What? What'd I do? T'w'ant me!
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
What? What'd I do? T'w'ant me!I saw what you did there.
Well if you cant figure it out, screw you, into the nearest lawn.What? What'd I do?
The dart of outrageous fortune!Well if you cant figure it out, screw you, into the nearest lawn.
P-39 Airacobra. Give it a ventral radiator similar to Mustang or Ki-61 and use the space in the wings for more fuel tanks.
...after a 15% total airframe upsize.It looks similar to the MiG-3.
I was going to say to improve the P-39 you could move the engine forward, then you would also have to move the pilot forward, but that would unfortunately mean the 37mm cannon will have to be ditched.
Then move the engine forward some more. Now the pilot has run out of room, so better relocate him behind the engine.
Also, the extension shaft is getting short. Better take that out and run the prop from a reduction gear on the engine.
Then we can install the P-51 style radiator....
...after a 15% total airframe upsize.
Thank God the AAF chose the Model 4.
You'd have a very goofy looking airplane!what would have happened had you stuck the pratt and whintey from the corsair in the mustang
but how would it have performed with the higher hp radialYou'd have a very goofy looking airplane!
Probably similar performance as the P-47, because it was the same engine.but how would it have performed with the higher hp radial
I would bet that the extra horsepower would have been consumed by the extra drag and loss of the Meredith effect. Also the range would suffer bigtime from the radial's higher specific fuel consumption, and high altitude performance would probably suffer as well. Witness how much more fuel the P47 required to fly the same distance as a P51.but how would it have performed with the higher hp radial
The USAAF had the P-47, didn't need a Corsair clone.ok plan b have the usaf adopt a verison of the corsair and the p51 never happens
Same engine, but not the same powerplant. P47 was turbocharged, F4U was two speed supercharged. P47 would have more power available above the low 20s in altitude.Probably similar performance as the P-47, because it was the same engine.
I kept the answer simple.Same engine, but not the same powerplant. P47 was turbocharged, F4U was two speed supercharged. P47 would have more power available above the low 20s in altitude.
My understanding was that the Meredeth effect merely negated the drag created by the scoop. No scoop, no Meredith effect, no difference.I would bet that the extra horsepower would have been consumed by the extra drag and loss of the Meredith effect. Also the range would suffer bigtime from the radial's higher specific fuel consumption, and high altitude performance would probably suffer as well. Witness how much more fuel the P47 required to fly the same distance as a P51.
The Corsair couldn't have done the Mustang's job of high altitude ultra long range escort. The P47 eventually got there, at the cost of lugging an inordinate amount of fuel around, but it was turbocharged, and could do it. The Corsair wasn't and couldn't. The Corsair fought a different war with different requirements.ok plan b have the usaf adopt a verison of the corsair and the p51 never happens
ok plan b have the usaf adopt a verison of the corsair and the p51 never happens