Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Stoney74 on January 08, 2008, 12:38:24 AM
-
Widewing,
I noticed on your website about the F4U-4, you mentioned that the Corsair could carry more ordnance than the P-47. Given the stock configurations of both aircraft, is this accurate? I know that during Korea, they would load up the Corsair to the gills, but was this more a result of operational experience or design? Had the P-47N been sent to Korea to bomb truck for the USAF, could you make the argument that eventually they would have found a way to hang another couple thousand lbs on the Jug as well?
I suppose the Spad ultimately puts this argument to rest :)
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
Widewing,
I noticed on your website about the F4U-4, you mentioned that the Corsair could carry more ordnance than the P-47. Given the stock configurations of both aircraft, is this accurate? I know that during Korea, they would load up the Corsair to the gills, but was this more a result of operational experience or design? Had the P-47N been sent to Korea to bomb truck for the USAF, could you make the argument that eventually they would have found a way to hang another couple thousand lbs on the Jug as well?
I suppose the Spad ultimately puts this argument to rest :)
I don't recall the P-47s ever carrying more than 1,200 lbs on any pylon/hardpoint. F4Us and P-38s were able to carry 2,000 lbs on their wing pylons. In the case of the P-38s, these loads were carried when bombing level, led by a droop snoot P-38. F4Us would carry a pair of 2,000 lb bombs and these were generally used to attack fortifications, bunkers and dug-in troops. To my knowledge, this load was not authorized for carrier ops, but for land-based Corsairs only.
My regards,
Widewing
-
p-38 did cary 2000ib bombs during ww2 there was a lead plane that had a norten bombsight lets say the bombadier was a litle cramped in the plane here is a photo i have a photo of a p-38 formation with bombs with a lead plane configured like the one in the photo
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/p38-8.jpg)
-
Originally posted by splitatom
p-38 did cary 2000ib bombs during ww2 there was a lead plane that had a norten bombsight lets say the bombadier was a litle cramped in the plane here is a photo i have a photo of a p-38 formation with bombs with a lead plane configured like the one in the photo
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/p38-8.jpg)
I beleive WW already explained this. The lead plane with the Norden was called a Droopsnoot.
-
F4U-1D also had a centerline rack for an additional 2000lber
-
Long time no talk,
I have a Vought Document that mentions the F4U-1D flying missions from hard runways in excess of 17,000lbs. Since the loaded aircraft weighed slightly over 12,000lbs that would mean a payload of roughly 5,000LBS. The F4U-4/5 could presumably carry more. The AU-1 had a 6,000LBS payload.
I have no idea what the payload capacity of the P-47 was but I imagine it is a function of wingloading, spanloading/liftload and power loading more so than the strength of the frame. I think the P-47 was more than tough enough to carry the load but it already had a long takeoff run at a standard loadout although I can't see the run being longer than the Bombers that operated from the same fields.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Long time no talk,
I think the P-47 was more than tough enough to carry the load but it already had a long takeoff run at a standard loadout although I can't see the run being longer than the Bombers that operated from the same fields.
Yeah, surely they could get airborne before those p-38's could!:D
donkey
-
DOA! Sup dude? You don't happen to be flying again and looking for a squad, do you? ;)
-
Originally posted by splitatom
p-38 did cary 2000ib bombs during ww2 there was a lead plane that had a norten bombsight lets say the bombadier was a litle cramped in the plane here is a photo i have a photo of a p-38 formation with bombs with a lead plane configured like the one in the photo
............................. .......
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
That should be enough to get you started. Let me know when you need more.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Long time no talk,
I have a Vought Document that mentions the F4U-1D flying missions from hard runways in excess of 17,000lbs. Since the loaded aircraft weighed slightly over 12,000lbs that would mean a payload of roughly 5,000LBS. The F4U-4/5 could presumably carry more. The AU-1 had a 6,000LBS payload.
I have no idea what the payload capacity of the P-47 was but I imagine it is a function of wingloading, spanloading/liftload and power loading more so than the strength of the frame. I think the P-47 was more than tough enough to carry the load but it already had a long takeoff run at a standard loadout although I can't see the run being longer than the Bombers that operated from the same fields.
The heaviest load I am aware of carried by the F4U-4B, was 2,000 lb center line, with 1,600 lb on the pylons, or 5,200 lb, This was carried by land-based Marine units operating in Korea. In WWII, Lindbergh did extensive testing with 2,000 lb on centerline and 1,000 per pylon (modified F4U-1A). This info can be found on the web here. (http://www.flightjournal.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=F999E8C39FCE47DEB4CDBABBFBF37179&nm=The+Magazine&type=PubPagi&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle+Title&mid=13B2F0D0AFA04476A2ACC02ED28A405F&tier=4&id=5EF2673E28CF4CD0AAFC2F35417301F3)
My regards,
Widewing
-
At the very least we're looking at 4000lbs of bombs. Didn't you or DOA post a Navy write-up or chart that gave provision for the 1D to carry 1x2000lbs, 2x1000lbs and 8xHVAR?
-
I doubt the wing set up would allow much more weight to be carried than what was accepted at the time on the P-47.
If you look in the center section through the gear well and unzip the canvas cover, you will see some extremely substantial structure (castings) that combined with the structure of the spar on the Corsair allow it to handle an excessive amount of weight and not suffer consequences. The fuselage hardpoint also benefits from the gull in allowing it to spread the weight out and not suffer adverse consequences. The 47 just does not have the benefits of this structure in it's wing design.
-
Thanks Bodhi. :)
The Corsair's design is really a wonderful example in how one simple change to accomplish one goal can have SIGNIFICANT consequences for the rest of the aircraft. Wish kitbashers would take note of that.
Vought's designers only gave her the gull wing to provide enough prop clearance, and yet the configuration decreased drag, the resulting change in airflow MAY have contributed to der Uberflappen, (as yet, I've seen no one here fully able to explain the substantial amount of lift the historical F4U's flaps generate) and as Bodhi points out, the resulting strength of the structure allows the wings to support a substantial amount of weight. Oh, and of course it's just dead sexy. ;) All of these were probably far from their minds at the time, or completely unexpected.
Of course, all that structural strength in the real bird just makes me wonder why Corsair wings pop off so easily in the game. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Saxman
Of course, all that structural strength in the real bird just makes me wonder why Corsair wings pop off so easily in the game. :rolleyes:
The otbd panels aren't all that strong in my opinion. Then again I am not an engineer. It seems that their strength is gained through the leading edge ribs skin and main spar. There really is no secondary spar on it. Otbd of the guns, the wing gets really sparse for solid structure and lacks the strength in a true metal skin as they are covered with fabric.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
I don't recall the P-47s ever carrying more than 1,200 lbs on any pylon/hardpoint. F4Us and P-38s were able to carry 2,000 lbs on their wing pylons. In the case of the P-38s, these loads were carried when bombing level, led by a droop snoot P-38. F4Us would carry a pair of 2,000 lb bombs and these were generally used to attack fortifications, bunkers and dug-in troops. To my knowledge, this load was not authorized for carrier ops, but for land-based Corsairs only.
My regards,
Widewing
Interesting note in the 82nd FG history and a photo as well regarding those droop snoot missions. They were set up with bomb pylons for 6 500 pounders, 3 on each side of the cockpit pod all inside of the engines.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Interesting note in the 82nd FG history and a photo as well regarding those droop snoot missions. They were set up with bomb pylons for 6 500 pounders, 3 on each side of the cockpit pod all inside of the engines.
It makes sense. The38's hard points are attached directly to the bottom spar cap and the spar in that area is reinforced to spread out the weight. Why not attach more pylons. We already know they could carry 2000 lbs on the single pylon, why not spread more pylons and carry more bombs.
As for the 2000 lbrs, Guppy, have you seen enough proof to know whether there was indeed a shortage that precluded the P-38 from carrying these weapons more?
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
It makes sense. The38's hard points are attached directly to the bottom spar cap and the spar in that area is reinforced to spread out the weight. Why not attach more pylons. We already know they could carry 2000 lbs on the single pylon, why not spread more pylons and carry more bombs.
As for the 2000 lbrs, Guppy, have you seen enough proof to know whether there was indeed a shortage that precluded the P-38 from carrying these weapons more?
Interesting to note, that in terms of photo evidence, I can't find any that show 2000 pounders on a 38. Most times it's 500 pounders. On occasion its 1000 pounders. I don't recall ever seeing mention of anything larger then 1000 pounders in a Group history and I have all of the 38 groups that have published histories.
As for the 3 pylon set up, the only group I've seen photos to support their use was the 82nd in the MTO.
Two below. First is their droopsnoot with 6 500 pounders.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/3bombs.jpg)
Second showing the 6 pylon set up with 4 500 pounders and 2 DTs.
(http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s199/guppy35/3bomb38.jpg)
-
that's awesome, thanks Guppy.
I wish we could fine some photos showing the 2000 lb eggs on them.
-
Saxman,
I dream of returning to AH however my dreams are on hold for the moment. I went and accepted a promotion that has pretty much ruined my life as I knew it for the last 1 1/2. Anyway one day I hope to poke my head back in. I have yet to fly the F4U-1A in earnest and I really want to take it up for a spin.
Widewing,
Here is the document I was reffering too. Apparently those pesky Marines don't always do what they are supposed to do. Over 5,000lbs of external ordinance is getting into 4 engine bomber territory. I don't suppose they were going very far.
(http://home.comcast.net/~markw4/F4Udrag.jpg)
-
(http://www.vought.com/heritage/photo/assets/images/db_images/db_4378_19.jpg)
This is from Korea but a heavy loadout regardless.