Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
R Leonard said:. . . but you could land a Corsair on a carrier.
R Leonard said:. . . but you could land a Corsair on a carrier.
Soren said:In a Dogfight, it would defidently be the Corsair !
It could climb faster and it was more maneuverable, plus against the P-47 the F4U Corsair had the rare advantage of being able to out-turn the P-47
The best thing the P-47 could hope fore against a F4U Corsair, would be a head on attack or, that there was enough altitude to let it dive away from harms way. (Almost nothing could follow a P-47 in a dive !)
DAVIDICUS said:RG_Lunatic,
What is your source regarding your statement, "Umm... the P-47 was fast into the dive, but a number of planes could dive faster. The Corsair and the P-47 were about equal in initial dive performance (both are very heavy planes) and the Corsair was actually faster (550 mph) under a high degree of pilot control."
In addition, what is your source for your statement, "And the P-47N had TWICE the firepower of the F4U-4, which is a huge factor."
I am certain the latter of your above statements is incorrect and interested to find out if my understanding concerning the former is incorrect.
DAVIDICUS said:RG_Lunatic:
My understanding was that the M2 was the standard gun used on U.S. aircraft throughout the war. (There certainly was no need to engineer and introduce a fifty with a higher rate of fire. Six fifties were considered more than adequate against other fighters [especially Japanese fighters] and most of the "N" models had eight! Also, as the cyclic rate increases, so do the jams.)
DAVIDICUS said:I'd like to read anything you know of that states differently. I have heard that the rate of fire of the M2 would increase as the belt got used up as the gun would be dragging a lighter ammunition belt although, frankly, I'm not sure about that claim.
DAVIDICUS said:As to the dive claim, please name some of these "number of planes" that could exceed the speed of a P-47 in a dive. I have never read or heard of these planes and everything I have read and heard indicates that the P-47 was faster in a dive than the F4-U, probably due to drag from the different wing loadings. The F4-U's wing loading made is better able to haul heavy loads and require less airstrip to get airborn. Perhaps you've heard of the joke about P-47's - Q: How mush airstrip does a P-47 need to take off? A: All of it!
Perhaps you have some date you can share concerning various "critical mach levels" of different aircraft.
DAVIDICUS said:One more unrelated question if you would be so kind as to indulge me. How exactly are the "confirmed kills" and "unconfirmed kills" calculated when you post?
Thanks.