Author Topic: F4u4"C" (Read 2932 times)

Bodhi · « **Reply #60 on:** January 31, 2007, 10:39:54 PM »

Krusty,
I am not trying to argue with you, but the F4u is fairly close to most of the speeds posted. Not 100% exact, but close. As for anything being 100% here, as you have agreed, this is a game. As such, it is impossible to model everything the way it was in real life with our current technologies.

For instance, I for one have no desire to warm up my R2800 for 15 minutes to reach operating temps.

I also have no desire to have complex engine management in here.

I also have no desire to experience the "real spin" of an F4u, as many feel it to be unrecoverable in a reasonable amount of time.

With these things in mind, we can compromise and realise that the flight models are fairly close. Sure, a lot of things are not as real as we would hope, but a lot of things are real enough with out turning this into a simulation that very few could fly.

Lastly, a friendly bit of advice without being mean, stick to the facts. You have the propensity for stating things that are not 100% accurate. You also can be quick to rebuke people without knowing 100% about the truth. So, to make things easier for all of us and you, understand it is ok not to know it all. Hell, I have spent the better part of 4 years dealing with two seperate Corsair restorations both restoring and managing them, and I definitely do not know it all on the subject. I do know though, that Vought is without a doubt one of those companies that never truly picked up "mass production" as far as the Corsair was concerned.

Kongkyuk · « **Reply #61 on:** January 31, 2007, 11:40:44 PM »

Wow it was just a thought to have an F4U-4C...

Saxman · « **Reply #62 on:** February 01, 2007, 01:16:53 AM »

Another (relevant) F4U question:

Didn't the 1D and 4 also carry external stores on the center pylon during WWII (as opposed to post-war upgrades)? I thought I remember seeing alternate ordinance loads on the 1D during the war that included a third bomb (I THINK it was an additional 500 or 1000lb bomb) or external drop tank on the centerline, in addition to bombs on the inside pylons and rockets on the outer wing stubs.

I know for SURE I've seen a stated loadout of 8x5" HVARs, 2x11" Tiny Tims and 1x1000lb bomb for the 1D.

Krusty · « **Reply #63 on:** February 01, 2007, 01:37:37 AM »

I've seen F6Fs with 3 DTs as well. I don't know how common it was.

Debonair · « **Reply #64 on:** February 01, 2007, 01:44:11 AM »

Lindbergh flew a MAG-31 F4U-1d with three bombs aboard, two 1000# & a single 2000#...doubt it could get off a carrier that way, though

F4UDOA · « **Reply #65 on:** February 01, 2007, 07:58:50 AM »

Saxman,

Apparantly it did. I just opened that manual to the fuel system diagram on the F4U-1D and on the fuel slector switch is listed left wing droppable/right wing dropable/center line dropable.

So I guess that is a yes. However the F4U-4 does not seem to have the center line tank available according to the manual.

Bodhi,

I will try to find the reference for you. I believe it was some thing I read online so I will take it for what it is worth.

F4UDOA · « **Reply #66 on:** February 01, 2007, 08:17:27 AM »

Bodhi,

Here is the artical I was speaking about. It also makes light of the difference in hitting power between the .50cal and the 20mill. Pretty good read actually.

Quote

Ron added, "F4U's carried 50 cal and 20 mm guns almost interchangeably. For uniformity with the other aircraft in our Air Wing our carried 20 mm. Those operating off the carriers (Task Force 77) used whatever the Navy squadrons onboard used (usually 50 cal)." Joe Rychetnik later added about the misinformation about the VMF(N)-513 20mm in some recent articles. "One writer claims planes were equipped with "rotary" 20mm guns but this not true, just plain vanila 20mm aircraft cannon made by General Motors etc."

For those uninitiated in the Korean War arguments over the difference between .50 caliber ammo the B-26s/F-84s used and the 20mm HEI that the Marines used, they scheduled a test in Taegu in the summer of 1951 between USAF F80 Shooting Star and F-84 Thunderjets with 30 rounds of 50 caliber per gun. The Marine F4U-5N had only 10 rounds of 20mm HEI. The F4U-5N was flown by Lt. Roland of the VMF(N)-513. USAF aircraft attacked their truck carrier targets with .50 caliber and caused the max damage of a "the kapok seat of one carrier began to smolder." The F4U-5N snapped the frame of the truck almost in half; blew one of the front wheels off; and destroyed the flatbed. On his second run, he hit the cab and snapped the steering column in half. Despite these tests, the USAF persisted in the use of .50 caliber ammo simply because there was a lot of it left over from World War II. Even today many people feel the USAF MiG kills would have been much higher if they had used 20mm HEI instead of .50 caliber as Soviet jets were literally riddled with holes from .50 caliber...but continued to fly and returned to base.

Actually, the Air Force did test a few fighters with 20mm ammunition. According to Officers in Flight Suits, The Story of American Air Force Fighter Pilots in the Korean War, by John Darrell Sherwood, 1996, these F-86 aircraft were flown in combat, but were withdrawn from service after a very short test period. Though the Air Force report conceded that the 20mm did "appear" to have better results, they attributed the kills partially to the experience of the pilots. The official reason the Air Force gave for not using 20mm ammunition was the short firing time; fewer rounds that could be carried; and a stall problem that occurred upon the firing of the guns. One aircraft was lost in combat.

Here is the link

http://kalaniosullivan.com/KunsanAB/VMF513/Howitwasa1ac.html

Saxman · « **Reply #67 on:** February 01, 2007, 08:25:38 AM »

Him, the three bomb or two bomb plus drop tank option sounds like a post for the wishlist....

Bodhi · « **Reply #68 on:** February 01, 2007, 09:44:03 AM »

The difference between the early Corsairs and late is the deletion of the extra structure in the belly of the aircraft that precludes it from having a centrer pylon. This was changed with field modifications, but the standard -4's did not have center pylon capabilty as delivered.

Bodhi · « **Reply #69 on:** February 01, 2007, 09:44:44 AM »

F4UDOA, thanks for that info, I think it is very intersting to read. I will try as I said before to post those pictures today.

morfiend · « **Reply #70 on:** February 06, 2007, 01:30:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Krusty, STOP!!!! Geez!

If you decelerated at 1 G, the rate would be 32.2 ft/sec. No one will be knocked out at 1 G. Formula One cars decelerate at 3 G, and I'm not aware of any drivers passing out.

My regards,

Widewing

Havent missed a race since 1982,ur abit behind there WW.....LOL.....
Last telemetry I saw showed 5g decelration and 3g acceleration and somewhere inbetween for cornering grip...... but thats only on the Ateam cars. Ferrari,Renault,BMW and McClaren,the others have somewhat lesser efforts as shown in lap times........................ ..

Wow never thought I'd have a chance to correct WW.... Wide:aok

PS plz update your site man.......

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #71 on:** February 09, 2007, 12:53:21 PM »

I never recalled the corsairs being overmodled, and I admit I've been grounded for about 18 months, but it sems to me that any experienced pilot that goes from 450 to 110 is either trying to make a combat landing on a carrier or trying to kill himself.

Anyone with any time in the seat of a corsair knows that below 20k, 250 IAS in a Co-E Co alt fight is in most cases going to lose that fight.

Bronk · « **Reply #72 on:** February 09, 2007, 01:21:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Red Tail 444
I never recalled the corsairs being overmodled, and I admit I've been grounded for about 18 months, but it sems to me that any experienced pilot that goes from 450 to 110 is either trying to make a combat landing on a carrier or trying to kill himself.

Anyone with any time in the seat of a corsair knows that below 20k, 250 IAS in a Co-E Co alt fight is in most cases going to lose that fight.

Bzzzzt wrong.

Bronk

Debonair · « **Reply #73 on:** February 09, 2007, 01:49:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Bzzzzt wrong.

Bronk

lol, yeah, cuase @20k it is so easy to just dive to the safety of CV acks:aok

Red Tail 444 · « **Reply #74 on:** February 09, 2007, 03:46:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bronk
Bzzzzt wrong.

Bronk

I said below 20k, and if you differ, that's fine, but a more informed response would be appreciated, if capable.