Here's some video of Robert Odegaard and his Super along with Gerry Beck and his Corsair - God's peace to them and their families .... sorry it took so long to post .... Padre
This ain’t your standard Corsair, this is one of the 15 Goodyear F2G Super Corsairs! The F4U has the R2800 18 cylinder 2,000 horsepower engine with a 13 foot propeller. The F2G has the R4360 28 cylinder 4,300 horsepower engine and a 14 foot propeller.
@@mikeholland1031 Yep, never saw service. By the time they came out, the first jets were being tested. They were considered obsolete before they even got a chance. Only five prototypes and ten production models were built, and now there's only two survivors, of which Race 57 here is the last one that can still fly.
When an F4 Corsair showed up at the Udvar Hazy Center/National Air and Space I didn't realize how big they are. I was part of the original security team there 1/2004 to 9/2009. It was hard not to take notice of this aircraft. Definitely one of my favorite aircraft of all time.
You should see an F7F Tigercat in person, they're huge! Same engine, only two of them! I can stand fully upright under the wing roots, there's two of them at a museum nearby, both flyable.
I remember this and 74 both as a child. I played with my friend Wally around 74 and 57 was in Chardon Ohio in a state of disrepair. I’m glad to see 57 flying and saddened of the crash of 74.
these motors are being started and run up perfectly! the amount of pilots i see starting these huge engines and revving them to get them going is bloody awful! This is a refreshing change!!
Reason why this is a SUPER Corsair is because of the size of the engine. This one here was made by Goodyear and has the Pratt & Whitney R4360 Wasp Major and has 3500HP while the Vought F4U had the Pratt & Whitney R2800-18W radial engine that produced 2380HP. Only 10 + 7 prototypes of the Goodyear F2G were made with only 2 survive today with only 1 that is airworthy.
We saw the FG-2 race at Reno, I think in 2010. At that time, Reno had added "High G Ridge" where you could actually watch from a spot where the racers actually flew over you. We were there when the Super Corsair was in an Unlimited Class heat. OMG! What a sound. High G Ridge was eliminated the next year because of the "Galloping Ghost" tragedy.
I worked at Goodyear Aerospace in the 1980s . That's where the Corsairs were built. I heard a story that near the end of the war they built a souped up Corsair and gave the employees a air show with it at the air field that was next to the plant . Is this the one they built I don't know ?
Goodyear built 11 Goodyear F2G-2 Super Corsairs. Unfortunately their performance was disappointing. Could only achieve a top speed of only 430 mph. Also suffered from handling characteristics that were never solved, which is why only two survive and of these only one still flies.
@@jimfinlaw4537 That sort of top speed isn't why the F2G was developed, the "fastest" piston engine propeller driven aircraft all have something in common that the F2G didn't have, a high altitude supercharger system. To get serious speed numbers out of any aircraft including jets you have to get them up into altitudes where the air is thin so you don't have as much drag on the airframe, but at the same time the engine has to be able to make it's maximum power at those altitudes which requires a special high altitude supercharger system like the regular F4U had, which in it's case was a 2 stage supercharger, the R4360 engine in the F2G only had a single stage supercharger, that's because it was meant to be fast at low altitude, those numbers are hard to come by because most sources only list an absolute top speed for just about every aircraft ever made, the amount of boost the single stage supercharger in the F2G would have started to drop right around 10,000 ft, so the 430 MPH top speed it had would have been achieved right around that altitude while other variant's of the Corsair with high altitude superchargers that could hit 460 MPH at a much higher altitude, probably around 20,000 ft, were doing it in thinner air but wouldn't have been anywhere close to the 430 MPH speed of the F2G at 10,000 ft, I'd lay odds if you found the data for an F4U's top speed at 10,000 ft it'd be below 400 MPH and even more importantly it wouldn't get to 10,000 ft from sea level nearly as fast as the F2G could, it was specifically designed to be fast at low level, that's what the Marine Corps, who was actually who wanted the F2G built and not the Navy as most people assume, wanted out of it, an aircraft that could take off from one of their islands and provide low level fighter cover for it's beaches to protect them from an invading force both in the air and on the ground. Another variant of the Corsair that was built with similar priorities was the Korean War era Goodyear F4U, even though it had the same Pratt&Whitney R2800 engine that was in the WW2 built Corsair's it had a single stage supercharger on it's engine because it wasn't intended to be a fighter instead it was meant for ground attack, although they can't provide maximum boost at higher altitudes single stage superchargers are actually better for aircraft intended to fly low altitude missions because only having to drive a single stage the engine suffers less parasitic power loss which means there's more power going to the propeller instead of being wasted driving a supercharger stage that's not needed at low altitude, it'll lose 250 to 350 HP at low altitude compared to the same exact engine with a single stage supercharger on it. The reason that the orders were canceled for the F2G was because after the destruction of the Japanese navy force at the Battle of The Phillipine Sea the threat of invasion or naval offensive forces against US held areas with beaches that would have needed to be defended was virtually eliminated coupled with the F8F and the Tigercat already starting to be produced which had similar performance in the realm needed for an aircraft like the F2G, as far as what was disappointing about the F2G that was considered an issue it wasn't it's absolute top speed since that was never the point behind it, as far as speed goes it was fast at low altitude which is exactly what they wanted out of it, it's handling characteristics at low altitude and low speed is what turned out to be disappointing, and since there were other aircraft already coming online with similar performance coupled with the fact that at that point no one was interested in spending any real money on propeller driven aircraft anymore because jets were apparently the way of the future the order for the F2G was canceled.
Listen to that exhaust note at idle. Sound a little like a Top Fuel Dragster. But the dragsters have 12,000 hp compared to maybe 3,500 for the R-4360 engine in the Super Corsair. Still, an awesome sound!
+ Paul Shaffer The late-war F2G Corsair was designed with a bubble canopy. Very few were built and several became race planes after the war, including Race #57.
I work in the hanger that is now home to Race 57. I can assure everyone that she is well taken care of and still flies regularly! Here’s a vid I shot of her flying! ruclips.net/video/30dIqzBYTAU/видео.html
interman 77, That four row radial is a beautiful engine, compact package of 3500 horsepower, too bad it couldn't have been put to better use than killing and going fast around the world, maybe. What happened?
@@Lumby1 The 3500 HP is a super corsair. They never saw combat. Too late in the war to be used. Only 10 were ever built by the Goodyear company. Surprisingly they didn't use them in Korea.
What you're seeing now its a normal F4F and this is F4U, Corsair. and this is what is known as the corsair that surpassed Corsair, or you can just call this Super Corsair. AND THIS! IS TO GO EVEN FURTHER BEYOND!!! *corsair engine rev up at full throttle*
Um, Joe--- the F4F is a Hellcat, made by Grumman. Neither of these is F4F. This is basic WW2 fighter information, and since you don't know, you should stop commenting and start reading.
@@lesizmor9079 um Les, the F4F is not a Hellcat, it's a Wildcat..... Learn basic WW2 aircraft names and numbers before you try to correct people. It's....... unbecoming
Those cowl flaps closed up as they gained altitude & speed. They were only open to keep enough airflow through the engine to keep it from burning up at low speed & idle.
@@cerhart7172 Yes, but look into the aerodynamic studies on the B-29 and see how much speed those cowl flaps cost. Grumman kept using them too, but there are more aerodynamic ways to do it.
@@SoloRenegade - the flaps caused negligible performance degradation when closed at altitude, which is where they spent most of their operating time. Since you brought it up, I suggest you look deeper into the development of the B-29 and you'll see why those cowl flaps were as important as they were - they burned up a LOT of engines without the airflow those flaps allowed, and even with them there were a lot of engine failures lifting lfully loaded birds off the island bases in the Pacific due to overheating. Also, you do realize that pure aerodynamics wasn't the only consideration in these aircraft, don't you? These combat aircraft weren't built in a modern theoretical vacuum with a virtually open timeline, they were developing from what they had available and were quite literally at the bleeding edge of what they had. Every decision made in the design of these aircraft was a compromise, including specification requirements, producibility, parts availability, survivability, and maintainability, in order to get the best combat aircraft they could into service as quickly as they could.
@@cerhart7172 I'm well aware of the B-29s engine issues. I did bring up the B-29 for a reason after all. Yes, built for their mission, and lacking modern info, but aerodynamic studies were done during the war and many airplanes benefited from that, yet the late model F4U and Grummans still used them. Even when other radial engine aircraft found other better ways to cool the engine. Fighter planes are teh pinnacle of aircraft performance, and speed was the name of the game in WW2 and into the early jet age. I am an engineer myself and design cooling systems, and a professional pilot as well. I know what I'm talking about here. But my original comment was partially tongue-in-cheek and light hearted even though it was also meant to stir up discussion. Take a chill pill and lighten up.
@@SoloRenegade - your "tongue-in-cheek" response reads more like that of someone who hasn't a clue what they're talking about, so I responded appropriately to your initial post. Since you decided to "educate me" you lost all possibility of claiming a light-hearted comment. Now, your claim of being an engineer makes you sound pedantic. Your current engineering degree of 2022 doesn't mean squat to the events of 1940-45. The studies you bring up were being done concurrently with the primary development of the majority of US WW2 combat aircraft: the results weren't finalized until most of them were well past prototyping and into production. In case your engineering background doesn't tell you this, a major retrofit to a design costs a great deal of time as well as money, especially once that design has been accepted and production is well underway. As I said earlier, compromises were made. They continued to use what they knew worked rather than try and reinvent the wheel, which would have bottlenecked production at a crucial time. The Germans did a lot of reinventing the wheel during WW2, and it shows a lot in the chaos that the personnel had to deal with just to keep anything working. I suggest you take the chill pill yourself, Mr. Engineer.
I think it's kind of disrespectful to clown up a corsair with that paint job there's only one color for them BLUE, CORSAIR BLUE, like it was meant to be..
Let the dogs of war lay down their harnesses. It may be a machine but I think the pilots would be greatful to know that their sacrifice would lead to a world where weapons of war turned into things of pass time.
@@kayvalencia2223 WHAT!! If it move's ,make's noise, can ride in it and cost money that make's it a fun, a pass time is collecting stamp's, painting, making clay pot's is a pass time.
+ Al King That aircraft has had a much longer history as Cook Cleland's Race #57 than it ever had as a test airframe at the Navy flight test center. www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/images/927/927-9.jpg www.pylon1.org/articles/uploads/f2g-1_race57_01.jpg
Is it then , also disrespectful , for a soldier to remove his uniform and wear street clothes once he is home from the war ? ... It's a race plane now , enjoying retirement .
+ Edsmaureen She was surplus in 1947 and been Race #57 since 1949. That's a much longer history as one of Cook Cleland's aircraft than any US Navy service.
@@billpayne6936 The F2G was specifically built as a high speed interceptor to counter the Kamikaze attacks. They have the 28-cylinder P&W R-4360 engine. Very few were built and only three intact examples survive, with one recently destroyed in a fatal accident.
Corsairs were by far the worst Navy/Marine fighter of WW2. The most overhyped pile of junk the USA ever built. The F7F Hellcat was by far a better machine than the Corsair. The F7F Hellcat had 305 Aces.
The Corsair was a handful because of it's long nose. Limited forward visibility initially made it very challenging to get aboard ship and earned it the nickname of Ensign killer. It was later found that it could be landed on ship if the approach was done in a continuous slip but this was still not a maneuver for the inexperienced. You have to remember that pilots fresh out of carrier quals back then had less than 1000 hours (much less). Once the Navy stopped assigning new pilots to the Corsair it proved itself very formidable.
@@gerrycarmichael1391 It was actually the English,specifically "Winkle" Brown who demonstrated to the USN how a Corsair could be recovered,with a curved approach.
I love the sound of radials when they are just loping along ready to show their real power.
jrfoleyjr yeah
Any corsair, F4U, in flying condition is 'super' in my book.
I so agree!!
This ain’t your standard Corsair, this is one of the 15 Goodyear F2G Super Corsairs! The F4U has the R2800 18 cylinder 2,000 horsepower engine with a 13 foot propeller. The F2G has the R4360 28 cylinder 4,300 horsepower engine and a 14 foot propeller.
@@zachboyd4749 I caught that from the video presentation. Does not negate my initial comment. :)
Not true. Super corsair is different and made by Goodyear. I don't think any saw combat. Too late
@@mikeholland1031
Yep, never saw service. By the time they came out, the first jets were being tested. They were considered obsolete before they even got a chance. Only five prototypes and ten production models were built, and now there's only two survivors, of which Race 57 here is the last one that can still fly.
When an F4 Corsair showed up at the Udvar Hazy Center/National Air and Space I didn't realize how big they are. I was part of the original security team there 1/2004 to 9/2009. It was hard not to take notice of this aircraft. Definitely one of my favorite aircraft of all time.
You should see an F7F Tigercat in person, they're huge! Same engine, only two of them! I can stand fully upright under the wing roots, there's two of them at a museum nearby, both flyable.
I remember this and 74 both as a child. I played with my friend Wally around 74 and 57 was in Chardon Ohio in a state of disrepair. I’m glad to see 57 flying and saddened of the crash of 74.
Rest in piece bob odegard and Jerry Beck, both regularly attended the fargo air museum it was great to know them
The 4360 was just a big, beautiful American overachiever and I wish there were more of them
Those Pratt 'Corncob' engines are awesome inspiring!
Gawd, can you imagine being on the flight deck of a carrier with dozens of Corsairs and Hellcats warming up for takeoff? Wow.....
Thank you for posting this, and thank you for not adding music.
They’re like muscle cars of the sky. They sound beautiful 🤩
these motors are being started and run up perfectly! the amount of pilots i see starting these huge engines and revving them to get them going is bloody awful! This is a refreshing change!!
That’s a lie you idiot
Those things sound so awesome
I know it's picky, but this is an F2G, not an F4U
Beautiful sight and sound 😍 chills the neck....
Reason why this is a SUPER Corsair is because of the size of the engine. This one here was made by Goodyear and has the Pratt & Whitney R4360 Wasp Major and has 3500HP while the Vought F4U had the Pratt & Whitney R2800-18W radial engine that produced 2380HP. Only 10 + 7 prototypes of the Goodyear F2G were made with only 2 survive today with only 1 that is airworthy.
Bob Odegaard . This airplane was put togeter from a shitpile in Cleveland. I had the privilege to see this monster multiple times in Reno/Stead Nevada
Best looking fighter of ww2. Period.
RIP Bob Odegaard...
We saw the FG-2 race at Reno, I think in 2010. At that time, Reno had added "High G Ridge" where you could actually watch from a spot where the racers actually flew over you. We were there when the Super Corsair was in an Unlimited Class heat. OMG! What a sound. High G Ridge was eliminated the next year because of the "Galloping Ghost" tragedy.
if this is the plane Cook Cleland raced,I used to play on it when he abandoned It in the tie down area of Cleveland Hopkins air port in the early 50's
Awesome sound too. I've been up close and personal with these airplanes what a rush
Shame to have lost these two icons !
Beautiful FG-1A
Look at the size of that prop!!
🔝🆙 Formidable Warriorbird of the time 💪✈️💫🌠
Image being on a carrier with 50 others all ready to go
Knew both men. Miss both are missed.
If you listen on closely, really closely. This is what an O sounds like.
Fine aircraft!
" Whistling Death" Japanese Nick name during WW2. Beautiful air plane.
no evidence that is true
I worked at Goodyear Aerospace in the 1980s .
That's where the Corsairs were built. I heard a story that near the end of the war they built a souped up Corsair and gave the employees a air show with it at the air field that was next to the plant . Is this the one they built I don't know ?
Goodyear built 11 Goodyear F2G-2 Super Corsairs. Unfortunately their performance was disappointing. Could only achieve a top speed of only 430 mph. Also suffered from handling characteristics that were never solved, which is why only two survive and of these only one still flies.
@@jimfinlaw4537
That sort of top speed isn't why the F2G was developed, the "fastest" piston engine propeller driven aircraft all have something in common that the F2G didn't have, a high altitude supercharger system.
To get serious speed numbers out of any aircraft including jets you have to get them up into altitudes where the air is thin so you don't have as much drag on the airframe, but at the same time the engine has to be able to make it's maximum power at those altitudes which requires a special high altitude supercharger system like the regular F4U had, which in it's case was a 2 stage supercharger, the R4360 engine in the F2G only had a single stage supercharger, that's because it was meant to be fast at low altitude, those numbers are hard to come by because most sources only list an absolute top speed for just about every aircraft ever made, the amount of boost the single stage supercharger in the F2G would have started to drop right around 10,000 ft, so the 430 MPH top speed it had would have been achieved right around that altitude while other variant's of the Corsair with high altitude superchargers that could hit 460 MPH at a much higher altitude, probably around 20,000 ft, were doing it in thinner air but wouldn't have been anywhere close to the 430 MPH speed of the F2G at 10,000 ft, I'd lay odds if you found the data for an F4U's top speed at 10,000 ft it'd be below 400 MPH and even more importantly it wouldn't get to 10,000 ft from sea level nearly as fast as the F2G could, it was specifically designed to be fast at low level, that's what the Marine Corps, who was actually who wanted the F2G built and not the Navy as most people assume, wanted out of it, an aircraft that could take off from one of their islands and provide low level fighter cover for it's beaches to protect them from an invading force both in the air and on the ground.
Another variant of the Corsair that was built with similar priorities was the Korean War era Goodyear F4U, even though it had the same Pratt&Whitney R2800 engine that was in the WW2 built Corsair's it had a single stage supercharger on it's engine because it wasn't intended to be a fighter instead it was meant for ground attack, although they can't provide maximum boost at higher altitudes single stage superchargers are actually better for aircraft intended to fly low altitude missions because only having to drive a single stage the engine suffers less parasitic power loss which means there's more power going to the propeller instead of being wasted driving a supercharger stage that's not needed at low altitude, it'll lose 250 to 350 HP at low altitude compared to the same exact engine with a single stage supercharger on it.
The reason that the orders were canceled for the F2G was because after the destruction of the Japanese navy force at the Battle of The Phillipine Sea the threat of invasion or naval offensive forces against US held areas with beaches that would have needed to be defended was virtually eliminated coupled with the F8F and the Tigercat already starting to be produced which had similar performance in the realm needed for an aircraft like the F2G, as far as what was disappointing about the F2G that was considered an issue it wasn't it's absolute top speed since that was never the point behind it, as far as speed goes it was fast at low altitude which is exactly what they wanted out of it, it's handling characteristics at low altitude and low speed is what turned out to be disappointing, and since there were other aircraft already coming online with similar performance coupled with the fact that at that point no one was interested in spending any real money on propeller driven aircraft anymore because jets were apparently the way of the future the order for the F2G was canceled.
57 still flies, and she flies out of my local airport.
Stand righting the plane of the prop. I hope it don't sling a blade.
Looks like the video was taken in Fargo?
I remember watching the super corsair blown a jug and crash during the Phoenix 500 back in 95.
+ wayney2 The Corsair in the Phoenix race was a regular F4U with a 4360, not a factory F2G..
Listen to that exhaust note at idle. Sound a little like a Top Fuel Dragster. But the dragsters have 12,000 hp compared to maybe 3,500 for the R-4360 engine in the Super Corsair. Still, an awesome sound!
And TF engine will last maybe 4 secs and have ZERO cooling.
Was the race 57 Super Corsair full-length wings?
Yep, it was 74 that had clipped wings
War Thunder player like me finding this video.
nice
The red and white one has a bubble canopy??
It was a race modified one... Number 57. The stock F4U also did not have 3,500 horsepower.
+ Paul Shaffer The late-war F2G Corsair was designed with a bubble canopy. Very few were built and several became race planes after the war, including Race #57.
Does anybody know how to hold a friggin camera still ? ANYBODY ?
Goodyear super corsair
Any day. All night. The End
I work in the hanger that is now home to Race 57. I can assure everyone that she is well taken care of and still flies regularly!
Here’s a vid I shot of her flying!
ruclips.net/video/30dIqzBYTAU/видео.html
I know right! I regularly go to KVBT and see it flying it’s very beautiful and loud
Also nice video
Thank you. I used to see 57 at least once a year during the transit to/from Reno. Good to see she's still going strong.
Poor camera man had a palsy.
Whistling Death.
Too bad the video was shot poorly. The sound was good.
F2G 4. If I'm not mistaken
Built when America was great.
interman 77, That four row radial is a beautiful engine, compact package of 3500 horsepower, too bad it couldn't have been put to better use than killing and going fast around the world, maybe. What happened?
@@Lumby1 The 3500 HP is a super corsair. They never saw combat. Too late in the war to be used. Only 10 were ever built by the Goodyear company. Surprisingly they didn't use them in Korea.
@@robertthomas5906 Thanks, my father called them corncob radials.
@@Lumby1 I'd love to fly one. Closest I've been so far is a T-6 Texan.
Never hurry a radial...
Puckta Puckta puckta
It's like a corsair and a mustang had a baby.
What you're seeing now its a normal F4F
and this is F4U, Corsair.
and this is what is known as the corsair that surpassed Corsair, or you can just call this Super Corsair.
AND THIS! IS TO GO EVEN FURTHER BEYOND!!!
*corsair engine rev up at full throttle*
Um, Joe--- the F4F is a Hellcat, made by Grumman. Neither of these is F4F. This is basic WW2 fighter information, and since you don't know, you should stop commenting and start reading.
*cue epic Bruce Faulconer music
@@lesizmor9079
F4F is called the Wildcat F6F is the Hellcat
Cliff waters. Correct. Les Izmir should take his own advice
@@lesizmor9079 um Les, the F4F is not a Hellcat, it's a Wildcat..... Learn basic WW2 aircraft names and numbers before you try to correct people. It's....... unbecoming
The only aircraft that sounds like a John Deere idling!
R3350 right in your face. Love it
Bob crashed the 74,
but the 57 is still intact right?
will the 57 race again?
EnglertRacing96 j
No, it’s based at new airport due to privacy reasons a can’t state were
@@nwaplanespotter9088 is it flightworthy these days?
@@EnglertRacing96 yes
I work in the hanger that is now home to Race 57. I can assure everyone that she is well taken care of and still flies regularly!
Every time I see an F4U, I can't help but feel sad. How much faster could they go without those stupid cowl flaps sticking in the wind?
Those cowl flaps closed up as they gained altitude & speed. They were only open to keep enough airflow through the engine to keep it from burning up at low speed & idle.
@@cerhart7172 Yes, but look into the aerodynamic studies on the B-29 and see how much speed those cowl flaps cost. Grumman kept using them too, but there are more aerodynamic ways to do it.
@@SoloRenegade - the flaps caused negligible performance degradation when closed at altitude, which is where they spent most of their operating time. Since you brought it up, I suggest you look deeper into the development of the B-29 and you'll see why those cowl flaps were as important as they were - they burned up a LOT of engines without the airflow those flaps allowed, and even with them there were a lot of engine failures lifting lfully loaded birds off the island bases in the Pacific due to overheating.
Also, you do realize that pure aerodynamics wasn't the only consideration in these aircraft, don't you? These combat aircraft weren't built in a modern theoretical vacuum with a virtually open timeline, they were developing from what they had available and were quite literally at the bleeding edge of what they had. Every decision made in the design of these aircraft was a compromise, including specification requirements, producibility, parts availability, survivability, and maintainability, in order to get the best combat aircraft they could into service as quickly as they could.
@@cerhart7172 I'm well aware of the B-29s engine issues. I did bring up the B-29 for a reason after all.
Yes, built for their mission, and lacking modern info, but aerodynamic studies were done during the war and many airplanes benefited from that, yet the late model F4U and Grummans still used them. Even when other radial engine aircraft found other better ways to cool the engine. Fighter planes are teh pinnacle of aircraft performance, and speed was the name of the game in WW2 and into the early jet age.
I am an engineer myself and design cooling systems, and a professional pilot as well. I know what I'm talking about here. But my original comment was partially tongue-in-cheek and light hearted even though it was also meant to stir up discussion. Take a chill pill and lighten up.
@@SoloRenegade - your "tongue-in-cheek" response reads more like that of someone who hasn't a clue what they're talking about, so I responded appropriately to your initial post. Since you decided to "educate me" you lost all possibility of claiming a light-hearted comment. Now, your claim of being an engineer makes you sound pedantic. Your current engineering degree of 2022 doesn't mean squat to the events of 1940-45. The studies you bring up were being done concurrently with the primary development of the majority of US WW2 combat aircraft: the results weren't finalized until most of them were well past prototyping and into production. In case your engineering background doesn't tell you this, a major retrofit to a design costs a great deal of time as well as money, especially once that design has been accepted and production is well underway. As I said earlier, compromises were made. They continued to use what they knew worked rather than try and reinvent the wheel, which would have bottlenecked production at a crucial time. The Germans did a lot of reinventing the wheel during WW2, and it shows a lot in the chaos that the personnel had to deal with just to keep anything working.
I suggest you take the chill pill yourself, Mr. Engineer.
As the title says-- "Ground Start" is what this vid is about. Once the planes are in the air the camera operator is useless.
Yo quiero uno...... Volar quiero y solo y fumarme un porro de marihuana, alli arriba
The R-2800 sounds better lol
Great airplanes, great sound, but please,,, give the camera to the person with the least palse!
Can't afford a tripod?
Jas
Långholmen
Bob Odegaard died flying an F2G.
I think it's kind of disrespectful to clown up a corsair with that paint job there's only one color for them BLUE, CORSAIR BLUE, like it was meant to be..
Let the dogs of war lay down their harnesses. It may be a machine but I think the pilots would be greatful to know that their sacrifice would lead to a world where weapons of war turned into things of pass time.
@@kayvalencia2223 WHAT!! If it move's ,make's noise, can ride in it and cost money that make's it a fun, a pass time is collecting stamp's, painting, making clay pot's is a pass time.
+ Al King That aircraft has had a much longer history as Cook Cleland's Race #57 than it ever had as a test airframe at the Navy flight test center. www.largescaleplanes.com/articles/images/927/927-9.jpg
www.pylon1.org/articles/uploads/f2g-1_race57_01.jpg
Al King, I agree with you there, that red n white just does not look right.
Is it then , also disrespectful , for a soldier to remove his uniform and wear street clothes once he is home from the war ? ... It's a race plane now , enjoying retirement .
A red flying circus paint job on a Corsair! What a terrible thing to do to such a beautiful and historic bird.
I'm warbird engine shy. Doe it have a more powerful engine than a standard F4U, or a P-47? Thanks in advance
+ Edsmaureen She was surplus in 1947 and been Race #57 since 1949. That's a much longer history as one of Cook Cleland's aircraft than any US Navy service.
@@billpayne6936 The F2G was specifically built as a high speed interceptor to counter the Kamikaze attacks. They have the 28-cylinder P&W R-4360 engine. Very few were built and only three intact examples survive, with one recently destroyed in a fatal accident.
jeez man, it’s a racer not a fighter plane!
That's its historic paint scheme from Cook Cleland's Race 57, winner of the 1949 Tinnerman Trophy that was flown by Ben McKillen. ref Wikipedia
And you painted it red? How unbelievably ugly
That's its historic paint scheme as Cook Cleland's Race 57, winner of the 1949 Tinnerman Trophy, flown by Ben McKillen. ref Wikipedia
@@wuffos that's an interesting trivia point to know. Thank you for sharing. It's still ugly
Corsairs were by far the worst Navy/Marine fighter of WW2. The most overhyped pile of junk the USA ever built. The F7F Hellcat was by far a better machine than the Corsair. The F7F Hellcat had 305 Aces.
F7F was the Tigercat.
Hellcat was F6F...which simply outnumbered the Corsair,and would have been succeeded by the F8F Bearcat
The Corsair was a handful because of it's long nose. Limited forward visibility initially made it very challenging to get aboard ship and earned it the nickname of Ensign killer. It was later found that it could be landed on ship if the approach was done in a continuous slip but this was still not a maneuver for the inexperienced. You have to remember that pilots fresh out of carrier quals back then had less than 1000 hours (much less). Once the Navy stopped assigning new pilots to the Corsair it proved itself very formidable.
@@gerrycarmichael1391 It was actually the English,specifically "Winkle" Brown who demonstrated to the USN how a Corsair could be recovered,with a curved approach.
@@chrisreynolds7164 now that you mention it that does seem to be what I remember.
Jas Långholmen