F4U Wing

[Oldman731]

That's interesting, since the Germans didn't use checklists at all.

I trust that's an exaggeration.

If not, it might explain their dreadful accident record!

- oldman

[GScholz]

I was surprised at that as well, and for the more complicated types like the Ju 88 I'm positive it lead to an increase in accident rate.

That said the USAAF and USN started including rudimentary checklists only in 1937... By 1945 they were getting pretty comprehensive.

[Puma44]

I was surprised at that as well, and for the more complicated types like the Ju 88 I'm positive it lead to an increase in accident rate.

That said the USAAF and USN started including rudimentary checklists only in 1937... By 1945 they were getting pretty comprehensive.

That's a good point; the more complex the aircraft/systems, the more need for checklists and usage to prevent inadvertent omissions and the subsequent accident potential.

[GScholz]

That's a good point; the more complex the aircraft/systems, the more need for checklists and usage to prevent inadvertent omissions and the subsequent accident potential.

Indeed, but I'm still shocked at the complexity and pilot workload of the F4U. That engine needs a flight engineer.

[Widewing]

For example, they sacrificed the ram air intakes that give the F4U its great deck speed in favor of drawing warmer air behind the engine in order to avoid icing and sucking in of sea spray. They used more wing area to lower the stall speed at the cost of drag (max speed). They built a higher cockpit and a slightly sloped cowling to improve over the nose visibility, again probably at the cost of added drag to the frame. They probably compromised on other things to make construction easier and built F6F at a crazy pace of 300 per month from a single factory - this means equipping a new squadron every two days...

At peak production rates, Grumman was rolling out over 600 Hellcats a month, along with F7Fs and F8Fs. They pushed out an average of 25 F6Fs each work day from October '44 thru April of '45. They were delivering Hellcats so fast, the Navy asked them to slow production as they had more than they could use. The reserve of Hellcats built up in the Pacific was enough that planes with only moderate damage were just jettisoned. Grumman laid off 1,000 workers in response and ended the Saturday shift. The work force, becoming nervous, pushed out even more planes the next month. Grumman laid off another 1,000 workers. The following month, they set a record of 656 aircraft delivered from one facility. This record still stands for an American aircraft manufacturer. F4U deliveries, Vought and Goodyear combined, never came close to what Grumman was producing. To this very day, Grumman's production methods are still studied for their incredible efficiency.

Grumman designed their aircraft for ease of flying around the boat, and ease of manufacturing. Most of the improvements seen in the F6F-5 were introduced gradually into F6F-3 production. Late block F6F-3s were 10 mph faster than early -3s. There were drag improvements and changes to to simplify manufacture. The aero improvements reduced drag enough to make the F6F-5 nearly as fast as the F4U-1D at critical altitude (409 mph at 21,600 ft. for F6F-5 and 413 mph at 20,400 ft. for the F4U-1D, with the Hellcat being slightly faster than the F4U at 25,000 ft).  

[Bodhi]

To this very day, Grumman's production methods are still studied for their incredible efficiency.

Grumman designed their aircraft for ease of flying around the boat, and ease of manufacturing. Most of the improvements seen in the F6F-5 were introduced gradually into F6F-3 production. Late block F6F-3s were 10 mph faster than early -3s. There were drag improvements and changes to to simplify manufacture. The aero improvements reduced drag enough to make the F6F-5 nearly as fast as the F4U-1D at critical altitude (409 mph at 21,600 ft. for F6F-5 and 413 mph at 20,400 ft. for the F4U-1D, with the Hellcat being slightly faster than the F4U at 25,000 ft).  

I think the main reason that Grumman was so efficient owed a lot to their simplified manufacturing.  Leroy Grumman and Jake Swirbul had figured out manufacturing and design by the time they got to the Hellcat.  That knowledge was paramount to the production at Grumman, ie. simplicity of manufacture.  Vought never figured that out, ever.

I think it's interesting how you mention the enhancements on the Hellcat to make it faster.  One of the things I always found interesting were the button head rivets aft of the critical area of smoothness.  Their conversion to countersunk rivets and dimpled skins (and formers) would have contributed greatly to overall speed, but to do so was to slow down production.  Interesting facts from the USN show some of the pilots buying every bit of shoe polish on a carrier so they could polish their aircraft and gain speed. 

[Puma44]

Indeed, but I'm still shocked at the complexity and pilot workload of the F4U. That engine needs a flight engineer.

Nothing a well trained, competent pilot can't handle.

[Widewing]

I must agree with General Rall... With all the manual work needed to just operate the aircraft I'm amazed the US pilots found the time to fight!

It isn't all that busy.... Throttle, mixture and blower manipulation were required for normal operation. Combat operation was simple enough. Mixture to auto-rich, blower according to altitude, prop to max rpm and throttle as needed. I believe that the intercooler flap was automatic in later builds. Bodhi can better talk to that.

In 1943, Leroy Grumman and Bob Hall visited Great Britain and had the opportunity to fly a captured FW 190A. Both men were very impressed with the automatic engine management system. Upon returning to Bethpage, Grumman ordered the Engineering department to design a similar system. The F8F-1 was built with much simplified engine control system, and the F8F-2 introduced the full blown AEC (automatic engine control). With that, Grumman had built what most who have flown it, call the ultimate prop fighter.

[Widewing]

I think the main reason that Grumman was so efficient owed a lot to their simplified manufacturing.  Leroy Grumman and Jake Swirbul had figured out manufacturing and design by the time they got to the Hellcat.  That knowledge was paramount to the production at Grumman, ie. simplicity of manufacture.  Vought never figured that out, ever.

I think it's interesting how you mention the enhancements on the Hellcat to make it faster.  One of the things I always found interesting were the button head rivets aft of the critical area of smoothness.  Their conversion to countersunk rivets and dimpled skins (and formers) would have contributed greatly to overall speed, but to do so was to slow down production.  Interesting facts from the USN show some of the pilots buying every bit of shoe polish on a carrier so they could polish their aircraft and gain speed. 

Simoniz paste wax was also in demand. Pilots and maintenance guys would write home asking for automotive paste wax. Paraffin was also used to fill seams and gaps. I know an former Plane Captain, who bought up every box of paraffin he could find in San Diego before his squadron deployed.

[Bodhi]

Ya know WW, in a way, the wax ideas were great, but I have to wonder how they liked that tropical heat!  Still, more examples of great improvisation from our people.

[Zimme83]

It dont seems more complicated than other constant-speed propeller equipped plane. A pilot had learned how to handle his engine well before he went to combat.

In terms of technology dough, the germans were bretty far ahed of the rest of the counties. Fuel injection and "kommandogerät" made it a lot easier for the pilot. But obviosly it didnt had a major impact on the air war, a trained pilot could still fight as well without those systems.

[morfiend]

Simoniz paste wax was also in demand. Pilots and maintenance guys would write home asking for automotive paste wax. Paraffin was also used to fill seams and gaps. I know an former Plane Captain, who bought up every box of paraffin he could find in San Diego before his squadron deployed.

  Wide,as a kid I'd heard stories about this,seemed to be common among most the airforces. I had thought I was being handed a load of you know what in a ruse to get me to wax Dad's car more often.....

  They even told me all those hotrods running around could thank the ground crews for those little speed things they came up with in an effort to gain just a couple extra MPH for their pilot!


  I guess it was all horse pucky afterall!



   

[GScholz]

It isn't all that busy.... Throttle, mixture and blower manipulation were required for normal operation. Combat operation was simple enough. Mixture to auto-rich, blower according to altitude, prop to max rpm and throttle as needed. I believe that the intercooler flap was automatic in later builds. Bodhi can better talk to that.

In 1943, Leroy Grumman and Bob Hall visited Great Britain and had the opportunity to fly a captured FW 190A. Both men were very impressed with the automatic engine management system. Upon returning to Bethpage, Grumman ordered the Engineering department to design a similar system. The F8F-1 was built with much simplified engine control system, and the F8F-2 introduced the full blown AEC (automatic engine control). With that, Grumman had built what most who have flown it, call the ultimate prop fighter.

I wish we could get the Bearcat as a perk ride. It's the ultimate late-war monster.

[GScholz]

It dont seems more complicated than other constant-speed propeller equipped plane. A pilot had learned how to handle his engine well before he went to combat.

In terms of technology dough, the germans were bretty far ahed of the rest of the counties. Fuel injection and "kommandogerät" made it a lot easier for the pilot. But obviosly it didnt had a major impact on the air war, a trained pilot could still fight as well without those systems.

It's a lot more complicated than the Merlin engine. I don't know about the Allison. The impact the German HOTAS systems had on the air war is probably not measurable in any meaningful way, but I doubt a late-war Luftwaffe greenhorn with 10 hours in trainers could operate an F4U in combat. Perhaps the fact that the Luftwaffe still existed at all in late-1944 and 1945 is the best testament to the ease of operation of a 109 or 190.

[GScholz]

Bodhi, I was under the impression that all major air forces in WWII waxed and polished their fighters to get more speed out of them. Was it not normal in the USAAF/USN?