F4U Takeoff problem

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

..and they were made in times, where Corsairs FMs where still quite optimistic.
And maybe they should be some challenge indeed - if you learn how to start from a CVE, then you will do it from a CV with a smile.

However, further tips for take of with F4U from CVE:

1. Use tailwheel lock so you don't have to use much rudder in the beginning of the acceleration

2. Push stick forward to early lift the tail (keep calm and sensilbe, when it happens)

3. Open flaps shortly before leaving the deck and maybe open them to landing config (ground lift effect will happen over the water, at the deck the flaps only slow you down)

4. Its normal that you sink lower after leaving the deck, so don't over-react trying to pulling too high - at that point you need speed more than height (paradox, I know)

5. Close radiators and cockpit and set mixture to 120% - every little bit can help!

[The Stalker]

Thanks, just one last question since we're at it. What exactly does the 120% mixture setting do?

I always thought it simply pumped more fuel that wasn't used but cooled the engine. Does it also develop more power? When should I use it generally?

[horseback]

Originally Posted by IceFire

If I'm not mistaken, those were all much larger than the one class of CVE that we have from Pacific Fighters.

The Wildcat may have been a bit of a handful but it was still the aircraft of choice for these tiny pocket carriers. At the battle of Leyte Gulf it was a few Wildcats and Avengers from the CVE's of Taffy 3 that held back a much larger force. There was no Hellcat or Corsair employed from these carriers.

Well, let's start with a comparison to the TBF, which usually operated off those CVEs with the Wildcat; powered by an R-2600 generating about 1,900 horses vs the 2,000+ hp R-2800 which powered the Corsair and Hellcat. The Avenger's empty weight is 2,000 lbs heavier than the Corsair's, and it was usually heavily loaded with fuel and bombs, rockets or torpedoes on takeoff. A fully internally laden Avenger carried about 16,500 lbs with a wing area of 490 square ft; a loaded clean Corsair weighed in at 10,500 lbs with a wing area of 314 square ft, which works out to less than one pound (less than .5 kg) difference in weight per square foot of wing area with an extra 5-10% of takeoff power

I think that we should also remember that CVEs were the primary means of supplying replacement aircraft to deployed carrier task groups in the last 18 months or so of the Pacific war; they routinely flew replacement Corsairs, Hellcats, Helldivers and Avengers from the jeep carriers to the fast big carriers when the big boys started running short of aircraft before their combat tour was over. It was (and is still) actually far easier to take off from a smaller deck than it was to land.

They put Wildcats on those little carriers for two reasons: they could more safely land on those smaller decks and they took up less space while still capable of performing the necessary light CAP, escort and ground attack functions, not because they could take off from them more easily.

cheers

horseback

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

3. Open flaps shortly before leaving the deck and maybe open them to landing config (ground lift effect will happen over the water, at the deck the flaps only slow you down)

That's not right.

That's not physics.

It may be how to make a flight sim, but it isn't what would happen in the real world. In the real world, you would get surface effect over any non-porous surface (i.e. not a net with air below it, but you wouldn't try to land on that anyway).

[JtD]

Originally Posted by The Stalker

Thanks, just one last question since we're at it. What exactly does the 120% mixture setting do?

I always thought it simply pumped more fuel that wasn't used but cooled the engine. Does it also develop more power? When should I use it generally?

To my knowledge, it only cools. It doesn't appear to increase power output or fuel consumption. I use it to run the engine cool at sea level.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

That's not right.

That's not physics.

It may be how to make a flight sim, but it isn't what would happen in the real world. In the real world, you would get surface effect over any non-porous surface (i.e. not a net with air below it, but you wouldn't try to land on that anyway).

I think flaps do generate lift on the carrier deck, too. But they also create drag -slowing you down a little. As you dont need lift on the carrier deck, you don't get any advantage from extending flaps early. As you can't extend them in an instant you need to compromise between drag and lift flaps create - and extend them on the way to the deck edge.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Exactly.

Don't try my tips in real life!

[Plane-Eater]

The obvious solution here is to implement deck catapults the same way the ships had (and depended on) them in real life...

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by horseback

Well, let's start with a comparison to the TBF, which usually operated off those CVEs with the Wildcat; powered by an R-2600 generating about 1,900 horses vs the 2,000+ hp R-2800 which powered the Corsair and Hellcat. The Avenger's empty weight is 2,000 lbs heavier than the Corsair's, and it was usually heavily loaded with fuel and bombs, rockets or torpedoes on takeoff. A fully internally laden Avenger carried about 16,500 lbs with a wing area of 490 square ft; a loaded clean Corsair weighed in at 10,500 lbs with a wing area of 314 square ft, which works out to less than one pound (less than .5 kg) difference in weight per square foot of wing area with an extra 5-10% of takeoff power

I think that we should also remember that CVEs were the primary means of supplying replacement aircraft to deployed carrier task groups in the last 18 months or so of the Pacific war; they routinely flew replacement Corsairs, Hellcats, Helldivers and Avengers from the jeep carriers to the fast big carriers when the big boys started running short of aircraft before their combat tour was over. It was (and is still) actually far easier to take off from a smaller deck than it was to land.

They put Wildcats on those little carriers for two reasons: they could more safely land on those smaller decks and they took up less space while still capable of performing the necessary light CAP, escort and ground attack functions, not because they could take off from them more easily.

cheers

horseback

Makes sense... do you know if there were any operational requirements for takeoff? I mean, I can get a Corsair off the deck of even the tiny CVE's in a Corsair so long as their is sufficient speed. Presumably they had some requirements for turning into the wind?

In terms of the training missions... an Essex class still represents the most typical carrier ops for a Corsair. Especially if you wanted to train with any kind of ordinance under wing.

[horseback]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Makes sense... do you know if there were any operational requirements for takeoff? I mean, I can get a Corsair off the deck of even the tiny CVE's in a Corsair so long as their is sufficient speed. Presumably they had some requirements for turning into the wind?

In terms of the training missions... an Essex class still represents the most typical carrier ops for a Corsair. Especially if you wanted to train with any kind of ordinance under wing.

ANY (intentional and authorized) carrier takeoff or landing was done with the flattop steaming full speed into the wind; the bigger carriers not only boasted a bigger deck (and remember that you actually only used about half the deck to either take off or land), but they were usually one of the fastest ships in any given task force. Today, a nuclear carrier is capable of a higher sustained speed than any other ship in the surface fleet, so the requirement remains in effect.

The jeep carriers were not nearly as fast, so the prevailing wind became more critical for aircraft operating off of them; into the wind, the aircraft's airspeed is that much higher while it is moving that much slower plus the deck's speed relative to the deck. That gives you a higher safety margin when landing on a postage stamp. Fortunately the Pacific usually has a lot of wind blowing about; I spent three years on a Fast Frigate out of Pearl, and I can remember only about three or four days at sea that I could describe as windless. A carrier going 25-30 knots into a 15 knot wind (which is about average, as I recall) subtracts 40+ knots from the speed you need to get into the air and adds that 40+ knots to your margin when you land.

Before the jet operations of the late forties-early fifties, catapult takeoffs were fairly rare (and I don't think that the escort carriers even had catapults). 'Cat' shots are kind of stressful on the old airframe, especially the sorts we had back in the day, so Air Group Commanders were not eager to add any additional risks to their pilots and aircraft. Jarring stuff loose is a lot less critical when you land, but banging and shaking your aircraft around on takeoff was rightly considered just asking for trouble.

cheers

horseback