Author Topic: Vought XF5U-1 (Read 590 times)

Raptor · « **on:** June 25, 2004, 11:07:14 PM »

Why do you think the military canceled their orders of the Vought XF5U-1?
-With the ability to take off vertically in 25mph headwind
-a top speed of 504mph at 20,000ft
-A climbrate of 3000 ft per minute at sea level
you would think they would want it in 1945.

XtrmeJ · « **Reply #1 on:** June 25, 2004, 11:13:11 PM »

The flying pancake. Dunno why.

Kweassa · « **Reply #2 on:** June 25, 2004, 11:26:45 PM »

I don't know the specific reasons, but the general issue isn't too hard to guess - obviously bad timing it seems. The prototype airframes were finished in August of 1945.

Despite prop planes were still used in the Korean War few years later, overall as a whole prop driven planes were more or less dead-end technology. The jet-era has started.

Besides, unlike Germany, the US knew they were gonna win the war with the resources they already had. So, if I were in their shoes, why'd I waste money on developing another prop-driven plane, when the future of warfare was clearly with the jets? I'd cancel all experimental props and push the budget to jet research.

gripen · « **Reply #3 on:** June 26, 2004, 03:11:28 AM »

IIRC the structure of the XF5U contained some balsa wood. Basicly same idea as in the Mosquito ie the balsa was used between thin layers of harder material. In the Mosquito harder material was birch veneer and in the case of the XF5U harder material was steel sheet.

gripen

edit: The harder material was aluminum the case of the XF5U.

Arlo · « **Reply #4 on:** June 26, 2004, 08:33:26 AM »

Just bristling with armament, ain't it?

hawker238 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 26, 2004, 04:21:45 PM »

Because it didn't work?

F4UDOA · « **Reply #6 on:** June 26, 2004, 07:43:38 PM »

I have some performance data on it.

They didn't pursue it because of many reasons.

1. The F4U-4 was priority on the assemble lines.
2. They were already working on the F6U Jet being tested at almost the same time.
3. Stability issues.
4. They wanted to switch to jet engines mid test cycle.

By the time it was all rung out it was already obsolete.

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 26, 2004, 09:17:42 PM »

I believe/think if 1 engine failed it would be unsteerable.

Arlo · « **Reply #8 on:** June 26, 2004, 09:20:55 PM »

I believe it was never really intended to be more than a test platform.

Flyboy · « **Reply #9 on:** June 27, 2004, 11:29:04 AM »

they didnt want it because its too damn ugly

Rasker · « **Reply #10 on:** June 27, 2004, 11:41:40 AM »

doesn't look like a "real" airplane, a "man's" airplane

Rafe35 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 27, 2004, 03:50:07 PM »

F4UDOA, I found these picture from Vought and I wonder if you want to know about them.

F4U-5 with auxiliary fins for an F6U-1.
F4U-5 rear view with auxiliary fin for an F6U-1.