Otto Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) As far as canopies go, not looking at the wind shield section, there were five specific sliding hoods. 1 Birdcage 2 Blown hood with dual upper frames and armored shield behind head. 3 Blown hood with no framing just armor shield behind head. 4 blown hood with NO armor shield (F4U-4 all) with and without armored windscreen.Sliding hoods were all interchangeable. 5 blown hood with raised cockpit (F4U-5,6,7, AU-1)All these had armored windscreen. Hoods 1-4 were all actually interchangeable, and were sometimes swapped due to damage. There were a few F4U-4s that received replacement hoods from cannibalized F4U-1s because damage to OE hood. hood 5 was completely unique and was installed on post war Corsairs -5 and newer. I am just worried that they will screw up the F4U-4 to the point of "not worth buying" just like they did with the F6F kit. That thing is a complete disaster. Edited January 24, 2012 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Their Avenger was pricey but beat the Accurate Miniatures one by a wide margin, and I'd rather have that than most of the cheaper models they have done since! Robertson Really?? Better than the kit that many touted as the best injection molded kit ever? I hadnt seen it, but I guess its worth looking into then? Edited January 25, 2012 by Cobrahistorian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 As a side note, (and I'm not saying the C model didn't exist or was not an official designation), but I just spent the day going through the BuAero General Correspondence files on the F4U for 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1951 and I saw plenty of F4U-4B notations, but not one -4C. I absolutely could have missed something, since I was looking for specific accident reports, but I've been keeping an eye out. Should be back into those records again on Thursday and will continue to look. Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 As far as canopies go, not looking at the wind shield section, there were five specific sliding hoods. 1 Birdcage 2 Blown hood with dual upper frames and armored shield behind head. 3 Blown hood with no framing just armor shield behind head. 4 blown hood with NO armor shield (F4U-4 all) with and without armored windscreen.Sliding hoods were all interchangeable. 5 blown hood with raised cockpit (F4U-5,6,7, AU-1)All these had armored windscreen. Hoods 1-4 were all actually interchangeable, and were sometimes swapped due to damage. There were a few F4U-4s that received replacement hoods from cannibalized F4U-1s because damage to OE hood. hood 5 was completely unique and was installed on post war Corsairs -5 and newer. Disagree to a point. There were the 5 different canopy types noted, but the round-windscreen -4 airplanes had the number 3 canopy. The flat windscreen introduced the canopy with no head armor (number 4), and had a different shape at the front end due to the flat top to the windscreen bow. This is noticeable in many photos. The round windscreen canopy would not interchange with the flat windscreen canopy because of this. Not sure that the number 1 canopy would interchange with numbers 2 and 3, either, since the windscreen changed with the introduction of the number 2 canopy, but it might. Some very late F4U-4B (and F4U-4P conversions) had the same sliding canopy as the F4U-5/-7/AU-1. Again, photo evidence confirms this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) That is kind of funny, If you are right about the canopies on the -4 than Hobby Boss already screwed it up there. And Yes, I have also found photo evidence of -4s with hood armor. I already know that they screwed up the cowling since all they do is shrink down the Trumpeter kits. Please notice proper shape of cowl lower intake and sides. I had to build one of these in Quantico a few years back so I am intimately familiar with it. Also notice unarmored front windscreen with hood that has no top armor. Edited January 25, 2012 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) There also seams to be some discussion on other threads and sights that the -4 did not have a fabric wing. That is completely FALSE, the -4 DID have fabric wings. There are SOME modern restorations that do not keep the fabric covering for maintenance purposes. The -4 when I came from the factory did have fabric. Here are some really exquisite pictures. http://www.midwaysailor.com/photos/corsair-f4u4corsair.html Edited January 25, 2012 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Robertson Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Really?? Better than the kit that many touted as the best injection molded kit ever? I hadnt seen it, but I guess its worth looking into then? The AM Avenger kit isn't the best kit by a long shot, as the canopy top width and both cowling types are badly shaped, especially the TBM. To top it off, the TBM version doesn't even have the right kind of prop. The Hobby Boss TBF cowling is really good, and quite a bit better than their own TBM, but at least the HB TBM has the right prop! On the down side, the tail feather hinges could really use the much better Acurate Miniatures parts... HB really dropped in quality after the Avenger, so be warned... Their recent semi-fictional Me-509 looks really nice, if you like that sort of thing... Robertson Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 I thought that this is a HB F4U-4 & AU-1 Corsair thread? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Sorry for the hijack there, Otto! :D Thanks for the info Robertson. I'd like to see a new-tool -4 and will keep an eye out for it, but in the meantime, I'm gonna convert the Tamiya. Jon Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) I guess another question is, when is this going to be available. I have seen Trumpeter announce something, show all kinds of pictures and than the announcement fell off the face of this earth. I have four concerns with a new F4U-4 release from HB. 1 Cockpit/Canopy area width and size 2 fabric areas representation 3 cowling shape 4 oil cooler, wing air intakes These are areas that Trumpeter and HB almost always screw up. If they screw up the fabric representation on the wing, or the canopy area, or wing air intakes, than the kit is pretty much DOA. Since you guys were on the TBF/TBM subject, how well were the fabric areas represented on it? I know that on the F4F-4 they were horrible and on the F4F-3 they were not great but acceptable. On the FW200 the ailerons were completely bogus. A cowling can always be changed, but only if the kit is not out of this world price wise. looking at the 3D model from them, the screwed up wing is a given, and so is the cowling. The wing air intakes were a complete bomb on the Trumpeter kit and look bogus on the 3D model also. It is hard to tell about the canopy. It looks like that part MIGHT be OK. Academy managed to screw up three out of four, the wing air intakes were fine. Hasegawa screwed up the canopy area, the fabric areas were marginal and the cowling and wing air intakes looked good. I would hate to buy this kit and than have to kitbash or spend twice as much on aftermarket parts. The sad part about the CMK conversion set is that they managed to screw up the cowling also. The Hasegawa cowling is still the best in size and shape. It is still not perfect, but it is the best available. Edited January 25, 2012 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I've put some images of the F4U-4 that I found at the National Archives here: These show both combinations of canopies/windscreens in use. One image in particular, the Coral Sea air wing image, shows both types clearly in use in the same squadron and shows the difference in windscreen bow shape between the round and flat windscreen versions. You can see where the flat windscreen has a noticable flat area at the top, where the internal armor glass windscreen is rounded over the top. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 Those are very nice. I know that my old squadron also had a mix of canopies on their -4s. They also had a mix of .50cal and 20mm armed corsairs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted January 25, 2012 Author Share Posted January 25, 2012 Anyone ever manage to talk themselves out of something even before they seen it? I think I just have. I think I am going with the Tamiya/Hasegawa kitbash route. i have two of the CMK conversion sets and will also incorporate some of that also. I don't like the undersized CMK cowling and that is why I will use the Hasegawa front end. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CorsairMan Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I love Corsairs but I won't be parting with $85 for a 1/48 one. If it was... say... a 1/32 from Tamiya... then yes. I just finished the- -4 CMK conversion and its a lot of work. While it looks the part, its far from perfect. It could be that the price is wrong as the other 1/48 hobbyboss stuff at my LHS is $25-$30 or so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nerdling Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I will never pay 85 dollars for a single engine 1/48 fighter. That just seems crazy. But I also tend to not like Hobby Boss kits at all. Seems that they cant do a good job getting them accurate at the rate they pump them out. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 I will never pay 85 dollars for a single engine 1/48 fighter. That just seems crazy. But I also tend to not like Hobby Boss kits at all. Seems that they cant do a good job getting them accurate at the rate they pump them out. That seems to be the case with all of them from the far east with the exception of Japan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted February 2, 2012 Share Posted February 2, 2012 The F4U-4C received the 4 x 20mm canon armament. The airframes for the -4B/-4C are 100% identical and the C was strictly an armament designation. There were -4Bs that were re-armed with 20mm guns and retained the -4B designation. There were 297 -4B built and 200 -4Cs built Hi Otto, I don't think any 4Cs were even built, there was a 1C that you may be confusing this with. I likey have every Corsair book published on the planet and I don't recall reading about any 4Cs being produced. Another good reference is this one that Joe Hegedus (who is in this thread) was an author of. http://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/ref/sam/book_sam_f4u.shtml I am a Corsair freak, but this projected cost of $85.00 is crazy. I hear it has 300 plus parts, a lot for a 1/48 WWII fighter. I like the KISS principle though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted February 2, 2012 Author Share Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) Please refer to post #13. The F4U-4C was also a Marine Corps fighter bomber designation. This was than later replaced by the AU-1 which was also originally a USMC specification and built for us. The navy originally ordered their F4U-4/4B as fighters. The Marines disabled the second stage of the two stage supercharger. Edited February 2, 2012 by Otto Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Joe Hegedus Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Please refer to post #13. The F4U-4C was also a Marine Corps fighter bomber designation. This was than later replaced by the AU-1 which was also originally a USMC specification and built for us. The navy originally ordered their F4U-4/4B as fighters. The Marines disabled the second stage of the two stage supercharger. I'd like to see the documentation that backs this up; this is the first I've ever heard of any -4 having the second stage supercharger disabled. I'm still of the opinion that the F4U-4C was a "paper" designation only, never having been applied to an airplane that was actually delivered. Joe Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Otto, the links provided there are all secondary and tertiary sources. Have you got any primary source documents that show that designation? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 Any modern book on the market is a secondary or tertiary source. When I am back in Quantico in about 9 months I will go threw the archives. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cobrahistorian Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 (edited) Right, I understand that. Any modern book that's reprinted the F4U-4C designation is most likely in error. I'm a historian by trade and I'm at the National Archives on a near-daily basis going through primary sources. I've been going through Record Group 72 (BuAer General Correspondence) for the F4U-1 and F4U-4 (and F6F) in 1944/45 for the past few weeks and I've seen F4U-4 and F4U-4B designations throughout, but I have yet to see a -4C designation. The General Correspondence files cover airframe changes, defective parts, accident reports, etc. The airframe change bulletins do not mention a -4C at all, but -4 and -4B designations are prevalent. Here's one of the pics I recently pulled. Enjoy! Edited February 3, 2012 by Cobrahistorian Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Right, I understand that. Any modern book that's reprinted the F4U-4C designation is most likely in error. I'm a historian by trade and I'm at the National Archives on a near-daily basis going through primary sources. I've been going through Record Group 72 (BuAer General Correspondence) for the F4U-1 and F4U-4 (and F6F) in 1944/45 for the past few weeks and I've seen F4U-4 and F4U-4B designations throughout, but I have yet to see a -4C designation. The General Correspondence files cover airframe changes, defective parts, accident reports, etc. The airframe change bulletins do not mention a -4C at all, but -4 and -4B designations are prevalent. Here's one of the pics I recently pulled. Enjoy! I tend to agree, I think Otto is wrong about the 4C designation. There is no way that every publication missed an entire production of aircraft. I have looked through log books and I have a large collection of Corsair publications (it is my favourite aircraft) and there is no way a run of 300 aircraft could have been missed by so many. I like the image you posted. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CreepyGuy Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 1/48 Hobby Boss F4U-4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Otto Posted February 3, 2012 Author Share Posted February 3, 2012 1/48 Hobby Boss F4U-4 OK I was off by a couple of bucks, but not much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.