|
|
Ordered as a prototype on 30 June 1938 by the US Navy
Bureau of Aeronautics, the XF5F-1 was of radical concept.
It was intended as a twin-engined shipboard
fighter, and this at a time when the first single-engined
shipboard fighter monoplanes were only just commencing
flight test. Conceived as the G-34 Skyrocket,
the XF5F-1 was flown on 1 April 1940, and, in its initial
form, had a singular appearance resulting from an
abbreviated forward fuselage, the wing leading edge
extending ahead of the fighter's nose. Powered by two
1200hp Wright XR-1820-40/42 radials and having provision
for two 23mm Madsen cannon, the XF5F-1
underwent some redesign as a result of testing, the engine nacelles being lengthened, the fuselage nose
being extended, etc. Flight testing of the XF5F-1 provided
information utilised in the development of the
more advanced XF7F-1 (G-51).
| MODEL | XF5F-1 |
| WEIGHTS |
| Take-off weight | 4599 kg | 10139 lb |
| Empty weight | 3677 kg | 8106 lb |
| DIMENSIONS |
| Wingspan | 12.80 m | 42 ft 0 in |
| Length | 8.75 m | 29 ft 8 in |
| Height | 3.45 m | 11 ft 4 in |
| Wing area | 28.19 m2 | 303.43 sq ft |
| PERFORMANCE |
| Max. speed | 616 km/h | 383 mph |
| Range | 1930 km | 1199 miles |
 | A three-view drawing (1276 x 794) |
| roy 24/10/2012, bschofield06=aol.com, 24.10.2012 does any company in u.k.produce decals of blackhawk insigna/logo.also is there a kit of the f5fon the market at present? | | airnut, 26.07.2011 Alas, shown is the Blackhawk comic book model. When I started reading Blackhawk comic books, the F5F was the star. The 7 Blackhawks each had an F5F and they seem to progress through experimental planes. The last I remember was the F-90 which I believe was Lockheed's first attempt at a swept wing fighter. Where did all those comics go???? Remember it did take some time to find out there was such a plane as the F5F as things were pretty hush hush in those days. While the F5F was really cool looking, the child of the F5F, was the exceedingly beautiful F7F. | | baxie, 21.06.2011 If development had continued, the history of the twin-engined fighter would have been very different... | | , poloralphlauren=aol.com, 21.06.2011 Grumman XF5F Skyrocket | | Rudy Dracka, rudydracka=yahoo.com, 21.04.2011 where can one get a model of this airplane ? | | XWXwireXWX, bloodred1314=live.com, 17.04.2011 The fighter itself was an incredible leap forward in technology, but like planes like the P-39 and other, it was too radical a design with too many new untested ideas. | | steve, steveg=abkj.com, 15.02.2011 The XF5F can be usefully thought of as the backup to the possible failure of radar development: An interceptor whose extreme climb performance permitted launch on the very short warning of an incoming raid provided by visual detection from a screening destroyer. Perhaps fortunately, the F5F lost its mission before its developmental troubles could be cured. The F5F's problems involved engine cooling and aerodynamic turbulence due to its too-short engine necelles. (Compare the Cyclone installation on the later S2F.) What the aircraft really needed was a smaller diameter engine - imagine a larger-displacement equivalent of the Gnome-Rhone 14M. | | junqueira macos, junqueiramarcos=igcom.br, 10.01.2010 Este avião é maravilhoso. Como conseguir o projeto para construção dele para radio controle na escala 1/4 ou em escala menor? | | junqueira macos, junqueiramarcos=igcom.br, 10.01.2010 Este avião é maravilhoso. Como conseguir o projeto para construção dele para radio controle na escala 1/4 ou em escala menor? | | Jim Lloyd, jrlloyd=vinfiz.net, 17.03.2009 It actually was continued into the F7F Tigercat, a clear descendent of the Skyrocket | | Roy Johnson, roynpegjohn=aol.com, 06.09.2008 In the early 1940's the comic book "The Black Hawks" featured a squadron that flew the Grumman Skyrockets. They later switched to jets after WWII. | | Castle22r, castle=castlerockhobbies.com, 16.06.2008 The plane was ahead of it's time. | | Aero-Fox, 11.03.2008 This aircraft had reportedly superb flight and handling preformance, it's only technical problem was unreliable landing gear, which could have been ironed out with commitment to the project. However, the reason the F5F was not adopted was reportedly a logistics issue...it was thought it would be too hard to maintain a twin-engined fighter in the field, which strikes me as odd...the F5F had radial engines, simple and reliable, whereas the P-38, the adopted twin-engine fighter, had in-lines...which are more complicated and harder to service... If development had continued, the history of the twin-engined fighter would have been very different... |
|
Do you have any comments about this aircraft ?
|
| |