F4U Corsair vs P-51 Mustang

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Shortround6 said:
also interesting would be the losses per 1000 sorties and perhaps distance from bases?
Click to expand...
There's also the issue of what they do on those sorties. A Marine who went to Korea expecting to fly F4U's or AD's was instead assigned to F9F's and said that might have saved his life. He said the jets usually only had enough fuel to make one pass and dump all their ordnance while the recips made multiple passes and the AA got more accurate on each pass. If the Corsairs were carrying more ordnance than the P51's, they may have been making more passes per sortie. Trying to make meaningful comparisons based on limited data is pretty hopeless. USAF was withdrawing P-51's from combat in Korea as fast as they could replace them with jets and they were all gone prior to the ceasefire while Corsairs fought through the entire police action(not a war).
 
GrauGeist said:
The term "police action" is much like Russia calling it's invasion a "special operation".

My Stepdad fought in it, as well as several other relatives.

They referred to it as a war.
Click to expand...

Soft language has no place here; euphemisms are for folks who can't stomach the hard truth.

Anything that involves artillery, bombers, and naval gun support is a war.

To your step-dad and other relatives, a hearty salute.
 
Thumpalumpacus said:
To your step-dad and other relatives, a hearty salute.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that.

Regarding Police Action, that was a term Truman used because he wanted the public's support, but didn't want to use the term "War" since WWII was only a few years distant and there wasn't a formal declaration.

I believe it was in the 1980's when the Federal Government started using the term "War" when President Reagan was rebuilding public support for the military and for Korean and Vietnam Veterans.
 

The word "war" is still a touchy thing in American politics because the power to launch war is Constitutionally vested only in the Congress, but those jackaknapes can only be bothered to congregate every so often and perhaps not in time enough to respond to events. But because the President cannot declare war, the lawyers are going to linguify. Hence Truman's terminology.
 
SaparotRob said:
Speaking of which, why is this basket case of a mafia run gas station with nukes still on the Security Council?
Just venting.
Click to expand...
History

The UN Security Council

The UN Security Council is the premier global body for maintaining international peace and security, but it faces steady calls for reform to better meet twenty-first-century challenges.
www.cfr.org

I assume you would be unhappy if the USA lost its Permanent Member status. And there lies the problem of reforming that body, if indeed it requires reform.
 
I thought of that long ago. I still felt like venting!
 
Some fair assumptions, I don't know about ordinance load out between the Mustang and Corsair, however the USAF shipped 145 Mustangs over on U.S.S. Boxer as quick as they could to strengthen FEAF's assets in theater. That the Corsair was in use so long doesn't speak to me of Marine or Navy planning, USAF replaced Mustangs because of the MiG15 (Jet) threat, even the old P-80 stood a better chance than any piston engine warrior and the F-84 was being sent over ASAP.

As for the Corsair, I guess run what ya brung, if that's what's available, that's what you go to war with. Personally, for a piston engine attack aircraft the Skyraider has it all over the Corsair if you're flying in the Navy or Marines.

And my apologies re: loss numbers, I have no excuse as I was looking at the tome on my shelf and totally spaced on even getting it off the shelf.
 
A few things to bear in mind.

Carrier type. The USN deployed a number of Essex class CV, a single CVL (Bataan) and a number of the large Commencement Bay class CVE (Badoeng Strait, Sicily, Rendova, Bairoko, Point Cruz). It was single USMC squadrons that flew from the latter two types for which the main equipment was the Corsair. They were probably too small for jet operations and for the AD Skyraider.

As for the Essex class the air group was built around a core of 4 fighter squadrons and an AD squadron, plus additional detachments of specialist aircraft - photo and night fighter Corsairs, AEW & electronic warfare flying AD and a few rescue helicopters.

Right from the start most of the air groups on the Essex class had two squadrons of F9F Panther jets and two squadrons of Corsairs. An exception was CVG-2 which flew from the Boxer between Aug & Nov 1950 with 4 Corsair squadrons then moved to Valley Forge & then Philippine Sea through to July 1951 with 3 Corsair squadrons. By spring 1952 when it was back aboard Boxer it had one with F9F and two with Corsairs.


You can follow the types of aircraft deployed in each air group on each carrier here.

The first Essex to operate off Korea was CV-45 Valley Forge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

J
Ki-84 vs P-51 engagemants 1945
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Jerrybandit67
J
G
Mustang Numbers
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
gruad
G
P-51H Mustang earmarked for the UK?
Replies
1
Views
674
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
O
F4U-4 Corsair contribution in WW2
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
nuuumannn
A
Italy VS USA: Different ways to improve the P-35
Replies
14
Views
1K
Jugman
J
Menu
Log in
Register