F8F Bearcat vs Zero, ME109, FW 190 How would it have done?

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Thu Jun 16, 2011 6:30 am

JDK wrote:

The Corsair was rejected for carrier operations by the US. The British were so desperate for an effective carrier fighter, they made it work as a carrier aircraft, and thus the USN decided to follow suit - after all they had to, as the Brits were, and the land-based Marines were showing what an effective fighter it was, even if it was almost as awful decklanding as the Seafire.

That's all in your Corsair 101, btw. :wink:

they even found that clipping the wings to fit into the british carrier hangers did not let the corsair lose any performance at all. Luckly the british showed how the landing approach should be done with the corsairs with that long wide turn, instead of just coming straight in.

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:40 am

touching back on the speed of the corsair and why it was faster and such was indeed the reasons i posted prior. Chance-vought using the inverted gull-wing design created a reduction in aerodynamic drag. The 90 degree angles of the wings allows the air to flow smoothly over the wing/fuselage joint, eliminating the need for a wing fillet. It also featured spot-welded external skins, further reducing drag. I'm not sure what Grumman did for their aircraft, but they were warriors as well. All great tough birds.

Speedy · **Posted:** Thu Jun 16, 2011 10:42 am

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

touching back on the speed of the corsair and why it was faster and such was indeed the reasons i posted prior. Chance-vought using the inverted gull-wing design created a reduction in aerodynamic drag. The 90 degree angles of the wings allows the air to flow smoothly over the wing/fuselage joint, eliminating the need for a wing fillet. It also featured spot-welded external skins, further reducing drag. I'm not sure what Grumman did for their aircraft, but they were warriors as well. All great tough birds.

Wow. And here all along I was under the belief that the inverted gull wing was just for prop clearance.

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Thu Jun 16, 2011 11:11 am

Speedy wrote:

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

touching back on the speed of the corsair and why it was faster and such was indeed the reasons i posted prior. Chance-vought using the inverted gull-wing design created a reduction in aerodynamic drag. The 90 degree angles of the wings allows the air to flow smoothly over the wing/fuselage joint, eliminating the need for a wing fillet. It also featured spot-welded external skins, further reducing drag. I'm not sure what Grumman did for their aircraft, but they were warriors as well. All great tough birds.

Wow. And here all along I was under the belief that the inverted gull wing was just for prop clearance.

well, that's true too! 13 foot prop needs some clearance!

Warbird Information Exchange

F8F Bearcat vs Zero, ME109, FW 190 How would it have done?

Who is online