Vought V-354 'two-seat' F4U Corsair ...

  • Thread starter joncarrfarrelly
  • Start date
J

joncarrfarrelly

Guest
Does anybody have any info on this conversion, aside from the one pic that shows up when googled?
It was built as a one-off during the war.
A three-view would be great, if one exists. :)

Jon
 

CliffyB

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
56
Reaction score
0
Any info on its performance; better, worse, neutral? I wonder how the extra man would have affected its range. Might have made for a better night fighter?
 

famvburg

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
347
Reaction score
22
Nice 3-view, thanks. I wonder if the front cockpit is the same location as the cockpit on the XF4U. I also wonder what they did about the fuel, if they made fuselage tank a lot smaller or put tanks in the wings, which, IIRC, is where the fuel was in the XF4U. ISTR having read where a lower powered trainer was planned using an R-1830. I wonder if it was this design, except for the engine.
 

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
famvburg said:
Nice 3-view, thanks. I wonder if the front cockpit is the same location as the cockpit on the XF4U. I also wonder what they did about the fuel, if they made fuselage tank a lot smaller or put tanks in the wings, which, IIRC, is where the fuel was in the XF4U.

The front cockpit is at least roughly where it was in the XF4U. The 237-gallon main fuselage tank was deleted to provide the space. The trainer was to have two tanks in the bottom of the fuselage and one in each outboard wing panel (darkish dashed lines depict the tanks). The wing tanks replace the internal wing volume that had been used for the F4U's two outboard guns and their ammunition so the trainer only has two guns. Total fuel capacity was 175 gallons, a reduction in internal fuel of about 62 gallons.
 

Jos Heyman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
24
Aerofiles suggests cautiously (ie with a question mark) that the Vought V-354 was a converted F4U-4 with serial 49763 and designated as F4U-4XA.
 

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
Jos Heyman said:
Aerofiles suggests cautiously (ie with a question mark) that the Vought V-354 was a converted F4U-4 with serial 49763 and designated as F4U-4XA.

According to http://www.uswarplanes.net/corsair.html (rewritten for clarity):

XF4U-4: Two F4U-1A, 1944, modified with engine / supercharger upgrade, chin air scoop, 4-bladed prop in 1944 and designated.
F4U-4XA(49763), F4U-4XB(50301); Five airframes new built with redesigned cockpit / canopy layout.


i.e. not the trainer, which was proposed in 1946 and to be modified from F4U-1Ds. It is possible, however, that the F4U-4XA could have been used to create the trainer after it was no longer needed for -4 development work.
 

famvburg

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
347
Reaction score
22
Considering the level of work to convert a -4 back to the -1 design as depicted in the 3 view, and considering it was to be a high-powered trainer, why wouldn't Vought leave the basic -4 design and convert it to 2 seat? I think it was always a converted -1. Also, yes, the front clearly is at least close to the XF4U's position. Maybe I'll try to overlay some drawings and see if it's exact or not.
 

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
famvburg said:
Considering the level of work to convert a -4 back to the -1 design as depicted in the 3 view, and considering it was to be a high-powered trainer, why wouldn't Vought leave the basic -4 design and convert it to 2 seat? I think it was always a converted -1. Also, yes, the front clearly is at least close to the XF4U's position. Maybe I'll try to overlay some drawings and see if it's exact or not.

I may have confused you. The F4U-4XA was created from an F4U-1. Presumably, the major changes for purposes of initially evaluated the -4 engine installation were from the firewall forward so probably it was still mostly an F4U-1. Since it was a hybrid, it was now what we used to call a dog ship in the old days: only good as a chase plane or to evaluate modifications (or as an impromptu wind tunnel: see attached). It might have therefore been available to convert to the trainer. It would have been relatively straightforward, given the other changes, to reinstall its original F4U-1 cowling, engine, propeller, etc. This is pure speculation but somebody has somehow associated that specific Bureau Number with the trainer prototype, which means that it might have a basis in fact.
 

Attachments

  • xF5U and F4U04X web.jpg
    xF5U and F4U04X web.jpg
    212 KB · Views: 368

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
famvburg said:
Considering the level of work to convert a -4 back to the -1 design as depicted in the 3 view, and considering it was to be a high-powered trainer, why wouldn't Vought leave the basic -4 design and convert it to 2 seat? I think it was always a converted -1. Also, yes, the front clearly is at least close to the XF4U's position. Maybe I'll try to overlay some drawings and see if it's exact or not.

And if you have a pretty good (i.e. Vought created) XF4U-1 drawing, please share it with me. I've been trying to create one from data, photographs, etc.
 

Attachments

  • Vought XF4U GA side view comparison with THT side view.jpg
    Vought XF4U GA side view comparison with THT side view.jpg
    224.2 KB · Views: 197

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
famvburg said:
Considering the level of work to convert a -4 back to the -1 design as depicted in the 3 view, and considering it was to be a high-powered trainer, why wouldn't Vought leave the basic -4 design and convert it to 2 seat? I think it was always a converted -1. Also, yes, the front clearly is at least close to the XF4U's position. Maybe I'll try to overlay some drawings and see if it's exact or not.

Based on my XF4U-1 drawing, the front seat of the trainer is considerably farther forward. It makes sense that Vought would retain the location of the existing F4U seat (support structure, controls, canopy, etc.) and locate the front seat relative to it, especially considering that none of the installation remained from the XF4U-1. Note that the powerplant installation had been moved forward from the XF4U-1, allowing the front seat to be more forward.
 

Attachments

  • Vought F4U Trainer vs XF4U-1.jpg
    Vought F4U Trainer vs XF4U-1.jpg
    304.5 KB · Views: 491

famvburg

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
347
Reaction score
22
I don't think I have any XF4U drawings that I'd guarantee their accuracy. Thanks for the overlay. In the pic of the F4U-4XA, it looks like it has the deeper forward belly of the later Corsairs. Was this deepened after the initial firewall forward mods?
 

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
702
Reaction score
151
Website
www.tommythomason.com
famvburg said:
I don't think I have any XF4U drawings that I'd guarantee their accuracy. Thanks for the overlay. In the pic of the F4U-4XA, it looks like it has the deeper forward belly of the later Corsairs. Was this deepened after the initial firewall forward mods?

No, but note that the F4U firewall is well aft of the wing leading edge. The upper part is just aft of the radio mast and the lower is located at the main wing spar.
 

Attachments

  • powerplant.jpg
    powerplant.jpg
    200.5 KB · Views: 429

Jos Heyman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
24
OK, I agree, Aerofiles was not correct but that's what was suspected. Hence the question marks.
If only we could get the serial of the V-354......
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,225
Reaction score
804
Jos Heyman said:
OK, I agree, Aerofiles was not correct but that's what was suspected. Hence the question marks.
If only we could get the serial of the V-354......

It's not even certain that it carried one after conversion. I have a feeling that the V-354 was pretty much a private venture.
 

Bill S

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2008
Messages
608
Reaction score
637
What I have found thus far:
1. One aircraft was given to Vought for use as a mockup
2. It appears that is was Voughts money as the Navy pulled their promised funding back
3. Vought did not want the work as they were busy with the current contracts
4. Edo (sp) was looked to for becoming a possible contractor
5. This was a 1946 proposal that was discussed several times with BuAir
6. One of the killing factors was the rate F4U-1Ds were being scrapped post war,
7. Vought was more interested in the post war F4U overhaul business


I have the BuNo, just have to locate it once again.


bill
 

sienar

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
710
Reaction score
394
Re: Vought F4U Corsair designs and prototypes

V-354 F4U two seat advanced trainer


source; http://celticowboy.com/V-LIST.html
 

Attachments

  • CDI1361.jpg
    CDI1361.jpg
    429.7 KB · Views: 270
  • CDIDF77.jpg
    CDIDF77.jpg
    564.7 KB · Views: 247

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,342
Reaction score
1,500
Re: Re: Vought F4U Corsair designs and prototypes

Especially interesting to me is, that a bomb load is shown, that probably is much
heavier, than would be used for pure training purposes.
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,342
Reaction score
1,500
Re: Re: Vought F4U Corsair designs and prototypes

Thank you, I thought of practice bombs as smaller ones, as used later by many/most airforces.
But a search showed, that even the German Luftwaffe used full sized replicas ("Betonbomben").
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,568
Reaction score
1,051
famvburg said:
I don't think I have any XF4U drawings that I'd guarantee their accuracy. Thanks for the overlay. In the pic of the F4U-4XA, it looks like it has the deeper forward belly of the later Corsairs. Was this deepened after the initial firewall forward mods?

No, but note that the F4U firewall is well aft of the wing leading edge. The upper part is just aft of the radio mast and the lower is located at the main wing spar.
That is the standard firewall location. F4Us and dozens of other WW2 fighters (Grumman Wildcat, P-51 Mustang,
Spitfire, etc.) had their firewalls co-located with their wing main spars. Steel tubing carried all the engine loads with just thin, sheet metal fairings aft of the cowling.
 

Similar threads

Top