Author Topic: F4U Corsair Roll Rate (Read 1424 times)

MAC · « **on:** March 02, 2003, 02:18:38 PM »

Greetings!

I know that there are many inaccuracies in our favorite aircraft, but this one stands out quite a bit.

Time after time you hear of Corsair fighter pilots praising in awe the phenomenal rate of roll the Corsair has, yet here in Aces High, it is unimpressive and quite frankly, VERY slow.

Here are some quotes:

"Along the way, we installed a new set of lengthened ailerons. They would further increase the rolling rate, but again necessitated copious refinements and adjustments to the nose balance. Finally we got it narrowed down until the results were satisfactory both to aerodynamics and to me, the pilot. At high speeds--as in combat maneuvers-- throwing the stick hard against its full throw stop would roll the airplane more than 180 degrees in a second. And the stick force required to do it was light--easy with one hand even at high speed. Combat pilots would later revel in the Corsair's phenomenal rate of roll."

....from page 85 of "Whistling DEATH The Test Pilot's Story of The F4U Corsair" by Boone T. Guyton (one of the original test pilots)

"d. Rates of roll.

The FW 190 and Corsair were superior to the Hellcat. The FW 190 and Corsair were about equal in rate of roll. "

...from PROJECT TED No. PTR - 1107
Report of comparative combat evaluation of FW190A-5/F4U-1D/F6F-3 (for the full report:
http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id91.htm

Peter Garrison in FlyingMag.com posted the rate of roll for several WWII aircrafts. Among them was the FW:

"The following numbers are the roll rate, in degrees per second, at 87 knots, followed by the maxium attainable roll rate with the associated true airspeed in parentheses..."

P-47 34, 71 (250)
P-38 24, 78 (257)
P51B 33, 98 (260)
P-40 45, 134 (315)
Spitfire V 90, 150 (176)
FW-190 75, 151 (226)

Thus, at 226 tas, the FW could do a 360 degrees roll in just over 2 seconds (2.3).

The Corsair should be able to do the same or close to it.

Try it. It is usually 4.0+ seconds.

It's time to adjust the rate of roll in the Corsairs.

Salute!

RTR · « **Reply #1 on:** March 02, 2003, 02:44:44 PM »

MAC what speed are you trying to roll at?
I have found the Hog to have an exceptional roll rate, as long as you are over 250mph. (and I fly it quite a bit). Albeit if you are slow it is like waltzing a large woman. However, get it fast and it turns into a ballerina.
"the FW190 and Corsair were about equal in rate of roll"....ASW and I once duelled the Dhog and 190 (A8 or A5..cant remember which), and found them to be very comparable in roll rates.
So..not sure what you experienced, but can tell you Hog does roll rather well...at speed.
cheers,
RTR

F4UDOA · « **Reply #2 on:** March 02, 2003, 03:22:36 PM »

Heya MAC,

Actually the F4U roll rates are pretty accurate.

I have a British document that is a follow up to the USN comparison of the F4U-1D and FW190A-5. Their point was to show the 190 roll rate was far superior at speeds below 300MPH. It was if fact far superior to the F4U in roll rate.

With the possible exception of the clipped wing F4U the Brits used. Clipping the wings of the Spit and P-47 drastically improved there rolling performance either of which was as good to start with as the F4U. With clipped wings the Spit is the only comparable rolling A/C I have seen.

The standard F4U is on par with the P-51B if not slightly superior.

I will post the document showing the F4U roll rate when I get a chance.

Staga · « **Reply #3 on:** March 02, 2003, 03:27:31 PM »

MAC · « **Reply #4 on:** March 02, 2003, 06:19:20 PM »

Thanks for the responses F4UDOA, RTR, and Staga!

I knew the charts and numbers were out there. You guys are great.

Its probably my computer. It's quite "outdated". (Pentium III 550.....)

I trust your charts and opinions gents, so if you feel its about right(F4UDOA), then I can accept it. =)

That was easy and painless.

Again, THANKS and SALUTE!

Puke · « **Reply #5 on:** March 03, 2003, 01:50:49 AM »

I like that last graph and it's interesting to see the Zeke at the bottom. And I wonder which Zeke it is. I would bet the A6M3 or A6M5 and if so, the A6M2 rolls even worse than that. Has anyone checked those numbers...other than how durable the Zekes are, I have some non-scientific contention with how well the Zekes roll in here.

Kweassa · « **Reply #6 on:** March 03, 2003, 02:15:40 AM »

It's interesting to note there are discussions going on both AH forums and IL-2 forums about the roll rate of the corsair.

In the case of the latter forum, opinions are dominant(or rather, an opinion of one individual is dominant) in that the Corsair could roll as fast as the 190 with ease.

..

the discussion can be found here

Staga · « **Reply #7 on:** March 03, 2003, 02:43:45 AM »

I've seen pretty interesting (in their very own way...) posts from that person... hmm... Yeah; now I remember.
There was a topic where people were discussing about diving speeds. Gotta see if I can still find it.

HoHun · « **Reply #8 on:** March 03, 2003, 03:11:20 AM »

Hi Staga,

>I've seen pretty interesting (in their very own way...) posts from that person... hmm...

You mean Skychimp? I've got some experience with him, too. In a nutshell, I'd not recommend discussion with him unless you're sure the respective forum is properly moderated.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Staga · « **Reply #9 on:** March 03, 2003, 04:21:03 AM »

It's pretty fun to read some of those posts thought problem is someone could actually believe what some of those ppl wrote.

Same thing happens in wwiiol board: someone has seen seen a story in a history channel or read a book which says pilot X with plane D left pilot Y and his plane Z to the dust.
From that info they're able to tell that plane D was much faster than plane Z even if controlled tests tell otherwise...