Originally posted by Krusty
F7F: A non-entity in this war. It was a dangerous plane, unstable, would spin out into non recoverable spins, and had MANY unfavorable handling problems. This plane flew so poorly that the request the military put out for which this plane was built had to be softened to allow it to even be pursued. It was bloody fast, climbed bloody fast, and flew bloody high, and had a bloody-huge punch (firepower). Those are the only reasons it was being developed. It didn't get anywhere until after the war was over. Sure, it flew "a sortie" on the day the surrender was signed, but by then we'd already steamed into Japanese harbors and there was no more resistance.
Krusty, I can't think of another person posting to these boards who so exudes negativity as does you. I cannot understand why you do that. That and the recurring issue of pulling so-called facts out of your rectal cavity...
Grumman's F7F-1 was one of the best prop fighters ever to take wing. 445 mph at altitude, damn near 400 mph at sea level (397 mph). A rate of climb that would make your nose bleed and your ears ache. Grumman figures show well in excess of 5k per minute when loaded as an interceptor. It was the fastest accelerating fighter in the US inventory, better even than the F8F-1.
Handling was considered outstanding, with a few quirks such as not spinning it more than three turns (manual states no more than two).
Corky Meyer, the program test pilot stated, "Because of its outstanding performance, handling characteristics, reliable engines and instant pilot acceptance, it had an exceptional safety record for such an advanced and powerful fighter." No one was having spin and handling issues...
It received rave reviews at the 1944 fighter conference. The biggest complaint was poor rearward vision. Other comments, "nothing can catch it". "Can beat the F6F in a dogfight."
The XF7F-1, circa August 1943.
Consider that it is armed with 4 Hispanos and four .50s cal MGs. That's considerably more fire power than the Mosquito. That's basically the weapons of a C-Hog and P-51B rolled into one.
You can read Meyer's article on the Tigercat
here.Here's a brief quote:
"Instead of delving into the details of the fantastic handling characteristics of the Tigercat, I will tell you of a totally unexpected and earth-shaking discussion that I had with the Navy's premier test pilot, Capt. Fred M. Trapnell. It will explain why all Tigercat pilots liked the airplane in spite of its failure to meet several important Navy SR-38D specifications for flight-handling characteristics.
For many years, Capt. Trapnell was the top test pilot in the Navy; his word was law, both in Navy and industry flight-test circles. An example of his influence: he came for a three-hour flight evaluation of the first XF6F-3 Hellcat soon after its first flight and he gave the official Navy go-ahead for mass production on that day! The Hellcat eventually passed all of its contractual demonstrations two and a half years later, after more than 8,000 aircraft had been delivered to fighting squadrons! Also, to his credit, the Hellcat racked up a record 19 to one kill-to-loss ratio-the highest recorded in WW II.
When he came to Grumman to conduct the preliminary evaluation of the Panther in early 1948, I was the only Grumman test pilot who had flown the company's first jet fighter. At every opportunity during his three-day evaluation, I tried to pry his opinions out of him; his only responses were grunts, which I interpreted as, "Cool it, Corky!" At the end of his evaluation, as we walked out to his F7F-4N Tigercat for his return trip to the Naval Air Test Center, I proudly told him that I was the Tigercat project pilot from 1943 to 1946. He immediately burst into a diatribe about the Tigercat's many deficiencies: the over-cooling of the engines; a lack of longitudinal stability; excessively high dihedral rolling effect with rudder input; the high, minimum single-engine control speed, etc. He ended his oration with: "If I had been the chief of the Test Center at that time, I would have had you fired!" Each criticism of the Tigercat was absolutely correct. I was devastated and fervently wished that I hadn't gotten out of bed that day.
Just as we reached his Tigercat, I blurted, "If you dislike the Tigercat so much, why do you always fly it?" He explained: "The excess power of its two engines is wonderful for aerobatics; the cockpit planning and the forward visibility in the carrier approach is the best in any fighter ever built; the tricycle landing gear allows much faster pilot checkouts; the roll with the power boost rudder is faster than the ailerons; and it has a greater range than any fighter in inventory." Again, he was absolutely right. As he climbed up the ladder to the cockpit, he turned around, grinned and told me, "It's the best damn fighter I've ever flown."
My regards,
Widewing
