Washing Machine Charlie
Airman
- 34
- Aug 1, 2018
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Tigercat was a contemporary of the Hornet, they are very closely matched. Pretty much as good as it gets in twin engine prop fighters.Hi all, I am a longtime reader, first time contributor.. I am a history buff, but, not much of a technical guy, as far as planes goes, so, talking specs juat scrambles my brains. I will leave that to the experts here.
One of my "that would really be cool to see" match-ups has been the British Mosquito vs American Tigercat.
The legendary wooden wonder, which jumped into the fight early on vs the American design, that arrived too late to battle. Would the late war design give the Tigercat enough of an advantage to dominate the mosquito or was the English design good enough to go toe to toe with a late war design?
Head to head, who would win? If the Tigercat was given a chance and the combat experience to mature, as a design, how would it compare to the Mosquito as far as versatility? It always baffled me,as to why, the design didnt see more action in Korea....
The Tigercat was a contemporary of the Hornet, they are very closely matched. Pretty much as good as it gets in twin engine prop fighters.
The Hornet was a single seat fighter, although it did carry an additional crew man later it must have affected performance. I would say they were as close as its possible to get, considering one was wooden with in line V engines and the other metal with radials, they were up against the actual limits of prop fighters, which ever route you take.And a better match in terms of role.
Well similar numbers of both were built, the F7F was eventually made carrier capable, I guess there was a bit of needs must and horses for courses.Hornets flew off carriers while the F7F did not.
The F7F was only produced for two years up to 1948, the Hornet up to 1950, if the US wanted or needed them they would have got them.A final version, the F7F-4N, was extensively rebuilt for additional strength and stability, and did pass carrier qualification, but only 12 were built.
The F7F was only produced for two years up to 1948, the Hornet up to 1950, if the US wanted or needed them they would have got them.
I hadn't noticed Biff. I don't think there was much to choose between the types, just depended on what other types each nation had as far as I can see.Pbehn,
Accidentally gave you a thumbs down but have since removed it.
Sorry about that!
Cheers,
Biff
Hi all, I am a longtime reader, first time contributor.. I am a history buff, but, not much of a technical guy, as far as planes goes, so, talking specs juat scrambles my brains. I will leave that to the experts here.
One of my "that would really be cool to see" match-ups has been the British Mosquito vs American Tigercat.
The legendary wooden wonder, which jumped into the fight early on vs the American design, that arrived too late to battle. Would the late war design give the Tigercat enough of an advantage to dominate the mosquito or was the English design good enough to go toe to toe with a late war design?
Head to head, who would win? If the Tigercat was given a chance and the combat experience to mature, as a design, how would it compare to the Mosquito as far as versatility? It always baffled me,as to why, the design didnt see more action in Korea....
This comes up a lot but the big thing that is overlooked is that the Mosquito was a bomber that was converted into a night fighter or fighter-bomber/strike aircraft.
It was never intended to pull the "G" loads a fighter operating in daylight would.
A IIF at 18,500lbs was rated at 8 "G"s ultimate load (not service load).
Single seat fighters (British and American ) went between 9.0 (Firefly) to 14 (Tempest V) with most being 10-12(Hellcat was 13.5).
The Mosquito did a lot of things very well, dogfighting single seat fighters in daylight was probably not one of them even if they did score some successes.
By the time you get to the later versions with two stage superchargers for extra power the wight has gone up but I am not sure they really beefed up the structure of the plane much.
Service loads were usually about 2/3 of the ultimate load (plane breaks in flight).
14G? 13.5G? I wonder what weight condition was used for those ultimate load factors.
As far as I know, Hellcat had 7.0G limit load factor with 12000 lbs(11000 lbs for F6F-3s). So It's 6.6~6.75G limit load factor for military gross weight, And applying 1.5 safety factor gives about 10G ultimate load factor.
In my knowledge most WWII fighters have an ultimate load factor of about 12G with 1.5(1.8 for axis fighters) safety factor.