No one does an warbird deep dive better than greg, no plane more worthy of one than the Corsair

I’m a retired airline pilot and when I was learning to fly in 1961 I remember a group of F4 U s rotting at Tamiami airport Had I bought one I’d be rich now but at 16 that would not have been possible

I love the comment about the Yak-9s: “Didn’t bother dropping ordinance before engaging” 😂

I have degrees in applied psychology and industrial psychology which are geared toward human factors. I remember one story I was told in class, which may be apocryphal, about the placement of the flap lever and ejection seat lever next to each other in the early F-104 Starfighters. Supposedly this resulted in at least one accidental ejection during takeoff. If nothing else, the idea impressed upon me the importance of getting the cockpit layout right. This equally applies to repair and maintenance. I recall a tragic incident when I was an Air Force Major that cost two lives. An elevator control line was hooked up backwards because access to it was through a blind hole and done by feel. The T.O. (Technical Order) contained an error and the follow-on inspection was improperly done. The pilot also failed to conduct an adequate system check during pre-flight and only discovered he had a control problem during his takeoff roll. He was unable to correct it, crashed, and was killed. The subsequent investigation led to the planned court-martial of the mechanic. However, he committed suicide out of grief before the board could meet. Yes, human factors is far more important than many people realize.

I'd love to see a series on the P-40 family.

Hi Greg, very minor correction on one point. The piston-powered A-1 Skyraider also scored not one but two air to air kills against jets in Vietnam, once in '65 and again in '66. I believe the victims were MiG 17s or 19s. Love the video!

My mother-in-law, Helen Minor Black-Thompson, was a "Rosie The Riveter" during WWII at the Goodyear Aircraft factory in Akron Ohio during the war years. She was a riveter on the tail sections of the F4U Corsair.

The first thing you lose to the cold is your fine motor skills. A heater is an absolute necessity for fighter.

I wanted to add that the early access for Patreons is nice, but watching without ads is really, really nice. Thanks

Wow that is the FIRST picture I've seen of a full WW2 hangar deck. Holy CRAP.

I had the privilege of sitting in an F4U-5 cockpit back in 2007 at Oshkosh. I walked by the plane and stopped to admire it. The pilot was sitting under the nose under the shade. Since it was my absolute favorite plane, I was able to have a detailed conversation about it and he trusted me to sit in it. I acted casual about it, but I was ecstatic. My friend took a few pictures of me in the cockpit - check that one off my bucket list. Thanks for all the detailed videos you did on my favorite plane. I was born too late to fly one, but late enough to have access to amazing content like yours on the web.

Thank you for (a) covering the importance of ergonomics, (b) how any design is a series of tradeoffs, and (c) how accidents accounted for many aircraft losses.

These are indeed superior videos that demonstrate how "regular" media sucks. Hats off to Greg! Greetings from Portugal.

I had not realized how advanced the -5 was compared with the previous versions until I worked on a -5 for 2 years. A very impressive machine!!!

Just this morning I listened to a radio interview called "World of Aviation" They interviewed a guy who flew Rare Bear at Reno for 3-4 years. He raced there a total of 18 times. He said the Sea Fury was by far his favorite aircraft. He now owns one.

An F4U was the first WWII warbird I ever saw in person, when I was maybe 4-5 years old. It was LOUD.

17:05 case in point: Hawker Typhoon Between the wings blowing off, tails falling off, carbon monoxide poisoning, engine failures, accidents, etc. a lot of airplanes were lost. Another example, Mustang MkI/Ia. In the first 18months of combat operations with the RAF, only 8 were shot down by AAA, Flak, or enemy fighters. All of the rest lost were due to accidents, or hitting things at low altitude (trees, buildings, hills, telephone poles, wires, a fence...).

The Corsair with the WK tail letters was from VMF-224, I was in that squadron in the late 60s as an A6-A plane captain. It was VMA-aw-224 at that time, but it was good to see it in this excellent presentation.

2700hp! Monster 👹

I remember getting excited about it being ba baa black sheep nite as a kid. I believe that show saved an encouraged the restoration of many wrecks. The f4u was not well known before the show

The Naval reserve unit in St. Louis, MO in the late 40's and early 50's flew air defense missions with radar equipped - 5's.

Fell for the F4U as a kid watching Black Sheep Squadron. I also have bee a Navy fighter fan F4U, F-4 Phantom and of coarse F-14 Tomcat!

One of the greatest joys I get watching your videos is seeing all of these incredible photos I've never seen before.

Nicely done, Greg, as usual. Not sure if dad ever flew a dash 5, though he trained for nearly a year in the dash 4, waiting for the invasion of Japan that never arrived. While working for McDonnell and flying the XF-85, F2H, XF-88, etc. he did climb into a Corsair of some type to fly over our suburban house one day. I have no idea what year it might have been - maybe 1949 or 1950. There was a naval reserve unit at Lambert Field in St. Louis, where McDonnell was located, and dad had 500 hours in the dash 4, so he must have persuaded someone to let him borrow a Corsair for an hour or two. Mom made a point of getting us kids outside to wave from the back yard, and dad waggled the Corsair's wings when he flew over, but I was 4 or 5 at the time, and not paying attention to armament types or cowl ducting. Not surprised that Vought tilted the engine down a bit for visibility with the dash 5. The Hellcat that dad flew in combat in 1944 was famous for its tail-down attitude in level flight because Grumman built it with, I think, a 3° downward tilt to the engine, and for the same visibility purpose.

I'm actually addicted to your awesomely researched videos. Yours and Flight Dojo's. The real magic of internal combustion engines. Thank you for your work, these videos are IMO a reason why educational content should be not only in private KZfaq hands. It's too important. Nowhere else is this information this dense, this good researched, from primary sources available. As I said, I'm addicted. I should go to sleep for I gotta get up early tomorrow, but I HAVE to watch this first!

Thanks for setting us straight about the small weight of cockpit heaters.

Love the Superprop Series, excellently researched. And I'll always watch a new video about the F4-U Corsair, I still have lots to learn about the different variants. Cheers Greg

Absolutely one of my favorite WWII aircraft. Thank you for explaining so much about this beauty with its distinctive design.

The F4U Corsair is my all time hands down favorite aircraft from WW2. The reversed gullwing with air intakes at the wing root giving it is unmistakable whistle. Love it man whst great looking & performing aircraft.

The picture at about 27:55 showing 10 F4U's tied down opposite each other appears to be an example of "wind milling". This was when carrier captains used their prop planes as makeshift side thrusters to dock the carrier. Needless to say the engines were prone to overheating when run up while the plane was stationary, and the process was detested by the aircraft maintenance chiefs.

I would be very interested in the story of the -6, -7 and AU-1 versions of the Corsair. These airplanes represented the beginnings of the dedicated attack role that became the A-1 Skyraider, A-4 Skyhawk, A-7 Corsair II and Grumman A-6 Intruders. I was in VA-52 an A-6 Squadron aboard the USS Kitty Hawk during the 70s. Today the Navy has come full circle back to the F/A-18.

This is such a great channel.. thanks Greg. I realize you could have just collected those manuals and traded/sold them at trade fairs or on the internet and most of us would never have had the opportunity to learn about all this fascinating information. 🙂

I was lucky enough to see an actual F4 Corsair at an air show recently, at Scone,NSW,Australia. Really impressive hearing those big radial engines under load. As always, thanks Greg for excellent, technically informative videos on these superb machines and their evolution. You are correct about the battle between aircraft sophistication of ergonomics and cost in weight and/or complexity. Stanley Hooker of Rolls Royce had a customary exchange with Sir Sidney Camm of Hawker where they humorously derided each others planes and engines as being in conflict with mutual requirements. Then we have the absurd madness for example, of the mid war change to the Spitfire, where the Altimeter was suddenly changed to read elevation "backwards".

I spoke to a Koreans war Corsair pilot and he told me he could also smoke a P51 When they would play. He had the 4 20mm plus the radar. He got caught in a N. Korean flak trap one night and the plane got out of it with no damage and hurt them back. He became one of my hero's because the Corsair is my favorite Aircraft. I would side the him over a SEA FURY. (-: Great presentation Greg

Outstanding video, Greg! It always impressed me that the FW 190 and, later, this aircraft had FADEC before FADEC was possible...if that makes any sense. As for weight, what comes to mind is Saburo Sakai's memoir, Samurai. The Japanese were weight-obsessed for a reason, but thinking that pulling the radio and leaving the parachute behind *improved your survival chances* owing to better maneuverability is perhaps more of a cultural viewpoint than a purely practical one.

Hello Greg, a small detail/addition regarding flooring in a cockpit. When you manage to get yourself in a negative g manouvre. Loose objects like the sand from your boots can come flying into your eyes. Thus a cockpit with flooring is so much easyer to keep clean. Tip from a glider pilot. And once again thank you for the great video

This is some of your absolute best work, Greg. You might be the best KZfaqr out there.

Best thumbnail Ive seen in a while. I genuinely said holey sh**t while processing what it meant

First time listening to your stuff. I gotta say..your analysis is absolutely fantastic, and spot on. You Sir, are a Master of your Craft Very informative...and entertaining. Thanks for the hard work. May the "BlackSheep" love for Ever!! Semper Fi !!

Unrelated, just had yet another person on Facebook claim the Lancaster was the first ever nuclear bomber. I corrected him and linked your video and challenged him to prove otherwise.

I love to see Greg's productions. I am a long ago retired Navy Aviator who loved my post maintenance test job and Quality Assurance Officer/Aviator job. Prior to that as an enlisted Marine I was assistant head of maintenance for deployed Harrier jets. I loved it. Sometimes I think Gregg has a PhD in Aviation Fuels Systems Engineering. And he seems to have worked hard, for years getting his hands on WW2 aircraft maintenance materials. But still is the mostly untold story of fuels development for aviation in WW2. I learned a lot about fuel systems metering into jet engines trying to figure out why some of our planes would go faster then others.

When Chuck Yeager was asked by General LeMay on the high altitude lateral instability of the MiG-15, Yeager responded, _"It's just bad enough for the cannon fire to hit a B-36 wingtip to wingtip."_ Yeager was _not_ a part of the bomber mafia. The F4U-5 would have made mincemeat out of the B-36.

As a teenager, areas of Phoenix,Az were basically scrap/junk yards('68-72) alot of this 'scrap' was old warbirds of WW2 vintage.went onto one scrap yard and be hold saw 3 maybe 4 Corsairs sitting on their wheels on the yard. Not knowing their worth, I sat in one cockpit and looked at the full array of cockpit. Now I'd wish I had written down the serial numbers of the airframes and engines for then the Confederate Air Force.

Thank you, an awesome video again. About the cockpit re-design adding weight to the whole aircraft, I have a couple things to mention on top of the things already mentioned. When you design an aircraft, and you factor in ergonomics to begin with, a lot of 'human factors compromise', in this case specifically an addition of weight, can be used for other gains. German designs, for instance, can have two largely un-noticed benefits in this regard. First, the cockpit floor on the 190 adds to overall structure. Even the airframes that predate monocoque construction can benefit from this. Both of Mitsubishi's relatively lightweight fighters - the A6M Zero and the J2M Raiden - had cockpit floors to begin with. Note, that A6M3 weighs about 1,820kg empty, which is literally half-a-ton lighter than the earlier Spitfires. The J2M Raiden, at least the early ones, weigh about the same or slightly less than comparable Bf 109 G variants, yet the plane is slightly larger than P-51 Mustang in almost every metric. This is not to suggest the floor was somehow magical in their lightweighting, yet in both cases, floor was positioned appropriately to be a part of fuselage structure. Second, the seating position not only helps in terms of better G tolerance and easier manipulation of side controls, but it also helps in reducing overall height required for canopy and fuselage. Messerschmitt Bf 109, a plane with much narrower fuselage cross section than a Spitfire, had just enough room to squeeze a pilot, control stick gears and links, and a portion of the fuel tank, all in a relatively vertical orientation. This applies to most of modern-day racing cars, too. Note the comparatively large height of pre-1960s F1 cars, such as Maserati 250F, versus post-1960s F1 cars, such as notoriously-understeer-prone Lotus 25, or even Lotus 18. RMR configuration and lack of driveshaft is a factor, but even then the car could have been lower with lower-slung seating position. But, these positives are a compromise as well. If you wish to use floor as a part of overall structure, then mounting it too high or too low would complicate an appropriate positioning of wing spars, rudder pedals, control linkages, (if needed) a space for main gear wheels to retract into etc., while low-slung position could make ingress/egress a little trickier. Compare getting out of Chevrolet Tahoe versus Alfa 4C, and the latter is more demanding of your waist, thighs and knees. Also, when the argument is that changing the cockpit after finalisation of the airframe would add weight, I cannot think of reasons why it would be as large of a detriment as some seem to think. Re-positioning the gauges would add weight for one, but can make the wiring, installation and the rest lighter for two or more. Adding floors would probably add weight in floor panel and fixings, not to mention the alterations needed in the manufacturing process. However, just by the floor, sometimes armoured, being there, you can make the structure nearby and/or linked to the floor slightly lighter, either by punching a few more holes in the spar, or rearranging fuselage skin panels to be larger in size, reducing rivets and fixtures required. So, again, if done so properly, weight gain is not impossible to be tackled, especially considering the level changes at different stages you already need to make anyway. Just to add a bit more: Mostly speaking, the question for initial designers isn't necessarily using the least amount of wires, but also to reduce manufacturing complications, through less intertwined wiring and/or reducing complication in factors otherwise related to installations. And, on top of that, you can think of the weight increase through cockpit re-design as a penalty for not considering ergonomics to begin with, not a sacrifice in pursuit of greater considerations for human factors. A.k.a, a well deserved consequence and lessons learned. If you read so far, thank you. And thanks again Greg for a superb video.

I think it's also worth mentioning that a better cockpit made for a more comfortable and confident pilot who wasn't distracted by freezing hands, an awkward instrument layout, or worrying about a bullet coming through the back of his chair.

Before I got my A&P license and smoking was still allowed in the hangar, I helped out working on the R-2,800. A mechanic asked me, as I was passing by, to please hand him the cigarette that he had dropped. I looked all over the floor but I couldn't see the cigarette that he said was right in front of me. Part of the ignition lead is called a cigarette and I couldn't see it because I was searching for a Winston cigarette that he smoked. At 16 I discovered that two different items can have the same name and I'll never forget what an aircraft cigarette is.

Yet again Greg nails it! In an _"in the weeds"_ historical, technical, and pilots perspective analysis of a WW II warbird that most "content producers" would have the audience clicking away after 10 mins, but Greg has us unexpectedly wishing for more when the video comes to an end. And what a great topic, crowning the Chance Vought F4U Corsair as the best piston engine Fighter of WW II against some stiff and formidable wartime and post-war opposition. Don't forget, the common consensus is that the Japanese Zero was better than American fighters all through the brutal, bloody, hard-fought year of 1942, but the Corsair (and the also Pratt & Whitney radial powered Republic P-47 Thunderbolt as well) first flew in 1940, and had America been on a war footing like Japan was in the late 1930s the Corsair and Thunderbolts would have seen more widespread use months earlier. A real tribute to the Chance Vaught engineers and production workers, to the Naval aviation supply, acquisition and development branches, and of course a fitting salute to the carrier crews and land crews who kept them flying, and especially to the pilots who flew them on long hazardous ocean missions against deadly enemy AA and opposing fighters

I wish we got to know how good the Sea Fury could have become with improvements. Such a beast of an airplane.

I had no idea a Corsair was large enough to climb up inside. Very interesting, as are all your videos.

Excellent video on one of my favorite aircraft. I cannot wait for the P 47 range debate. For such a niche topic I have seen multiple people in different comment sections mentioning you by name and contradicting you with no evidence. The Santos Dumont clowns were emboldened by Real Engineering and are showing up everywhere now, and some people only got interested in WW2 aviation because of the legend of the Mustang, so I understand why they are emotional about it. But I hope you have a civil, truth-seeking discussion, as I think that in that domain there is simply no contest.

I've been waiting for this one. Worth my Patreon subscription all by itself. Thanks, Greg!

Well done as always Greg. Can’t wait for more superprop content. I’m thinking we get a dehavilland hornet or sea hornet video next. Ludicrously fast aircraft.

I really enjoy your lectures , all of them are very detailed , very entertaining and very relaxing for this viewer .

13:44 "There are no solutions, only tradeoffs." -Thomas Sowell

I very much enjoyed learning about the -5 and the other super prop comparisons. Please keep them coming!

I want to see a corsair built using titanium and modern composites. That would be an amazing machine.

Always loved the Corsair. Such a badass bird

I love that you’re talking about human factors lately and it really matters and is overlooked. A plane having to constantly adjust fuel mixture and cowl flaps and engine setting etc.. is more likely going to do worse than a fighter pilot in a plane who only has to control his throttle lever and gets to keep his eyes and mind on the fight. Even though the opposing aircraft has the same/better performance on paper. (p40’s and bf109f4’s in north africa I think is a perfect example)

I know it's not really a warplane, but I'd love to see a video of the F2G. Thanks for your work on this video, it's very much appreciated.

Fantastic episode. A topic that might be worth considering: knowing what we know today, what change, or changes, to fundamental design might a contemporary designer with perfect foreknowledge make to optimize a / each key WW2 gen airplane? Things like span, wing thickness, structural margins or criteria, different contemporary engine, airfoil section, armament, etc. Would the IJN benefit from a slightly more rugged Zero? Would the Brits benefit from a Spit with more fuel capacity, or being designed w drop tanks from day 1? Going to the ergo vid, would a "modern" cockpit be the best change in a Sept 1939 Me or Hurricane?

I loved learning so much about the -5. Hope you take the time to do the same for the F2G one of these days.

Once again your channel has another great aviation dissertation, so much attention to detail. o/

Love the Corsair (all Mk's/Dash) my favorite US WW2 fighter!

Very well done video. I didn't know the Corsair was that much more expensive than the Hellcat.

Super nifty keen video Greg. Thrilled I caught the premiere! Had a blast. 🐿

Hi Greg. Great videos. I just found your channel this evening. When I was a young teenager and younger, in the1960s, there was an F2-G in Pioneer Park in Lincoln, Nebraska on display, but it was in a very poor condition at that time. In the late 1990s, I tried to track down the airplane,but it must have been scrapped by then. That is more history lost forever. Have a great day.

The 5"/38 shell was 27kg (~60lbs), the various 8" around five times that (~115-155kg). The reason for the myth about rockets hitting as hard as the 8" comes from bursting charge, the weight of explosive was simlar between 8" and rocket which is meaningful for some applications (like defoliation, chemical gas, smoke or incendiary impacts ect), but even for damaging fairly unarmored target ignoring the fragmented case and incoming velocity of the round is to ignore almost the majority of its effect on most targets.

Fascinating as always. Thanks.

Great information! Wish we'd see this on history channel.

Really nice video. I would love to see a video on the changes from WWII fighter to a Reno Air Racer. You do such a good job on engine performance and explaining compromised designs.

Excellent stuff, as always! Thanks

Outstanding. Thanks Greg.

Greg - Another David Vizard Cult Member! We should have know - you’re a genius too Greg. The Mighty Corsair:) Light on the stick too. Unlike the P51 at high speed.

Another outstanding video, Greg. Thank you.

Some great knowledge, and specs on the corsair. Thank you for sharing your knowledge with us.

G. Looking forward to this one. Just like all of Greg's vids. I always learn something new!

Great episode, thank you. I appreciate your explanation of the variants. Have always thought Corsairs were just neat as heck, even though my dad flew Skyraiders.

This is so insightful. thank you.

Good specnut info, love it !

Another great and informative vid, thanks for the content. One thing to note, the supercharging on the Sea Fury was basic by the standards of the day and work had only just begun to squeeze the considerably more power it was capable of. Work really stopped on it with the rise of the jets, but it would be interesting to see just how much they could have reliably achieved, some say 5000 hp+. Good comment on the air frame development

Thank you for all you do.

I am both entertained and educated! Thank you!

Excellent!!! Your analysis as always is so spot on and based in facts as opposed to conjecture. Thanks again

yet another superb video! Thanks Greg!

Outstanding analysis Mr Greg- a hearty thank you for,all,of this!

Another excellent video Greg, thanks!

Hey Greg! Love the video! Personally, I’d love to see a dedicated f4u Corsair series like the p47.

Really good information. Thank you Sir.

Excellent overview of the dash 5. I learned lots. Many thanks for your excellent work and please keep it up.

Great video per usual Greg, and it’s on my favorite prop!

Love this vid, Greg!

Great stuff, Greg, thanks!

A lot of off-subject information, but still interesting information. Thanks for the video.

I must admit, I loved the DC-7 video, I had not heard of the engine technology. This is from someone who grew up in the 60s and 70s reading his father's subscriptions to Wings and Airpower magazines. I also remember the sonic booms from planes flying out of Tinker AFB.

Fantastic video Greg! 👏👏👏👏

Greg, you always do a great job presenting the facts and making good, cogent arguments. In those regards, this episode is one of your best. Outstanding!

Great video! Your videos make building plastic airplane models even better!

Mr. Greg, great work as usual. Y The effort put into your videos it's seen as well as greatly appreciated. 😀👍

As allways, very fair and unbiased opinions. Really appreciate this approach to your vids 👍

Greg! Wow, great video! Dang, I learned a lot. And your delivery is awesome - perhaps the best narration on KZfaq (right up there with Lance, The History Guy). I knew that my dad flew Corsairs for the USMC in WWII and Korea, but I wondered if he ever flew the F-4U-5? So I dug out his old logbooks. The entries for his WWII flying with VMF-314 only state "F-4U" so I'm guessing that that's what they (or whichever Admin was filling in the pilots' logbooks) called the "-1" back then. But he also flew the FG-1D a **lot**, which I didn't realize, and something called the F-3A which apparently also was a Corsair built by Brewster, famous...infamous?...for the F2A Buffalo. The story goes that the Brewster Corsairs had defective wing attach-fittings which caused them to be limited in speed and prohibited from aerobatics...which makes a fighter pretty much, well, **not** a fighter. In 1950, when dad got recalled for Korea (VMF-232) the F-4U-4 started showing up in his logbook, and he got a lot of flight time in them. Alas, I found no entries for the F-4U-5. In January of 1953, he began flying the jet-powered Douglas F-3D-2 and said good-bye to piston fighters forever.