Year 1943: the best fighter

[wuzak]

With radiators installed in Mosquito fashion, the fuel tanks of Spitfires can be installed between wheel wells and hull, so the plane is both more streamlined with greater fuel load. Without going for a major wing redesign.

Like that shown here?

 

[tomo pauk]

Yep, the cutaway shows that radiator 'eats up' the wing between wheel well and cockpit floor. The space between well and lower hull fuel tank is also a nice spot, just aft the main spar, but it's cluttered with structural parts of the wing, much like of P-40 P-47.

 

[wuzak]

Yep, the cutaway shows that radiator 'eats up' the wing between wheel well and cockpit floor. The space between well and lower hull fuel tank is also a nice spot, just aft the main spar, but it's cluttered with structural parts of the wing, much like of P-40 P-47.

Part of that space is also taken up by the landing gear.

For mine there is more volume to be had in the leading edge. IIRC PR Spitfires used leading edge tanks most of the span, but this precluded armament.

 

[tomo pauk]

Indeed you're right, the part of the wing just aft the main spar serves as 'housing' for gear strut. The space between gun barrel hull looks like a good spot, too, and it was being used for fuel tanks, but just for 2 x 13 imp gals. Kindly provided by NZTyphoon here (post #86):

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/109g-vs-spitfire-ix-42-a-17372-6.html

 

[Vincenzo]

All my sources show they were self sealing

and the manual is not agree with your source

 

[FLYBOYJ]

What manual and what model?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Found pilot's notes for RAN Corsairs, it says those aren't self sealing and should only be used for ferry flights

 

[Vincenzo]

my is
"Pilot Manual for F4U Corsair" data are for model called F4U-1 and F4U-1D (and equivalent from others factory) only F4U-1 has wing tanks
as described the F4U-1 was a F4U-1A

 

[FLYBOYJ]

P16 and 17 of the NAVAIR flight manual says it all. Yes Vincenzo, you are correct. Depending on serial number and customer determined fuel system configuration

 

[FLYBOYJ]

On P17 it describes the fuel tank pressurization system for the aux. tanks making them inert with CO2 so there is no ignition within the tank from gunfire

 

[Vincenzo]

On P17 it describes the fuel tank pressurization system for the aux. tanks making them inert with CO2 so there is no ignition within the tank from gunfire

as i writed in my number 45 post

 

[FLYBOYJ]

as i writed in my number 45 post

Ok - didn't see it....

 

[Vincenzo]

back on F4U-1A trouble (my) on fulfill the requiremnts
if the joe baugher page is right on bureau numbers for F4U-1A the first was loss on 28th june 1943 from VMF 121 an other two were loss from VMF 122 on 30th june in same days this squadrons losses also the olders F4U-1.
i need to known how many fighters had a marines squadron and a navy squadron?

 

[Vincenzo]

the number of squadrons with loss of F4U-1A, i use this as proxy for squadron equipped with F4U-1A and i don't count squadrons based in hawaii as operational, up within 1943, with a maximum of 9 squadrons in october/november, the use of olders F4U-1 continue for all the year, most unit used both model in same time. none reply me on how many aircraft had a usn or usmc fighter squadron at time, i suppose around 36 in this case i think that 100 F4U-1A were operational around august or september so the 1A fullfill the requirements

 

[Vincenzo]

F4U-1A R-2800-8 ( ) 12162 lbs, 237 gals
S.L. 350 mph 3020 fpm
10k 374 mph 2420 fpm
20k 404 mph 1920 fpm
30k NA 1000 fpm


the performance of Corsair in British test were much lower
Corsair II R-2800-8 (52.5") 11865 lbs
S.L. NA 2600 fpm
10k 342 mph 2140 fpm
20k 370 mph 1640 fpm
30k 363 mph 490 fpm

 

[Shortround6]

British, for reasons known to the British, tested the plane in climb at 2550rpm and 44in manifold pressure, ie the max continuous rating (unlimited time limit) and not Military or take0off power ratings let alone emergency power or WEP. This was standard British procedure as their own aircraft were tested in climb at a 30 minute rating and not full combat power. The British test plane was not defective and the American test plane was not specially prepared or test results faked. Differt limits were used on the engines and were so noted in the tests.

 

[Glider]

Am I correct in remembering that RN Corsairs had clipped wings which presumably would have impcted climb performance?

 

[Vincenzo]

British, for reasons known to the British, tested the plane in climb at 2550rpm and 44in manifold pressure, ie the max continuous rating (unlimited time limit) and not Military or take0off power ratings let alone emergency power or WEP. This was standard British procedure as their own aircraft were tested in climb at a 30 minute rating and not full combat power. The British test plane was not defective and the American test plane was not specially prepared or test results faked. Differt limits were used on the engines and were so noted in the tests.

the data for climb of Corsair II were at military power 52.5" Hg like that for speed