Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Widewing on May 07, 2013, 08:35:22 PM
-
You'll like these.....
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/920169_591290900890282_362626277_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/459906_591290624223643_1565206470_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/468142_591290350890337_960611806_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/477316_607602072583641_1446412341_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/472988_581305595233299_890561220_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/464183_4640382248878_168417483_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/920615_3062493296652_440081553_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/919974_3061013859667_1938633896_o.jpg)
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/882461_3025764298450_1453895701_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/906574_3025502651909_1167896138_o.jpg)
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/885924_378046382302277_865339124_o.jpg)
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/860338_255873331213570_1999045017_o.jpg)
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/857855_152029178289096_572301305_o.jpg)
-
:salute
-
Gotta be a bit tough to slow down in an 86 enough to hang with that Peashooter :)
Even scarier to think that some Peashooters went up in the Philippines alongside those early P40s against the Japanese
Great pics. Wish I could have been there to see all those 38s up.
-
That all metal P40 is too bad, why not paint it war time colors
-
:rock
-
That all metal P40 is too bad, why not paint it war time colors
Those were most likely its war time colors. A lot of fighters went into the war without paint on them.
-
That all metal P40 is too bad, why not paint it war time colors
Maybe because it's a pre-war (1938) inline Allison P-36A (re-designated as an XP-40)?
-
Gotta be a bit tough to slow down in an 86 enough to hang with that Peashooter :)
Even scarier to think that some Peashooters went up in the Philippines alongside those early P40s against the Japanese
Great pics. Wish I could have been there to see all those 38s up.
it was really epic to be there. From what I could tell besides the j, and L, was atleast 1 Early model perhaps an F or a G.
My
pics
are
here some where.... :headscratch: :bolt:
-
Maybe because it's a pre-war (1938) inline Allison P-36A (re-designated as an XP-40)?
I thought 36's and 40's
were
cometly
different airframes? :headscratch:
Forget the designaion
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-36_Hawk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Xp_40.jpg)
-
it was really epic to be there. From what I could tell besides the j, and L, was atleast 1 Early model perhaps an F or a G.
My
pics
are
here some where.... :headscratch: :bolt:
Glacier Girl is a P-38F. Gotta love those early intake 38s :aok
-
Glacier Girl is a P-38F. Gotta love those early intake 38s :aok
it almost seems
like the early mods are
later due to how cleaner they look.
But the sound they made :O
-
Notice the Eagle on the 86 :banana:
We need the peashooter and the 36 :old:
-
I had no idea there was a flying P-26.
I want one.
- oldman
-
If the F7F Tigercat had seen service in WWII, iI bet it would be perkered in AH.
-
How could we not like them :D
Who are the skinny twins in the middle? :headscratch:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/920615_3062493296652_440081553_o.jpg)
-
How could we not like them :D
Who are the skinny twins in the middle? :headscratch:
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/920615_3062493296652_440081553_o.jpg)
Grumman F7F Tigercat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F7F_Tigercat)
460mph, 4,500 fpm climb rate, 40,400 ft ceiling, 4x 20mm cannon, 4x Ma Deuce. Sweeeeeeeeet.
-
:aok nice pics... Tigercat is awesome plane.
-
I cant get over how narrow the fuselage is, even taking into account how big those wasps are :confused:
-
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/464183_4640382248878_168417483_o.jpg)
Wow! Can you say new wallpaper!
Thanks for sharing WW!!!
#S#
Josh
-
all these pics would make great wallpapers
-
I cant get over how narrow the fuselage is, even taking into account how big those wasps are :confused:
Test pilots described the Tigercat as "two Bearcats strapped together."
They did see service in WWII. At least the night fighter version did. Two Marine F7F-2Ns flew a single night time patrol from Okinawa the day before the surrender, but did not encounter any Japanese aircraft.
The Navy's chief test pilot called the F7F, "the best fighter I ever flew", and he flew them all. He wasn't thrilled with the poor rearward vision, and the rudder was too small to fly it on one engine without extreme leg fatigue. That said, it's combination of speed, climb, range and firepower were unequaled in a carrier fighter. Published climb data is for MIL power, not WEP. Around 4,500 fpm in MIL power, jumping to nearly 6,000 fpm in WEP with 375 gallons of fuel at takeoff. About 380 mph at sea level for the F7F-1 using WEP. It was, and still is, a monster.
-
Yea the Tigercat & BearCat are two mean mean MEAN carrier fighters.
-
Didn't the RN shop for F7F's but decided to go with the DH Hornet? Was the Hornet a better performer or was it just a case of using a domestic AC?
63tb
-
I wish folks at HTC could make an exception and quietly add the F7F. If the 152 qualifies, we might as well get the Tigercat. :pray
It would be a hangar queen just like the latest additions .. for a different reason of course :)
-
I wish folks at HTC could make an exception and quietly add the F7F. If the 152 qualifies, we might as well get the Tigercat. :pray
It would be a hangar queen just like the latest additions .. for a different reason of course :)
Difference is the Ta-152 served in combat in WW2, the Tigercat didn't.
-
Difference is the Ta-152 served in combat in WW2, the Tigercat didn't.
Yeah, but it only takes a slight change of argument from "saw combat" to "was in service and flew combat missions" and we could get it ;)
-
Yeah, but it only takes a slight change of argument from "saw combat" to "was in service and flew combat missions" and we could get it ;)
The ship carrying the crew for VMF(N)-533 were enroute to Guam when the atomic bomb was dropped - they Flew via Iwo Jima to Okinawa arriving the day before the end of World war two.
It wasn't in squadron strength yet, and the crews haven't even flown one mission.
If HTC decided, then the F7F-2N's would be the one added in game.
Top speed of 403 MPH sealevel, 445 at 20,000ft. Max Ceiling was 40,600ft and range of 1790 miles on internal fuel, and a climb rate of 5,200 FPM.
If It did get added, HOLY perk mobile..... (as a joke I think all of the P38 Lightening crew would change that lightening in a bottle to Tigercats)
-
..... (as a joke I think all of the P38 Lightening crew would change that lightening in a bottle to Tigercats)
I think you misunderestimate how stupid us 38 pilots are, sir. :furious
-
I think you misunderestimate how stupid us 38 pilots are, sir. :furious
:rofl
-
Published climb data is for MIL power, not WEP. Around 4,500 fpm in MIL power, jumping to nearly 6,000 fpm in WEP with 375 gallons of fuel at takeoff.
Hmm...I don't recall seeing any documentation giving 6000fpm climb rate.
Here's published figures for War Emergency Power: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/F7F-1_Airplane_Characteristics_Performance.pdf (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/F7F-1_Airplane_Characteristics_Performance.pdf)
They list 4360fpm with 426 gallons of fuel onboard.
I doubt a 51 gallon decrease in fuel load would produce 1640fpm increase in climbrate.
-
Awesome photos Widewing. Thanks for sharing!
-
Even scarier to think that some Peashooters went up in the Philippines alongside those early P40s against the Japanese
A couple of Filipino pilots even scored a couple of kills in the Peashooter.
ack-ack
-
Hmm...I don't recall seeing any documentation giving 6000fpm climb rate.
Here's published figures for War Emergency Power: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/F7F-1_Airplane_Characteristics_Performance.pdf (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/F7F-1_Airplane_Characteristics_Performance.pdf)
They list 4360fpm with 426 gallons of fuel onboard.
I doubt a 51 gallon decrease in fuel load would produce 1640fpm increase in climbrate.
That figure is for the XF7F-1. Further down in the document is the climb chart for the F7F-1, which attained 4,250 fpm in MIL power (the production aircraft had a newer, high activity prop). In October 1945, the Navy did a test with an F7F-3. From a standing start, the aircraft reached 10,000 feet in 104 seconds. That's an average of 5,769 fpm, including the takeoff roll. An F8F-1 was also tested the same way (in 1946). From a standing start, it reached 10,000 ft in 96 seconds. This record stood unbeaten until Rare Bear edged it out (91.9 seconds, IIRC). That's averaging 6,250 fpm (including the takeoff roll). Like the F7F-3, this was an unmodified F8F-1, carrying ballast equal to the weight of MG ammo.
-
That figure is for the XF7F-1. Further down in the document is the climb chart for the F7F-1, which attained 4,250 fpm in MIL power (the production aircraft had a newer, high activity prop).
If the document would list XF7F-1 figures, shouldn't it read XF7F-1 instead of F7F-1?
Actually it lists the different weight configs/powersettings as 1-8 in the tables, "1" being the War Emergency rating/full internal fuel. In the climb chart it lists the only climb curve exceeding 4000fpm as "1". Also, looking at the chart it indicates 4360fpm, not 4250fpm which indeed was the listed climb rate of the XF7F-1. I think it is very clearly meaning WEP-rating for the highest climb rate.
-
You'll like these...
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/860338_255873331213570_1999045017_o.jpg)
For a moment, there, you had me... when I saw that G.55 I thought it was in the US... then I saw the Albatross' tail in background and realized it's the one at the Italian Air Force historical museum at Vigna di Valle! :lol
Great pictures, Widewing, thanks!
-
The Navy's chief test pilot called the F7F, "the best fighter I ever flew", and he flew them all.
Did he give any details on F7F vs. F8F? I'd love to know how those two stacked up against each other in the view of someone who flew both of them.
-
If the document would list XF7F-1 figures, shouldn't it read XF7F-1 instead of F7F-1?
Actually it lists the different weight configs/powersettings as 1-8 in the tables, "1" being the War Emergency rating/full internal fuel. In the climb chart it lists the only climb curve exceeding 4000fpm as "1". Also, looking at the chart it indicates 4360fpm, not 4250fpm which indeed was the listed climb rate of the XF7F-1. I think it is very clearly meaning WEP-rating for the highest climb rate.
If you look at the data relative to the aircraft serial number, you'll see what I'm talking about.
-
... An F8F-1 was also tested the same way (in 1946). From a standing start, it reached 10,000 ft in 96 seconds.
When you let that sink in ... for a prop plane that really is remarkable. wow.
edit: and to illustrate just how much things have moved on, a eurofighter fuelled and armed as an interceptor takes about that long from rest to 40k ...
-
If you look at the data relative to the aircraft serial number, you'll see what I'm talking about.
There's no serial numbers listed in that document that I can see?
-
There's no serial numbers listed in that document that I can see?
You are correct. Try this one:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/XF7F-1.pdf (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/XF7F-1.pdf)
-
Unfortunately, not everywhere in the world people appreciates old planes.... there are Third World countries (like Italy) where something like this can happen:
http://volosportivo.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/vergogna-della-piu-profonda/
I'm ashamed of this country....
-
Gotta be a bit tough to slow down in an 86 enough to hang with that Peashooter :)
In the first picture you can see the F86 has a few degrees of flaps dialed in.
-
You are correct. Try this one:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/XF7F-1.pdf (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f7f/XF7F-1.pdf)
Yep, that doc lists an F7F-1 (No.80262) having an inital climb rate of 4250fpm at military power. WEP increases the total power output by ~600hp.
I must say that, without any documentation regarding the time-to-climb test to 10000ft, I just can't see 1750fpm increase climb rate obtainable with a power increase from 4200hp to 4800hp.
At WEP this F7F-1 would have a power loading of 4.46lbs/hp which is slightly better than Spitfire Mk.XIV at 18lbs power setting for example (4.60lbs). When Spitfire manages an 4700fpm initial climb rate, 6000fpm from F7F-1 is very very hard to believe without any detailed documentation. The prop effiency and the contours behind the prop obviously have a great deal of effect here but the difference is so huge. I haven't been able to find any proper documention for this experiment, I'd really be interested in reading about it further.
(Spitfire docs here: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-XIV.html (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-XIV.html))
-
Yep, that doc lists an F7F-1 (No.80262) having an inital climb rate of 4250fpm at military power. WEP increases the total power output by ~600hp.
I must say that, without any documentation regarding the time-to-climb test to 10000ft, I just can't see 1750fpm increase climb rate obtainable with a power increase from 4200hp to 4800hp.
At WEP this F7F-1 would have a power loading of 4.46lbs/hp which is slightly better than Spitfire Mk.XIV at 18lbs power setting for example (4.60lbs). When Spitfire manages an 4700fpm initial climb rate, 6000fpm from F7F-1 is very very hard to believe without any detailed documentation. The prop effiency and the contours behind the prop obviously have a great deal of effect here but the difference is so huge. I haven't been able to find any proper documention for this experiment, I'd really be interested in reading about it further.
(Spitfire docs here: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-XIV.html (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-XIV.html))
I think that the missing item is the Navy's change-over to AN-F-33 115/145 octane fuel. It was required for the C series R-2800s to reach maximum combat boost safely, and beginning in late April of 1945, 115/145 entered the fleet distribution system. Those aircraft requiring it included the F4U-4, F8F-1 and the two F7F versions in service. The F8F and F7F that set the climb records were doing so with the 115/145 fuel and at least 72" of MAP.
-
and at least 72" of MAP.
Yikes!
- oldman
-
Yikes!
- oldman
The same as the P-47M and N.... The P-51H was rated for 90 inches MAP!
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/p-51h-8284.html (http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/p-51h-8284.html)