Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I know most single engine aircraft (apart from the P39 possibly) had poor visibility over the nose particulary on the ground and approaching the runway/flight deck. Did either engine type have an advantage I am thinking that possibly the shorter nose of a Radial might give an advantage but was that lost by the wider engine. Did aircraft with inverted engines have any advantage over a tradional upright inline.
What single engined aircraft were particulary notorious for bad visibility and what aircraft were considered by the standards of the day to have good visibility.
I know the Corsair had a repuation for poor visibility but 2 others that seem to me to be poor are the FW190 and the DeWoitine D520
Two that seem to have good visibility to me are the Wildcat and the Nakajima Ki 43 Oscar
Yes, tricycle landing gear ala P-38, P-39, B-24, B-25, et.al. offers much better ground handling visibility.Would visibility be more determined by the aircraft's stance on the ground that it's engine configuration?
Side visibility during ground operations is not that critical. The P-38 would have no problems. Once airborne, gear configuration has no impact. Navy aircraft, excluding the F4U, typically stressed good downward visibility for carrier landings.P-38 front view was adequate, but side view was not the greatest due to the twin booms.
One of the earliest twins of the war, the Whirlwind, boasted an alleged superb view from the office. I have a pic somewhereP-38 front view was adequate, but side view was not the greatest due to the twin booms
For that to happen, the attacker's airplane's nose needs to be sloping at least 6 degrees away from the cockpit. Both the F4F and the F6F had very good visibility in that area. The FW190 and the P47 were poor in that respect. The F4U was adequate.
Cockpit armor was typically only proof against .30 cal bullets. If the bad guys are firing 20mm mine shells the only solution is to not get hit.too exposed in the Wirlwind cockpit...especially with 20mm shells flying about.
All WW2 Navy and Marine pilots were taught to land with the fullstall to approach. The short final was standard and the Corsair landing pattern was no different than the Wildcat's or Hellcat's. .
I think its worth remembering that the RN were used to a curved approach with the Seafire so modifying that experience for the Corsair would have been pretty straightforward
One of the earliest twins of the war, the Whirlwind, boasted an alleged superb view from the office. I have a pic somewhere
Here it is: