Aircraft comparisons
- Thread starter Moglwi
- Start date
I'm not aware of any systematic program, but I can't think of any mass-produced US or GB plane that the other NEVER flew.
In a few cases the non-designing country actually taught the designing country a few tricks - the way to land a Corsair on a carrier safely, for example, came from the Brits.
From what I remember the Luftwaffe had a special unit which flew captured allied planes on missions - KG200.
The Allies flew the hell out of each other aircraft. The British were looking to buy early on, and continued to do so throughout the war (hence the FAA flying version of the 4F, F4U, and TBF) and the U.S. was always looking for what it could stea- er... improve.
I beg to differ, they were outstanding examples of early 1930s aeronautical engineering. The problem was they were still flying in the 1940s. They weren't bad per se (pretty much anything made by Blackburn excluded), they were just very, very outdated.
The British did not need to push there Carrier Designs since the could buy the US Carrier Aircraft .
Yup. Same problem with the (US) TBD. It was a darn good torpedo bomber when it entered service. Notably, most of its negative rep comes from the same battle that its replacement first fought in (not that the TBF did very well in that fight).
Also given what the Swordfish achieved in combat, it is hard to class it as a bad aircraft. Mind you, I'm sure the FAA was thrilled when they started getting the later US carrier aircraft.
The story I love the most regarding the Swordfish was that when they flew against the Bismarck the planes flew so slow that the AA guns that had compensated sights had their shots go wide as a result.
There are examples of USAAF pilots flying aircraft built in allied and axis countries most often at the test ranges in Nevada. It was dead on that US manufacturers were always looking for new ideas from wherever they could beg, borrow or steal them. There is some controversy surrounding the Grumman Bearcat in this regard.
What happened more often is that engines were swapped around to improve the performance of existing airframes. The P-51 being fitted with Rolls Royce engines is the best example.
There are examples of USAAF pilots flying aircraft built in allied and axis countries most often at the test ranges in Nevada. It was dead on that US manufacturers were always looking for new ideas from wherever they could beg, borrow or steal them. There is some controversy surrounding the Grumman Bearcat in this regard.
What happened more often is that engines were swapped around to improve the performance of existing airframes. The P-51 being fitted with Rolls Royce engines is the best example.
What is the controversy about the Bearcat? I've never heard it and I thought I was pretty knowledgeable about aircraft development of that era. Would you mind passing the info on?
There is a school of thought that the design of the Bearcat was heavily influenced by captured FW-190 fighters in 1942-43.
I heard that, and I think its funny ... the Bear looks clearly like a bigger and more aerodynamic Hellcat ...
The Hellcat is actually a larger plane than the Bearcat though both aircraft have about the same loaded weight. The main difference is that the Bearcat is a smaller plane with a bigger engine. Both have the same designers so of course they are similar in appearance.
Meet the Hawker Seafury:
Often called the best naval prop fighter. The fastest too.
Raced in Reno against Bearcats and Mustangs regularly untill a few years ago.
The Griffon-engined Seafires weren't something to sneeze at either.
The Bearcat was basically an outgrowth of the Hellcat where everything was lightened or stripped off to improve acceleration and maneuverability.
It used the same basic engibne as the Hellcat (Pratt & Whitney R-2800) but weighed about 3000 lbs less (7070 v 9300 lbs empty weight) and had about 1000 feet per minute better climb rate (4500 v 3500)
The Bearcat was meant to be an interceptor while the hellcat was a general purpose fighter. I can't say I've heard the idea that the F8F was heavily influenced by the FW-190. I see it as a direct evolution of the Grumman design that extends back to the Biplane designs of the mid 30s. The Hellcat was directly affected by the capture of an A6M in the Aleutians and that possibly had an even greater affect on the Bearcat which was much earlier in development.
"The Hawker Sea Fury was a post-war development of the land-based Fury which received no orders. Griffon Seafires were also post-war. The fastest piston engined development of a naval fighter was the Bearcat, Rare Bear, and Conquest I. The FAA was only introduced to proper naval fighters because they fell heir to a French order for F4Fs.Meet the Hawker Seafury:
Often called the best naval prop fighter. The fastest too.
Raced in Reno against Bearcats and Mustangs regularly untill a few years ago.
The Griffon-engined Seafires weren't something to sneeze at either.
Meet the Hawker Seafury:
Often called the best naval prop fighter. The fastest too.
Raced in Reno against Bearcats and Mustangs regularly untill a few years ago.
The Griffon-engined Seafires weren't something to sneeze at either.
True but I belive if first flew in 1941 and did not reach production till late 1945
Anything the British got there hands was systematically tested at the Royal Aircraft Establishment Farnbrough. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Aircraft_Establishment
Cpt Eric Brown known as Winkle was reckoned to have flown more types of aircraft then any other pilot of the period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Brown_%28pilot%29
Cpt Eric Brown known as Winkle was reckoned to have flown more types of aircraft then any other pilot of the period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Brown_%28pilot%29