Matt W. Barrow wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
news
Morgans wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote

The 51 was a fine airplane, and it worked well at all altitudes but it
was nearing the end of its run at the end of the war.
I loved the airplane and flew it often but for me, flying the F8F
Bearcat one sunny afternoon in December, redefined the meaning of the
term "prop fighter performance".
In my opinion, if the war had lingered on and the Bear had been mass
produced for both theaters, the F8F would have not seen its match
anywhere.
Interesting. I had never heard that expressed, before.

Would the F8F had the legs to do the long range bomber escort missions?

How about top speeds; was it as fast, or faster than the 51?
The Bear had VERY short legs and even with the drop tank would never have
made it as a long range fighter.
In close, intercept, and shoot it down fast was the Bear's prime intended
function.

Designed to defeat Kamikazes' at a distance, no?


Not all that far really. Total fuel was 185 gals without the drop tank,
so the range was severely limited. Figuring climb, cruise and combat
power settings, I'd say less than 90 minutes to bingo fuel.

--
Dudley Henriques