the P47 "the Unbreakable"no more

[IceFire]

Bombs and fuel are now critical factors to what you can do during a dive bombing run. I've run a few dive bombing runs in the FW190, P-47 and Tempest which are all bomb carrying aircraft with historically above average strength airframes. I haven't broken any of them yet...except when I went nuts and I did a hard pull out in which case all of them exceeded the airframe limits as specified in the game and the aircraft broke.

I think this patch has been harder for people who in the past have treated the aircraft as unbreakable and stressed them to the limits at all opportunities. Although I flew like this in the first couple of years of playing the game I later learned that the better way to fly was smoothly and calmly with deliberate and planned out action. The benefit pre-4.10 was a aircraft that flew better and faster. Now those benefits are realized in not breaking the airframe as well.

[Zorin]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Bombs and fuel are now critical factors to what you can do during a dive bombing run. I've run a few dive bombing runs in the FW190, P-47 and Tempest which are all bomb carrying aircraft with historically above average strength airframes. I haven't broken any of them yet...except when I went nuts and I did a hard pull out in which case all of them exceeded the airframe limits as specified in the game and the aircraft broke.

I think this patch has been harder for people who in the past have treated the aircraft as unbreakable and stressed them to the limits at all opportunities. Although I flew like this in the first couple of years of playing the game I later learned that the better way to fly was smoothly and calmly with deliberate and planned out action. The benefit pre-4.10 was a aircraft that flew better and faster. Now those benefits are realized in not breaking the airframe as well.

quoted for truth

[mazex]

When flying IRL manouvre speed (Va) is one of the most important things to know for an aircraft, especially when flying aerobatics which I have done quite a lot. It's nice that we now have it in this game too. I'm pretty sure that the P-47 was famous for high speed dives as it did not get control surface flutter and compression problems, and not due to the fact that you could pull the stick in your belly at near mach speed?

[JtD]

The P-47 suffered quite a bit from compressibility and certainly wasn't pleasant to handle at high speeds. It was famous because it was fast in a dive and because it usually survived the problems so the pilots could tell the tale.

[TinyTim]

Are you sure you are dropping all bombs before pulling up? If you drop only wing bombs, your underbelly bomb will cause problems during pull up.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by JtD

The P-47 suffered quite a bit from compressibility and certainly wasn't pleasant to handle at high speeds. It was famous because it was fast in a dive and because it usually survived the problems so the pilots could tell the tale.

Well, I have never flown any plane that is pleasant to fly near Vne (Velocity never exceeded) - all movement in the air feels like riding over a road bump in a car and you sure understand without patch notes for 4.10 that sudden stick movements are a "no no" above Va (manouvre speed which is the maximum speed for full deflection of the control surfaces). That's the problems with sims - you don't get the stiff feeling of the air getting "harder and harder" as the speed increases

The fact that the P-47 could get close to mach 1 in dives must for sure tell that it was less prone to control surface flutter (which is really nasty - can tell you that from own experience), or compressability problems with rudders that are "locked" due to design of ailerons or elevator. I'm pretty sure that it was not the ability to withstand excessive G load during the pull ups that made it famous for surviving those dives... The planes with the problems mentioned before could not get high G:s - that was the problem as the controls where either torn away from flutter or "locked" due to compressability. I guess you had to be really smooth after shaking the 109 that when down straight into the fatherland with an elevator that was "stuck" after going 800 km/h in a dive... Not due to ripping the wings pulling 12 G:s...

[JtD]

Early P-47 tail design broke in a wind tunnel at 468 mph due to control flutter.
Flight tests of P-47 regularly state that the elevator froze in high speed dives and that trim was necessary to recover from it.

[mazex]

Originally Posted by JtD

Early P-47 tail design broke in a wind tunnel at 468 mph due to control flutter.
Flight tests of P-47 regularly state that the elevator froze in high speed dives and that trim was necessary to recover from it.

OK, but I guess they corrected that in the late D-models? And compared to the 109 at least I guess it was a lot better as the 109 was infamous for very stiff elevator controls at high speed? I once flew with an old 109 pilot (that was to old to keep his license) that spoke of very nasty behavior at deep dives with "locked" elevator. The worst thing was landing that beast of a crate with it's narrow gear and high wing loading though (he was flying late G and K models in 44-45). Which plane was better than the P-47 regarding these issues? I'm not that well read up on the P-47 so I'm not gonna keep on pressing my point much longer