"new" 1944 F4u-1d Navair

[bkbandit]

A big question i have now is, simply f6f vs f4u.

In real life f4u is supposed to be better in all performance specs, but in ah i dont see it that way, last tour i spent all my time in f4u, this tour i have spent all my time in f6f. Its not a dragster but it doesnt take years to build up ur e to fight, and for some reason f4u feels like it bleeds e like a bastard, f6f i have took through rolls loops twist and turns and after im done i dont feel like a collected a bunch of rocks on the plane. 10k is my average alt and u would figure f4u shines but it doesnt, takes longer to get up there and to build speed. The thing that corsair has hands down is roll rate, but that comes wit speed, and the ability to drop the landin gears for brakes, but then its a pain to get the e back. THe accel couldnt have been that bad in ww2, jezz its freakin terrible, its faster but u can never hit the speed u need.  They carry the same bomb and rocket load,same guns and ammo, the difference would be in the drop tanks but f6f carrys more inside then f4u. Im no expert but this is just what i have noticed.

p51b has been a pleasant surprise, if it had 2 more extra guns(i noe it would wieght it down some) it would be hard to convince me to get into the 51d. Wasnt the 51b supposed to be slow up top, i didnt notice it slow at all.

[F4UDOA]

bkbandit,

I don't know if it is a lack of F4U-1 performance in AH2 or that the F6F is overmodeled. All radials will bleed E faster than their inline counterparts but side by side the F4U should acclerate faster than the F6F. It is a cleaner airplane and all things being equal it should accelerate faster and blled E slower.

The F6F in AH is slightly overmodeled in two areas.

1. I have enough testing from Navy/NAVAIR, British or TAIC testing and nothing is close to our F6F-5. The only thing I have seen that points to the climb rate we have is a Grumman report based on calculation and not flight test.

2. Flaps, the F6F did not have deployable multiposition flaps as did the F4U. It had electronic flaps that took longer to deploy and they could only be deployed at 50 degrees and then auto retract to lesser deflections. You could not deploy 10 or 20 degress at a time, it simply was not possible from the cockpit as there was only a one position switch, either up or down.

Check either report of side by side test of the A6M5 or FW190A5 and neither shows the F6F we have. The F4U-1/1D on the other hand is a pretty fair representation I would say.

[bkbandit]

yea since its a cleaner plane i figured accel would be alot faster but its not, its HORRIBLE. The only time  remember corsair flyin and feeling powerful, fast, like i have read and seen in books and in tv is when we had wind on in this 8 player room. It wasnt even a alot maybe a 5 mph breeze.

IM goin to have to rock my slightly over modeled f6f cause that f4u lacks.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by bkbandit
A big question i have now is, simply f6f vs f4u.



p51b has been a pleasant surprise, if it had 2 more extra guns(i noe it would wieght it down some) it would be hard to convince me to get into the 51d. Wasnt the 51b supposed to be slow up top, i didnt notice it slow at all.

The B is faster than D from about 14k to 19k then 27k to 30K+
The B has a faster top speed overall.



Bronk

[joeblogs]

While what you say is certainly true, I have just seen an actual flight test video where the pilot shows how the flaps achieve variable position as a simple function of airspeed.  

Now that doesn't mean these are combat flaps the way we use them in the game.

-blogs

Originally posted by F4UDOA
bkbandit,

... 2. Flaps, the F6F did not have deployable multiposition flaps as did the F4U. It had electronic flaps that took longer to deploy and they could only be deployed at 50 degrees and then auto retract to lesser deflections. You could not deploy 10 or 20 degress at a time, it simply was not possible from the cockpit as there was only a one position switch, either up or down. ...
 

[Saxman]

I thought I remember reading somewhere that the F6F's flaps were spring-controlled, so that if the pilot set them to the "down" position, they would automatically retract/deploy dependent on airspeed. While not automatic flaps per SE, it functioned in much the same way.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by F4UDOA
2. Flaps, the F6F did not have deployable multiposition flaps as did the F4U. It had electronic flaps that took longer to deploy and they could only be deployed at 50 degrees and then auto retract to lesser deflections. You could not deploy 10 or 20 degress at a time, it simply was not possible from the cockpit as there was only a one position switch, either up or down.
 

F6Fs did not have electric flaps. The flaps were hydraulic, and the control valve was operated by a servo motor. Using manual override, flaps could be positioned at any point between full up and full down. Using the servo motor, you had two positions. The flaps would blow back up in relation to the aero loading related to speed. Tom Gwynne says that they would not fully blow up until speeds exceeded 300 TAS. (a quick edit: Manual Override was not especially easy to operate, thus a pilot had better practice using it. The valve applied pressure to the actuators for as long as the spring-loaded lever was depressed)

Our F6F-5 climbs more like the F6F-3. It should be slightly inferior to the F4U-1D, but is actually slightly better. However, the difference either way is not usually sigificant. Overall, the AH2 F6F seems like an amalgam of the two models. I'd rather have both, accurately represented.

As to drag and max speeds, the TAIC test presents a max speed for the F4U-1D as 413 mph @ 20,400 feet. This same test shows the F6F-5 as doing 409 mph @ 21,600 feet. With only 4 mph to differentiate between the two, drag differences cannot be substantial. Indeed, a good washing can gain 4 mph....

My regards,

Widewing

[F4UDOA]

Here is a little snip of an artical that describes a WW2 pilots point of view of the F6F-5 and F4U-1. He is discribing the use of flaps on the two A/C.

With flaps full down (50 degrees), I moved the throttle forward and started to roll. First thing I noticed was engine noise. Much louder than the F4U. Also, I was not gaining speed as fast (due to having to use full flaps. In the bent-- wing we only used 20 or 30 degrees). That in itself was probably the biggest difference in the two planes taking off from a runway. On a carrier, both planes needed 50 degrees.

The Corsair had hydraulic flaps that could be lowered ten degrees at a time down to 50 degress. The F6F had electric flaps that were either full up or full down under 200 knots IAS (Indicated Air Speed). Over 200 knots IAS, the flaps would blow up on both planes. However, on the F4U they moved faster. I always felt that the F6F would have been a better plane if it had the hydraulic arrangement.

The whole article can be found here.

The Big Swtch

The TAIC report is actually great proof of my point about the climb of the F6F-5 compared to the F4U-1D. Even in a test where the F6F-5 performs well ahead of any other F6F speed it still is out climbed by the F4U-1D by anywhere from 500FT to 750FT per minute.

The FW190 test is an F6F-3 that does 390MPH and the F4U-1D out climbs it too. And that F4U-1D did not have the high activity prop (Paddle prop) and it was still superior in climb and acceleration.

[joeblogs]

The flaps were hydraulic, but the switches (other than the overide) were electric...

-blogs

Originally posted by Widewing
F6Fs did not have electric flaps.  . .

Widewing

[F4UDOA]

Indeed,

For whatever reason they were slower to deploy.

[Debonair]

50 degrees of flap for takeoff is a big surprise.
I've never met a plane where the flaps add much more than drag over 25 degrees.

i've also never taken off from a CV where you just about always get a 40kt breeze to T/O into

[bkbandit]

Yea i would like to see both the f6f-3 and the f6f-5 done correctly, but until then ill just run the current model. wit black and white proof of performance ah needs to go back in an adjust it. I want all the planes to be accurately represents.

[Saxman]

Shh! bk! You'll just make the Hurri dweebs angry!

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Debonair
50 degrees of flap for takeoff is a big surprise.
I've never met a plane where the flaps add much more than drag over 25 degrees.

i've also never taken off from a CV where you just about always get a 40kt breeze to T/O into

I have no idea why that guy used 50% flaps as the manual states that no flaps are required for field takeoffs. I suspect he didn't read the NATOPs very thoroughly before going flying. He certainly did not know how the system operated, or perhaps simply didn't understand how it operated.

My regards,

Widewing

[F4UDOA]

I have no idea why that guy used 50% flaps as the manual states that no flaps are required for field takeoffs. I suspect he didn't read the NATOPs very thoroughly before going flying. He certainly did not know how the system operated, or perhaps simply didn't understand how it operated.

Maybe they had a short runway to fly off of? Maybe it was base practice to takeoff with flaps. In any event it shows some of the differences between the two A/C that you might not read from Corky Meyer.

I happened to have the magazine in which this artical was printed. The pilot goes on to list several positive and negative factors for each airplane. This is not in the online article for whatever reason.

Air Classics Volume 37 number 6

The pilot Williamm Chatham list.

Corsair Positive features
1. Flap arrangement
2. The light touch on the controls, especially at high speeds.
3. Fuel economy 40 gal per hour
4. Better gun platform and dive bombing platform for me.
5. Quick acceleration in a dive and when adding full power.
6. Better visibility in the air due to semi-bubble canopy
7. Good top speed approx 405MPH
8. Easy plane to ditch on water

Corsair Negative features
1. High speed stall, on occasion so violent it would pull the stick out of my hand.
2. Long nose hid the runway on takeoff and landing, especially at night.
3. Too many hydraulic problems
4. Rocker boxes leaking oil onto the windshield. Mostly on old birdcage model.

Hellcat positive factors
1. Better visibility over the nose especially at night
2. Better night approaches
3. No high speed stalls
4. Nice and stable
5. Good low speed characteristics. Came aboard 10 to 15MPH sower than F4U
6. Cockpit neat/well planned
7. Safe secure feeling. Very forgiving.
8. Well built/rugged.
9. Word of mouth. We had six Hellcat aces in VF-2 and they all swore by her. One Ace (I think from VF-15) said "if she could cook, I'd marry her!". Some guys called her the Navy Jug. because she was tough and strong like the Army P-47. The Army had a saying: If you want to be a hero fly Mustangs, if you want to come home fly the Jug.

Hellcat negative factors
1. Really did not like the flap arrangement, being able to drop flaps ten degrees at a time was an advantage.
2. Fuel economy a bit high at 55GPH.
3. Engine noise, Corsair much quiter.
4 Control pressure heavy at high speed.
5. High right rudder pressure on Carrier landings, on occassion inducing leg cramps


I have read about the rudder and stick forces being rough on the Hellcat before.