F8F Bearcat vs. Fw 190D/Ta 152C vs. Spitfire Mk 21 (1 Viewer)

Best dogfighter?


  • Total voters
    36

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

By spring 1945 I think the Tempest V was pretty good too with most of the technical glitches fixed.

How reliable was the F8F during April 1945? I don't want a newly introduced uber aircraft that crashes even without enemy assistance.
 
Sea Fury and F4U5 had similar performance with the Corsair having the edge. The F8F was really a tough opponent as far as ACM is concerned but above 20000 feet it began to falter. Down low it could do stuff no other piston engined fighter could do. Not a good muti role fighter like the Sea Fury and Corsair.

I beg to differ. My understanding is tat the Sea Fury easily has the legs over the F8 as well as being more flexible. As for the F4U5, I don't know its performance but if it was that good why did the USN introduce the F8?
 
Sea Fury and F4U5 had similar performance with the Corsair having the edge. The F8F was really a tough opponent as far as ACM is concerned but above 20000 feet it began to falter. Down low it could do stuff no other piston engined fighter could do. Not a good muti role fighter like the Sea Fury and Corsair.

What does ACM mean?
 
US Warplanes
The F8F-2 was produced during 1948. Are we supposed to predict what a 1948 version of the Ta-152 would look like? Otherwise we need to stick with the F8F-1 that was produced during 1945.

Maybe some kind of advanced Jumo 222s/BMW 802s or past Jumo 213J/S or DB 603N development....
The one projected with Jumo 222 and enlarged laminar flow wing would have been in the F4U-4/5 class of fighters performance and size wise (source: "LUFTWAFFE SECRET PROJECTS FIGHTERS 1939-1945" by Meyer and Schick ).
They don't look as nice as the Jumo 213/DB 603 powered ones though:

Focke-Wulf Ta 152 H-0, Verschiedene Hersteller 1:72 von Falko Bormann
Focke-Wulf FW Fighter Project w/ BMW 802 engine Luft '46 entry


A Ta 152C with 2300PS DB 603LA and reduced weight (by scaling down the armament to let's say three or four 20mm cannons among other things maybe fuel etc.) should close the power to weight ratio/ performance gap.
It is also much faster than the F8F-1.
 
Last edited:
If we're talking 1948 then all German fighter aircraft would be armed with the MG213 revolver cannon plus R4M FF rockets. A single hub mounted MG213 would probably be enough.
 
20,000 ft. and lower my moneys on the skyrocket from the Ironworks. I believe It definitely ruled in the vertical plane. The only other Ironworks wartime fighter that could outturn it was the FM-2 which I believe turned in the neighborhood of the Spitfire XIV at speeds up to 325 mph. I hope someone here has roll and acceleration figures for these three.
 
I beg to differ. My understanding is tat the Sea Fury easily has the legs over the F8 as well as being more flexible. As for the F4U5, I don't know its performance but if it was that good why did the USN introduce the F8?

The US could afford to use 2 different fighter aircraft at the same time. Each with a specialized role. The F4U-5 used a special supercharger set with two small superchargers running in parallel to feed the main supercharger, the superchargers and intercoolers took up about as much room as the basic engine. It did give some rather impressive performance at 30,000 ft though.
 
I just looked up the W.E.P. rating of the R-2800-34W engine of the F8F-1 of WW2. It is 2,400 hp by many sources. Considering the weight advantage over the Sea Fury......? I still have to locate the interceptor weight of the Bearcat. I haven't researched this bird enough yet....but I will.
 
From "Whistling Death" by Boone Guyton.
F4U5- 568 produced from 1946-51,470 mph @ 26800, service ceiling 41400 feet, climb rate-3780 fpm, four 20 mm cannon, ten 5 inch rockets under wings, up to 5000 pounds on center line and wing pylons. First Corsair with all metal construction.

F8F was designed to be a fleet defense fighter to operate from CVEs. Because it was not really proficient in air to ground work all Bearcat squadrons were replaced by Corsairs on USN flight decks prior to the Korean War. However it was used extensively by the French for air to ground.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for this, they are impressive numbers for a design that was basically unchanged since 1941. Are there any clues as to how she handled, as she must have gained a fair bit of weight with the continued development.
 
Glider, I'm with ya buddy. There just isn't that much info out there on the performance figures or F4U-5 at W.E.P. About all I have found today was that the R-2800-32W produced 2,675 W.E.P. and several sights giving max.speeds of F4U-5: 462 and F4U-5N: 470. I do remember an article I read 25-30yrs. ago stating the F4U-5 was capable of 480 mph in Korea. I think it was in Air Progress.
Did some digging in my old files and found the single page I kept from Air Trails MILITARY AIRCRAFT 1971: F4U-5N: 480mph. 5,240 fpm. It was developed as a high altitude, all weather night fighter. No altitude or combat weight is given for the speed or climb.
 
Last edited:
Chuck Yeager once mentioned that the" longnose Focke Wulfs were maybe the best piston engined fighters" he ever flew.
Does anyone know if he flew the Bearcat as well? I think him being one of the premier test pilots he might have done so.
 
Last edited:
An older thread but maybe someone know about following question now:

Chuck Yeager once mentioned that the" longnose Focke Wulfs were maybe the best piston engined fighters" he ever flew.
Does anyone know if he flew the Bearcat (or other first class fighters) as well? I think him being one of the premier test pilots he might have done so.
 
Pb, I remember that story and also remember that a number of sources discounted that story as being false. In your haste you may not have thoroughly read what I posted from Linnekin's book. He never said and I never said that Bearcats ever bested any Spitfires. All he said was they had an eight on eight and it was a wonder someone did not get killed. I expect he meant that in the melee it was a wonder no one had a collision. As far as the USN pilot and his claim about making a run before the Spit could get off the ground, that was just big talk and was never proven. As far as the Vampires are concerned, they came in low and level and the Bearcats, in a dive and with an angle were able to close but as soon as the Vampires began to pitch up, it was good bye Vampires. So what! I feel sure that Richard Linnekin's book "80 knots to Mach Two" is available used a or maybe even in your library. If you want to learn about what a graduate from Canoe U, a veteran pilot witha an aeronautical engineering degree and a former test pilot as well as a veteran of the Korean War has to say about the period of time when recips disappeared and jets came aboard, it is a great read. He tells what it was like to fly the N2S, SNJ, Hellcat, Bearcat, Corsair, Panther, Cougar, Skyraider, Crusader, Banshee, Skynight, Skyhawk, Phantom and a number of general aviation light planes. He even mentions Bill Leonard and his strength. His son is I believe on this forum. The Bearcat could from a standing start, on the runway, go to 10000 feet in around 1.5 minutes and the F8F1 was an honest 440-450 mph airplane at low altitudes, according to Linnekin.

The Bearcat held the brakes-off to 10,000 ft record for about 20 years.
 
The Bearcat held the brakes-off to 10,000 ft record for about 20 years.

It is in several threads here.

It was a bit of stunt but it was done at the 1946 Cleveland air races.

It also a caution about comparing book figures and performance on a given day, the two planes involved took off into 30-40kt head winds and had one or more safety interlocks taken out that allowed full military emegency power (or WEP) to be used with the landing gear down, something that could not be done on a service airplane.
 
It is in several threads here.

It was a bit of stunt but it was done at the 1946 Cleveland air races.

It also a caution about comparing book figures and performance on a given day, the two planes involved took off into 30-40kt head winds and had one or more safety interlocks taken out that allowed full military emegency power (or WEP) to be used with the landing gear down, something that could not be done on a service airplane.

...which was about the same sort of trickery done with other record-breaking military aircraft, including the F-15, when it took the zoom climb record. The Bearcat was also loaded with the minimum safe fuel load for the flight, no ammunition (if the guns hadn't been removed), and they probably weighed the pilots and picked the lightest one ;)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back