Author Topic: Would any figher provide a better front view then this? (Read 1455 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #15 on:** July 26, 2004, 08:01:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Did you know that the F8F Bearcat owes much of its concept to Kurt Tank's Fw 190?

Roy Grumman and Chief Engineer Robert Hall went to Britain to test fly a captured 190A-3. They were extremely impressed with the 190 and upon return to Bethpage, Long Island, set out to design a fighter that incorporated much of design philosophy of Tank's most important aircraft.

They used the powerful R-2800 engine and a laminar flow wing of only slightly less area than the extremely agile Wildcat. They also designed it for carrier duty. This meant positioning the pilot higher so that the view over the nose was optimized for seeing a flight deck on approach. I view it as the Frankenstein evolution of the Wildcat

What they eventually built was probably the best prop driven dogfighter ever made, and certainly the most superlative carrier fighter of the war. Tank would have been proud had he known that his influence resulted in such a beast of an airplane.

My regards,

Widewing

Finally! I have been talking about this Bob Hall FW190 testing inspiration for Bearcat for years and years but have gotten attacked for it mercilessly. After the test FW190 flights I think Bob Hall was qouted saying: "If we put an R-2800 in this thing we'll have a world beater." Thanks for settling the issue Widewing.

Widewing · « **Reply #16 on:** July 26, 2004, 09:27:26 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Widewing, when did Roy Grumman and Chief Engineer Robert Hall go to Britain to test fly a captured 190A-3?

I had to check sources. It was the fall of 1943, and according to Grumman's Chief test pilot, Corwin Meyer, it was a 190A-4 that they tested, not an A-3. Grumman's Bud Gillies also went along.

What they liked was flight handling characteristics that could be mastered by a 200 hour pilot. They liked the cockpit layout and the "one lever" power management. They were impressed with the canopy design. At the top of their list was the structural design; sturdy, and ideally suited to mass production.

Inasmuch as Tank was influenced by Palmer's racer design (the Hughes H-1), Grumman was influenced by Tank's design. And anyone who has ever designed anything will tell you that someone else's work always infuences the next evolution. No one ever designed a world-class fighter in a vacuum. Every designer could call upon the work that preceded his. Grumman and Hall were remarkably honest men and gave credit where it was due.

By the way, Hall was the designer of the Granville Brothers Gee Bee model Z racer that utterly dominated the Thompson Trophy race in 1931. He also designed the well known Hall Bulldog that raced in 1932 and 1933. If you've ever seen the movie "The Rocketeer", you have seen a replica of the Model Z, that tiny yellow racer.

When Grumman hired Hall, he picked up one of the era's great talents of aviation design, and a damn good test pilot too.

My regards,

Widewing

Guppy35 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 26, 2004, 09:50:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
I had to check sources. It was the fall of 1943, and according to Grumman's Chief test pilot, Corwin Meyer, it was a 190A-4 that they tested, not an A-3. Grumman's Bud Gillies also went along.

What they liked was flight handling characteristics that could be mastered by a 200 hour pilot. They liked the cockpit layout and the "one lever" power management. They were impressed with the canopy design. At the top of their list was the structural design; sturdy, and ideally suited to mass production.

Inasmuch as Tank was influenced by Palmer's racer design (the Hughes H-1), Grumman was influenced by Tank's design. And anyone who has ever designed anything will tell you that someone else's work always infuences the next evolution. No one ever designed a world-class fighter in a vacuum. Every designer could call upon the work that preceded his. Grumman and Hall were remarkably honest men and gave credit where it was due.

By the way, Hall was the designer of the Granville Brothers Gee Bee model Z racer that utterly dominated the Thompson Trophy race in 1931. He also designed the well known Hall Bulldog that raced in 1932 and 1933. If you've ever seen the movie "The Rocketeer", you have seen a replica of the Model Z, that tiny yellow racer.

When Grumman hired Hall, he picked up one of the era's great talents of aviation design, and a damn good test pilot too.

My regards,

Widewing

Nice recovery Widewing

Dan/Slack

M.C.202 · « **Reply #18 on:** July 26, 2004, 10:31:27 PM »

I think the M.C. 200 would be as good. Check out the art at http://www.kotfsc.com/thunderbolt/mc200.htm

As fast, no, but a great view :-)

Pongo · « **Reply #19 on:** July 27, 2004, 12:56:09 AM »

Its got a low nose but the pilot is way back. Not sure the effect. But a way better view then many for sure.
How much bracing? as bad as the mc202 and 205?

straffo · « **Reply #20 on:** July 27, 2004, 02:01:30 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by simshell
im sure furball is about to blast you widewing about seafury and the 45000 spitfire verisons they made

more probably with the sea Fury

SFRT - Frenchy · « **Reply #21 on:** July 27, 2004, 02:20:36 AM »

The P38 beats them all hand down.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #22 on:** July 27, 2004, 02:59:23 AM »

Quote

It was the fall of 1943, and according to Grumman's Chief test pilot, Corwin Meyer, it was a 190A-4 that they tested, not an A-3.

It had to be before the fall of '43 Widewing.

Some discrepency, for on July 28 1943, Grumman sent a memo to head designer Schwendler (German sounding name) outlining the design's specs > small and light weight.

The US Navy order two prototypes, XF8F-1, in November, 1943.

(from a source I have)

Fw190A-4 coded PE882 was captured when she landed at RAF West Malling during the early morning hours of April 17, 1943. This photo shows PE882 in RAF markings while on tour of USAAF bomber units. (via Robert Weyer/LEMB)

Furball · « **Reply #23 on:** July 27, 2004, 03:10:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo

Ya I get it. Lets all name some two engine planes we know. Name a front engine tail dragger though. The high cockpit and low nose make the F8F pretty hard to beat.

simshell · « **Reply #24 on:** July 27, 2004, 03:24:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Furball

LOL:rofl

Pongo · « **Reply #25 on:** July 27, 2004, 10:15:36 AM »

poke.

Furball · « **Reply #26 on:** July 27, 2004, 12:38:58 PM »

poke?

Panzzer · « **Reply #27 on:** July 27, 2004, 12:50:32 PM »

But wasn't the Blohm und Voss 141 (the plane in Furball's pic if I'm not completely wrong??) supposed to be a ground attack aircraft, not a fighter? And it clearly says fighter in the name of this thread. Well, actually it says figher.

Still, the front view would probably have been nice (depending on the cockpit layout and whatnots..)

Quote

It (BV141) was 39 feet 10 inches long, with a wingspan of 50 feet 8 inches and a weight of 8600 pounds, putting it in almost exactly the same size and weight class as the familiar Messerschmitt Bf-110. Powered by a BMW132 865 hp radial engine, the Bv-141 had a respectable top speed of 248 mph and a ceiling of 29,530 feet, while its 700-mile range was almost twice that of the Fw-189.
Its first flight, on 25 February 1938, proved the Bv-141 to be more airworthy than its detractors wanted to believe. Over the next two years three prototypes and 10 Bv-141A production aircraft were completed, but the poor bird never shook the stigma of its disfigured appearance.

Glasses · « **Reply #28 on:** July 29, 2004, 01:15:13 AM »

TA TA TA ta ta TANK ta TA tank.....

ok that's all I got

RTSigma · « **Reply #29 on:** July 29, 2004, 03:03:26 AM »

I just about dry-heaved when I saw that odd-looking plane Furball put up.

It doesn't look very fun to fly, its like having a P-38 with one engine.