B being closer since it is lighter than the H. I would think that change would have been no more complex than the other engine upgrades. They just didn't need to do it.

    As for comparing the P-51 to the F4U, they were designed for different missions. Neither aircraft could perform the other mission better. The F4U-1 would not have been able to provide the coverage necessary to protect the bombers in early to late ā€™44. While their range was adequate, performance dropped off significantly above 25k, allowing the enemy to attack from above. The F4U-4 could perform at altitude but lacked internal fuel range and if they were added, the F4U-4 would still have missed the critical time for bomber escorting. While the P-51 could probably been upgraded to carrier quals, the added weight would have hindered performance even more at lower altitude, where it was not designed to play. In addition, the liquid cooled design would have made carrier maintenance more complex.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    But performance of the F4U-1 at alt was much better than the the contemporary Fw 190A, and some 109's. (and still compeditive with most contemporary 109's)

    As it was the P-51B made a much better escort fighter -particularly fo the higher flying B-17's- but if there had been separate development of the F4U for the AAF, a higher altitude supercharger would likely have been used sooner if not a turbocharged variant.


    Here's an interesting discussion on this we had going a while back: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/battle-over-germany-january-1944-a-13336.html
     
  18. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    I agree with this KK. The F4U had a clean airframe and the R-2800 certainly had models tuned for high altitude as evidenced by the P-47. I have always thought in hindsight that the F4U would be considered the best US fighter, hands down, had it been used and deployed also by the USAAF.

    But it did not get to make a combat record against the Luftwaffe to demonstrate its true value
     
  19. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    Damn good summary. Also if the B or H had been carrier qual per tail hook and gear loads, they would have been back to the P-51D in performance.
     
Loading...

Share This Page