« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20   Go Down

Author Topic: Myth or fact > F8F  (Read 16018 times)

Offline JAWS2003

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #270 on: December 22, 2005, 04:38:47 PM »
I found this test pilot's testimony quite interesting:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_199808/ai_n8826530

At some point the Bearcat was limited to 4 G's!
« Last Edit: December 22, 2005, 04:44:14 PM by JAWS2003 »
Logged

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #271 on: December 22, 2005, 04:50:00 PM »
Crumpp,

The P-51D was resticted to 8G's at 8000LBS. The Bearcat was restricted to 6+ G's while over 10,000LBS. That works out to about 7.5G's at combat weight for both.

The dive restriction for both A/C is approximately 500MPH IAS at 10,000FT which is almost 600MPH TAS.

Jaws,

Trust me when I say this. Nobody was ever told to "take it easy in an F8F".

The breakaway wing tips were a hedge against compressability, that is all.
Logged

Offline humble

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6434
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #272 on: December 22, 2005, 04:51:19 PM »
The F8F was 4 x 20mm not 4 x .50....or am I mistaken here?

Crumpp,

I'm in no way saying the F8 was faster than the D9...it wasnt....as we know it was marginally slower. As you stated it did have significantly better performance as a "turn fighter"....while maintaining relative equality as an "E fighter"....given its time to alt world records (that stood into the 60's) it also has (at least at lower alts) a distinct acceleration/climb advantage vs any other prop plane in the world. So in an E fight the F8 would regain E and initiative faster than an opponent (not just the D-9). So given the same relative topend the F8 would by virtue of its other attributes be effectively a double superior plane in a dogfight....as was readily acknowledged by US pilots in Japan where the F8 dominated the pony in many mock dogfights....

As for the divebombing, the F8 was not designed to be a ground attack plane....it was never intended to replace the F6F/F7F/F4U in that role. It was the 1st plane really designed as a CAP plane for carriers. One of its primary desing criteria was climb to 10,000 ft....the goal to be able to scramble a cap over the fleet as quickly as possible. My understanding is that the F7F/F6F would be the "strike" aircraft and the F8F the air superiority escort in the 1945/46 CV airwing with the Skyraider entering service in 1946/47 to provide a true air to ground strike capability....obviously the jet age intervened...but the skyraider served well into the 70's....
Logged

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."-Pres. Thomas Jefferson

Offline JAWS2003

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #273 on: December 22, 2005, 04:52:04 PM »
Just read the article
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #274 on: December 22, 2005, 05:25:41 PM »
Quote
The P-51D was resticted to 8G's at 8000LBS. The Bearcat was restricted to 6+ G's while over 10,000LBS. That works out to about 7.5G's at combat weight for both.


Yep and if you divide the combat weight of the P51 by 64,000 as the load sheet instructs you come out to 6 G's for 10,100lbs.

It was restricted to 4 G's for diving because of the physiological limits of the pilots.  Which is the restricting factor in all WWII aircraft.  So I was confused.

The FW-190 was also 8 G's and below depending on the loadout as I stated earlier so they are pretty equal.

If you read the article, the Bearcat was restricted to 4 G's at one point and had plenty of difficulties at higher loads.

 

All the best,

Crumpp
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #275 on: December 22, 2005, 05:33:55 PM »
Quote
Just read the article


Great article BTW.  I wonder if the Grumman team would have the same comments flying HTC's FW-190's?

All the best,

Crumpp
Logged

Offline JAWS2003

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #276 on: December 22, 2005, 06:59:39 PM »
They would coppy it right the way, make some crappy cargo plane for lend lease to the russians, and then laugh their AO.:lol
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #277 on: December 22, 2005, 07:03:15 PM »
:rofl
Logged

Offline ShortyDoowap

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #278 on: December 22, 2005, 07:17:08 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Why am I not surprised by your reply Crumpp.  

Maybe others would like to know how you arrived at the weights you state since they are in conflict with what a Fw data sheet says.


Why don't you call Garber to find out?  :D
Logged

Offline ShortyDoowap

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #279 on: December 22, 2005, 07:44:13 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by JAWS2003
The wings on the Bearcat were too weak. Pilots lost their life pulling out of dive bombing runs. The proble was never fixed properlly.


The breakaway tips were designed to breakaway if the pilot exceeded the operational G limitations.   The tips worked, but getting them to come off simultaneously was a problem.   It was corrected in the 251st Bearcat when Grumman changed from countersunk rivets at the breakpoints to brazier head rivets.    Explosive bolts were added to ensure simultaneous seperation.    In 1949, Bearcats still in service had their wings locally strengthened to eliminate the breakpoints.
Logged

Offline ShortyDoowap

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #280 on: December 22, 2005, 07:53:26 PM »
From the article posted above:

It had an amazing rate of climb of 5,340 feet per minute, which was more than twice the Hellcat's!

This is one of the most confusing aspects of the Bearcats performance.  BuAer shows an initial climb rate of 4,570 fpm at combat weight.  It seems clear the Bearcat could actually exceed that by a substantial margin.
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #281 on: December 22, 2005, 08:19:22 PM »
Quote
This is one of the most confusing aspects of the Bearcats performance. BuAer shows an initial climb rate of 4,570 fpm at combat weight. It seems clear the Bearcat could actually exceed that by a substantial margin.


Climb rate is very much weight and altitude dependant.
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #282 on: December 22, 2005, 08:35:43 PM »
Quote
The breakaway tips were designed to breakaway if the pilot exceeded the operational G limitations. The tips worked, but getting them to come off simultaneously was a problem. It was corrected in the 251st Bearcat when Grumman changed from countersunk rivets at the breakpoints to brazier head rivets. Explosive bolts were added to ensure simultaneous seperation. In 1949, Bearcats still in service had their wings locally strengthened to eliminate the breakpoints.


Read the article.  It explains it all pretty well.
Logged

Offline ShortyDoowap

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #283 on: December 22, 2005, 08:44:45 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
Climb rate is very much weight and altitude dependant.


No way.



Quote

Read the article.  It explains it all pretty well.


Already read it.
Logged

Offline ShortyDoowap

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 111
Myth or fact > F8F
« Reply #284 on: December 22, 2005, 09:13:50 PM »
From Naval Aviation news, June 1949

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 [19] 20   Go Up
« previous next »