Vought F4U-1 'Corsair'


Control Panel
  Base model:F4U
  Designation System:U.S. Navy / Marines
  Designation Period:1922-1962
  Basic role:Fighter

  Length: 33' 4" 10.1 m
  Height:16' 1" 4.9 m
  Wingspan: 41' 12.5 m
  Wingarea: 314.0 sq ft 29.1 sq m
  Empty Weight: 8,982 lb 4,073 kg
  Gross Weight: 14,000 lb 6,349 kg

  No. of Engines: 1
  Powerplant: Pratt & Whitney R-2800-8
  Horsepower (each): 2000

  Range: 1,015 miles 1,634 km
  Cruise Speed: 182 mph 293 km/h 158 kt
  Max Speed: 417 mph 671 km/h 362 kt
  Climb: 2,890 ft/min 880 m/min
  Ceiling: 36,900 ft 11,247 m

Known serial numbers
02153 / 02156, 02158 / 02736, 03802 / 03841, 17392 / 17455, 17456 / 17515, 17517 / 18191 , 49660 / 49762 , 49764 / 50300 , 50302 / 50359 , 55784 / 56483

Examples of this type may be found at
The Air Museum "Planes of Fame"ChinoCalifornia


Recent comments by our visitors
 , IL
Let me see, I'm pretty sure that the Corsair shot down at least 2,180 enemy aircraft with combat losses of under 190. I am also pretty sure that the only U.S. Navy Korean War Ace flew Corsairs. Training accidents (and poop) happens. As for the men who flew them, even the language found on Combat Citations do not do these exceptional human beings justice. So lets review; Carol dismisses the Corsairs WWII combat record, knows nothing about aviation or technology (I think some jets can fly a little faster than piston engine aircraft)and decides to revise history to her point of view. We have had a lot of that lately. I think they call these people liberals. My antidote is to just vote against them so that they can be were they belong; "On the ash heap of history."
12/11/2009 @ 16:25 [ref: 25419]
 Philip winks
 somerset, OTH
Carol realy has a strange twist on facts here possibly for good reasons just lets not forget the f-4u to zero kill ratio in wwII was 11:1 in the corsairs favour impressive at least
11/28/2008 @ 11:56 [ref: 23155]
 Eric Hanson
 , CO
I don't know what Carol Murphy is thinking. Why are we talking about its record of being shotdown in Korea. The very fact that an airplane designed in the 30's was still fighting in the "Jet Age" speaks loudly for it's greatness. As far as visibility, the Mustang also had the pilot toward the back of the wing. Visibility was TERRIBLE with most of these A/C with conventional gear including the Mustang. I don't know where Carol gets his/her "FACTS", but the statement that it killed almost as many of it's own pilots as the enemy is ridiculous, false, and shows lack of knowledge or diligence. Of course they got rid of them after Korea, the Skyraider (of much newer design) was already superior for the role; never mind it being the Jet Age! The Corsair was a WWII design, which when coupled with a pilot who had the greater talent required, was the superior shipboard fighter of that war (and no Hellcats in Korea you notice)!
03/18/2008 @ 21:09 [ref: 20089]
 Fort Wayne, IN
I like the colors of the plane its kewl!!
04/25/2007 @ 14:47 [ref: 16304]
 , IN
I like the colors of the plane its kewl!!
04/25/2007 @ 14:47 [ref: 16303]
 , IN
I like the colors of the plane its kewl!!
04/25/2007 @ 14:46 [ref: 16302]
 , IN
I like the colors of the plane its kewl!!
04/25/2007 @ 14:46 [ref: 16301]
 Jessica Lutz
 Fort wayne, IN
I like the colors on the plane!!!! it's kool!!!!
04/20/2007 @ 14:57 [ref: 16249]
 Carol Murphy
 , NY
The FACTS are that the Corsair almost killed more American pilots than it did bad guys. Bad visibility because they placed volatile aviation gasoline tanks in FRONT of the pilot placing him too far back on the fuselage. High torque from oversized prop/engine made Corsairs prone to ground loops and flipping over.


The USAF's P-51 Mustang losses in Korea were second to the Corsairs owing to its fragile liquid-cooled engine. At least the USAF wised up as the war progressed.

While Halsey's absurd dark blue paint scheme made it easy for commie gunners to aim on and hit all Navy and marine planes and contributed to the Corsairs being downed, the facts are that they did not get around to adequately armoring Corsairs for the ground attack role until the Korean War was nearly over (AU-1).

If the Corsair was soooooo great why did the Navy/marines throw them away so quickly after the Korean War???

Because the armored SkyRaiders despite still using volatile AVGAS were/are far better for ground attack than Corsairs which were really place-the-biggest-engine-and-the-biggest-prop-possible-to-shoot-down Japanese planes.

Let's get the FACTS and history straight here.

01/01/2007 @ 22:12 [ref: 15061]
 Frank Hasty
 , GA
I served in MGCIS-1 (Ground Controlled Intercept), 1950-52 (Korea). VMF (N)-513 flew F4U-5N's out of K-8 (Kunsan), their tail markings were "WF". The Corsair "Ace" mentioned above was actually a Navy plane and pilot, and those kills were "bedcheck charlies", old slow biplanes used for nuisance raids, not MIG's. However I believe a Mig was downed by a Corsair but that pilot was never an "Ace".
Our function was to search for enemy aircraft, determine their altitude, speed, heading etc. and steer our fighters in to make the intercept. July '06
07/09/2006 @ 13:33 [ref: 13688]


Recent photos uploaded by our visitors