Holy cow i took a beating and still landed.

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
So im sorry your information was incorrect. Arent you happy now that you learned something new?  <S>  

Who says my information was wrong.. I'll point you to this thread. Particularly interesting is pzvg's comment, read it a couple times for the best effect.
 http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000268.html
-SW

[GRUNHERZ]

My info says its a 1D, a Vought test document posted on this BBS for all to see says its identical to a 1D, and the Kinsey book clearly makes the point in the opening paragraph of the 1C section that its a common misconception that 1C is based on 1A.

BTW Are you saying that that no F4U1-D appered before December 1945, because we all know that 1C made it first appearence in the Okinawa battle, which only started in April 1945.
 
If we go by your idea that F4U1-C predated 1D by eight months that would mean according to HTC 1D combat date of April 1944,  that
the 1C existed in the fall of 1943.  

Whatever our disagremments 1943 is way to early.

[This message has been edited by GRUNHERZ (edited 03-29-2001).]

[This message has been edited by GRUNHERZ (edited 03-29-2001).]

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
My info says its a 1D, a Vought test document posted on this BBS for all to see says its identical to a 1D, and the Kinsey book clearly makes the point in the opening paragraph of the 1C section that its a common misconception that 1C is based on 1A.

Where is this document? I can't seem to find it. Anyway, is your information so much better than mine, that mine is certainly wrong? If we are going to compare how much information there is out there about where the -1C originated from, I'm sure both sides stack up the same.

However, if the -1C was built before the -1D... how could it possibly be a -1D?

Where is this document? I can't find it, if you can please post the link.
-SW

[GRUNHERZ]

Arghhh its that big thing Westy or F4UDOA put up few weeks ago, where it go? lol  

Ill find the sucker.  

[Xjazz]

Few days a go I prsupactising ack  supression with F4Ud in offline mode. My target was get small field down as fast as possible. Only thing what happend fast during practising was my respawn :-/

Anyway, ones that d@rn ack take out my both wings. I was supriced, because still could fly back to base and langing (boing boing..)

I have film about it.

Xjazz

[Jigster]

AH uses multiple lift points for varying calculations along the surface of the wing.

The F4U happens to one of the few that have most of it's lift points on the inner section of the wing, so losing an outter section isn't immediately fatal.

Btw SW the 1C is based on the 1D production block, F4UDOA posted the charts for in the A&V folder awhile ago. All of the 1C's that arrived in the Pacific had two hard points.

[Naudet]

I find the dmg modleing with this half wing is really good, there are planes, like Hog,F´W190 and P47 that are still flyable after missing the outter wing part.

But the FW 190 for sure is really tricky to fly home with one half wing. U have to give full airleron trim and stick force to one side to avoid rolling to the side were the half wing is missing, this also makes turing really tricky, cause u can only turn "controled" to one side.

And if this is real. Hell yes. I saw a picture of a FW190 that collided with a SPit (sry dont have a scanner so cant post it).

In a dogifhgt over france, both plane collided, both planes lost the a big part of one of the wings. The Spit crashed to the gorund while the FW190 did a "smooth" landing on 1 and a half wing at its homeairfield.