Navy Corsair vs P-51B Climb Test, March 1944 (2 Viewers)

[Old Crow]

Does anyone have or know if the Navy provided a graph or numbers for the climb test?

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/p-51b-f4u-1-navycomp.pdf

Thanks

 

[GregP]

Interesting. I have seen three or four other comparisons saying the Corsairs was superior to the P-51, but never this document.

Interesting that the Corsair is more maneuverable, but not surprising. One of the requirements for a Naval aircraft is good low-speed handling, which naturally translates into good maneuverability at medium speeds. The F4U seems to carry this into higher speeds.

I'm pretty sure an F6F will ALSO out-maneuver any P-51 since it has the most wing area of any single-seat WWII fighter, but it is also slower and likely has not as good roll performance.

The Super Hellcat turned into the Bearcat, but would likely have been a sure winner absent the F8F

The choice of the F4U over the P-51 / P-47 / F6f in Korea is starting to be more clear.

 

[SaparotRob]

Interesting. I have seen three or four other comparisons saying the Vorsairs was superior to the P-51, but never this document.

Interesting that the Corsair is more maneuverable, but not surprising. One of the requirements for a Naval aircraft is good low-speed handling, which naturally translates into good maneuverability at medium speeds. The F4U seems to carry this into higher speeds.

I'm pretty sure an F6F will ALSO out-maneuver any P-51 since it has the most wing area of any single-seat WWII fighter, but it is also slower and likely has not as good roll performance.

The Super Hellcat turned into the Bearcat, but would likely have been a sure winner absent the F8F

The choice of the F4U over the P-51 / P-47 / F6f in Korea is starting to be more clear.

 

[drgondog]

Does anyone have or know if the Navy provided a graph or numbers for the climb test?

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/p-51b-f4u-1-navycomp.pdf

Thanks

Note that F4U running very high MP compared fleet standard, and to P-51B 67", when 115/145 or 130/50 fuel was available to boost to 75". Note also that P-51B was carrying wing racks to slow it down about 12mph and reduce 500fpm in climb.

Didn't look to the load outs to see if both were flown at full internal load - and as far as turn and roll performance, pilot skill matters.

 

[Old Crow]

Note that F4U running very high MP compared fleet standard, and to P-51B 67", when 115/145 or 130/50 fuel was available to boost to 75". Note also that P-51B was carrying wing racks to slow it down about 12mph and reduce 500fpm in climb.

Didn't look to the load outs to see if both were flown at full internal load - and as far as turn and roll performance, pilot skill matters.

Yes, thanks for your response. I've never put too much stock in this test since the Corsairs weren't standard production aircraft drag wise plus one ran at 65" instead of the normal 60" of boost. The Navy claimed that in the climb test "the F4U's are everywhere superior in climb, having an estimated margin of from 750 feet to 1,000 fpm at various altitude levels." In this first loadout, the P-51B weighed 9,423 lbs. and the F4U's weighed 12,162 lbs. (one ran at 65", the other at 60") In the second loadout, the P-51 weighed 9,100 lbs. the F4U's weighed the same 12,162 (same boost settings) with the Navy stating at this loadout "the F4U's are superior in climb to 20,000 feet and the P-51B superior above that altitude to ceiling." Neither of those Navy quotes make sense to me except the P-51B being superior above 20,000 feet. That's why I wondered if there's any data or chart to back up what the Navy said.
Thanks again---Looking forward to your next P-51 book.

 

[pinehilljoe]

Were there any engagements between Corsairs and Mustangs in the Banana War's in Central America?

 

[SaparotRob]

There were engagements during the "Soccer War".

 

[GregP]

I'm hoping they ran the maneuverability tests, came down, changed pilots, and re-ran the tests to account for pilot differences. But, it doesn't so state that.

Also, one pilot may be VERY familiar with one airplane and may have never flown the other one, making turning performnances a bit suspect unless pilot familiarity with the airplane was taken into account when selecting pilots.

I've talked with a guy who said the P-51 was, hands-down, the best fighter of it's time. I also asked him how many difference fighters he had flown, and he had only flown the P-51. But, he had engaged in dissimilar combat with other types and always bested them. Not sure that tran slates into a better airplane or a better pilor, or neither.

Sort of like choosing "the most beautiful woman," which is very dependent both on the observer and possibly on how many clothes she is not wearing at the time.

I doubt the guy in the P-51 above knew the loadout of the opposition during any particular fight, or the experience of the opposing pilot. I don't even know how many dissimilar dogfights he participated in, it never came up. So, the conclusions are murky at best.