Author Topic: U.S. Naval Planes (Read 5615 times)

VVV · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2007, 01:32:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Benny Moore
That's quite impossible. Not only is the F6F far too slow to be a "best" fighter, but the F4U, as Saxman pointed out, does everything better.

That's why I said in MY opinion.
Nice post widewing.

My Regards

bozon · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2007, 03:50:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Then again, I have some issues with the flight modeling. The F6F-5 is at least 20 mph too slow at its best altitude (should be neck and neck with the F4U-1D at 20k). There is a serious dynamic instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. On the contrary, the F4U, which should be notably less stable than the Hellcat, is rock steady under those conditions and a paragon of genteel handling. Our F4Us display none of the vices known in the RW. The F6F-5 has vices that didn't exist in the RW. If they ever fix the F6F, it'll move up in the standings. It should also be able to carry the centerline tank AND 2 bombs, or 3 bombs (as should the F4U-1D).

Spot on.

Nilsen · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2007, 05:45:41 AM »

FM2 and SBD are the most fun.

I get most of my carrier plane kills in C-hog but the F4u4 is prolly "the best".

The F6F is an awesome climber with full ord and a good allround plane.

Oldman731 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2007, 07:24:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
which F4U we are talking about.

Quick question for you knowledeable Corsair people:

What model(s) would US carriers have been carrying off Japan in July-August, 1945?

- oldman

AKDogg · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2007, 08:06:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Oldman731
Quick question for you knowledeable Corsair people:

What model(s) would US carriers have been carrying off Japan in July-August, 1945?

- oldman

F4u-1D and/or f4u-4

BaldEagl · « **Reply #20 on:** June 13, 2007, 09:56:28 AM »

I don't think there is one best. I think it toally depends on the situation.

My fave's in approximate order of preference are:

If I'm going in to attack:

F6F-5
F4U-1D
TBM
D3a

If I'm going in to fight/cap:

Seafire Mk.II
F6F-5
F4U-1C
F4U-1A

If I'm going in to furball/cap:

FM-2
A6M2
Seafire Mk.II
A6M5
F4F-4

I'm not arguing what's better or not, just my preferences and adjusted given the scenarios I commonly see CV's in.

Saxman · « **Reply #21 on:** June 13, 2007, 12:37:51 PM »

There were a couple CVs carrying F4U-1Cs, as well.

kennyhayes · « **Reply #22 on:** June 13, 2007, 01:16:10 PM »

i hate the f4u1c i think performence is BAD

Jonny boy 8 · « **Reply #23 on:** June 13, 2007, 01:32:30 PM »

F4U is good plane if u know how to fly it.

p51srule:aok

JimBeam · « **Reply #24 on:** June 13, 2007, 02:32:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by kennyhayes
i hate the f4u1c i think performence is BAD

its not as nimble the others but i wouldnt go as far as to say its performance is "BAD"

Bodhi · « **Reply #25 on:** June 13, 2007, 09:31:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
I think you will have to quantify that by being specific as to which F4U we are talking about. The Hellcat carries the same ordnance load as the F4U-1D and climbs much better when fully loaded. That means you will have more altitude when heading from a CV to a target. Especially when the field is hot with enemy fighters.

Then again, I have some issues with the flight modeling. The F6F-5 is at least 20 mph too slow at its best altitude (should be neck and neck with the F4U-1D at 20k). There is a serious dynamic instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. On the contrary, the F4U, which should be notably less stable than the Hellcat, is rock steady under those conditions and a paragon of genteel handling. Our F4Us display none of the vices known in the RW. The F6F-5 has vices that didn't exist in the RW. If they ever fix the F6F, it'll move up in the standings. It should also be able to carry the centerline tank AND 2 bombs, or 3 bombs (as should the F4U-1D).

Turning circles are virtually identical.

I'll take the F6F-5 over the F4U-1 as it is better in the vertical. I'll take it over the F4U-1C as a dogfighter (although those 4 Hispanos can make up for its reduced agility in many instances).

As favorites go, I like them in this order:

1) F4U-4
2) F4U-1A
3) F6F-5
4) F4U-1C
5) F4U-1D
6) F4U-1
7) FM-2
8) Seafire Mk.II
9) A6M5
10) F4F-4
11) A6M2
12) TBM (similar turn radius to Hurri IIC)
13) SBD-5 (decent dogfighter when required)
14) D3a (very agile, but almost worthless in firepower)

My regards,

Widewing

Excellent post Widewing... although I can not choose the 1A over the 1d... just like the 1d more, probably stupid in that, but it's the U-bird I learned first... As for the F6F and F4u handling characteristics, I agree whole heartedly. The F6F is described by everyone I know who has flown it (both veterans and current pilots) as being better named a ***** cat when it's flight characteristics are considered. The contrary is the F4u's flight model, and every one I know that has major time in tem is do not get low and slow and try to maneuver. The stall below 200 kts and 6k AGL is unrecoverable as the wing drops and a spin results which is unrecoverable given the altitude. Given altitide the F4u is still a monster in the spin, and the few pilots I know that have intentionally spun the Corsair say they will never try it again. The U-bird is a beast in all sense of the word. It is very poorly protrayed here with regards to stall characteristics, that and it's very lightened load, especially cosidering the -1d's and the -4's. The '4's were carrying field modified pylons that could and did carry two 1k bombs each.

Shuckins · « **Reply #26 on:** June 13, 2007, 10:42:07 PM »

If Aces High's Corsair had the same stall characteristics that it displayed in real life, there would be a lot fewer people flying it.

As late as 1952, the F4U-5 Pilot's Handbook stated the following on page 29:

"At the stall with power on, flaps down, a roll off to the left is violent and is accompanied by a 600- to 900-foot loss in altitude."

At this late a date in the Corsair's operational history, which spanned a decade, torque roll on the carrier approach was still causing a lot of accidents. This in spite of the addition of the stall-tripper wedge being installed on the starboard wing.

By contrast, the Hellcat was rated almost universally as having the best all-around stability of any operational U.S. fighter. Even in accelerated stalls its behavior was superb, and recovery was mild.

Movie · « **Reply #27 on:** June 14, 2007, 03:57:41 PM »

Had the FM2 been equipped with bigger, faster, badder engine it would totally PWN.

Widewing · « **Reply #28 on:** June 14, 2007, 05:13:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Movie
Had the FM2 been equipped with bigger, faster, badder engine it would totally PWN.

They built some of those, kinda... F8F Bearcat.

My regards,

Widewing

Movie · « **Reply #29 on:** June 14, 2007, 06:44:26 PM »

yea the bearcat too bad they got delivered a few months after war ended i believe