Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Movie on June 11, 2007, 04:43:59 PM
-
Which naval plane you think is the best in the game?
-
F4U-4, no contest.
But given hat the F4U-4 is, hands down, the best prop fighter in the game that is hardly a surprise.
-
Tie between TBM-3 Avenger and SBD-5 Dauntless. But then again, im a bomber jock.
-
The blue ones
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Tie between TBM-3 Avenger and SBD-5 Dauntless. But then again, im a bomber jock.
lol Serenity...
anyway...F6F is the best non-perked...
F4U4 is best hands down
-
#1. F4u-4
#2. f4u-1 (best non perked imho)
#3. f6f-5
#4. f4u-1a
#5. f4u-1d
#6. f4u-1c
-
Originally posted by AKDogg
#1. F4u-4
#2. f4u-1 (best non perked imho)
#3. f6f-5
#4. f4u-1a
#5. f4u-1d
#6. f4u-1c
mine picks are almost same as your picks AKDogg.....except...
#1. F4u-4 ( but it is perked ) ( perk really don't affect this plane, except it is a wee bit more than a -C hog ) )
#2. f4u-1 (best non perked imho) ( I would normally pick this even over the F4U-4 model )
#3. f6f-5 |( can really surprise thoughs pdiry8's, Kicanbeatno4's, and zeehowhedothaeke's.)
#4. f4u-1c ( CANNONS baby.......and lots of em ) ( perk really don't affect this plane )
#5. f4u-1d ( best thing it has going for it is the ordanance load out.)
#6. f4u-1a ( fuel load out drops his one to the bottom for me )
-
Well, I have the C at the bottom due to performance of the plane, not the gun package. Otherwise I have it at the same spot as U if I included the gun package. I can get more kills in a .50 cal hog then a cannon hog in 1 flight. One of the main reasons I fly the -1, heehehe. -1 is also the 2nd fastest Hog but 2nd worst climb rate and acceleration. 2nd fastest in dive speed. Alrdy had it to 615 mph and pulled up. 620 and it locks up and u better have enough alt to use the trim to get u out of the dive,lol. It also has a high ENY depending on Arena. WHat I don't undertand though is the -1a on certain maps is either not available and the ENY is higher then the -1. Some maps the -1 has a eny of 25 while the -1a has 30 or 35, can't remember exactly but I just know that the 1a should be a lower eny then -1 know matter what arena/map!
-
SBD-5, it is very tough, incredibly maneuverable, fun to fly and rewarding to know that your kicking peoples tulips in a plane that is completely outclassed by them. its my main plane
-
I would have to say the F4U-4 is the best. But in my opinion, I think the F6F-5 is could be number one as well.
-
my list
f4u-4
f6f-5
f4u-1
f4u-1D also f4u-1C ( i cant tell the difference besides the cannons)
f4u-1a
-
F4U-4 -- Best prop in the game period.
F4U-1A -- I am in total disagreement with T/C and Dogg over the fuel loadout. IMO the distribution is far more flexible and useful than the -1. Anyway, I think the improvements in acceleration and climb more than makeup for the extra gas in the wings.
F4U-1D -- Best jabo you can roll off the CV (unless you don't mind risking 50-odd perks on a jabo run). Now if only HTC would turn on the centerline pylon for 3x1000lb'ers...
F4U-1C -- Cannon or not, she really loses out otherwise compared to the 1A/D.
F4U-1 -- IMO the sluggish acceleration and climb over the other Hogs shows, especially against most of the MA rides. Forward visability is also markedly poorer, and gunnery in anything other than a dead-six pursuit miraculous.
F6F -- Nothing against the Fat Cat, but most anything the F6F can do any Hog does better, with the exception of the more forgiving departure.
FM-2 -- Would be higher on my list if she didn't feel like she was perpetually flying in slow motion. However I love using her to turn the tables on Spit drivers who think they can outturn anything with a star-and-bar on it. :D
F4F-4
-
Originally posted by VVV
But in my opinion, I think the F6F-5 is could be number one as well.
That's quite impossible. Not only is the F6F far too slow to be a "best" fighter, but the F4U, as Saxman pointed out, does everything better.
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
That's quite impossible. Not only is the F6F far too slow to be a "best" fighter, but the F4U, as Saxman pointed out, does everything better.
I think you will have to quantify that by being specific as to which F4U we are talking about. The Hellcat carries the same ordnance load as the F4U-1D and climbs much better when fully loaded. That means you will have more altitude when heading from a CV to a target. Especially when the field is hot with enemy fighters.
Then again, I have some issues with the flight modeling. The F6F-5 is at least 20 mph too slow at its best altitude (should be neck and neck with the F4U-1D at 20k). There is a serious dynamic instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. On the contrary, the F4U, which should be notably less stable than the Hellcat, is rock steady under those conditions and a paragon of genteel handling. Our F4Us display none of the vices known in the RW. The F6F-5 has vices that didn't exist in the RW. If they ever fix the F6F, it'll move up in the standings. It should also be able to carry the centerline tank AND 2 bombs, or 3 bombs (as should the F4U-1D).
Turning circles are virtually identical.
I'll take the F6F-5 over the F4U-1 as it is better in the vertical. I'll take it over the F4U-1C as a dogfighter (although those 4 Hispanos can make up for its reduced agility in many instances).
As favorites go, I like them in this order:
1) F4U-4
2) F4U-1A
3) F6F-5
4) F4U-1C
5) F4U-1D
6) F4U-1
7) FM-2
8) Seafire Mk.II
9) A6M5
10) F4F-4
11) A6M2
12) TBM (similar turn radius to Hurri IIC)
13) SBD-5 (decent dogfighter when required)
14) D3a (very agile, but almost worthless in firepower)
My regards,
Widewing
-
WW: F4U-1D has an extra pair of rockets over the F6F (8x vs 6x). :D
-
Originally posted by Benny Moore
That's quite impossible. Not only is the F6F far too slow to be a "best" fighter, but the F4U, as Saxman pointed out, does everything better.
That's why I said in MY opinion.
Nice post widewing.
My Regards
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Then again, I have some issues with the flight modeling. The F6F-5 is at least 20 mph too slow at its best altitude (should be neck and neck with the F4U-1D at 20k). There is a serious dynamic instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. On the contrary, the F4U, which should be notably less stable than the Hellcat, is rock steady under those conditions and a paragon of genteel handling. Our F4Us display none of the vices known in the RW. The F6F-5 has vices that didn't exist in the RW. If they ever fix the F6F, it'll move up in the standings. It should also be able to carry the centerline tank AND 2 bombs, or 3 bombs (as should the F4U-1D).
Spot on.
-
FM2 and SBD are the most fun.
I get most of my carrier plane kills in C-hog but the F4u4 is prolly "the best".
The F6F is an awesome climber with full ord and a good allround plane.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
which F4U we are talking about.
Quick question for you knowledeable Corsair people:
What model(s) would US carriers have been carrying off Japan in July-August, 1945?
- oldman
-
Originally posted by Oldman731
Quick question for you knowledeable Corsair people:
What model(s) would US carriers have been carrying off Japan in July-August, 1945?
- oldman
F4u-1D and/or f4u-4
-
I don't think there is one best. I think it toally depends on the situation.
My fave's in approximate order of preference are:
If I'm going in to attack:
F6F-5
F4U-1D
TBM
D3a
If I'm going in to fight/cap:
Seafire Mk.II
F6F-5
F4U-1C
F4U-1A
If I'm going in to furball/cap:
FM-2
A6M2
Seafire Mk.II
A6M5
F4F-4
I'm not arguing what's better or not, just my preferences and adjusted given the scenarios I commonly see CV's in.
-
There were a couple CVs carrying F4U-1Cs, as well.
-
i hate the f4u1c i think performence is BAD
-
F4U is good plane if u know how to fly it.
p51srule:aok
-
Originally posted by kennyhayes
i hate the f4u1c i think performence is BAD
its not as nimble the others but i wouldnt go as far as to say its performance is "BAD"
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I think you will have to quantify that by being specific as to which F4U we are talking about. The Hellcat carries the same ordnance load as the F4U-1D and climbs much better when fully loaded. That means you will have more altitude when heading from a CV to a target. Especially when the field is hot with enemy fighters.
Then again, I have some issues with the flight modeling. The F6F-5 is at least 20 mph too slow at its best altitude (should be neck and neck with the F4U-1D at 20k). There is a serious dynamic instability in the roll axis at high angles of attack. On the contrary, the F4U, which should be notably less stable than the Hellcat, is rock steady under those conditions and a paragon of genteel handling. Our F4Us display none of the vices known in the RW. The F6F-5 has vices that didn't exist in the RW. If they ever fix the F6F, it'll move up in the standings. It should also be able to carry the centerline tank AND 2 bombs, or 3 bombs (as should the F4U-1D).
Turning circles are virtually identical.
I'll take the F6F-5 over the F4U-1 as it is better in the vertical. I'll take it over the F4U-1C as a dogfighter (although those 4 Hispanos can make up for its reduced agility in many instances).
As favorites go, I like them in this order:
1) F4U-4
2) F4U-1A
3) F6F-5
4) F4U-1C
5) F4U-1D
6) F4U-1
7) FM-2
8) Seafire Mk.II
9) A6M5
10) F4F-4
11) A6M2
12) TBM (similar turn radius to Hurri IIC)
13) SBD-5 (decent dogfighter when required)
14) D3a (very agile, but almost worthless in firepower)
My regards,
Widewing
Excellent post Widewing... although I can not choose the 1A over the 1d... just like the 1d more, probably stupid in that, but it's the U-bird I learned first... As for the F6F and F4u handling characteristics, I agree whole heartedly. The F6F is described by everyone I know who has flown it (both veterans and current pilots) as being better named a ***** cat when it's flight characteristics are considered. The contrary is the F4u's flight model, and every one I know that has major time in tem is do not get low and slow and try to maneuver. The stall below 200 kts and 6k AGL is unrecoverable as the wing drops and a spin results which is unrecoverable given the altitude. Given altitide the F4u is still a monster in the spin, and the few pilots I know that have intentionally spun the Corsair say they will never try it again. The U-bird is a beast in all sense of the word. It is very poorly protrayed here with regards to stall characteristics, that and it's very lightened load, especially cosidering the -1d's and the -4's. The '4's were carrying field modified pylons that could and did carry two 1k bombs each.
-
If Aces High's Corsair had the same stall characteristics that it displayed in real life, there would be a lot fewer people flying it.
As late as 1952, the F4U-5 Pilot's Handbook stated the following on page 29:
"At the stall with power on, flaps down, a roll off to the left is violent and is accompanied by a 600- to 900-foot loss in altitude."
At this late a date in the Corsair's operational history, which spanned a decade, torque roll on the carrier approach was still causing a lot of accidents. This in spite of the addition of the stall-tripper wedge being installed on the starboard wing.
By contrast, the Hellcat was rated almost universally as having the best all-around stability of any operational U.S. fighter. Even in accelerated stalls its behavior was superb, and recovery was mild.
-
Had the FM2 been equipped with bigger, faster, badder engine it would totally PWN.
-
Originally posted by Movie
Had the FM2 been equipped with bigger, faster, badder engine it would totally PWN.
They built some of those, kinda... F8F Bearcat.
My regards,
Widewing
-
yea the bearcat too bad they got delivered a few months after war ended i believe
-
Originally posted by Movie
yea the bearcat too bad they got delivered a few months after war ended i believe
They were in service before the war ended and were on carriers heading to Japan when they tossed in the towel. Too late for combat, but not too late for squadron service. Another two weeks and they would have been flying combat patrols.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Two weeks?
:noid :noid :noid
-
Yeah.
"wwII pilots- When are we going to get our new fighter boss?"
"Commander- Two weeks son"
*radio, japan surrenders!*
"wwII pilots, ahh crap!"
"yeah yeah, i know no man would say aaaw crap to the end of any war."
-
damn 2 weeks...why couldnt they just hold out alittle longer:cry
-
would be awesome to see groups of bearcats destroying squadrons of jap zeros
-
that would be like shooting fish in a barrel...and im kinda into that
:noid
-
This has a familiar ring to it:
"wwII pilots- When are we going to get our new fighter boss?", "Commander- Two weeks son", *radio, japan surrenders!*, "wwII pilots, ahh crap!"
But wasn't it "Combat Tour" instead of a new fighter? :huh
LTARsqrl <>
-
Originally posted by AKDogg
#1. F4u-4
#2. f4u-1 (best non perked imho)
#3. f6f-5
#4. f4u-1a
#5. f4u-1d
#6. f4u-1c
^^^ What he said. F4U-1's a monster when flown on the edge. The -4 is a monster, period.
If they adjusted the FM to cause the Corsairs to fly closer to RW, I'd still fly them. I only hope they's make an appropriate ENY / perk value adjustment, as well.
-
My OPINION :D (in the order in wich I prefer them)
F4U-4
4U-1D
F6F-5
F4U-1
FM2
F4F-4
F4U-1A
F4U-1C
:noid
Like I said, that just my Opinion
-
i think the F4F or the F4U-4 is the best navel fighter
F4F has good balance of speed, firepower and muneverability
-
What are "speed" and "F4F" doing in the same sentence?
-
FM-2... I love using her to turn the tables on Spit drivers who think they can outturn anything with a star-and-bar on it.
That’s what makes the FM-2 so much fun. You’d be surprised how many people will actually commit to a sustained turn fight with an FM-2 when they are flying a Spit or an La-7.
-
F6F IMHO
-
#1 F6F-5 HELL CAT
#2 A6M5B ZERO
#3 F4U CORSAIR
-
Originally posted by SPARKY8400
#1 F6F-5 HELL CAT
#2 A6M5B ZERO
#3 F4U CORSAIR
LOL kid... we already know this and dont use caps seems aggravating for some reason:aok
-
Spit IX will hold it with a FM-2. Just.
-
Holy old threads, Batman!
1 month old, 2 weeks since last "bump from the grave"...
And I seriously hope HTC remodels the corsairs... Honestly, it shouldn't be out turning spits and p51s at 90mph when it would stall out and kill you well before that...
-
ROFL
-
Widewing, and other USN pros, I'm wondering why the Hellcat climbs better than the F4U but does not accelerate better. (first off, I'd like to say I'd love the aircraft's skin revamped also... why is it even as it is right now anyway? HTC didnt feel like upgrading it from a patch?) Anyway, yes. The Hellcat's loaded weight is about 12,600 lbs and the F4U-1A's is about 14,000 lbs. Both are fitted with similar engine. The Hellcat, with the lack of winter injection's got 2,000 hp I think and the F4U-1A has 2,250 hp.
With a similar power loading and similar prop, they somehow don't climb the same. Is it because of the wing loadings allowing the less aerodynamic F6F to climb better?
-
Widewing, and other USN pros, I'm wondering why the Hellcat climbs better than the F4U but does not accelerate better. (first off, I'd like to say I'd love the aircraft's skin revamped also... why is it even as it is right now anyway? HTC didnt feel like upgrading it from a patch?) Anyway, yes. The Hellcat's loaded weight is about 12,600 lbs and the F4U-1A's is about 14,000 lbs. Both are fitted with similar engine. The Hellcat, with the lack of winter injection's got 2,000 hp I think and the F4U-1A has 2,250 hp.
With a similar power loading and similar prop, they somehow don't climb the same. Is it because of the wing loadings allowing the less aerodynamic F6F to climb better?
(Just a side note, but why don't the Hamilton Standard planes over rev once oil pressure is lost?)
Heheh. Zombie threads.
-
The F6F isn't much less aerodynamic than the F4u. In the climb it's almost purely a matter of power vs weight. Think of it as an incline. Load a truck with 14000lbs and floor it uphill. Now load it with 12000lbs. You're going to get up the hill marginally faster, all other things being equal.
-
Ah yes. I just looked things up again. The Hellcat also has a water-injected R-2800. Alright. I think that means our Hellcat accelerates too poorly in-game since it SEEMS to pick up speed more slowly than the F4U, but that may just be me (i.e. 120 - 220 mph).
Then again, the P-51's are outclimbing my Corsair I think, or at least according to the info I've read up on various sites, yet the Mustang has a worse powerloading. 1,695 hp for 12,100 lbs. vs the hog's 2,250 hp for 14,000 lbs.
-
this sucks
-
Originally posted by HoseNose
Ah yes. I just looked things up again. The Hellcat also has a water-injected R-2800. Alright. I think that means our Hellcat accelerates too poorly in-game since it SEEMS to pick up speed more slowly than the F4U, but that may just be me (i.e. 120 - 220 mph).
Then again, the P-51's are outclimbing my Corsair I think, or at least according to the info I've read up on various sites, yet the Mustang has a worse powerloading. 1,695 hp for 12,100 lbs. vs the hog's 2,250 hp for 14,000 lbs.
That's the thing with ponies... Highly streamlined.
Click the DokGonzo link in my sig, choose the F4u1D, P51D, F6F, and throw in the P38L just for good measure.
-
dude 109F versus FM2 tough they both kinda turn the same
-
Thanks Krusty!
Movie.. say what..?
-
i was in fm2 in a turn fight with 109f omg he was winning until i gave some flaps it was a good fight btw
-
FM-2 just doesn't have the horsepower to hold up in a sustained turning fight, but otherwise she's a sweet ride (she just needs some RATOs). My #2 choice in a fight after the various Hogs.
Although I still don't understand why the FM-2 has a lower ENY than the F4U-1.
-
Without flaps the FM2 outturns the 109F easily. With flaps it will still out turn it. The 109F must have been using flaps before you did (the only way it would out turn you) or had a better merge point.
Anyways, if he had gone nose high you'd have stalled out and he'd have killed ya :)
Just because we're on this topic, http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php?p1=fm2&p2=109f4
-
I discovered some interesting facts on US Navy planes.
(Please correct me if the following statements are incorrect)
1. FM2, a variant of F4F Wildcat is a late war plane (Nov '44). It came later than F6F and F4Us.
2. F4U was carrier-certified by US Navy in early 1944. F4U became fully operational on USN carriers in late 1944.
-
F4u is a late war plane, don't forget :)
FM2 is as well. F4F-3 and F4F-4 were the mainstay until the F6F came around. The FM2 is like the next generation after F4F-4 (technically F4F-8, I believe)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
F4u is a late war plane, don't forget :)
I think Marines used them as early as 1943 (the Birdcage version). I just wanna make sure/double check if later F4Us A and D were fully operational in late '44.
-
Generally speaking, they didn't see much action til late half of 1943.
-
Krusty,
The F4U was actually in service in early 1943 and scored 640+ kills in 1943 more than any other Navy type for the year including F4F and F6F.
The F4U had more kills in 1943 than in 1944. The first kills were in April of 43 peaking in June with over 120 for the month.
-
who is this guy?
-
Dangit, you're gonna make me look it up when I get home, ain't ya? :D
I don't recall there being *that* much action for the Corsair in 1943.
-
VF-17 qualified their corsairs for carrier duty 1943, and were the first F4U Naval squadron to launch a combat mission from a carrier 1943.
-
Walsh had already become the first all-Corsair ace by mid April '43, hadn't he?
-
Originally posted by Saxman
Walsh had already become the first all-Corsair ace by mid April '43, hadn't he?
He's a Marine pilot right?
I think the F4U still wasn't in widespread use on the US Navy carriers. until late 1944.
-
The first combat operation of the Corsair from a carrier was off the HMS VICTORIOUS on April 3, 1944, by the British Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm Number 1834 Squadron.
The US adopted the British landing technique and the first operational sortie from a carrier by the US was by VMF 124 from the USS Essex on December 28, 1944. There was widespread use of land-based F4Us in 1944, but not from carriers.
The F4U was essentially a USMC aircraft with Marine pilots shooting down 1,400 enemy planes. US Navy pilots scored 162 victories.
-
Uh, check your facts again.
VF-17 was operating off carriers as early as mid-1943 and proved the F4U was perfectly suitable for carrier use. They were shipped to land bases because it was easier for the Navy F4U squadrons to rely on the Marine Corps' established supply chains rather than specially provision a handful of carrier-based Corsair squadrons in a fleet full of Hellcats and F4Fs.
Also, VF-17 by ITSELF scored 160-odd kills. I find it hard to believe that of ALL the US Navy land and carrier-based Corsair squadrons, the Jolly Rogers succeeded in shooting down all but TWO of them. :P
-
Krusty,
Take a look here. It is a condensed version of the Naval Historic Records file.
Naval Aircraft Victories by Type (http://www.acepilots.com/planes/air_wins.html)
-
Rolex stated that the first COMBAT operation was flown by FAA Corsairs, and he's right. VF-17 never flew a combat sortie from the Bunker Hill. They were detached and transferred via a 'jeep' carrier to Guadalcanal. They then flew to New Georgia, where they flew their first combat mission under Marine Corps command on October 27, 1943.
My regards,
Widewing
-
After the Corsair became operational from carriers, another 570 some victories were claimed, Saxman. I should have clarified that, but was running out the door as I posted.
Sure, Corsairs were being flown off and on US carriers, starting with carrier trials on the USS SANGAMON on 25 September 1942, but I believe VMF-124 was the first US squadron to fly operations off a carrier, and VF-17 was the first US Navy squadron to fly the Corsair off carriers.
Those are the facts as I understand them. If there is something wrong with that information, I'm always ready to accept correction to it. I'm not in this for a fight, whatever is right is right. ;)
I understand Lt. Walsh was an ace in mid-May, 1943.
-
Actually, VF-17 DID fly at least one combat sortie from Bunker Hill. The took off from a land base, flew CAP over Bunker Hill and landed aboard. They later took off and flew either a strike/sweep or bomber escort then returned to the land base. :D
-
its all good:aok
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Rolex stated that the first COMBAT operation was flown by FAA Corsairs, and he's right. VF-17 never flew a combat sortie from the Bunker Hill. They were detached and transferred via a 'jeep' carrier to Guadalcanal. They then flew to New Georgia, where they flew their first combat mission under Marine Corps command on October 27, 1943.
My regards,
Widewing
Widewing I have to respecfuly disagree with you here. November 11, 1943, twenty-four corsairs from VF-17 left Ondongo to act as cover over Task Force 50.3 (U.S.S Bunker Hill, Essex, Independendce, and DD screen) east of Bougainville. At 2130 the shore based fighters began to land aboard the carriers (11 f4u's landed aboard Essex, 12 aboard Bunker Hill), one returned to Ondongo as he left late and was unable to find the others. Landing operations were completed in 15 minutes.
At 2330 the fighters were launched to provide cover for the Task Force as the strike group returned to the carriers. VF-17 destroyed several enemy aircraft with the loss of one of their own, but the pilot was recovered. A few of the pilots had to land back aboard the carriers to refuel as they were to low on fuel to return to Ondongo.
Now I'm not sure what constitutes combat carrier operations, but the fact that the aircraft of VF-17 had at least one trap, one launch, and saw combat I would believe that that would be combat operations from a carrier.
Granted the FAA corsairs were the first to carry out regular combat carrier operations, but not the first to carry out combat operations from a carrier.
My sources are from both "The Skull & Cross Bones Squadron" by Lee Cook, and "The Jolly Rogers" by Tom Blackburn.
Edit to name sources
-
Now those were F4U-1's correct? just making sure, since i think the only F4U-1A's (which were not designated as such yet) entered service only with the USMC during 43, some with water injection in late 43.
-
VF-17's, corsairs were indeed -1A's, they were received in September 1943, just before CV-17, (Bunker Hill) was deployed to the PTO.
I'm not sure if these aircraft had water injection, but they did have the raised seat, bubble canopy, and the starboard wing spoiler to improve stall characteristics.
-
VF-17 had 1As in late 43 as well. IIRC, a number of -1s already deployed were upgraded to "1A's" in the field
-
Here are a couple of famous photo's the VF-17 deployment on the Bunker Hill.
Definitely -1's, the cowl flaps are open in front of the canopy (Not sealed) as well as the birdcage and early war paint.
(http://www.bluejacket.com/usn/images/ac/f4u-1_vf17_bunker-hill_cv17.jpg)
(http://www.almansur.com/jollyrogers/vf17f4au1.jpg)
-
Those pictures were taken during Bunker Hill's shakedown cruise to Trinidad July of '43. The squadron was equiped with the F4U-1A before deploying to the Pacific.
-
1. F4U-4
2. F6F
3. F4F
4. SBD
5. TBM
6. Zekes
7. D3A
8. Kate
9< Every other plane :D
-
Don't know if anyone has a copy of Ronald Nijboer's 'Cockpits: An Illustrated History of WWII Aircraft Interiors' but there's a few F4U corsairs on .. well.. the F4U page. Turn to the page which labels all the parts in the cockpit and you'll find a couple of FAA Corsairs.
The picture is labeled 'Fleet Air Arm F4U-1's at Squantum, Massachusetts, 1943.'
If you look carefully, the aircraft has a windshield of an F4U-1A but the cowl flaps seem to go all around the engine, rather than having the top flap blocked.
What's weirder is that they're seeminly FAA Corsair II's (F4U-1A) but they seem to have full tip wings, rather than the clipped ones commonly seen on FAA Hogs.
-
I was reading some where that only the corsair I's, (F4U-1) had the non clipped wing, (I'm at work so I can't check my source material), but maybe they had the canopies converted to the bubble ones of the 1A.
I know that many of the US -1's were field modified to 1A specs.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
.... The F6F is described by everyone I know who has flown it (both veterans and current pilots) as being better named a ***** cat when it's flight characteristics are considered. .....
OK, I give up. Can I buy a vowel?
Toss me a few more letters, cause I cant think of the 5 letter word you mean.
-
Men and dogs both chase after it. Another name for a kitty cat. A real ***** cat.
-
still dunno:huh :huh :huh
-
Starts with a P
-
omfg im a dumb a** on this 1 gimme more letters
-
u
-
omg MORE pu??????
-
Originally posted by Movie
Which naval plane you think is the best in the game?
A lot of people are forgetting what this phrase said. Please allow me to translate it.
"Which naval plane in your opinion is the best in the game?"
Word.
Mark
P.S. I am partial to the FM2 but beleive the F4U-4 is one of the all time best
-
I like em all, but find the F4U-1 and F6F to be my favorites.
A question I have for some of you experts.... Does anyone know why VF-17 switched from Corsairs, to Hellcats, when they made their last cruise, after being the Navys premier Corsair squadron?
I've always wondered about this.
-
The original VF-17 was decommissioned 10, April 1944.
A lot of the original members of VF-17 went to VF-84 under the command of Roger Hedrick flying F4U-1D's aboard CV-17 (Bunker Hill).
VF-17 was reformed 18, April, 1944, after transitioning to the F6F hellcat, under the command of Lt. Cdr. Marshall Beebe. As far as anyone knows none of the original members went to this squadron.
Why the Navy did it this way is debateable, but there are a few that believe it is because of the reputation as Irregulars (for lack of a better term) that the original squad had.
-
I am pretty sure VF-17 was promised 1As before they went into combat, and they got them.
looked it up.
Page 22 of The skull & Cross bones Squadron VF-17 in WW2 by lee Cook.
ISBN0-7643-0475-5
The book has TONS of shots of VF-17 1As in the solomons, and they had them when they arrived, the reason stated was the 1A was much more suited to Carrier duty, they got to keep when they were forced to make the call, either fly land based or go to F6Fs.
The book also states VF-17 was a very important part of the improvements that went into the 1A.
Also was 1A ever a official designation?
-
Originally posted by SIK1
The original VF-17 was decommissioned 10, April 1944.
A lot of the original members of VF-17 went to VF-84 under the command of Roger Hedrick flying F4U-1D's aboard CV-17 (Bunker Hill).
VF-17 was reformed 18, April, 1944, after transitioning to the F6F hellcat, under the command of Lt. Cdr. Marshall Beebe. As far as anyone knows none of the original members went to this squadron.
Why the Navy did it this way is debateable, but there are a few that believe it is because of the reputation as Irregulars (for lack of a better term) that the original squad had.
Thanks for the info SIK1
-
What is the best bombing type plane that can take off from the carrier?
-
I would have to say the F6F hellcat is probably the best attack type plane that is available from a carrier. Only because they are easier to get off the cv when fully loaded than an F4U-1D. Both carry about the same ord load out, I think the F4U-1D can carry two more rockets.
If you mean actual bombers then I don't know, you will have to wait for someone with a little more knowladge in the subject than I have.
-
Originally posted by SIK1
I would have to say the F6F hellcat is probably the best attack type plane that is available from a carrier. Only because they are easier to get off the cv when fully loaded than an F4U-1D. Both carry about the same ord load out, I think the F4U-1D can carry two more rockets.
Every aircraft available on a CV can get airborne without drama from the deck spawn, fully loaded. There's never a need to taxi back.
To do this, drop full flaps and use WEP on the takeoff run. The instant you roll off the bow, raise the gear. As you build speed, start pulling up flaps in increments. Other folks will suggest you not use flaps until near the bow. Ignore them. Use full flaps.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Im surpirised to see the A6M5b ranked so low... IMO, its one of the best planes in the game. Awesome turning, good gun package, long legs, and for some reason I can pull an Immelman at 200mph IAS in it with no trouble at all, not sure if thats elevator responsiveness or energy retention, but its awesome. The only downside is speed and durability, but it seems to burn longer than any other plane. Oh... and compression is pretty bad, not that this is a problem in a turnfight.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Every aircraft available on a CV can get airborne without drama from the deck spawn, fully loaded. There's never a need to taxi back.
To do this, drop full flaps and use WEP on the takeoff run. The instant you roll off the bow, raise the gear. As you build speed, start pulling up flaps in increments. Other folks will suggest you not use flaps until near the bow. Ignore them. Use full flaps.
My regards,
Widewing
I agree with you 100% Widewing. I don't have a problem getting the hog off a cv, unless it's turning. I do hear a lot of people complaining about launching a heavy hog though, that is why I recomended the F6F.
-
Originally posted by SIK1
I agree with you 100% Widewing. I don't have a problem getting the hog off a cv, unless it's turning. I do hear a lot of people complaining about launching a heavy hog though, that is why I recomended the F6F.
Roger, understood.. :)
My regards,
Widewing
-
Now, if they were to give us the centerline 2000lber on the 1D, THEN we'd need to see catapults. ;)
-
Thanx for the info SIK1. And ill have to try and practice that method you mentioned Widewing.
-
Hi SIK1,
Sorry for the delay about the "first combat sortie" controversy. :)
I believe you'll find the conventional definition to be launching from a carrier, completing the combat mission and returning to the carrier.
-
The easiest way for me to get off a carrier with a heavy hog was told to me by an old friend in the navy. It is as follows:
1: 1 notch of flaps as the engine comes to full throttle
2: Another notch of flaps when the tail wheel leaves the deck
3: One more notch of flaps right before you leave the deck
This being said you use 3 notches of flaps...i found you gain speed quicker if you use this method.
This method never fails for me unless the cv is turning. In that case i use WEP and maybe 2 more notches of flaps:aok
Just thought that would help.
Banshee7
-
Originally posted by Saxman
Now, if they were to give us the centerline 2000lber on the 1D, THEN we'd need to see catapults. ;)
Don't forget Tiny Tim.
;)
Bronk
-
Originally posted by rednex21
The easiest way for me to get off a carrier with a heavy hog was told to me by an old friend in the navy. It is as follows:
1: 1 notch of flaps as the engine comes to full throttle
2: Another notch of flaps when the tail wheel leaves the deck
3: One more notch of flaps right before you leave the deck
This being said you use 3 notches of flaps...i found you gain speed quicker if you use this method.
This method never fails for me unless the cv is turning. In that case i use WEP and maybe 2 more notches of flaps:aok
Just thought that would help.
Banshee7
Well, during the 200+ deck runs I've experienced (C-1A and US-2B), you did not have a spare hand to play with the flap handle. You set flaps, released brakes and applied power.
Using full flaps makes every takeoff uneventful. There's never any reason NOT to use full flaps when heavily loaded.
Like I stated earlier in the thread, "Other folks will suggest you not use flaps until near the bow. Ignore them. Use full flaps." There's many pet theories, but only one tried and true, guaranteed method... Full Flaps.
My regards,
Widewing
-
My flaps are set on my joystick:aok
That makes it easy...I have found i gain more speed this way
-
Originally posted by rednex21
My flaps are set on my joystick:aok
That makes it easy...I have found i gain more speed this way
Yes, you may gain a couple of mph, but you more than offset that with reduced lift.
I also have flaps on my joystick.. ;)
Use whatever method you prefer, but just understand that speed is generally inconsequential if you have sufficient lift. Full flaps invariably means less risk of dipping a wing or causing an accelerated stall by applying excessive back pressure.
If you have landed aboard a CV and have rearmed, you will not need full flaps as you have an extra 200 feet of deck. But, I recommend full flaps when taking off from the spawn.
My regards,
Widewing
-
And...in my opinion...it is easier to land a corsair on a carrier than it is to land on a runway..unless im going 80 knots
-
Originally posted by rednex21
And...in my opinion...it is easier to land a corsair on a carrier than it is to land on a runway..unless im going 80 knots
Ground looping it?
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Using full flaps makes every takeoff uneventful. There's never any reason NOT to use full flaps when heavily loaded.
Which is a clear indication that full flaps model is BS.
-
Um. How?
Even the pilot's manual advised full flaps when taking off with extremely heavy loadouts.