« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 24   Go Down

Author Topic: Grumman Rules the Sky  (Read 14528 times)

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2013, 07:11:58 PM »
Here are  service standard performance documents for Bearcat & D-H Hornet..

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/F8F/F8F-2_Standard_Aircraft_Characteristics.pdf

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Hornet/Hornet_I_aircraft_data_card.jpg

Note: both documents list a 'combat' climb time to 20,000ft..

The F8F takes 5.5min, the Hornet does it in 4.0min..

Standard 'combat' initial climb rate for F8F is listed as 4,655ft/min, the Hornet makes over 5,000.

At 'combat' rating the F8F is using 2,500 hp/244sq/ft wing @ 10,337lbs for lift..

..vs Hornet which has at 'combat' - 4,140hp/361sq/ft wing @ 12,537lbs for lift.

Anyone want to 'do the math'?
« Last Edit: December 13, 2013, 07:25:12 PM by J.A.W. »
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline DaveBB

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1356
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #16 on: December 13, 2013, 08:15:59 PM »
The F8F had break-away wing tips in case the pilot pulled too many g's.  In reality, one wingtip would break away and the plane would enter an unrecoverable spin.  Was this massive design flaw ever remedied?
Logged
Currently ignoring Vraciu as he is a whoopeeed retard.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #17 on: December 13, 2013, 08:23:49 PM »
Quote from: DaveBB on December 13, 2013, 08:15:59 PM
The F8F had break-away wing tips in case the pilot pulled too many g's.  In reality, one wingtip would break away and the plane would enter an unrecoverable spin.  Was this massive design flaw ever remedied?

That was on the F8F-1. The F8F-2 didn't have them.

jaw, a twin engine a/c is in a different class.
Logged

Offline colmbo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
      • Photos
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #18 on: December 13, 2013, 08:40:17 PM »
Quote from: J.A.W. on December 13, 2013, 05:33:44 PM
Anyone with aeronautical knowledge care to discuss the effect on climb rate of
flying into a stiff headwind ?


LOL


My idiot alarm just went off.

Logged
Columbo

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return."

Fate whispers to the warrior "You cannot withstand the storm" and the warrior whispers back "I AM THE STORM"

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #19 on: December 13, 2013, 08:48:14 PM »
Well, m.m.   dunno what you are going on about class distinction-wise..

But..as far as true mil-spec time to climb  goes, yes the Hornet is a classy unit..

You could compare it to the F7F if you like..

However, if you run a hp/weight/wing area  ratio on the `51H at 90in boost/8,000lbs

It may well have the standard mil-spec Bearcrap whipped too..

& didn't the USN ground the 'Blue Angels' F8F's & relegate them to F6Fs due to
too many hot-dog airshow stunts going wrong/fatal crash mis-haps?
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #20 on: December 13, 2013, 08:48:54 PM »
Quote from: colmbo on December 13, 2013, 08:40:17 PM

LOL


My idiot alarm just went off.


Yup.  Once airborne it ceases to matter, hence the term "air speed".
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #21 on: December 13, 2013, 08:49:57 PM »
Quote from: colmbo on December 13, 2013, 08:40:17 PM

LOL


My idiot alarm just went off.


Yeah, & I'll bet whoever gave you that - really wanted to know - when you are around, huh?

Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #22 on: December 13, 2013, 09:10:25 PM »
& m.m., here is another single engine job that would give a true mil-spec F8F a hurry up..

( the Sabre-Fury, which had 3,000+ hp to burn, but alas - went unwanted by the jet-bent RAF..)

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Fury/Sea_Fury_Flight.pdf
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9434
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #23 on: December 13, 2013, 10:56:11 PM »
Quote from: Karnak on December 13, 2013, 08:48:54 PM
Yup.  Once airborne it ceases to matter, hence the term "air speed".

With the rare exception of wind shear, which probably wasn't around on a day when they were doing performance testing.

As others have said, headwind will affect distance traveled during climb and ground speed, and nothing more.

- oldman
Logged

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #24 on: December 13, 2013, 11:05:48 PM »
Are you sure?

What with the climb angle lift/drag/thrust/forward speed/vertical speed=climb rate factors?

& at the very least..
.. a stiff cold November wind off the lake is gonna let that big mill run at its best,
 air density/cooling/power output factor-wise..
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6770
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #25 on: December 13, 2013, 11:13:22 PM »
Quote from: colmbo on December 13, 2013, 08:40:17 PM

LOL


My idiot alarm just went off.


:aok  :rofl
Logged



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline Puma44

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6770
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #26 on: December 13, 2013, 11:16:50 PM »
Quote from: Oldman731 on December 13, 2013, 10:56:11 PM
With the rare exception of wind shear, which probably wasn't around on a day when they were doing performance testing.

As others have said, headwind will affect distance traveled during climb and ground speed, and nothing more.

- oldman

Better sit back down and relax, Oldman.  You're getting outta your league here.  :D
Logged



All gave some, Some gave all

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #27 on: December 13, 2013, 11:18:28 PM »
Hey, cheap shots make an easy smokescreen.. & you could show some formulae as proof..

That would be a bit too logical/scientific (work) though.. right?
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9434
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2013, 11:32:31 PM »
Quote from: J.A.W. on December 13, 2013, 11:18:28 PM
Hey, cheap shots make an easy smokescreen.. & you could show some formulae as proof..

That would be a bit too logical/scientific (work) though.. right?


Actually, we were sort of hoping that you might have some sort of formulae, or at least one formula, to support your contention that climb rate increases as headwind increases.  I, at least, desperately could use the education.

- oldman (can't believe I'm feeding the troll.  Hey, it's late.)
Logged

Offline J.A.W.

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 636
Re: Grumman Rules the Sky
« Reply #29 on: December 13, 2013, 11:43:44 PM »
Do you actually read the posts?

If you did .. then you would know that I invited discussion, & did not make any such 'contention'..

Discussion is not trolling, but posting data-less derision is..

Here is the mighty Sabre 7 , 3000hp for take off @ 3,850rpm - from a mere 2238cu"..

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Aircraft_Engines_of_the_World_Napier_Sabre.pdf
Logged
"Cybermen don't make promises..
Such ideas have no value."
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 24   Go Up
« previous next »