The Vought UO was a two-seat biplane observation aircraft that the Chance Vought company developed in the early 1920s from the VE-7 and VE-9 trainer line. Its airframe was basically similar to the VE series with some refinements, the most noticeable being revised vertical tail surfaces. It was powered first by a Lawrence J-1 or J-3 radial engine of 149 kilowatts, later by a Wright J-1 or J-3 radial, and from 1927 many were re-engined with the 164 kilowatt Wright J-5. The UO-1 landplane had a wingspan of 10.45 metres, a length of 7.45 metres and a top speed of 200 kilometres per hour. Final development produced an order for 20 UO-3 single-seat catapult-launched floatplane fighters, which were redesignated FU-1 before delivery, and Peru later replaced its surviving UOs with Vought O2U-1 aircraft in 1929.
Facts
Engine Class Engine149kW Wright J-3 radial engine 1 Comparison
Body StyleAircraft (no road body style) 1 Connections
Exemplifies
Source Vought FU (Wikipedia)
In the Other Atlases
Manufactured By
Also in Business Atlas: the manufacturer of this subject.
Source Vought FU (Wikipedia)Design and developmentQuote, Design and development
Vought already had a two-seat observation plane, the UO-1, basically a VE-7 with additional fuselage streamlining and a Wright J-3 radial engine.
Originated In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject originated.
Source Vought FU (Wikipedia)LeadQuote, Lead
The Vought FU was a biplane fighter aircraft of the United States Navy in service during the late 1920s.
Sources
1. Aviastar: Vought UO
Specification, UO-1
MODEL UO-1 (landplane)
Specification, UO-1, engine
ENGINE 1 x 149kW Wright J-3 radial engine
View the SourceVought FU (Wikipedia)
Design and development
Vought already had a two-seat observation plane, the UO-1, basically a VE-7 with additional fuselage streamlining and a Wright J-3 radial engine.
Lead
The Vought FU was a biplane fighter aircraft of the United States Navy in service during the late 1920s.
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.