Author Topic: For comparison: Bearcat & Hellcat jpg (large) (Read 1718 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #45 on:** July 02, 2002, 01:34:14 AM »

If you or I said it then yes, but if the chief designer and test pilot for Grumman, Bob Hall, said it then I put some more weight to that statement.

Do you think its a coincidence they designed Bearcat right after their experiences with FW190? And plese keep in mind there was NO Navy requirement at that time, mid-late 1943, for a compact light fighter, if anything the Navy wanted bigger ones with the really huge US radial engines. Think much bigger and heavier than even F2G.

Hristo · « **Reply #46 on:** July 02, 2002, 01:37:46 AM »

another original design follows...

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #47 on:** July 02, 2002, 01:51:42 AM »

Actually Tu144 flew many months before Concorde. Even the Russians wouldnt copy French planes.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #48 on:** July 02, 2002, 01:53:05 AM »

Another point Steven why do you gus focus this so much on Kurt Tank? I dont see why that matters...

K West · « **Reply #49 on:** July 02, 2002, 08:07:48 AM »

" And please keep in mind there was NO Navy requirement at that time, mid-late 1943, for a compact light fighter..."

I replied more in the other F8F topic. But essentially the USN "awarded a contract to Grumman in Nov of 1943 to develop a fighter that could operate from ALL carriers rathet than be limited to just the largest. To meet the requirement Grumman engineers pursued a derivative of the F6F Hellcat."

And the F8F was of high enough priority that "...compared to some of its competitors, the Grumman Aircraft Corporation of Bethpage, Long Island was rather late in getting into the design of jet combat aircraft. However, between July of 1943 and November of 1944, Grumman undertook some preliminary work on several different jet-powered designs, some of them powered by a mixture of jet and piston engines. The first of these was the G-57, which was to have been powered by an R-2800 piston engine plus a small turbojet. Next was the G-61, which was a development of the F6F Hellcat with a turbojet engine in the tail. However, both of these projects had to be shelved in favor of higher-priority work on the G-58 (XF8F- 1 Bearcat), a conventional piston-engined fighter."

As for the F2G? "F2G Corsair was the US Navy's idea of a fast climbing interceptor... (from the opther topic). Wrong. It was Chance Voughts contender for a fast climbing interceptor. The USN liked it. Same thing as Republic milking more out of thier P-47 for the M and N models. Chance Vought used what they had and made it better. Much better. Without too much re-tooling to make and it would nor take resources away from jet aircraft development and production.

Westy

(Samm, the basic planeform does look very much alike. But in light of day they are very different. I guess if the F8F looked like any other plane (besides a bubble top F6F) it would resemble a George more than an FW)

Scootter · « **Reply #50 on:** July 07, 2002, 09:54:52 AM »

Anyone ever consider that design peramaters are dictated by the laws of nature, the manufacturing capabilities at the time and the physical requirments of aerodynamics.

The amount of power was about the same in all late war fighters -+ 300 hp or so, this dictated fuel capacity this led to airframe size that led to wing size ect. ect. The truth is that there really was not that much differance with AC performance when you compaired competing designs ie. P-51-Fw-190D.

It is not by copying but by understanding the design requirements that gives such sameness of design.

or should we just say that all aircraft are direct copys of the Wright Flyer (designed by .... a couple of Yanks ) I hope you see my point (I also hope I made one lol)

Steven · « **Reply #51 on:** July 07, 2002, 12:30:33 PM »

Quote

Do you think its a coincidence they designed Bearcat right after their experiences with FW190?

Grun,

Yes and no. You make it seem as though the Grumman team only looked at the FW and then decided to make an American copy because it was so good.

Making a flippant statement that the FW would be a world-beater with an R2800 doesn't mean Grumman copied the airframe of the FW. It was a flippant statement because the FW wouldn't look anywhere near an FW with a 2800 because of the size of the engine and the redesign that would then be needed due to weights and balances and the multitude of other things that would be needed taken into account. And the concept of putting a large engine to a small airframe is not novel to the FW. Power/Weight and Range/Size is an elementary concept dating back to the birth of aviation.

If your world is a better one for thinking the Bearcat copied the FW, then go ahead and enjoy. From judging this thread, it appears to me you are in the minority if not the only one who holds this opinion.