Don't shoot me for asking .....

[Jekyll]

But why is the F4U-1C carrier capable?  I had understood that the entire 200 unit block had been operated by the US Marine Corps, in particular the 4th Marine Air Wing.

Now, if the only 1C's to enter combat were operated by the Marines, then they would not have had tailhooks, right?

And if they didn't have tailhooks, then why are they available for use from our CV's?

I just know I'm gonna get murdered for asking this  

[Karnak]

The assasins are on their way, Jekyll.

Others on this BBS have said that they were Navy and operated off of carriers at Iwo Jima.

I have no reason to think otherwise, so until I see evidence to the contrary I'll take them to be Navy.

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Sisu
-Karnak

[TheWobble]

yes i was hoping to get away from that bastard by hopping on a boat but alas it follows me..........

[Ghosth]

Bang!  ...................> Your dead!

JK Jekyll  Couldn't resist.  

If it was up to me the 1C would be perked with a very low # of points. This would solve a lot of gameplay issues IMHO.

However, until we get a full complement of CV capable planes I don't see anything changeing.

[oboe]

From "American Warplanes of WWII" by David Donald, "...only 200 F4U-1Cs were built, with most going to VMF-211."  I'm not sure how to take that - one squadron couldn't possibly have made use of the majority of 200 airplanes.  It does not, however, rule out a small number seeing action for the Navy, flying off carriers.

My biggest problem with the F4U-1C is the external stores capability.  I have cross referenced this in 3 different sources, and they are all clear on the point that the 1D was the first Corsair equipped for carrying droptanks, bombs, and rockets.   The 1C should not be able to load these items.

Its virtual absence of torque also surprises me.  I stood at the end of the runway in a 1C, with 75% fuel and 1 notch of flaps, and rammed the throttle to full.  I was able to control torque steer with minor rudder inputs.  I believe the A6M5b requires more correction than this.  It certainly doesn't remind me of its reputation as an ensign eliminator.

I agree with Ghosth - it makes sense to perk it for a small number of points.  It'll give the Hog drivers something to aspire to.

[Jekyll]

Lazs or F4UDOA should be able to help with this one.  But my references also say that it was the 1D model which was fitted with the twin-pylon rack for 2 * 1000lb bombs or auxilary fuel tanks, rocket projectile equipment.

[Zigrat]

i dont necessari;y think it should be perked, but what i understand is that:


it was a pure land borne fighter with no a2g ordnance capability. no tailhook, no pylons. thats what i heard. then people could make the decision, do i want ordnance or cannon?

that would be best IMO, unless someone proves the -1cs could a) operate off carriers and b) carry 2 1k eggs plus 4 rocks

[Jekyll]

Well that was my understanding as well zigrat, but I'm far from an expert on the Corsair series.

Still hoping lazs or F4UDOA will jump in here and set things straight.

[Mathman]

I am not positive, but I do believe the -1C was used in WW2 by at least 1 Navy squad.  I think it did operate off a carrier, but I am not sure.  Can't remember the squad number off the top of my head, but it is in the Osprey aircraft of the aces book on the F4U.  The only -1C in the profile section is from a Navy squad.

BTW, I may be mistaken on this.  If I am, please forgive my ignorance  

-math

------------------
"Any American fighter near Orote Penninsula.  I have forty Jap planes surrounded and need a little help."
-Ens. W.B. "Spider" Webb during the Marians Turkey Shoot

[oboe]

I checked the Osprey book, and it talks about VF-85 flying 1Cs off the Shangri-La.

The color plate incorrectly shows a 1D, however the line drawings in the back show rocket hardpoints on a 1C.  Also there is a first hand account given by Lt Joe Robbins of Shangri-La's VF-85, of cap missions with drop tanks and A2G missions using the 1C carrying rockets and bombs.

Based on the evidence given by the Osprey book, I think we can conclude the 1C was used by the Navy off CVs, and carried A2G ordnance.

Thanks for your help, Mathman!

[Torgo]

I have no idea how the idea that CHogs were solely land-based Marine aircraft got started, but it's utterly and COMPLETELY wrong.

In fact, the opposite may be true; as best I can currently tell, there were NO land-based CHogs AT ALL.

1) There clearly were Naval Chog Squadrons.

"Aces over Japan" By Eric Hammel, is a series of personal accounts of US WWII Fighter Pilots.

"Taming the 20mm" is in Chapter 15 and is by a Navy CHog pilot from VF-85 based on the Carrier Shangri-La.

2) After 1944 when the Corsair became Carrier-capable, there many MARINE squadrons that were moved to CARRIERS. This business about Marine AC not being CV-capable is from 1943 when the vast majority of Hogs were Marine and the Hog wasn't CV-qualifed yet. CHog didn't turn up till 1945.

But MARINE squadron does NOT = land based, automatically, as many people believe.

The same pilot in "Taming the 20mm" mentions VMF-311(a Marine Squadron) flying off USS Breton as the first CHogs in combat.

He also states VMF-441 was equipped with the AC.


Simply the facts. I personally support the CHog being made an easy-to-get perk plane.

I note that my prediction that the addition of CVs would make the plague of Chogs even bigger has come true (despite the mocking my prediction received.)  After the "novelty" effect of Hellcats has been wearing off it's getting even worse.

[Torgo]

Also, everything I can find has the CHog with the 2x1000 lb bomb carrying capacity, etc.

[Pyro]

Some light info: http://www.hitechcreations.com/f4u1c.html


------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[AKDejaVu]

Jekyll,

I don't really know where you are getting your information.. but there are a few things that seem wrong.

I've not known the military to vary any multi-branch aircraft in the manner you are describing.  The struts, the tail-hook, the re-inforcements would all be in place regardless of wether it was going to fly from a CV or not.  Carrier qualified was not a field mod... it was an aircraft spec.

Hell.. most of the planes in the Air Force have tail-hooks these days.

AKDejaVu

[Torgo]

Well, if you want to cripple the CHog a little, historically, according to the account in Aces Against Japan, when the CHogs first arrived, the guns froze completely above 15,000 ft....the gun tests above 15k in the US were canceled.

The mechanics quickly fashioned heaters and some were sent from the US to solve the problem.

We could model a CHog during the couple of weeks they couldn't shoot above 15k :-) Not that that matters in AH much at all given the average altitude of combat.

I really think the Chog becoming a low-cost perk solves EVERYTHING and doesn't screw over anybody.

Any whiner CHog drivers bemoaning how their God-Given right to fly any plane whenever they want has been violated(who were the sort of people who had massive conniption fits over the RPS in Warbirds) can't complain too much since they have another AC virtually identical in handling, the DHog, and with the changes to the gunnery model, the .50s are a lot more effective.

And they can fly for a few days and get enough perk points to buy a CHog to fly for a bit.

I think that would move CHogs to a reasonable % of the number of Hogs in the air in the arena at any one time...maybe 5%....