Saxman

There's anecdotal claims the clipped wing Corsairs had a faster sink rate during landing, but AFAIK there's no actual flight tests that confirm this.

The R-3350 isn't remotely a comparable example to the R-2800. The 3350 suffered numerous problems inherent within its design (including the use of flammable magnesium components, bad cylinder head design,excessively lean fuel-air mix, etc.) because of a rushed production cycle. The cooling issues were only part of the problem. The R-2800 didn't have those problems. It was an engine that could LITERALLY have whole cylinder heads blown off and still get the plane home again.

In which case I would use IAS and kts, because kts is what's actually on the dial, and I believe it's what the original POH used.

Sorry, I lost track of who was working on this. @BIGNEWY is there any update?

Part of the problem with determining what the specs should be is it's unclear what configuration the Navy evaluations were performed under. The F4U-1A with ADI was able to hit about 420mph TAS at critical altitude with a combat-condition bird. A specially-prepared, stripped, and sealed 1A (tail hook removed and its compartment faired over for maximum drag reduction) was able to hit closer to 430. However, there's a question Rudel pointed out about what being flown "clean" meant for the F4U-1D. The 1D normally retained the knuckle pylons even when not carrying ordinance, with an aerodynamic cap fitted over the bomb/tank shackles. What we don't know is whether those pylons were removed when the Navy ran performance evaluations on 1D (or -4, for that matter) airframes. So if the Navy clocked the 1D at 410mph at critical altitude, is that with or without the pylons in place? That's an important distinction, because if that's without the pylons that could potentially knock another 10mph off top level speed once they're put back on (the 1D was heavier than the 1A at the same fuel and ammunition load which would add some induced drag).

@-Rudel- Poke

Clarification: Not as bad IN the real thing, or not as bad AS the real thing. My understanding has been pop culture has exaggerated the drop, especially when flown in a clean (no gear/flaps) configuration IE during combat maneuvers. Also, incredibly jealous you've gotten to fly the real thing. As for the controls, I wonder if there ought to be some sort of stick length setting that will adjust stick input automatically to correct for the difference in the amount of deflection.

You mean this dive sound?

There IS a problem if you have to dive to get it to rated airspeeds. The Corsair should hit them from level acceleration alone.

If they're tying activation of ADI to what's on the MP dial that may be part of the problem.

So was I. And there's any number of reasons. Complexity, weight, technology simply not being available, or because they just plain didn't think of it.

Because the Corsair didn't have automatic cowl flaps.

Because there's going to be times where you have to dive literally right now with no time in advance to prepare. That Zero on your six isn't going to kindly wait for you to shut all your flaps before shooting. And sometimes you have a target of opportunity that you'll lose if you don't take advantage of it.

We've had home flight sims for 45 years. Sim developers NEED to find a better way to model this.

I wonder how many people actually follow all those instructions in combat, lol.