Supose the Corsair went to the 8th AF !

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by MikeGazdik, Dec 13, 2008.

  1. MikeGazdik

    MikeGazdik Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    531
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Ohio
    How do you think the Corsair would have performed with the 8th AF in conjunction with the P-47 ? How would it have handled bomber escort into Europe? How would it have dealt with the Bf 109s' or the Fw 190s'? How would the use of the Corsair in conjunction with, or instead of, the Thunderbolt changed the bombing campaign, and how might it have affected the introduction of the Mustang?

    This is a subject I have often tossed about. Both the Corsair and the Thunderbolt were put into service in about the same time frame. We know the Corsair was at first somewhat put aside by the Navy. I have also read stories that the Army Air Corps did look into the Corsair.

    I personally think the Corsair may have changed the fighter scene in Europe. I think it performed better than the Thunderbolt, yes slightly slower at altitude, and not as high of a ceiling. But overall a much better fighter. It had more range I believe too. Plus I think the Corsair may have further delayed or changed the importance of the Mustang over Europe. Your thoughts / arguments?
     
  2. Watanbe

    Watanbe Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student, Casual
    Location:
    Adelaide
    I think the Corsair would have easily done the same job that the Mustang did! The key to the success of the Mustang was that it was a capable fighter with long range. The Corsair was IMHO as a better fighter than the Mustang, it was at least as good and it had the range to get the mission done.

    It was more rugged and less suspect to getting torn up by ground fire on strafing runs.

    I think it would of handled the 109's and FW190's just as well as the Mustangs did especially considering the numerical advantage they would have held.

    The Mustang and Corsair are better all round fighters than the P47 (one of my favourites) despite its superior high altitude performance!

    I don't think the result would of changed at all though. The Mustang wasn't a superior aircraft to its German opposition but it did have vast numerical superiority and the Corsair would also have enjoyed that.

    Just my 2 cents. Feel free to disagree!
     
  3. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    The early models of the Corsair (pre F4U-4) had altitude performance inferior to the P-51B/C/D. Though it was good enough high altitude escort and had better high altitude performance than the Fw 190. (and somewat better than the Bf 109G -without high-alt supercharger or GM-1)

    To make a good escort it would need to retain the wing ferry tanks of the F4U-1 and preferably add self-sealing. (they had only fire supression CO2 purge) Without the added fuel, range was no better than the early P-47C/D. (pre D-25, with 305 gal rather than the later 370 gallons)

    an interesting comparison:
    http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/battle-over-germany-january-1944-a-13336.html


    I wonder how the P-47 would have turned out if it had been developed with the 2-stage supercharged engine rather than the turbocharged one. (not to mention if a tight engine cowling with large spinner and cooling fan had been considered earlier, like the Fw 190A -or any installation of the BMW 801, or the XP-47J)
     
  4. MikeGazdik

    MikeGazdik Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    531
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Ohio
    The Army Air Corps "Corsair" would have been in use before there was a P-51B to be compared against.

    I could see the AAC Corsair being produced by Goodyear, like the FG-1, without any wingfold or arresting gear features. The Corsair would have supplemented the Thunderbolt. I could see how futher developing the Corsair for long range escort would have improved itself even better. I know both the P-47 and P-51's would have retained thier better performance at higher altitudes, but I really think the Corsair could have also done the job.

    Anybody with computer skills care of posting a Corsair done up in early olive drab over grey undersides, painted up like an early 56th group Thunderbolt!
     
  5. renrich

    renrich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,542
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    real estate
    Location:
    Montrose, Colorado
    IMO, if the Corsair had been put into production instead of the P47, assuming development had been taken over by by another company than Vought(Vought was too small to develop the Navy and Army version at the same time) the Corsair would have been in service in the ETO before the P47 and would have been an improvement over the P47 as an escort fighter. Structural modifications would have made the Corsair a significantly lighter fighter than the Navy version(no wing fold, no tail hook and other structural weight saving measures plus no marinisation) which would have resulted in a performance improvement. The F4U1 carried a large amount of internal fuel and with external drop tanks had a significant range advantage over the P47. Even the Navy Corsair had a performance advantage over the P47(better climb, better turn and roll and more speed below 25000 feet where most ACM took place) As an escort fighter until the P51B was available in 1944, the army Corsair could have saved some lives, IMO.
     
  6. Lucky13

    Lucky13 Forum Mascot

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2006
    Messages:
    36,727
    Likes Received:
    1,064
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Nightshift picker
    Location:
    A Swede living in Glasgow, Scotland
    Home Page:
    ...and few later ones in natural metal with checkered noses and noseart!8)

    Interesting thread!
     
  7. ccheese

    ccheese Member In Perpetuity
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,669
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Occupation:
    R E T I R E D !!
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, Va.
    Clave is the man for this job..... He can do it !

    Charles
     
  8. timshatz

    timshatz Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2006
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    MGR
    Location:
    Phila, Pa
    Probably would've come out looking a lot like a bent wing version of the F8F.
     
  9. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Why bent wing? The P-47 had a conventional low wing configuration. (albeit the belly ducting made it look like a low mid-wing)

    In terms of looks I think it would be pretty similar, just with a slimmer fuselage and no "fat gut" (belly ducting).

    This is getting somewhat off the main topic here (and I've been meaning to start a thread on alternate P-47 development for a while), but given the low drag wing of somewhat lower area (the F4U having a high lift wing) such a P-47 should be faster than the Corsair, though climb rate will probably be similar. (possibly less, though after stripping the turbocharger and all that ducting, the P-47 may weigh only slightly more than the Corsair -granted the land based Corsair will be lighter)

    The Top speed will probably be similar to the historical P-47 (~430-440 mph), but attained at ~22,000 ft rather than 30,000+ ft and significantly better low altitude performance. (higher speeds were later attianed at lower altitudes on the P-47 due to increase in boost preassure, with 70" Hg and 2,600 hp available with 100/150 grade up to ~24,000 ft, 65" Hg with ~2,520 hp avialable somewhat earlier at 65" Hg at ~25,000 ft up from 2,300 hp at 56" Hg) Addition of water injection to the Corsair's 2-stage engine brough power up to 2,250 hp, and the later engine of the F4U-4 produced 2,450 hp with better altitude performance.

    The reduction in fuselage bulk and weight should significantly improve range as well. (probably bring fuell efficiency to similar levels as the Corsair, though range will still be somewhat less with the 305 gal of the pre D-25 compared to the F4U's 361 gal with the 2x 62 gal wing tanks, though it should be longer with the later 370 gal of the D-25) Cruise speed should be somewhat higher than the Corsair.



    The elimination of the belly ducting will also leave more clearance under the fuselage for external stores. (eliminating the need to use performance degrading wing pilons durring escort -300 gal drop tank should be possible- and improving air to ground capabilities)


    Of course adding the tight engine cowling will significantly improve top speed as well as improve range, but this feature would of course benefit the Corsair as well. (the XP-47J gained ~25 mph over the similar P-47C test aircraft using the same engine)
     
  10. Marshall_Stack

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Missouri
    Wouldn't the Corsair be faster than the P-47 due to its bigger prop (turbo not withstanding)? Would you include the nose tank on the P-47 as well?
     
  11. renrich

    renrich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,542
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    real estate
    Location:
    Montrose, Colorado
    KK89, those are some interesting and thought provoking ideas that speculate about a non turbo charged P47. Would you care to speculate about the weight saved on an F4U if it was developed to be strictly land based? There were actually some Corsairs manufactured by Goodyear which did not have folding wings but I have never seen any figures about weight saved. The tail hooks were often removed on the landbased Corsairs in the Pacific but I don't know how that affected performance or weight and balance. Any ideas?
     
  12. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    IMO - the Corsair, less 600-800 pounds due to a strict land based version of the wing and structure for carrier qual - is better than the P-38 and P-47, with tweener range in 1943.

    Whether it has the range in late 1943 to escort to Berlin or Munich is a question I don't offhand have the answer to, and the P-51B Mustang which already had orders would have been put into production and still showed up in late 1943 in the ETO.. However the Corsair less the navy wing/arresting gear/landing gear requirements should be able to convert that to disposable fuel tanks to get the range with an extra 120-140 gallons.

    There would have been a lot of reasons for 8th AF to focus on one fighter, two at most, and I think the 8th loses the P-47s and P-38s, keeps Corsair and Mustang.
     
  13. Watanbe

    Watanbe Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2007
    Messages:
    526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Student, Casual
    Location:
    Adelaide
    The Corsair in a combination with the P51 in the ETO I think would have just about made the P38 redundant! I can still see the P47 serving an important role as a fighter bomber performing ground attack and close support! Although at low altitude probably would of ran into trouble with FW190's
     
  14. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,200
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    Shorter landing gear = strength.
     
  15. drgondog

    drgondog Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Executive, Consulting
    Location:
    Scurry, Texas
    plus shorter landing gear, but long enough for prop clearance, meant less weight than say a P-47 gear...
     
  16. FLYBOYJ

    FLYBOYJ "THE GREAT GAZOO"
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    23,200
    Likes Received:
    784
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Aircraft Maintenance Manager/ Flight Instructor
    Location:
    Colorado, USA
    Yep!!!
     
  17. MikeGazdik

    MikeGazdik Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    531
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Ohio
    Whoever it was that mentioned the thinner wing of the P-47, that is one design feature Republic never seems to get any praise for. Alot of talk about the thin wing of the Spit, or the Laminar of the Stang though. I think the comparatively thin wing ( for the size of the aircraft ) of the P-47 was definately one of its "secrets".

    And also, as tough as the Corsair was, it was no Thunderbolt. I have seen a few photos of crash landed F4U's with the cockpit broken or twisted. Obviously not good. One drawback of having the cockpit at the back of the wing where the fuselage would twist in a bad crash landing. So the Corsair may have added a few casualties in those situations. But I think it would suredly offset those by being a more able dog-fighter.

    This board it awesome!!
     
  18. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    I don't know if it was thinner, but the P-47 used a "low drag" airfoil, the specific characteristics I'm not sure of. It was not an NACA airfoil, but the Seversky S-3 airfoil which was also used on a number of other Seversky/Republic aircraft (like the P-35, XP-41, and P-43). I believe some other members know more on this arfoil design, though possibly not the actual thickness of the P-47's wing.

    The XP-47F featured a laminar flow wing of a different planform, but this was abandoned. I don't know if there were any performance improvements, but the prototype crashed, killing the test pilot. (though I don't know the cause)
     
  19. kool kitty89

    kool kitty89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    3,069
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    I was refering to the below statement about a P-47, not the inverted gull wings of the Corsiar.

    And I still don't see why that would give the P-47 bent wings. (let alone look like the Bearcat)
     
  20. renrich

    renrich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    4,542
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Occupation:
    real estate
    Location:
    Montrose, Colorado
    Watanabe, if you look at the Corsair performance figures, relative to other AC, the closer to sealevel the Corsair was the better the performance, relatively. Like all recips the Corsair got faster higher IF the engine power held up but the P47 was pretty sluggish at sea level. The Corsair was not. Good reason for that since most carrier operations took place pretty near sea level. We have been through this before but I agree with Bill that an Army F4U would have probably replaced the P47 and perhaps also P38. 600 or 800 pounds lost would have made a big difference in performance.
     
Loading...

Share This Page