Author Topic: Fix the F4U-1D (warning large imgs) (Read 2693 times)

F4UDOA · « **on:** January 09, 2001, 04:58:00 PM »

Gents,

We have a flight model in the F4U-1C/D which is representative of the F4U-1A. Except up until now I never had the test data to prove it. Now thanks to Wells I have these documents and I can show our FM matches.

This data is a F4U-1A with water. It matches the current F4U-1D we have.

Here is the correct F4U-1D data

Notice

1. Initial climb is 3370FPM combat power and 2930FPM military power at 12,175LBS. Since climb and acceleration are tied together this mean a much better accelerating bird as well as a MUCH better climber.

2. Vmax at sea level in the clean condition is 366MPH and 417MPH at 20,000.

3. Notice how this data matches the Flight test against the P-51B, FW190A5, F6F-3/5 and A6M2/5 much better than the charts listed in AH.

4. Level stall at gross weight is 87.5mph.
The current AH FM stall is 100MPH.

It has been said be me and others that the prop change was largely responsible for the performance increase between the -1 and -1D.
This is apparently so as the -1 results use the blade design 6443 and the -1D uses 6501A-0.

5. Notice the design spec for the -1C is clearly a F4U-1D with a slightly heavier weight.

[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 01-09-2001).]

[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 01-09-2001).]

Hooligan · « **Reply #1 on:** January 09, 2001, 05:26:00 PM »

My observations:

I don't think we really ever fly in "clean" condition in AH so the AH 1D should go 359.

The 1D has 2250 HP (instead of 2135 for the 1A) with WEP. I suspect this accounts for about half of the increase in climb rate.

Very nice data. Thanks F4UDOA and Wells!

Hooligan

[This message has been edited by Hooligan (edited 01-09-2001).]

Jimdandy · « **Reply #2 on:** January 09, 2001, 05:29:00 PM »

Great data. This is the kind of stuff needed to base arguments off of. Thx

Fatty · « **Reply #3 on:** January 09, 2001, 06:00:00 PM »

Hehe, did I see options for additional armament?

A 3rd bomb on the fuselage?

2 11.75" rockets instead of the pylon bombs?

Thanks for the scans, cool reading.

F4UDOA · « **Reply #4 on:** January 09, 2001, 09:34:00 PM »

This data was shown on this website.

Wells pointed it out to me. The climb I have always been suspicious of considering every climb calculation and flight test I have seen for the F4U puts it at roughly 3400FPM. For some reason this document has been hiding from me for a while.

Here is the main URL.

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id63.htm

Fishu · « **Reply #5 on:** January 09, 2001, 11:15:00 PM »

Fix the 190a8 climb too

Citabria · « **Reply #6 on:** January 09, 2001, 11:25:00 PM »

looks like the ah f4u1d matches the f4u1d data pretty close with pylons on.

but im almost sure the AH f4u1d is modelled for combat conditions with pylons and rocket mounts. it wouldnt make sense for it not to be. these items were standard on almost all f4u1d's and rarely removed.

but i'm all for decreasing the f4u1c's performance to be less than the f4u1d

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 01-10-2001).]

flakbait · « **Reply #7 on:** January 09, 2001, 11:52:00 PM »

You guys notice he's got F4U-F6F vs. Fw-190 A5/U4 charts there too?

-----------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #8 on:** January 10, 2001, 12:15:00 AM »

Hi

Interseting how this this data shows that chog is quite a bit heavier than dhog. Isnt the whole chog bunch arguing some bs that chog was 200-300 lbs lighter than dhog???

thanks GRUNHERZ

funked · « **Reply #9 on:** January 10, 2001, 12:30:00 AM »

Citabria - the same applies to pretty much all of the fighters in AH.

Citabria · « **Reply #10 on:** January 10, 2001, 12:41:00 AM »

f4u1c: 12470lbs
f4u1d: 12175lbs

12470-12175=295lbs

f4u1d should outperform that big blue piece of toejam chog by a hair. currently the chog outperforms the f4u1d by a hair.

Citabria · « **Reply #11 on:** January 10, 2001, 12:54:00 AM »

only place the f4u1d climb performance shows less in ah than in real life is below 1000 feet. above that the AH f4u1d is the same or better

Swoop · « **Reply #12 on:** January 10, 2001, 01:10:00 AM »

nev mind.

[This message has been edited by Swoop (edited 01-10-2001).]

Citabria · « **Reply #13 on:** January 10, 2001, 01:17:00 AM »

funked aircraft like the typhoon and p38L had rocket rails installed only when rockets loaded though. otherwise they were removed.

Hooligan · « **Reply #14 on:** January 10, 2001, 03:38:00 AM »

Grunherz wrote:

Quote

Interseting how this this data shows that chog is quite a bit heavier than dhog. Isnt the whole chog bunch arguing some bs that chog was 200-300 lbs lighter than dhog???

Pyro stated that the C and D used the same FM and that in AH the C was a couple of hundred pounds lighter. Nobody has been “arguing some bs” about this, merely quoting Pyro. And I am certain that if Pyro says that the AH Chog is a bit lighter than the AH Dhog, this is a fact.

Citibria wrote:

Quote

f4u1d should outperform that big blue piece of toejam chog by a hair. currently the chog outperforms the f4u1d by a hair.

If HTC should decide to change the F4U FM based on this data, the Dhog will get about a 10% increase in climb and acceleration as well as a noticeable improvement in turn ability. The new Chog will perform a hair worse than the new Dhog but it will still perform better than the current Chog.

I’m certainly glad (and admittedly surprised) to see the two of you cheering the publication of this new data. And I am also looking forward to the possibility of FM changes to the F4Us that will increase their climb, acceleration and turn performance.

Hooligan