Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Widewing on December 26, 2011, 08:04:02 PM
-
There's a reason why one Bearcat or another has held the world record for time to climb (standing start to 10k feet in 96 seconds, IIRC) for over 60 years. The F8F is wheels up and long gone before the P-51 is off the runway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5HfqMtksBI&feature=share (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5HfqMtksBI&feature=share)
-
Thats because it has a good AIR COOLED engine ;)... not one of merlin engines. And no laminar flow wing.
-
I so want an F8F or F9F now :(
-
I was incorrect as to the time to climb record... The time was 94 seconds. The F8F-1 used was fueled with 150 gallons of avgas and was not modified whatsoever, and the flight was made in 1946. The follow-on F8F-2, climbed even better. I've seen Navy test data indicating a climb rate in excess of 6,300 fpm. Remember, the F8F was a few inches shorter and a slightly smaller wing span than the F4F-4, and had twice the horsepower.... It missed combat by about 10 days.
-
Wow, I had no idea that it was smaller than the F4F.
-
To be fair, the F8F should be compared with the P-51H, not the D :P The D's climb was easily beat by its contemporaries, so putting it up against a late war monster like the F8F is pretty much pointless.
-
Widewing,
Is world record you mentioned specific to US Navy classic aircraft or is it actually a record for all aircraft? I'm pretty sure that modern fighters can climb a bit faster. ;)
Another reason why I'm doubting is I though that post war Spitfires (mk XVIII, 21, & 22) had the fastest climb rate of the class. I don't have the numbers for their climb rate other then that it was greater that 5000ft/min, so this information is not really evidence.
Does anyone have the numbers for their climb rates by any chance?
Thats because it has a good AIR COOLED engine ;)... not one of merlin engines.
What does the type of cooling have to do with the climb rate?
-
6300 fpm... wow thats sick.
A 7000lbs, 2000Hp 109 K-4 could do a bit above 5000fpm... Not easy to find a smaller plane with a more powerful engine.
Which engine that monster had? Or was it a "hot rod", lightened and pimped up for the record?
-
What does the type of cooling have to do with the climb rate?
The same as whether the wing was a laminar flow or not....not a dang thing.
-
The same as whether the wing was a laminar flow or not....not a dang thing.
But MAINER flew Piper Cubs that did 120mph :devil
How can you not be in awe of his knowledge and superior skeelz?
-
I'm sure his Piper Cub could also beat the P51 since it has an air cooled engine and not one of them laminar flow wings.
-
If we ever get the Korean Theater with F-86s and Mig-15s we need to add some of these post-war monsters. Did the F8F or F9F see combat in Korea? That climb was incredible, like it had a RATO on it or something.
No I'm just getting envious for unrealistic combat. I want...
F8F
F9F
Dornier 335 Arrow
Japanese Delta wing pusher (forget nomenclature)
Spit Mark 21 or 22
P-51H
???
Boo
-
Widewing,
Is world record you mentioned specific to US Navy classic aircraft or is it actually a record for all aircraft? I'm pretty sure that modern fighters can climb a bit faster. ;)
Another reason why I'm doubting is I though that post war Spitfires (mk XVIII, 21, & 22) had the fastest climb rate of the class. I don't have the numbers for their climb rate other then that it was greater that 5000ft/min, so this information is not really evidence.
Does anyone have the numbers for their climb rates by any chance?
The record was for all aircraft, set in 1946. The record was the world record until beaten 10 years later by a turbojet aircraft. It remained a record for prop driven aircraft until 1972, when Rare Bear beat it by 1.1 seconds. Rare Bear, a modified racing F8F-2, also holds the world closed course speed record for a prop driven aircraft at just over 528 mph average speed (fastest run was 541.2 mph).
The Navy's F8F-1 was unmodified and fully fueled. It used Combat Power for the climb. It averaged 6,383 fpm, which included the time required for takeoff.
I recommend that anyone interested in the F8F read this article by Budd Davisson...
http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html (http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html)
-
Unreal...
Was there some huge technological change that allowed that climb rate? Or was it just an absurd power-to-weight ratio?
EDIT:
Whoa... 3.5lbs per horsepower...
-
I recommend that anyone interested in the F8F read this article by Budd Davisson...
http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html (http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html)
thanks!
an amazing aircraft, for sure
-
Just read the pilot AAR. I WANT ONE!!!
Skuzzy, let's set about discussing rules for adding ubber monster birds that came within 10-days of combat. Perk it halfway between a Tempest and 262 and let's call it good. Or perk it one point about the 262, whatever. No reason we shouldn't add this bad boy...
Boo
-
If we ever get the Korean Theater with F-86s and Mig-15s we need to add some of these post-war monsters. Did the F8F or F9F see combat in Korea? That climb was incredible, like it had a RATO on it or something.
No I'm just getting envious for unrealistic combat. I want...
F8F
F9F
Dornier 335 Arrow
Japanese Delta wing pusher (forget nomenclature)
Spit Mark 21 or 22
P-51H
???
Boo
The F9F was a post war jet fighter... I believe you are thinking of the F7F Tigercat. Marine F7F night fighters were on Okinawa, flying local patrols when Japan surrendered, however no Japanese aircraft were encountered. Lucky for the Japanese.... The F7F was a very effective night fighter in Korea, eventually replaced by the twin turbojet F3D Sky Knight.
When Grumman brought the XF8F-1 and F7F-1 to the Joint Fighter Conference in October of 1944, the general conclusion of the many test pilots was that these were the two best fighters present (and this included the P-51D, P-47M, XF4U-4 and XF2G "Super Corsair").
-
Did the F8F or F9F see combat in Korea?
The F9F Panther (straight wing version of the F9F) did see combat in Korea. Watch the movie "Bridges at Toko-Ri".
-
The record was for all aircraft, set in 1946. The record was the world record until beaten 10 years later by a turbojet aircraft. It remained a record for prop driven aircraft until 1972, when Rare Bear beat it by 1.1 seconds. Rare Bear, a modified racing F8F-2, also holds the world closed course speed record for a prop driven aircraft at just over 528 mph average speed (fastest run was 541.2 mph).
The Navy's F8F-1 was unmodified and fully fueled. It used Combat Power for the climb. It averaged 6,383 fpm, which included the time required for takeoff.
I recommend that anyone interested in the F8F read this article by Budd Davisson...
http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html (http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepBearcat.2.html)
Roger, I first thought you mean that it was a record that still stands.
-
The same as whether the wing was a laminar flow or not....not a dang thing.
As far as I understand the wing shape will make a difference in climb rate. You can have a wing designed for tight turns and climbs or you can have a wind designed for high speed. Take the P-51 and Spitfire (Merlin variant) for example, both had the same engine and the difference in speed was still almost 100mph. There is no way the prop can make such a large difference so this also points at the wing.
-
I'm sure his Piper Cub could also beat the P51 since it has an air cooled engine and not one of them laminar flow wings.
Laminar flow wings generally to not create as much lift as a standard airfoil design. therefor your climb rate will in most cases be worse.
-
However a laminar flow wing also produces less lift induced drag.
-
Laminar flow wings generally to not create as much lift as a standard airfoil design. therefor your climb rate will in most cases be worse.
Life has squat to do with climb. Climb comes from excess power/thrust.
-
There is no way the prop can make such a large difference so this also points at the wing.
It just points to the total drag vs power available. The Mustang was a very clean design.
-
It just points to the total drag vs power available. The Mustang was a very clean design.
That too, but that clean Mustang can't climb as well as a Spitfire.
However I'd argue which one is cleaner. Spitfire also has flushed rebids and it's highback design is more aerodynamic.
-
That too, but that clean Mustang can't climb as well as a Spitfire.
However I'd argue which one is cleaner. Spitfire also has flushed rebids and it's highback design is more aerodynamic.
I'd think the wing differences would more than make-up for that in terms of drag.
-
I'd think the wing differences would more than make-up for that in terms of drag.
No, the difference is in weight. A spitfire weighs much less than a p51. As stated before climb == excess power, so reducing weight improved climb.
-
Lift has squat to do with climb. Climb comes from excess power/thrust.
** Edited for spelling
-
My K4 could pwn it.
-
No, the difference is in weight. A spitfire weighs much less than a p51. As stated before climb == excess power, so reducing weight improved climb.
I was talking in terms of aerodynamic "cleanliness," but yes I'm sure power-to-weight plays the biggest role.
-
That too, but that clean Mustang can't climb as well as a Spitfire.
However I'd argue which one is cleaner. Spitfire also has flushed rebids and it's highback design is more aerodynamic.
But, then you would have to argue drag coefficients, and the P-51D's CDo, despite being a larger aircraft, is significantly less than that of the Spitfire.
-
My K4 could pwn it.
Given equal pilots... The K-4 would be forced to get its kills via vulching. Can't run away, can't climb away, can't dive away and can't even hope to turn with an F8F...
-
Given equal pilots... The K-4 would be forced to get its kills via vulching. Can't run away, can't climb away, can't dive away and can't even hope to turn with an F8F...
BAM! Cease fire...I so want the F8F! Finally a bird that will help me overcome my many shortcomings as a pilot.
Boo
-
Given equal pilots... The K-4 would be forced to get its kills via vulching. Can't run away, can't climb away, can't dive away and can't even hope to turn with an F8F...
None of that worries me. :)
-
But, then you would have to argue drag coefficients, and the P-51D's CDo, despite being a larger aircraft, is significantly less than that of the Spitfire.
What's CDo?
-
BAM! Cease fire...I so want the F8F! Finally a bird that will help me overcome my many shortcomings as a pilot.
Boo
Just take the Spit14 out :aok
-
The criteria for inclusion to AH should allow for planes that were in production during the war. It's not the Bearcat's fault the Japanese gave up while it was enroute to pwn them.
-
It's not the Bearcat's fault the Japanese gave up while it was enroute to pwn them.
:rofl
-
Wide,
n
Nice vid,thx for linking it! :aok
What struck me,besides the incredible climb rate,was the length of the landing gear on the "cat". Seems pretty long for a navy bird,atleast to my eyes.
I also noticed the wing is very similar to that of the hellcat{F6F},in shape,how does it compare in reality? I know the hellcat had 1 of the largest wings of any single engine A/C,was wondering how it compares with the bearcats wing.
:salute
-
Morf I have the F6F, and the F8F both in 1/72 scale and the F8F seems dinky compared to the F6F. When I first got the F8F I thought it was out of scale, but it was close enough for me after I measured it to consider it in scale.
This is a shot of an F6F, F8F, and of course an F4U.
(http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff266/Radcam/f6ff8ftop.jpg)
-
The F8F was the Navy's solution to replace F4F's for small carrier operation. It was designed for max. takeoff performance. I think it had the same engine as the F6F's. The 51D and H aren't designed for max. takeoff performance. The 51's are designed to operate in significantly different conditions than a Navy fighther would be expected to.
I would love to see F8F's, F7F's, and 51H's in this game. However, I think the non-US fliers in this game would probably be humiliated as to the extreme performance.
-
The F8F was the Navy's solution to replace F4F's for small carrier operation. It was designed for max. takeoff performance. I think it had the same engine as the F6F's. The 51D and H aren't designed for max. takeoff performance. The 51's are designed to operate in significantly different conditions than a Navy fighther would be expected to.
I would love to see F8F's, F7F's, and 51H's in this game. However, I think the non-US fliers in this game would probably be humiliated as to the extreme performance.
Yes the F8F used the R2800 which was in the F6F
-
Given equal pilots... The K-4 would be forced to get its kills via vulching. Can't run away, can't climb away, can't dive away and can't even hope to turn with an F8F...
I wasn't under the impression that the F8F was spectacularly fast. I thought the Bf109K-4 was faster at best alt, not sure about on the deck.
-
Morf I have the F6F, and the F8F both in 1/72 scale and the F8F seems dinky compared to the F6F. When I first got the F8F I thought it was out of scale, but it was close enough for me after I measured it to consider it in scale.
This is a shot of an F6F, F8F, and of course an F4U.
(http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff266/Radcam/f6ff8ftop.jpg)
Thx Sik. :aok
Looks like they shrunk a hellcat and came up with the bearcat...... :lol
:salute
-
Thx Sik. :aok
Looks like they shrunk a hellcat and came up with the bearcat...... :lol
:salute
To me the F8f looks a lot like a 190A with slightly fatter wings. The fuselages are about the same size, and of course the F8f has that tall tail.
-
I wasn't under the impression that the F8F was spectacularly fast. I thought the Bf109K-4 was faster at best alt, not sure about on the deck.
The F8F-1's max speed was 421 mph using Military power @ 19,700 ft and 433 mph @ 17,200 ft using Combat power. Speed at Sea Level was 382 mph. This is based upon 2,100 hp MIL and 2,400 hp WEP. The most widely published test data for the F8F-1 used Military power only as there was no ADI fluid available at the test facility. This resulted in the 421 mph speed. Corky Meyer's notes (Corky was lead test pilot on the F8F program) provides Combat power data for best altitude and sea level. Essentially, the F8F-1 has the speed of the Tempest, better climb than anything in the game, and a turn radius not much greater than that of the FM-2. Like the F6F, the F8F has infinitely variable flap settings. Unlike any other Navy fighter, it also incorporated the NACA dive recovery flaps. Fuel load was 160 gallons internally and up to 300 gallons in drop tanks. It could carry two 1,000 lb bombs and a 150 gallon centerline fuel tank along with four 5" rockets.
Think about it.... It could run down just about anything down low. Its acceleration would be the best in the game, as would its rate of climb (excluding the Me 163). It would dominate below 20k. Its one weakness is the gun installation... The same as the FM-2. Later in the production run, it was re-gunned with four 20mm cannon (F8F-1B).
The fact is, that in the highly unlikely chance that HTC would model the Bearcat, it would have to be perked severely....
The F8F-2 could manage 431 mph using Military power and 447 mph @ 28,000 ft using Combat power. The F8F-2 could reach 387 mph at Sea Level. This is based upon 2,250 hp MIL and 2,550 WEP.
-
The F8F would severely unbalance the game. I'm glad its not added.
-
A direct comparison of P-51D and F8F-2 power loadings reveals why the Bearcat has such a startling climb advantage over the Mustang.
F8F-2 Empty weight: 7,650 lbs 2,250 hp Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Power loading 3.4 lbs per hp
P-51D Empty weight: 7,635 lbs 1, 720 hp Rolls-Royce Merlin Power loading 4.4 lbs per hp
-
There's a reason why one Bearcat or another has held the world record for time to climb (standing start to 10k feet in 96 seconds, IIRC) for over 60 years. The F8F is wheels up and long gone before the P-51 is off the runway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5HfqMtksBI&feature=share (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5HfqMtksBI&feature=share)
LOL. That was our birds at Thermal this year.
And yes, there are MANY reasons why the F8F got off and away logn before the mustang.
1. Most the hard numbers have been covered already. One that has been more overlooked than other though, take into consideration fuel capacities (wet weight, even though the P-51 in the clip does not have it's aux tank anymore (trust me)). :aok
2. One is blatantley made for carrier operations, the other for 2,000 foot runway conditions.
3. This is more of a 1 + 2 from above thing: the F8F sits twice as high off the ground, and has a propeller of almost equal-sized air-beating proportions. At this particular runway that this filming took place, it is called the "thermal airshow"... some *cough* carrier *cough* planes like taking off in a stiff breeze a lot better than others.
4. I am 80% sure, if I can recall from two months ago, that the two pilots that day were as far opposites as you can get, with different incentives of getting into the air and then back "home". :devil :rofl
a. "Mutha" I think is in the F8F. Besides his profession allowing him the leasure of showing up on the museum's tarmac with a $70-million 40-ton 6-month new Super Hornet a month later (he is the Commodore of Lamoore and the entire Pacific Fleet Fighter Wing), i believe this is the show that he got to take the Bearcat back to Lamoore afterwards and showoff around the base for a week (That thing was wheeles up before you can say "Iz cans borrows toy for week and takez tos F-18 fighter training baze!?").
b. The other pilot in the P-51 is a very nice and gentle fellow pushing I'd guess 70-years. You couldn't ask for a better pilot to make sure nothing gets rushed doing it right and to treat the one of those two planes which was only recently leased to our museum, lol (besides, the pony is the favorite of the two).
PS - That IS the same F8F that emergency glided/landed at Burbank Airport (now Bob Hope I think) a few years ago. Also I heard a rumor that one of our Yak3s finally flew again this past weekend.
-
LOL. That was our birds at Thermal this year.
And yes, there are MANY reasons why the F8F got off and away logn before the mustang.
1. Most the hard numbers have been covered already. One that has been more overlooked than other though, take into consideration fuel capacities (wet weight, even though the P-51 in the clip does not have it's aux tank anymore (trust me)). :aok
2. One is blatantley made for carrier operations, the other for 2,000 foot runway conditions.
3. This is more of a 1 + 2 from above thing: the F8F sits twice as high off the ground, and has a propeller of almost equal-sized air-beating proportions. At this particular runway that this filming took place, it is called the "thermal airshow"... some *cough* carrier *cough* planes like taking off in a stiff breeze a lot better than others.
4. I am 80% sure, if I can recall from two months ago, that the two pilots that day were as far opposites as you can get, with different incentives of getting into the air and then back "home". :devil :rofl
a. "Mutha" I think is in the F8F. Besides his profession allowing him the leasure of showing up on the museum's tarmac with a $70-million 40-ton 6-month new Super Hornet a month later (he is the Commodore of Lamoore and the entire Pacific Fleet Fighter Wing), i believe this is the show that he got to take the Bearcat back to Lamoore afterwards and showoff around the base for a week (That thing was wheeles up before you can say "Iz cans borrows toy for week and takez tos F-18 fighter training baze!?").
b. The other pilot in the P-51 is a very nice and gentle fellow pushing I'd guess 70-years. You couldn't ask for a better pilot to make sure nothing gets rushed doing it right and to treat the one of those two planes which was only recently leased to our museum, lol (besides, the pony is the favorite of the two).
PS - That IS the same F8F that emergency glided/landed at Burbank Airport (now Bob Hope I think) a few years ago. Also I heard a rumor that one of our Yak3s finally flew again this past weekend.
All of that said, the fact remains that the F8F (especially the -2 model), handily outperforms the P-51D in every metric except range and raw speed above 25,000 feet. My former CO, Navy Captain John McConnell, flew F8Fs during his first assignment. He tangled with Air Guard P-51s on several occasions and was adamant that the Mustang was badly outclassed in mock dogfights.
-
All of that said, the fact remains that the F8F (especially the -2 model), handily outperforms the P-51D in every metric except range and raw speed above 25,000 feet. My former CO, Navy Captain John McConnell, flew F8Fs during his first assignment. He tangled with Air Guard P-51s on several occasions and was adamant that the Mustang was badly outclassed in mock dogfights.
It would be cool to see them race to their limit and in stock condition, the odds would still be in the bearcats favor, but my point was you'd never come close to seeing the mustang in the clip push any known or otherwise limits (and it would be pushing the wall a good majority of the time against the bearcat).
Hmmm... clearly post-war, I wonder what model the AG mustangs were that your CO tangled with (wouldn't make too much a difference, but still, a difference)?