Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It's peak dive speed may not have been that much better than some other fighters but apparently it accelerated in the dive pretty well?
There seems to be some question. However, it is generally considered to be one of the better divers and has control of the high ground, i.e. energy. And besides, I understand the devil is fast but also has a somewhat varying diving speed which depends on how close the archangel Gabriel is to his forked tail.It's peak dive speed may not have been that much better than some other fighters but apparently it accelerated in the dive pretty well?
Finishing what I was try to say yesterday. The net difference in weight of the turbo R-2800 as installed in the P-47 over the two-stage model was probably around 300-450lbs. This extra weight ( based off of the 977lbs figure from Dean) probably includes all the ducting, moutings, heat shields, oil tank, and waste gates for the turbo. It could include the belly cowling as well.
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!
I'll reply to the original quote, with a short story, before the answer.
In junior high, and high school, all the kids in my neighborhood, invented a war game to make use of our 1/72nd scale, WWII planes we loved to build. We divided the 15 acres of our 3 farms, into oceans and land. We built land bases. We used 4x4 fence posts, and gave them an island and flag and they were carriers (the better ones had 1x6 planks on top of the 4x4 for that "flattop look".
Well, as you may imagine, we had a bunch of rules for combat (including a referee we called the "witness"), and we often had to settle disagreements. Because the model box might say the top speed of the plane was 437mph, but the literature actually said it was 442mph. And we had to agree on top speeds, for pursuit of a plane, escaping a dogfight, etc.
Since we didn't limit a person to any single nation, you might actually have a P-51 fight a F4U Corsair.
....which leads me back to the original topic.
Across this many decades, I can't tell you what the name of the book was. But it was a library book about WWII Airplanes/battles/history. And it said (paraphrasing):
"In post-war trials, with American pilots at the controls of both planes, above 20,000 feet, the planes were even. Below 20,000 feet, the F4U Corsair was superior."
The ONLY part of this quote I can't remember clearly, to be certain about, was if it was above, or below, 20,000 feet that the Corsair was superior. I remember clearly, that American pilots rated the Corsair superior to the Mustang above (or below) 20,000 feet. And on the other side of that altitude, they considered them even.
There is actual test data out there to find. You have a quest, sir knight
It is also a question of which version of the P-51 and which version of the F4U.
The F4U-1 would not fare very well against a P-51H. Nor would a P-51 or P-51A cope very well with an F4U-4 or -5.
If you search though old threads this is discussed. There was a USN procurement requirement for the F4U that allowed the production line to remain open until 1953. If the same requirement would have existed for the USAF the P-51 would have remained in production as well.Another interesting twist to the conversation that I have not seen anyone talk about is production. Both aircraft started out in 1940. Production for the P-51 ended in 1945. Production for the Corsair ended in 1953. Why would militaries purchase an inferior aircraft? As the longest produced piston engine plan in world history it seems the F4U was simply the best all round WW2 era fighter ever produced.
Re-read the notes of the Fighter Conference at Patuxent River, Oct 1944. The Mustang was deemed 'Best Fighter below 25000 feet', the P-47D the best above 25000 feet and the F4U was third in both comparisions - flown by USN, AAF, RAF, Lockheed, NAA, Vought, Grumman test pilots.So, here's the context:
My brothers, neighbors and I, played this game with 1/72 scale model aircraft in the 1970's and 1980's. We divided up the 9 acres of property we lived on (in the middle of all 3 families properties), designated oceans and came up with a set of rules about bombing, carriers, parents, and planes, to make it all work
As you can imagine, we had disagreements. When we had dogfights, those of us not involved were "witnesses" who were in charge of what was allowed/believable, and what wasn't. We could call a time out ("time stop!") during a dogfight, to argue our points about turning radius, altitude, climbing speed, etc. and implore the witness to agree with us, just as our adversary did the same.
We'd meet every few weeks, to talk about the planes and stats. We had to. The "witnesses" (aka referees) had to know which stats to apply. During a "time stop", the would back up or advance our frozen-in-space planes. They would explain to us who was faster at that point in the turn or climb.
As you can imagine, those meetings, about planes and stats...mattered a truckload.
We would bring books from the library. We would compare passages. We would vote and decide, which tome was most believable (based on evidence that supported it) and which wasn't.
I tell you ALL of this, to let you know how I spent about 5 or 6 years of my childhood.
..and to settle this debate....
Now, like anyone in this sort of circumstance, I'm ONLY as good as the info I was provided.
But trust me. As a teen, living on 9 acres of battleground, I f*cking did my homework. And this is what I remember most vividly about these two great American fighters. Of which I owned both planes, in various versions: (BOTH, P-51B, AND, P-51-D if you are asking, as well as the F4U). And here was OUR gospel, voted on and agreed on, after much book-reading and comparing and correlating.
AFTER, WWII, according to the book we agreed seemed reasonable, accurate and in accordance with all of the other books we used for reference -- the Air Force did post-war fighter trials (I bet, to see which one to buy more of, as the era of jet fighters was arriving). And THIS is what I remember, from 1 or 2 books.
With American fighter pilots, at the controls, above (or below) 20,000 feet, the planes were considered equal.
And on the other side of that altitude (and I don't remember if it was ABOVE IT, or BELOW IT), the Chance Vought F4U was considered superior.
By American pilots.
Discuss.
Another interesting twist to the conversation that I have not seen anyone talk about is production. Both aircraft started out in 1940. Production for the P-51 ended in 1945. Production for the Corsair ended in 1953. Why would militaries purchase an inferior aircraft? As the longest produced piston engine plan in world history it seems the F4U was simply the best all round WW2 era fighter ever produced.
So, here's the context:
My brothers, neighbors and I, played this game
Discuss.
I've always thought the B and C versions of the Mustang were actually better overall.Re-read the notes of the Fighter Conference at Patuxent River, Oct 1944. The Mustang was deemed 'Best Fighter below 25000 feet', the P-47D the best above 25000 feet and the F4U was third in both comparisions - flown by USN, AAF, RAF, Lockheed, NAA, Vought, Grumman test pilots.
Had the P-51B been the a/c flown the P-47D would have been at a speed and manueverabilty disadvantage all the way through 32,000 feet. The P-51D critical altitude for the 1650-7 was at 24,000 feet, the B at 29000 ft for the 1650-3