Goodyear F2G vs Grumman F8F Bearcat

[Harry64]

As I found so different performance data of this two aicraft in the net, I would ask the specialists here in the forum for official or primary sources for performance data and comparison.

Examples for statements I found:

"the Grumman F8F Bearcat, that could do all the F2G could do"

or

"The F2G was designed to "'get it" up to altitude quickly, as was the F8F Bearcat, to counter the Japanese kamikaze threat. The expression "climbs like a homesick angle" was coined with the performance of the F2G. 6000 feet per minute climb is in the neighborhood of twice that of any preceding Corsair or other prop driven aircraft of the time."

Okay that is interesting, but maybe anyone has real data for the performance of this two aircraft or an official Navy comparison?

Harry

 

[krieghund]

This data may provide part of your answer

 

[wuzak]

Interesting charts krieghund.

The climb numbers for the F8F-1 seem low. It is supposed to have been one of the fastest climbing piston engined planes - at least to 10,000ft.

Initial rate of climb seems simialr for both - but the F2G gets to 10,000ft sooner.

 

[wuzak]

"The F2G was designed to "'get it" up to altitude quickly, as was the F8F Bearcat, to counter the Japanese kamikaze threat. The expression "climbs like a homesick angle" was coined with the performance of the F2G. 6000 feet per minute climb is in the neighborhood of twice that of any preceding Corsair or other prop driven aircraft of the time."

The charts don't show performance anywhere near that. However, even if 6000ft/min were true it wouldn't be "twice that of any other prop drive aircraft of the time".

Mk.VIII, IX and XIV Spitfires all had initial climb rates of around 5000ft/min. And the Spitfires were all quicker to 10,000ft and 20,000ft.

I believe the P-51H had a similar initial climb rate.

 

[GregP]

We have both visit the Planes of Fame on a regular basis. Bob Odegard comes by every once in awhile and we fly Bearcats regulalrly at the Museum and are restoring one to as-new condition.

The Bearcat (F8F-2) has a normal loaded weight of 9,600 lbs with 2,250 HP and 244 square feet of wing area. That is 4.27 pounds per HP a,d 39.3 pounds per square foot.

The F2G has a normal loaded weight of 13,346 lbs with 3,000 HP and 314 square feet of wing area. That is 4.44 pounds per HP and 42.5 ppounds per square foot.

So the power loading and wing loading both favor the F8F-2, and it is also faster at 455 mph versus 431 mph, both at best altitude.

Advantage Bearcat all the way around except for ordnance load. Give me a Bearcat any day of the week.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

Thanks Harry, I'd never heard of this really interesting aircraft (the F2G) but of course much about its more famous counterpart the F8F.

Surely an apocryphal story:

Flyoff between an P-52 (Version?) and F8F. Both launched from the runway at the same time, but by the time the P-51 reached equivalent alititude the F8F had already made two passes on it. Don't know if its true, don't know if its even realistic. just a story I heard long ago.

 

[Harry64]

Many thanks, Krieghund, for your charts, outstanding interest, great.

Also thanks to you Greg for your data.

The charts don't show performance anywhere near that. However, even if 6000ft/min were true it wouldn't be "twice that of any other prop drive aircraft of the time".

As I said wuzak, that are infos you found in the net, that was the reason I asked for official data.


oldcrowcv63
good story, even the P-52 was not outclassed in this extent

Harry

 

[krieghund]

I believe the P-51H had a similar initial climb rate.

Here are the F-51H charts

 

[oldcrowcv63]

oldcrowcv63 [/B]
good story, even the P-52 was not outclassed in this extent Harry

Ooops, I meant P-51 of course! Senior moment.

 

[GregP]

With a handle like oldcrow, we KNEW that! We just thought you were accounting for inflation ...

Cheers!

I see the nice chart on the F8F-1.

How do you account for the fact that a stock military F8F-2, at the Cleveland Air races in 1949, went from a standstill on the runway to 10,000 feet above ground level in 91 seconds? Sounds like the rate of climb chart is a bit off, huh?

 

[GregP]

duplpicate post ...

 

[krieghund]

We have both visit the Planes of Fame on a regular basis. Bob Odegard comes by every once in awhile and we fly Bearcats regulalrly at the Museum and are restoring one to as-new condition.

The Bearcat (F8F-2) has a normal loaded weight of 9,600 lbs with 2,250 HP and 244 square feet of wing area. That is 4.27 pounds per HP a,d 39.3 pounds per square foot.

The F2G has a normal loaded weight of 13,346 lbs with 3,000 HP and 314 square feet of wing area. That is 4.44 pounds per HP and 42.5 ppounds per square foot.

So the power loading and wing loading both favor the F8F-2, and it is also faster at 455 mph versus 431 mph, both at best altitude.

Advantage Bearcat all the way around except for ordnance load. Give me a Bearcat any day of the week.

It would be interesting to know the loaded weight. I would imagine no ammo and min fuel. The ambient temperature would be good to know.

 

[krieghund]

Just in case the F4U-4 Corsair is discussed here are the USN charts

 

[GregP]

Alas, I am a lousy typist. The record was set in 1946, not 1949 (typo). The stock F8F-2 went from 0 to 10,000 feet in 94 seconds after a takeoff run of 115 feet. The average climb rate froma standing start was 6.383 feet per minute (1,276.6 meters per minute). The Bearcat held taht record for 10 years until beaten by a modern jet fighter that still could not beat the takeoff distance.

I have never seen a weight, engine rpm, manifold pressure, or horsepower rating for the particular F8F-2 used anywhere. World speed records are much the same.

The Me 209 was never documented all that well because they didn't want to give anything away to the competition. When Rare bear set the existing record, nobody publically recorded the weight, power, rpm, etc. The plane was certified as in the class if was supposed to be in and the rest was up to the record-setting team.

As an educated guiess, I'd estimate the F8F-2 at Cleveland in 1949 was taking off at about 8,500 pounds that day and was probably making about 2,400 HP.

 

[Shortround6]

The engine in a F8F-2 Bearcat was good for 2250-2300hp at sea level dry and 1600hp at at 22,000ft also dry. They were fitted for water injection. The engine in the F4U-5 was rated at 2300hp dry at sea level but one source gives 2850hp wet at 30,000ft with it's fancy two stage sidewinder supercharger. The F8F-2 used a variable speed drive on it's single stage supercharger. I would guess that 2400hp is a very conservative figure and 2800hp (wet) at the lower altitudes (and perhaps all the way to 10,000ft) would be closer.

 

[GregP]

Most of the Bearcats WE see at the museum have 2,250 HP R-2800 engines in them. Defying all logic, most Bearcat people seem to take off at about 2,000 HP or so, even today, and throttle back once well airborne and cleaned up. The R-2800 doesn't seem to mind making almost full power once in awhile. All in all, my favorite piston fighter of all times and, in truth, faster tahn the specs in every single case I know of, which is more than 6 supposedly-stock Bearcats.

Of course, Rare Bear is FAR from stock and is more tahn 100 mph faster than stock specs. It'll make 540 mph or so any day of the week when it is running ... at a relatively low altitude, say .... about 4,400 feet MSL (mean sea level). At sea level, it is still capable of more than 500 mph on an average day.

 

[Timppa]

The record was set in 1946, not 1949 (typo). The stock F8F-2 went from 0 to 10,000 feet in 94 seconds after a takeoff run of 115 feet. The average climb rate froma standing start was 6.383 feet per minute (1,276.6 meters per minute).

This is totally unbelievable.
Take-off speed is, say 100 mph. 115 feet is 38 yards. That is a plausible acceleration ( average about 3g) for a Top Fuel dragster, but not for a WW2 wintage stock propeller airplane.
Or then there must have been a storm like headwind.

Also we know that Lyle Shelton set in 1972 time-to-climb record to 3,000 m in 91.9 seconds.
That was a heavily modified Bearcat with a 4,500 hp engine, weighing only 8,700 lb:
The Bear Is Back | History of Flight | Air Space Magazine

Claiming that a stock F8F could climb practically as well with (probably) more weight and half the power is beyond belief.

 

[davparlr]

This is totally unbelievable.
Take-off speed is, say 100 mph. 115 feet is 38 yards. That is a plausible acceleration ( average about 3g) for a Top Fuel dragster, but not for a WW2 wintage stock propeller airplane.
Or then there must have been a storm like headwind.

Also we know that Lyle Shelton set in 1972 time-to-climb record to 3,000 m in 91.9 seconds.
That was a heavily modified Bearcat with a 4,500 hp engine, weighing only 8,700 lb:
The Bear Is Back | History of Flight | Air Space Magazine

Claiming that a stock F8F could climb practically as well with (probably) more weight and half the power is beyond belief.

I would guess that there is some issue with the time-to-climb number but I understand that wind down the runway was 30 to 40 kts. As such, short takeoff in this situation is not unrealistic and is probably typical of carrier take offs. That kind of head start into a wind would also be reflected in the climb time. I read somewhere that the F8F was tied down and released but I don't know for sure.

Greg, wikipedia has the climb rate of the T-38 at 33k/min which is probably about right. I do know we flew a burner demo when we first got into the T-38 with a max burner climb followed by a burner TACAN arc at supersonic speed followed by a out of fuel recovery. Flight time was 15min. That plane could definitely go up! Thanks for the tour, I had a great time. Once my wife interrupted me with text message asking if I was in hog heaven. I replied, "yep".

 

[GregP]

I was not at Cleveland in 1946, but it is reported as such in more than just a few places. You might try looking up the Grumman F8F Bearcat an checking it for records. You might also try looking for the 1946 Cleveland Air Races and looking at records set there.

I personally make no claim at all, just reported what is written about the aircraft. I can tell you this; reports of this feat are out there, authored in 1946 by people who were witnesses, including the U. S. Navy.

You are free to doubt the record. Having witnessed many stock Bearcat takeoffs, I don't really doubt it all that much.

 

[Timppa]

Possible explanation:
Strip the F8F from all unnecessary weight;
-No guns
-No ammo
-No arresting gear
-No gunsight, armor, oxygen bottles, radio, removable armor, pyrotechnics, dinghy etc.
-Minimum fuel, lets say 40-50 gals, enough to to get to 10,000ft and back.
Weight : 7.000-7,500 lbs.

Boost the engine to 3,000-3,500 hp. (R-2800 was actually run with this power).


Of course this is not a "stock" F8F anymore, but a one-off racer to get an order from the US Navy.

Well, the Navy chose the F4U-5 anyway.