PDA

View Full Version : Corsair Vs P-51?



VF-3Thunderboy
03-22-2005, 02:24 AM
http://home.att.net/~historyzone/F4U-4.html

Good site, interesting info!

WOLFMondo
03-22-2005, 03:51 AM
F4U-4 best piston powered plane period? It doesn't really do fair or in depth comparisons.

Capt Eric Brown (who flew just about everything for both the US and British and most captured German planes including Me163 and 262) stated the best piston powered fighter was either the SeaFury or the Bearcat. The Bearcat had a better climb but the Seafury was a superior weapons platform.

FatBoyHK
03-22-2005, 04:08 AM
I think, if you really want to compare, it is more apporiate to compare F4U-4 with P-51H and P47M. P-51D is an early 1944, or even a late 1943 plane. P-51H and P-47M were already in mass production in 1945, just not early enough to make significant, if any, contribution to the war.

FA_Whisky
03-22-2005, 05:57 AM
Or compare it to a high boost P51d/k.

WOLFMondo
03-22-2005, 06:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FatBoyHK:
I think, if you really want to compare, it is more apporiate to compare F4U-4 with P-51H and P47M. P-51D is an early 1944, or even a late 1943 plane. P-51H and P-47M were already in mass production in 1945, just not early enough to make significant, if any, contribution to the war. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't you mean P47N? Why just compare to US aircraft? After all in 1945 there were 4 nations producing excellent piston powered planes all with very similar performance.

A fairer comparison of very late war planes would be:
Spitfire Mk22 or XIV
P47N
F4U-ID
Tempest V (or II, the first ones were built in 1944)
FW190D9
Ta152H
BF109k4
Ki-84
La7
Yak3

Post war:
P51H
P47N
F4U-4
Tigercat
Spitfire Mk22 or 24 or late Mk Seafire
Bearcat
Tempest II
Seafury
Dehavilland Hornet
La9
Yak3P

VF-3Thunderboy
03-22-2005, 11:15 AM
This is obviously a pro-corsair site, but it also gave interesting statistical and flight performance data. For example: At low speeds turning,the P-51d could fall out of the air, but the corsair could go 30 knots slower. Its some information from 'valid sources' good for flight comparison.

The Sea Fury/Tempest would have lost the turning battle, and the Bearcat didnt see combat, (but it was in the Combat Zone. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif )

This is just an "I love the Corsair" site.But its a pretty good one!

VBF-83_Hawk
03-22-2005, 05:50 PM
Corsair has a thick cord wing for carring loads and low combat. The P-51 is designed much like jet for light loads and high alt stuff.

fordfan25
03-22-2005, 06:16 PM
i my self feel that all in all the f4u was the top fighter in ww2. now remeber that i said ww2 not FB+AEP+PF dogfight missions. it may not have been as fast as some or as good a turner as some it might not of had even THE best range BUT, it was a great at alot of things at the same time. it had better ground attack than most med bombers it was still a VERY good fighter for AIR to AIR. it had the range and high alt performnce for escorting bombers yet still good down low "unlike the stang http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif".It could intersept incomeing planes.it was tough as all get out. could be used on carriers. planes like say the la-7,yak-3 ect were great dog fighters and intercepters but thats about all thay could do. if i was in a war and didnt know if i was going A2A or A2G or even escort then i would rather be in a hog. thing in the field you may not be able to get a freash suplie of new planes and IF your dedacated bombers wear all out of comision and you had a factory ,gun implacement or had troops that needed air support well, there you go. it was not a plane built to win a pissin contest it was built for war. in war you need to adapt to changeing needs and thats just what the hog could do better IMO than anything else. now if i KNEW i was going to be going up and faceing a single enemy fighter 1 on 1 and shoting him down in a furball all by my self so i got some points then id pick a la-7 or a spit.

all of that is IMO of course feel free to disagree just know you are wrong and im right lol J/K

Papa_K
03-22-2005, 06:21 PM
If you look at WOLFMondo's lists, they read like a wish list for the game.

Of the two aircraft in the original question, Corsair vs P-51, I'd say P-51 for air-to-air, Corsair for air-to-ground -- but that's only based on in-game as they are right now.

Corsair in the original PF release was fun in a slow-speed fight. It's lost some of that slow speed ability as patched. As it is now, it accelerates like a pig, wallows like a pig, but carries tons of ordnance.

The P-51 in game right now handles very well at high speed, breaks if you try to give it hard maneuvers over about 750kph (approx), and is fairly easily damaged.

Papa_K

SkyChimp
03-22-2005, 07:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
F4U-4 best piston powered plane period? It doesn't really do fair or in depth comparisons.

Capt Eric Brown (who flew just about everything for both the US and British and most captured German planes including Me163 and 262) stated the best piston powered fighter was either the SeaFury or the Bearcat. The Bearcat had a better climb but the Seafury was a superior weapons platform. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eric Brown apparently was paid by Grumman to speak kindly of their planes. He never flew a Corsair he liked, and never flew a Grumman he didn't.

fordfan25
03-22-2005, 07:38 PM
yea to be fair though i bet that bearcat was a real killer. i havent been able to find any thing about it other than spec sheets.......um skychimp got any links lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JR_Greenhorn
03-22-2005, 10:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Post war:
.
.
.
Spitfire Mk22 or 24 or late Mk Seafire <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but when did they go to the Spiteful/Seafang designations?

MrMoonlight
03-23-2005, 12:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JR_Greenhorn:
I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but when did they go to the Spiteful/Seafang designations? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They didn't. The Spiteful and Seafang were compeletely different designs that were developed independently of the Spitfire/Seafire series. The most notable differences being the use of a new laminar flow wing of tapered planform (dispensing with the characteristic elliptical planform of the Spit), new tail surfaces as well as wide-tracked landing gear for better ground handling.

Since overall performance wasn't significantly better than that of the late Spitfire/Seafire series and with military aviation moving into the jet age, the Spiteful and Seafang projects were cancelled with only a handful of examples actually being built.

VFA-195 Snacky
03-23-2005, 12:54 AM
For high altitude escort hands down the Mustang

For carrier and ground based multirole missions hands down the Corsair


Best fighter of WWII? Whichever Oleg upgrades in the next patch. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WOLFMondo
03-23-2005, 04:43 AM
I think the Corsair is nice but its wings fall off to quickly in a dive and it takes an age to accelerate. Seems to me like a P51, best at nothing but does everything good enough to make is a great fighter plane.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
F4U-4 best piston powered plane period? It doesn't really do fair or in depth comparisons.

Capt Eric Brown (who flew just about everything for both the US and British and most captured German planes including Me163 and 262) stated the best piston powered fighter was either the SeaFury or the Bearcat. The Bearcat had a better climb but the Seafury was a superior weapons platform. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eric Brown apparently was paid by Grumman to speak kindly of their planes. He never flew a Corsair he liked, and never flew a Grumman he didn't. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where did you read that? I always thought he would be one of the best pilots to give opinions on planes simply because he's flown so many different planes, probably more than any other pilot and written a number of books on his opinions.