JohnB wrote:
Chris Brame wrote:
I wonder how much damage an F3F could have absorbed in combat and survive, as opposed to an F4F?
Their fuselage structure looks pretty comparable.
Wings are a different matter. And the F3F did not have wing tanks, which could reduce vulnerability in combat.
Initially the fuselages were identical, the XF4F being a biplane and iterative development of the F3F. The Navy wanted a monoplane, so the XF4F lost its top wing, and enough of its maneuverability to lose out to the Buffalo. Redesigned wings and tail - and a horsepower increase - led to the F4F we know.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
