Holes in the F4U-1

[Puck]

I was tooling around in a -1 last night causing pain and consternation when I looked down and realized someone forgot to install the floor.  No wonder my bottle of Jack vanished.  I'm going to assume this was done by my ground crew for causing them pain and consternation.

Is that really how the F4U was designed; no floor in the cockpit?  I suppose it would be useful if a pilot, me for example, is a tea guzzler and had to take a leak in the middle of a long flight.  On the other hand it would seem to be a bit windy and chilly in colder climates.

[Krusty]

It's supposed to be that way.

[wstpt10]

That's what it looked like in real life too.

[Puck]

Why?  Weight?  Visibility?  The ability to clean the pit easily if the driver got violently ill?

[Ball]

Originally posted by Puck
Why?  Weight?  Visibility?  The ability to clean the pit easily if the driver got violently ill?

It gives the toolshedders somewhere to hide if the enemy gets too close.

[stephen]

It's a WINDOW.....

look at the ju87's floor board........................ .........sheeesh

[F4UDOA]

The F4U was designed as a fighter bomber with actual bomb bay doors in the wings. They ditched the bays but left the window in the floor. I am not sure when they offically abandoned the glass floor approach.

[AquaShrimp]

The initial requirements for the F4U were that it be able to drop small bombs onto formations of enemy bombers.  I think each wing was supposed to hold around 30 aerial bombs.  Hence the need for a window in the floor.

From what I've read, pilots disliked not having a floor.  Lots of debris and dirt could accumulate down there, making inverted flight hazardous.  Plus the windows were impossible to clean due to being double layered.

[JB35]

interseting find, never knew that  

[Puck]

Originally posted by AquaShrimp

From what I've read, pilots disliked not having a floor.  Lots of debris and dirt could accumulate down there, making inverted flight hazardous.  Plus the windows were impossible to clean due to being double layered.

That fails the sanity test.  In what way does a glass floor collect dirt and debris in a manner unlike an aluminum floor?  Personally I think they didn't like the feeling of nothing between them and the ground.  As for double layering, if the space between them was sealed you're just trying to get the crud off both sides.  In a Hog I could see where that would be entertaining.

Overall, however, this has been very interesting and well worth the question.  I'd never thought of glass floors in a fighter.

[Bodhi]

Originally posted by AquaShrimp
The initial requirements for the F4U were that it be able to drop small bombs onto formations of enemy bombers.  I think each wing was supposed to hold around 30 aerial bombs.  Hence the need for a window in the floor.

From what I've read, pilots disliked not having a floor.  Lots of debris and dirt could accumulate down there, making inverted flight hazardous.  Plus the windows were impossible to clean due to being double layered.

Please provide a source for the above paragraph.

Lastly, the window was not "double layered", it is a single piece of glass.

[frank3]

In a very old thread about (almost) the same subject, but about the F4F's 2 floor windows, I read a reply saying the windows were used for carrier approuches.
Often the plane would be nosed up to lose speed, and the small windows were added to give the pilot some sense of were here is above the carrier.

I'm not sure how believable this 'theory' is, but I believe there were alot of replies supporting this idea.

[AquaShrimp]

There was an odd form of armament contemplated for this new fighter, 20 anti-air bombs, loaded in the wings, plus two .30-caliber guns above the engine and two .50-caliber guns in the wings. With a test flight bringing the fighter to the phenomenal speed of 652 km/h on October 1st 1940, its future was secured and liquid-cooled engines were discarded from future development, as there arose the question what they could do what the R-2800 could not.

    Before the F4U could see service, however, a series of changes had to be made. The bombs were removed, and so were the .30-caliber guns, all replaced by a further four .50-caliber machine guns to supplement the two already in the wings. Without the option of installing fuel tanks in the wings, a large tank had to be put right behind the engine, forcing a backwards movement of the cockpit, and reducing seriously the visibility over the nose.

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/aviation/f4u_corsair.htm

The US Navy ordered a prototype of the Vought design as the "XF4U-1" in June 1938. Armament was planned as two 7.62 millimeter (0.30 caliber) Browning machine guns in the top of the nose, and a single 12.7 millimeter (0.50 caliber) Browning machine gun in each wing, for a total of four guns. The prototype also had little bombbays in the outer wings for fragmentation bombs that would be dumped on enemy bomber formations, with a window in the cockpit floor for sighting. The bombbays were a screwball idea that would be quickly abandoned.

http://www.vectorsite.net/avf4u.html#m1

[AWwrgwy]

Originally posted by frank3
In a very old thread about (almost) the same subject, but about the F4F's 2 floor windows, I read a reply saying the windows were used for carrier approuches.
Often the plane would be nosed up to lose speed, and the small windows were added to give the pilot some sense of were here is above the carrier.

I'm not sure how believable this 'theory' is, but I believe there were alot of replies supporting this idea.

Windows in the F4F was so you could see when the gear was up or down fully as it was hand-cranked.


wrngwy

[Bodhi]

Aquashrimp,
I owe you an apology on the fragmentation bombs.  I pulled out Barret Tillman's Corsair book and read through the beginning last night and it metioned wing racks for 10 fragmentation bombs, although it was dropped before the prototype was built.  Nothing about the bomb bays though.