4.11 F4U Performance

[JtD]

Originally Posted by h0MbrE

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...f4u-1d-acp.pdf

It says 409 mph top and this is what you get in game.

Would be nice to not clutter up a General debugging topic with a single FM debate.

[h0MbrE]

Originally Posted by JtD

It says 409 mph top and this is what you get in game.

How is this achieved? Altitude, throttle, pitch, fuel, armament, difficulty switches (overheating on/off)? I have never been able to get this out of a Corsair in this sim in level flight with full real settings or otherwise. Please give me a scenario and I will try to duplicate it.

Would be nice to not clutter up a General debugging topic with a single FM debate.

The issue was already underway in this thread before I made a post. If it would be better in addressed another thread go ahead and move all the posts on this issue there. It isn't my intention to clutter anything up.

[JimmyBlonde]

Originally Posted by JtD

Would be nice to not clutter up a General debugging topic with a single FM debate.

^^This^^

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Hombre be more specific at what altitude ?

Try everything at Sea level Crimea. See what numbers you get then compare them to a specific chart from your reference.

Also read the title of that report .. it refers to a test for max performance at War Emergency Power of a "Cleaned up version"



When I test in 4.11 Again Crimea Midday, WEP, RAD 2, 100% Fuel at 19,000ft (FTH Supercharger 3) I get the following:
240KIAS,280MPH IAS, 633KMH TAS (that works out at 393MPH TAS or 342Knots TAS)

The Max speed achieved in the Cleaned up test aircraft was as the report shows 429MPH TAS (averaged of the 2 runs). Its also worth pointing out they flew the test at 23,000ft, rather than the 19,000ft I flew the test.

Besides the altitude difference accounting for your slower in game speed, weather/temperature differences? Looks like the real life test was done during winter time. Not sure what the Crimea Midday temp is modeled to. But it's not a winter map, or is it?

[h0MbrE]

The season they did the tests in is irrelevant. It was probably done in Hawaii or somewhere in the southern part of the US where there is no winter. Besides... as I pointed out in an earlier post, this test was done early in 1943 on the earlier 1942 F4U-1s. After which the improvements were made and the C and D models were produced. Once again, refer to THIS document for the relevant test results on the 1944, 1945 C and D models we use in the sim:


http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u-1d-acp.pdf

We need to stick to the facts here and not be assuming things that might or might not be a factor. These tests were conducted at different altitudes and weapon/fuel loadouts, but the planes were ALL loaded as the official documents clearly point out.

Edit: Also if you notice at the bottom of that doc you will see "Water available for approximately 8.5 minutes at combat power". Wasn't the water cooling removed with 4.11 which causes it to overheat more quickly?

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by h0MbrE

The season they did the tests in is irrelevant. It was probably done in Hawaii or somewhere in the southern part of the US where there is no winter. Besides... as I pointed out in an earlier post, this test was done early in 1943 on the earlier 1942 F4U-1s. After which the improvements were made and the C and D models were produced. Once again, refer to THIS document for the relevant test results on the 1944, 1945 C and D models we use in the sim:


http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u-1d-acp.pdf

We need to stick to the facts here and not be assuming things that might or might not be a factor. These tests were conducted at different altitudes and weapon/fuel loadouts, but the planes were ALL loaded as the official documents clearly point out.

Actually, the rl report that you provided says it was -30/-32 degrees C for the runs. It does matter because temperature is modeled in the game on each map. That's why there are summer and winter versions, desert...etc. The airspeed are slower on the warm maps and faster on the cold ones. It has to do with density of the air. So if Ivank is test flying on a warm map he is going to get a slower non-comparable result. And if he is flying at a lower elevation than the real life (as he pointed out), he is going to get a slower result. Assuming everything was modeled in the ballpark. I would trust Ivank based on past experience.

[Pursuivant]

Ah, nothing like a chart war to go with the new patch.

It's nerfed! It's uber! Oleg's biased against Western Allies! Oleg's biased against the Axis!

re: Ship size. Other people have tried to claim that tanks and ships in the game are the wrong scale. It's not true. Just get the length of your favorite plane and measure it against the scale of whatever it is that you think is too big or too small. The comparative sizes will come out fairly close to reality.

Modelers bust their butts to make their models realistic. They're not going to screw up something as basic as length or width, since that will make the entire model look wrong.

re: F4U performance.

Originally Posted by IvanK

Also read the title of that report .. it refers to a test for max performance at War Emergency Power of a "Cleaned up version"

The words that jump out at me are "Cleaned Up Version." Operationally, the F4U-1 mostly operated from primitive airstrips carved out of some of the most unforgiving terrain on earth. They sure as hell weren't "cleaned up." They were constantly exposed to salt spray, mud, sand and tropical weather, maintained by overworked and relatively untrained mechanics, and regularly abused by their pilots.

Charts and tables showing prototype and test plane performance are ideals, as far removed from actual combat performance as "miles per gallon" figures in car advertisements.

That's why I'd love to see a feature within IL2 which allows users, or server hosts, to tweak aircraft performance slightly. That way you can nerf or uber your own plane as you wish.

[h0MbrE]

"They were constantly exposed to salt spray, mud, sand and tropical weather, maintained by overworked and relatively untrained mechanics, and regularly abused by their pilots."

Ahhh I get it now... that's why the F4U is too weak to even make it off the deck now. Well that makes it okay then. LOL

[mmaruda]

It's not to weak to take off, you can take off from large carriers that are moving with a load of bombs and go straight up from the deck, takes some skill, but it's possible. Static small carriers are impossible though, but I'm not sure the Corsair operated from those.

Still, for a 2300HP engine, acceleration is a bit poor, but maybe that's the way it was.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by mmaruda

It's not to weak to take off, you can take off from large carriers that are moving with a load of bombs and go straight up from the deck, takes some skill, but it's possible. Static small carriers are impossible though, but I'm not sure the Corsair operated from those.

Still, for a 2300HP engine, acceleration is a bit poor, but maybe that's the way it was.

Absolutely. All of this discussion has made me go back and replay an old campaign I did (called Facing The Wind) which follows VF-84 and VF-85 during the Okinawa campaign. I haven't finished the campaign but so far every mission works just as it did before... and the first couple of missions including some fairly normal and realistic loadouts that were used during attack missions.

Taking off from a stationary deck right now does appear impossible... but with a ship underway at normal speeds everything appears to be working quite well. That includes the AI. I've had zero mishaps on takeoff (and I've been watching!).

So far the only issue I see is that takeoff distance is a bit long. Maybe something to do with low speed acceleration. Everything else seems to be fine... and working as normal. To be honest, I'm not even sure what a couple of people are up in arms about. We hear that TD broke it so they should fix it but I'm not sure what they broke or what they should fix. I'll get onboard that bandwagon as soon as someone makes sense!