syscom3
Pacific Historian
Lets hear your opinions on these two legendary warbirds.
Seafury vs F4U-4. Which is better?
- Thread starter syscom3
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
red admiral
Senior Airman
- 479
- Mar 24, 2005
The Hawker Sea Fury is undoubtedly superior.
Faster, more maneuverable, better armed, better visibility, has a floor to the cockpit, much prettier.
Faster, more maneuverable, better armed, better visibility, has a floor to the cockpit, much prettier.
Glider
Captain
Have to second that
- Thread starter
- #5
syscom3
Pacific Historian
Fair enough, compare it to the F4U-5.
red admiral
Senior Airman
- 479
- Mar 24, 2005
The F4U-5 gets faster and has more pilot comfort. I'd still take the Sea Fury.
Interestingly I found this opinion on the -5
"Engineering improvements that weren't
I've flown the F4U-4 Corsair. It was a good airplane. I've also flown the later model F4U-5-it was no F4U-4!
I flew the F4U-4 in flight training, and when I received my "Wings of Gold" in August of 1950, I was immediately assigned to the VF-14 Tophatters based in Jacksonville, Florida and flew the F4U-5. I found the F4U-5 heavier and more dangerous than the F4U-4, primarily because of several "improvements" that were at best ineffective and at worst dangerous.
The F4U-5, a 1945 design modification of the F4U-4, was intended to increase the F4U-4 Corsair's overall per formance and incorporate many earlier Corsair pilots' suggestions. It featured a more powerful 2,300hp engine with a fully automatic two-stage supercharger. Other "improvements" were electrical trim control, automatic cowl flaps, a gyroscopic lead-computing gunsight and other automatic functions. These and other changes made the F4U-5 500 pounds heavier than the F4U-4. "
Interestingly I found this opinion on the -5
"Engineering improvements that weren't
I've flown the F4U-4 Corsair. It was a good airplane. I've also flown the later model F4U-5-it was no F4U-4!
I flew the F4U-4 in flight training, and when I received my "Wings of Gold" in August of 1950, I was immediately assigned to the VF-14 Tophatters based in Jacksonville, Florida and flew the F4U-5. I found the F4U-5 heavier and more dangerous than the F4U-4, primarily because of several "improvements" that were at best ineffective and at worst dangerous.
The F4U-5, a 1945 design modification of the F4U-4, was intended to increase the F4U-4 Corsair's overall per formance and incorporate many earlier Corsair pilots' suggestions. It featured a more powerful 2,300hp engine with a fully automatic two-stage supercharger. Other "improvements" were electrical trim control, automatic cowl flaps, a gyroscopic lead-computing gunsight and other automatic functions. These and other changes made the F4U-5 500 pounds heavier than the F4U-4. "
I would take the Sea Fury for the reasons stated by red admiral.
elmilitaro
Senior Airman
Agree to that also.
SM79Sparviero
Airman
Sea Fury handling and performances were superlative ( a "jet with propeller" according to the pilots)but its Centaurus engine had a very high fuel consumption. It is an important parameter for a naval fighter.A low fuel consumption was one of the best advantages of Mitsubishi Zero.
- Thread starter
- #10
syscom3
Pacific Historian
The only thing Ive seen negative about the Sea Fury was its range.
But even still, with external fuel tanks, it was still adaquet
But even still, with external fuel tanks, it was still adaquet
Twitch
Staff Sergeant
As far as I'm concerned they're a draw. Neither has any points of performance that are staggeringly superior to the other.
red admiral
Senior Airman
- 479
- Mar 24, 2005
Maybe not staggeringly better for the Sea Fury, but still better than F4U-4/5. It is the "better" aircraft, not by a massive amount, but still "better".
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
Actually I'd go for the F4U-4
Sea Fury - top Speed - 460mph
F4U-4 --- top speed -- 460mph (without external racks) 446mph with
Sea Fury - Climb ------ 2777ft/min
Corsair --- climb ------ 3870ft/min (reports of 4.9min to 20,000ft at WEP)
Sea Fury - range ------ 700mi internal
Corsair --- range ------ 1015mi internal
Sea Fury - ceiling ----- 35,800ft
Corsair ---ceiling ------ 41,500ft
Sea Fury - loading ----- 2,000lbs
Corsair --- loading ----- 4,000lbs War time load outs of over 5,500lbs reported
Sea Fury - Armament -- 4 x 20mm
Corsair --- Armament -- 6 x .50s or 4 x 20mm
Sea Fury - Horse power - 2,480hp
Corsair --- Horse power - 2,450hp
Sea Fury - empty wt ---- 9,240lbs
Corsair --- empty wt ---- 9,206lbs
Sea Fury - Gross wt ----- 12,500lbs
Corsair --- Gross wt ----- 14,670lbs
Sea Fury - wing area ---- 280sq/ft
Corsair --- wing area ---- 314sq/ft
As you can see the Corsair has it in all respects except possibly speed (wheather the Sea Fury speed is with/without external mounts). Equal power and more wing area gives the Corsair the edge in climb and should also give it an edge in turning. Climb and ceiling alone would give the edge to the Corsair in air to air encounters. However the more savy pilot could win in either aircraft.
wmaxt
Sea Fury - top Speed - 460mph
F4U-4 --- top speed -- 460mph (without external racks) 446mph with
Sea Fury - Climb ------ 2777ft/min
Corsair --- climb ------ 3870ft/min (reports of 4.9min to 20,000ft at WEP)
Sea Fury - range ------ 700mi internal
Corsair --- range ------ 1015mi internal
Sea Fury - ceiling ----- 35,800ft
Corsair ---ceiling ------ 41,500ft
Sea Fury - loading ----- 2,000lbs
Corsair --- loading ----- 4,000lbs War time load outs of over 5,500lbs reported
Sea Fury - Armament -- 4 x 20mm
Corsair --- Armament -- 6 x .50s or 4 x 20mm
Sea Fury - Horse power - 2,480hp
Corsair --- Horse power - 2,450hp
Sea Fury - empty wt ---- 9,240lbs
Corsair --- empty wt ---- 9,206lbs
Sea Fury - Gross wt ----- 12,500lbs
Corsair --- Gross wt ----- 14,670lbs
Sea Fury - wing area ---- 280sq/ft
Corsair --- wing area ---- 314sq/ft
As you can see the Corsair has it in all respects except possibly speed (wheather the Sea Fury speed is with/without external mounts). Equal power and more wing area gives the Corsair the edge in climb and should also give it an edge in turning. Climb and ceiling alone would give the edge to the Corsair in air to air encounters. However the more savy pilot could win in either aircraft.
wmaxt
- Thread starter
- #15
syscom3
Pacific Historian
I wonder if the sea fury was the safer of the two planes when landing on a carrier.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
I have seen the F4U-4 at 5min to 20,000ft but did not have a source/site handy, so I used readily available data on both aircraft. Do you have sources and sites, if so please post them for our education?
wmaxt
wmaxt
elmilitaro
Senior Airman
nice info, wmaxt!
Didn't know much of that.
Didn't know much of that.
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
elmilitaro said:nice info, wmaxt!
Thanks,
I hope Soren posts his data (hopefully test reports) because there are so many site that use METO as best performance instead of WEP or worse a mix of the two. I always want to see the best available data and flight test reports esp when there from two different sources, pilots, and aircraft are the best.
wmaxt
elmilitaro
Senior Airman
Me too.
