PDA

View Full Version : P-47 in FB 1.1 Final, first impressions



XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 07:49 PM
As probably most people here know, I've been a dedicated Jughead since Forgotten Battles was released. However, I have been rather disapointed in the performance of the jug in Forgotten Battles 1.0 and in the beta patch. The critical areas were roll rate, stall responce, dive performance, speed and damage tolerance, however I have also been irritated by several gauge problems, and trim flaws as well.

This patch seems to be a major improvement for the Thunderbolt over FB 1.0 and 1.1 Beta.

The roll rate has been markedly improved over 1.0, across the entire range of flight. The plane actually has an effective roll rate at 400 mph IAS. It's around 7-8 sec for a 360, but that's good for any aircraft at such an airspeed. It is actually possible to change flight heading in a 300mph IAS bounce, quick enough to track a manuvering bandit.

The only caveat here is that this seems to be achieved by using a longer throw on the control column and surfaces. At low speed the ailerons will deflect around 30 degrees, allowing a higher low speed roll, than the aircraft should have, with a slight reduction in the roll rate at the high end of the spectrum. It would be better overall to have the aileron travel limited to only 15 degrees, but with reduced stick forces require to achieve the deflection, and roll, than to have increased the the travel range of the control surfaces. This may be a limitation of the game's forces engine, however.

The stall responce also seems to have significantly improved over 1.0. Stall is now indicated by pronounced buffetting well before the aircraft enters a stall. Once the aircraft enters a stall, it tends to depart quite violently, yet it can be recovered relatively quickly, though it leaves you often pointing in an unpredictable direction, with very little energy. Stalls will not kill you, but they will leave you extremely open for attack.

Speed seems to have been improved overall, by around 20-40 mph IAS depending on the situation.

I've got to get to class, so I'll cut the elaborations short.

The plane now has roll trim. It is now possible to perfectly trim the aircrafft for any sustainable flight condition. I flew for 10 minutes at 2x time compression, in a 2000ft/m completely hands free. It was wonderfull. This was actually one of the advantages of hte P-47 over the P-51. While the P-51 could fly longer, it seemed that it was impossible to trim the aircraft for perfect hands-off flying.

The artifical horizon now fully works. This is very nice.

It also seems that the waste gates now open and close, depending on altitude. Also a nice touch.

I have not tested the damage modelling, or the dive performance, however the dive performance seems to be about what it was in the 1.1b patch.

Overall, this seems to be shaping up as a good time for the Jugheads.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 07:49 PM
As probably most people here know, I've been a dedicated Jughead since Forgotten Battles was released. However, I have been rather disapointed in the performance of the jug in Forgotten Battles 1.0 and in the beta patch. The critical areas were roll rate, stall responce, dive performance, speed and damage tolerance, however I have also been irritated by several gauge problems, and trim flaws as well.

This patch seems to be a major improvement for the Thunderbolt over FB 1.0 and 1.1 Beta.

The roll rate has been markedly improved over 1.0, across the entire range of flight. The plane actually has an effective roll rate at 400 mph IAS. It's around 7-8 sec for a 360, but that's good for any aircraft at such an airspeed. It is actually possible to change flight heading in a 300mph IAS bounce, quick enough to track a manuvering bandit.

The only caveat here is that this seems to be achieved by using a longer throw on the control column and surfaces. At low speed the ailerons will deflect around 30 degrees, allowing a higher low speed roll, than the aircraft should have, with a slight reduction in the roll rate at the high end of the spectrum. It would be better overall to have the aileron travel limited to only 15 degrees, but with reduced stick forces require to achieve the deflection, and roll, than to have increased the the travel range of the control surfaces. This may be a limitation of the game's forces engine, however.

The stall responce also seems to have significantly improved over 1.0. Stall is now indicated by pronounced buffetting well before the aircraft enters a stall. Once the aircraft enters a stall, it tends to depart quite violently, yet it can be recovered relatively quickly, though it leaves you often pointing in an unpredictable direction, with very little energy. Stalls will not kill you, but they will leave you extremely open for attack.

Speed seems to have been improved overall, by around 20-40 mph IAS depending on the situation.

I've got to get to class, so I'll cut the elaborations short.

The plane now has roll trim. It is now possible to perfectly trim the aircrafft for any sustainable flight condition. I flew for 10 minutes at 2x time compression, in a 2000ft/m completely hands free. It was wonderfull. This was actually one of the advantages of hte P-47 over the P-51. While the P-51 could fly longer, it seemed that it was impossible to trim the aircraft for perfect hands-off flying.

The artifical horizon now fully works. This is very nice.

It also seems that the waste gates now open and close, depending on altitude. Also a nice touch.

I have not tested the damage modelling, or the dive performance, however the dive performance seems to be about what it was in the 1.1b patch.

Overall, this seems to be shaping up as a good time for the Jugheads.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 07:58 PM
Harry you are spot on. The engine bug, however (1 hit kill) is STILL there.
S!
Chris

http://members.cox.net/miataman1/WAR-08.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:04 PM
chris455 wrote:
- Harry you are spot on. The engine bug, however (1
- hit kill) is STILL there.
- S!
- Chris


Once again Chris, one well placed hit will damage an engine, no matter that it is radial or inline. The only quality of radials is that you have better chances to get home with engine hit. But you certainly are out of the fight.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 09/04/0302:05PM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:13 PM
It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever bring the US planes up to there respective specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will always be a UBER joke.

http://www.ultimate-gamers.com/sigs/lulubelle3.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:15 PM
VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
- bring the US planes up to there respective
- specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will
- always be a UBER joke.
-

Hmm, interesting.

<center>
http://sunstarentertainment.maddsites.com/images/1asig3.gif

http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat/
JOIN OUR SQUAD TODAY!
http://sunstarentertainment.maddsites.com/images/1banner.gif

http://sunstarentertainment.maddsites.com/il2homepage.html

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:18 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
-
- Once again Chris, one well placed hit will damage an
- engine, no matter that it is radial or inline. The
- only quality of radials is that you have better
- chances to get home with engine hit. But you
- certainly are out of the fight.
-
-

So...If my engine is killed with one shot and isn't even turning, My chances are better than if it were a water-cooled?

Sorry, I don't get it.



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/_uimages/p47atm.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:20 PM
Salute Huck

You are wrong.

Knocking out the turbocharger in the P-47 would have no effect on the engine as far as its ability to continue to function.

All it would remove is the engines ability to produce power at higher altitudes.

The Turbocharger is not connected to the engine at all, except via the exhaust pipes, and the piping to the supercharger. No pressure from the Turbocharger is required to run the engine and if pressure is not being applied to the supercharger, then there are no ill effects.

At sea level, loss of the turbocharger would have negligible effects on performance.

The other issue that the Turbocharger unit is a large mass of hi density hardened steel, which should be essentially impervious to any small calibre MG round. As it stands now, any light MG hit in this area kills the engine.

Think of an engine crankshaft and you have the same quality of steel. Except that the crankshaft is not as compact or dense an object. The steel of a turbocharger unit is much denser and higher quality than an engine block.

The other think is that it is required that the bullet travel through a lot of sheet metal to get to the turbocharger. The likelyhood it would be deflected is high.

Here is a diagram of the P-47's turbo/supercharging system:

http://rwebs.net/avhistory/images/superchg.jpg



RAF74 Buzzsaw

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:21 PM
Great American. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif


VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
- bring the US planes up to there respective
- specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will
- always be a UBER joke.

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:37 PM
-
-
- VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
-- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
-- bring the US planes up to there respective
-- specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will
-- always be a UBER joke.
-
Wow German birds über? Try look at the VVS-birds (in FB 1.0 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:46 PM
I don't think anyone flies VVS planes anymore. They are just a novilty.

<HR WIDTH=100% ALIGN=CENTER SIZE=2>
<font color="red">
Cardinal
Staffel Adjudant Officer
7. Staffel, JG 77 "Black Eagles"
7jg77 (http://7jg77.com)
<font color="blue">

CO
92nd FG
92ndFG (http://92ndFG.com)
<center>http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 08:51 PM
I see them all the time. In all their UFO glory too. I don't know where people get off claiming that the 190 is, or ever was "œber" in any 1C product. It's so absurd that I'm just at a total loss as to possible explanations for them (or their behavior).

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:38 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- chris455 wrote:
-- Harry you are spot on. The engine bug, however (1
-- hit kill) is STILL there.
-- S!
-- Chris
-
-
- Once again Chris, one well placed hit will damage an
- engine, no matter that it is radial or inline. The
- only quality of radials is that you have better
- chances to get home with engine hit. But you
- certainly are out of the fight.
-
-

Again, this is not a case of a single well placed round merely damaging an engine. This situation is that any round that hits the turbo-charger stage of the turbo-super-charging system destroyes the engine.

Again, the turbo-charger is not the engine, and is mounted in the aft part of the fuselage, with no mechanical conection to the engine. Destroying it only serves to reduce the maximum compression ratio deliverable to the engine, which reduces its maximum high altitude manifold pressure. It has little effect at lower altitudes.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:41 PM
It will never stop, will it?



"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:43 PM
Unfortunately,I'm afraid not....

47|FC
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p47-6.jpg


Message Edited on 09/04/0303:44PM by necrobaron

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:47 PM
I am so tired of all these overmodeled german plane zooming around all over the place it is just rediculus/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


"Ich bin ein Wuergerwhiner"

"The future battle on the ground will be preceded by battle in the air. This will determine which of the contestants has to suffer operational and tactical disadvantages and be forced throughout the battle into adoption compromise solutions." --Erwin Rommel

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/Mesig.jpg
--NJG26_Killa--

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:47 PM
RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
- Salute Huck
-
- You are wrong.
-
- Knocking out the turbocharger in the P-47 would have
- no effect on the engine as far as its ability to
- continue to function.


First, I said a hit in the engine. Read again.
Second, how did you decide that turbosupercharger was hit?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 09/04/0303:49PM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 09:48 PM
RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
- Knocking out the turbocharger in the P-47 would have
- no effect on the engine as far as its ability to
- continue to function.

A loss of a turbo means loss of HP. Granted, a turbo needs a minimum level of exhaust pressure, but its certain that in combat the engine will be spinning above this level. In my car its at 3000rpm/40% throttle. In a P-47, I can't see it being more than 70% throttle


- All it would remove is the engines ability to
- produce power at higher altitudes.

Turbos, superchargers, intercooler all do one thing, make the intake air/charge more dense. At sea level the air is more dense. So if you start with denser air a turbo will make an even denser charge


- The Turbocharger is not connected to the engine at
- all, except via the exhaust pipes, and the piping to
- the supercharger. No pressure from the Turbocharger
- is required to run the engine and if pressure is not
- being applied to the supercharger, then there are no
- ill effects.

A turbo is connected to the engine via the intake also. It compresses the air prior to induction, on the P-47, the air goes into a an intercooler after the turbo prior to induction, there is no other 'supercharger'. A turbo is a type of supercharger but these days supercharger usually refers to a compressor that runs off the engine ( unlike a turbo which is a compressor that runs off the exhaust ).

.

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 10:10 PM
MZ6 wrote:
-
- A turbo is connected to the engine via the intake
- also. It compresses the air prior to induction, on
- the P-47, the air goes into a an intercooler after
- the turbo prior to induction, there is no other
- 'supercharger'. A turbo is a type of supercharger
- but these days supercharger usually refers to a
- compressor that runs off the engine ( unlike a turbo
- which is a compressor that runs off the exhaust ).


I agree with you, but they have a point, P-47 has another supercharger, besides the turbo, a supercharger geared directly to the engine. Problem is, if turbo is hit how much the boost decreases? But in the event that internal supercharger is hit?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 10:29 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- RAF74BuzzsawXO wrote:
-- Salute Huck
--
-- You are wrong.
--
-- Knocking out the turbocharger in the P-47 would have
-- no effect on the engine as far as its ability to
-- continue to function.
-
-
- First, I said a hit in the engine. Read again.
- Second, how did you decide that turbosupercharger
- was hit?
-

I recorded several events under controlled circumstances, and replayed the tracks with Acrade='1' to see where the hits impacted. I will post the methodology after the results, so people can test this for themselves.

After watching many of the events it became very apparent that hits that actually impacted the engine do little damage. Critical engine damage only occures if the rounds impact the chin air intake. This air intake runs directly to the gas turbine that powers the turbo charger stage.

This occured when any rounds even as small as .30 impacted the chin air intake.

Conversly, rounds as large as 37mm have little effect if they impact the engine itself.

Remember, the "turbo-super-charger" is actually two semi-independent systems, composed of a "turbo-charger" and a "super-charger". The Turbo-charger is actually an exhaust gas power turbine driven compressor, that serves to compress incomming air. In the P-47's turbo-super-charger system, it is mounted in the aft part of the fuselage, just inside that litte knot under the tail.

The picture Buzzsaw posted shows the location of the Turbo-charger stage. Note: The terminology is still not set, between what is a turbo-charger and what is a super-charger, and what is a turbosupercharger compound. While that image refers to the gas-tubine powered compressor as a Super-charger, in this context, I am refering to it as a Turbo-charger. Collision of jargo, so to speak.

The second stage is a mechanical gear driven compressor. This is what I am refering to as the Super-charger. This is mounted directly behind the engine, and is an integral part of the engine. It compresses the air comming from the Turbo-charger stage, and finally feeds it into the carburetor. It is analogous to the Superchargers the Russian, German, and British aircraft engines of the time also used.

One of the peculiar quirks of US aeronautical engineering of the time, is that we reffered to an aircraft engine installation which had both an integral mechanically geared engine driven compressor, and an exhaust (waste) gas powered turbine driven compressor as being Turbo-Super-Charged.

That was a mouthful.

Short Version

To put it simply: the engine has a Mechanical compressor, and a Gas Turbine compressor. The Mechanical compressor is a part of the engine. The Gas Turbine compressor is mounted in the tail, with a long funel leading to the chin of the aircraft. If the Gas Turbine compressor gets hit, by anything, the engine dies.

How to Test This

Open the Quick Missions builder, and Select any P-47 as your aircraft.

Pick an enemy aircraft, and set skill to Veteran. This works best against the Pz-11c in my experience

Fly directly towards Enemy fighter. Do Not Fire.

When you get with in gun range, pull up slightly. He should hit the underside of the fuselage and/or the chin air intake, fairly directly.

Switch to external. If you see a Thin trail of smoke from the lower Left Waste Gas Gate (mounted on the lower left chin of the aircraft), then disengage.

Continue flying away from the bogey for about ten minutes, at a reasonable power setting, 60%-100% should work just fine, so long as he does not get to shoot at you again.

With in around ten minutes, you should hear increasing roughness from the engine, and notice a loss of power. Check your Manifold pressure gauge. If the gauge reads 29 inches, or similare at 100% power, then you engine is dead.

You can test this, by entering a climb, and holding the aircraft in it, until it reaches well under 100 mph IAS. The propeller should stop spinning, clearly indicating the engine is delivering no power.

Quit the mission and Save the track is .trk form.

Quit the game, and in the Il-2 Forgotten Battles directory open conf.ini

Find this line:

[game]
Arcade=0

Change Arcade=0 to Arcade=1 This will enable impact arrows.

Save the file, and reopen the game. Open the track in the Play Track menu, and watch. It is easier to do this in slow time. Note where the rounds have impacted on the aircraft, before engine damage resulted. The Smoke starts nearly immediatly after the critical damage has been done.

Rinse, wash, repeat. With practice, and many tracks, one can get the number of rounds impacting down to only one or two, with a reasonable amount of control over the impact location. The impact area for the critical hit is rather wide, covering the lower fifth of the frontal profile, and it will always kill the engine. It is a very serious weakness when engaging in head on attacks, and a notable vulnerability in ground attack, and stern attacks as well.

Unfortunatly, when I uninstalled FB 1.1b I forgot to back up my tacks, and whiped everything, so I do not have my store of old tracks, but it is a simple matter to make more.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 10:42 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- MZ6 wrote:
--
-- A turbo is connected to the engine via the intake
-- also. It compresses the air prior to induction, on
-- the P-47, the air goes into a an intercooler after
-- the turbo prior to induction, there is no other
-- 'supercharger'. A turbo is a type of supercharger
-- but these days supercharger usually refers to a
-- compressor that runs off the engine ( unlike a turbo
-- which is a compressor that runs off the exhaust ).
-
-
- I agree with you, but they have a point, P-47 has
- another supercharger, besides the turbo, a
- supercharger geared directly to the engine. Problem
- is, if turbo is hit how much the boost decreases?
- But in the event that internal supercharger is hit?
-

At sea level the Waste Gates are completely open. Only enough gasses are sent to the turbo to keep it spinning. All compression at sea level is due to the Mechanical Supercharger.

At the system's critical altitude, (I think it is 9000m) the exhaust gas gates are completely closed, and the Turbine powered compressor is spinning at as high an RMP as it can manage. The integral Supercharger, if I recall correctly, is spinning at the same rate it is at Sea level.

The point to this is to keep the engine's manifold air intake pressure at 57 inches of Mercury at full throttle. Higher than that, and you are risking cylinder failure. Lower than that, and you are not producing maximum power. (that is how a throttle actually works, btw. It simply restricts airflow to the engine.)

As for what happens when the Mechanical compressor is hit, it likely causes serious damage to the engine. Here is the caveat, it is mounted directly behind the eninge, and is actually an integral component.

In order to hit the Mechanical Compressor from the front, one must go through the entire engine crankcase. This in and of itself will cause serious damage to the engine. To hit it from behind, one must go through most of the aircraft. A lucky hit from the side migh hit it, however it is fairly tightly sandwitched between the engine and the armoured firewall. It is highly unlikely to hit.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

Addendum: Gag. I just looked at the volume I just posted. Hope I didn't hurt anybody. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Message Edited on 09/04/0304:44PM by HarryVoyager

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 11:20 PM
Initial impression, P-47D-27 roll is still off. Will perform some measures to see how much.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/corsairs.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 11:27 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Initial impression, P-47D-27 roll is still off.
- Will perform some measures to see how much.
-
- Regards,
-
- SkyChimp
-

It seems to be rolling as it would with the modified long throw linkage. It was much better in the low speed range, but dropped off on the high end, which was why Republic opted for the shorter throw linkage. Notice how far the ailerons deflect now at low speeds?

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-04-2003, 11:32 PM
VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
- bring the US planes up to there respective
- specifications.

That's a little silly when we have the likes of the
P39 exceeding specifications in some areas. I think
it is a case of the complexity of the physics model,
getting things right, getting all the bugs out of the
system, rather than some bias. Oleg seems to care about
trying to get things right, rather than having some
sort of bias. After all, some people accuse him of being
biased _against_ LW planes, and not biased _for_ them.

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 12:17 AM
TooCooL34 wrote:
- Great American. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif
-
-
- VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
-- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
-- bring the US planes up to there respective
-- specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will
-- always be a UBER joke.
-
-
Obviously, HaVok hasn't been around long enough to remember the FWs in IL2. Then he'd think twice...maybe /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

However, you couldn't leave it alone could you TooCool? Not all of us Americans share HaVok's opinion, so please don't try to pigeon-hole all of the USA in the same caste. So cut us some slack and take your generalizations elsewhere please.

HB





American by birth; Southern by the Grace of God!

www.jagdverband44.com (http://www.jagdverband44.com)
http://www.jagdverband44.com/JV44Banner400x75.jpg

Bearcat101
09-05-2003, 12:32 AM
I remember the old 190s ....

Could barely take-off without stalling and careening towards the ground, much less dogfight.

"-When in doubt, empty your magazine.
-Never share a foxhole with anyone braver than you are.
-Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder.
-If your attack is going really well, it's an ambush.
-No plan survives the first contact intact.
-All 5 second grenade fuses burn down in 3 seconds." Excerpt from Murphy's Laws

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 01:53 AM
Problem is that if you got hit in the internal supercharger you are back to 1 atm manifold pressure, like a normal aspirated engine. Even if the turbine is still working it won't be able to supply with boost no more, because it supplies compressed air to the internal supercharger, where it is lost. That means that your max MP is around 30 in.Hg.

If you got hit in the belly in front of the pilot, there is no reason for an AP round to stop in the supercharger piping, it will cut through them like a hot knife through the butter. It will destroy the supercharger and possible hit something behind it too, maybe reaching the cylinders rows. What you are describing is a hit causing serious damage.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:03 AM
Huck, you're misplacing the hit location.

The impacts that cause critical damage all point directly, or nearly directly to the the aft mounted Gas Turbine driven compressor, not the integral Gear driven compressor. The aircraft has two compressors and they are located at nearly opposite ends of the aircraft. At Sea level, either compressor has enough compression ratio to keep the engine at 1.95 atm. It is only at altitude that they are both needed.

What is happening in a head-on attack is that there is a very direct open path to the Gas Turbine driven compressor. The is a duct that runs directly back from the chin of the aircraft into the air intake of the Gas Turbine driven compressor. A few rounds here will destroy the compressor.

While the external model indicates the rounds as impacting the chin ofthe aircraft, when they are coming directly from head on, the are entering a very wide air intake, and they have nothing between them and the compressor. You can also achieve similare results by aiming at the housing for the Gas Turbine powered compressor under the tail.

Once I get back from class tonight, I'll run the test, and take some screen shots of it, with the locations drawn out for you, so it's easier to see.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:15 AM
Stop yer whinnin' try flying without a rudder LMAO! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Roy Baty
IV/JG51 M¶lders

"Be happy in your work!"
- Col. Saito

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:17 AM
A hit in the turbine (behind the pilot) probably would not affect the max boost at SL. But you have to remember that the waste gate, even if it made the whole travel to open position, will still allow exhaust gases to go to the turbine. Not all the exhaust is directed outside. But I don't know how much adds this to the total boost at sea level.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:18 AM
I give up waiting for the P-47 to be right. I'm just going to accept it as it is, and do what I can with it.

25th_Buzz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/buzz.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:26 AM
The P-47 turbosupercharging system is less vulnerable than it seems.

The duct work along the bottom cennterline of the plane is intake duct work. Holes in this will create just another entry point for air taken in. Compromising this would be difficult except from underneath, where it would be easier.

Just above that and to the sides (just below the wing root) is the exhaust duct work that leads back to the turbine. Compromising this would be difficult except from below. Compromising this would lead to a reduction in turbine speed. If the duct pipes were completely severed, the plane will probably not be flyable anyway.

The duct pipes leading from the turbine, thru the intercooler, to the carb are located along the sides of the plane, about a foot or so up from the wing root. Compromising this may lead to reduced compacted air flow into the carb.

The engine stage supercharger sits behind the crank case. It is protected from the top by 3/8 steel armor covering the fuel tank. From the front it is protected by the engine, from the rear the cockpit and cockpit armor. From below by structure and intake duct work. It's most vulnerable position is 90 degrees from the sides, an unlikely angle to be hit. And a hit hard enough to seriously damage the engine stage supercharger will be a fatal hit anyway. It was extremely ruggedly constructed.

Most of turbosupercharging duct work in the P-47 was made of stainless steel.

The turbosupercharging system on the P-47 is clearly most vulnerable from below, and unlikely spot to be hit by an enemy fighter. And during the air-to-grond missions below 12,000 feet, the system is not really in use anyway, so most hits will have little practical effect.


But the most telling way to judge its vulnerability is to look at is record in air-to-air and air-to-ground action:

Eighth Fighter Command
Summary of the causes for damaged aircraft
August 1943 - May 1944

Vulnerability To Enemy Aircraft
A/C lost : A/C hit
P-38 49%
P-51 46%
P-47 37%


Vulnerability to Anti-aircraft Fire
A/C lost : A/C hit
P-38 25%
P-51 29%
P-47 10%



P-47 -- P-38 -- P-51
Average hours per sortie: 3.7 -- 3.9 -- 4.3
A/C Damaged per 1000 sorties: 28 -- 16 -- 16
A/C lost per 1000 sorties: 7 -- 7 -- 11
% A/C lost/hit: 19% -- 30% -- 41%


Without dout, the P-47 was a rugged plane, able to be hit and survive, much better than its contemporaries. Anyone that thinks it was vulnerable because of a turbosupercharger will be sorely disappointed.


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/corsairs.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:37 AM
Chimp,

Is there a way to compare it to the Fw190?

25th_Buzz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/buzz.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:45 AM
BuzzU wrote:
- Chimp,
-
- Is there a way to compare it to the Fw190?


Crash them into each other.



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/corsairs.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 02:51 AM
I meant in real life knucklehead.

25th_Buzz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/buzz.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:01 AM
VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
- It is very clear to me now that Oleg will never ever
- bring the US planes up to there respective
- specifications. While planes like the FW-190 will
- always be a UBER joke.

That is one of the funniest posts I've ever seen. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The "uber" 190 was completely ignored in IL-2 and FB. I guess your definition of "always" dates back a month or so.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:04 AM
kyrule

Actually, the 190 wasn't bad in IL2. You could use flaps to make it turn pretty good. It was in pre patch FB that it was porked.

25th_Buzz
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/buzz.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:05 AM
BuzzU wrote:
- I meant in real life knucklehead.
-
- 25th_Buzz


/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif So did I!

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/corsairs.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:11 AM
LOL, I forgot about the good 'ole "flaps cheat." I still think it made the plane FAR from "uber" though when compared to Yak-3, La-5FN and 109G-6A/S. I remember the first time I was out-turned by a 190 when I was in an La-5FN, needless to say I was a bit confused.

As far as American planes go, I don't think it is an "American" thing. But then again maybe I am wrong. Still, it seems to me that the P-40 is the plane everyone should be complaining about now, does that thing get anywhere near it's top speed? Again, maybe I am wrong.



<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

Message Edited on 09/05/0302:12AM by kyrule2

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:23 AM
Wow, that's pretty cool about the turbo/supercharger thing, before the patch I used to fly niether the FW or Jug, but tried them since. The P-47 hooked me and the FWs didn't, it's just too big and powerful, and heavy with too much ammuntion not to like.

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 03:26 AM
Well I think the roll rate is about 100% better, perhaps a little high at low speed, still could use some tweaking at high speed I think. But I am happy with it where it sit's. The top-speed is back and she seem's to dive well again. I am not sure against other a/c as I have just been doing some quick tests.
~S!
Eagle
CO 361st vFG

<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center> <center> www.361stvfg.com</center> (http://www.361stvfg.com</center>)
<center>
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1003.jpg

</center>

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 04:56 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- A hit in the turbine (behind the pilot) probably
- would not affect the max boost at SL. But you have
- to remember that the waste gate, even if it made the
- whole travel to open position, will still allow
- exhaust gases to go to the turbine. Not all the
- exhaust is directed outside. But I don't know how
- much adds this to the total boost at sea level.
-

From my understanding, the design intent that the Gas Turbine driven compressor was to do almost none of the compression at sea level. It was only there to provide compression at higher altitudes. That way, they could use a Mechanical Gear driven compressor optimised for compressing 1 atm air to the 1.95 atm needed for peak engine operation.

However, it looks like this has been fixed or at least mitigated in FB 1.1

I ran the test, and despite several rounds hiting the Gas Turbine, the engine did not fail. There was a reduction in power, however, so getting hit in the Gas Turbine driven compressor is significant damage, but it is not the fatal wound that it was before. Overall, it seems to be a good compromise between the Games engine's abilities, and the aircraft's performance.

Images from the test:

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0WwDKAgYcZAW2ez3jaolxZA*OWNrcwvuJhmzgVPmnSb5poF3j7 hGI0g4OJLt!FjW58Pkx4mZjYLDQLAcXYhQrk7zzE9njWnAX0xM Mqzz4n9S*RsJMppYAh59idWzEVVuLBO17SKuZSTQ/The%20P-47%20Highlighted.jpg?dc=4675437470047493767

This first image show the P-47D-10. The blue box roughly shows the engine. The Red box behind the engine shows the rough location of the Mechanical Gear driven compressor. The Red box under the tail shows the location of the Gas Turbine driven compressor. The Yellow box shows the location of the ducts leading to the Gas Turbine driven compressor. Note, it is the Gas Turbine driven compressor that has been the caus of all these problems, not the Mechanical Gear driven compressor.

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0TgAaRcUXy6m2ez3jaolxZE6QpmTF!EmSWj6c4SZjuHu2807ry imYML8UEDMKTtV54K1UpvJDczYxVUQQULsfhpn64oxOpjwc4R7 H5e47D8rmGJII9RzvNQ/The%20Pz11c.jpg?dc=4675437470075654436

Our opponent for this mission, a Pz.11c flown by a Vetern Finn. After all, who else would still be flying Pz.11c's by 1943, and winning? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Besides, this aircraft is armed solely with 7.8mm machine guns, so it makes an ideal test aircraft.

Results of the first pass:
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0UQDTArgZtzuAhOHV4*34v1eedZZ3cqQ9xgDXmbFSjWAWcoRGY 40hf2qQ3*o0nYV48VDtrUzp6l4EtBXPAnmiaYlRKhHZSvbilvn ve*a8YksIu0Q9uXAMTPOs!4m!TRQu/First%20volley.jpg?dc=4675437470097924637

Most of the hits only impact the ducting, with none hitting the target area. The aircraft barely notices. Neither did the pilot, by the way. I was actually looking in another direction when he made his pass, and didn't realise he had even hit me, until I reviewed the track.

Results of the second pass:
http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0UgDTAuwZ9U1Fjq6CEtGGfw4gcQoOmZNm!gZ21EK36HKHU9kfa JjMY6G8HCMF3sbRbuosturOhf5o2VQIWqwK14RN*lyVwcuGrGU gx86wnKjOWhaE1AguuYCQ0yEwoDZD/Second%20Volley.jpg?dc=4675437470119103597

Now we have the impact we are looking for. Notice the arrow sticking its pointing directly through the Gas Turbine driven compressor? That actually had an effect on the aircraft. The engine did start thrashing, and there was an immediate loss of power though there was no smoke trail. I disengaged and continued to fly for another twenty minutes (8xtime). While there was a power loss caused by the hit, there was no subsequent power drop, over time. The aircraft remained flyable until I ended the mission.

It seems that the P-47 may well be free of this "engine-off" button, finally. More tests will be needed to be fully conclusive, but it seems to be working.

Harry Voyager.

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 05:28 AM
Just to chime in -

I just got done a night in the VFC Host server, under the tutilage and wing of VFC Koro.

I must say the P-47 is much better now. However, it still gets crapped on by absolutely everything.

Say what you will about odds during the war, but, someone here posted the info showing that early on the Jug was doing serious A2A on roughly even odds against experienced pilots....and winning.

The 109s have been hurt, bad in this patch. Too much actually. The solution is NOT to nerf the 109s anymore than they have been. It's to give the Jug some E retention.

Once you get up to about 300-400kph, you can cut back on pitch, mixture - depending on alt, and throttle down to about 75% and keep on truckin at that speed, with the rad full open, perahps even in a slight climb (if down near the 300kph range).

Trouble is.....pitch at all, try to zoom at all, and it drops speed quicker than a sky diver pulling the rip cord.

I know it was a large a/c, I know it was heavy, I know it had bad power loading....but come on! The disparity couldn't have been this bad.

Jug experts - some questions, IRL and in game, what is it's cruising speed and top speed on the deck, what is it's ideal climb, and what is it's ideal alt? In game specifically, and mix/prop tricks? I'm finding dropping to 95% early on then down to about 80% around 3Km (pitch) and trying to run LoP mixture helps performance a bit, but, it could be my imagination.

It's sooo damned frustrating to spend so long trying to play to strengths only to be shot up after a move you couldn't hope to even think of following and be done, in abotu 5 seconds after spending 15minuts to get to alt and find action.

Makes me want to go to the P-39. And that sucks (that it does that).


'Nother question. The F6F had the same engine. Was damn near the same weight. But it not only routinely got over 250mhp on the deck, but it held and fought at those speeds, and TnBd with Zeros. How bad could the Jug have *possibly* been for a few hundred extra pounds? Probably more power too with the T/SC rig.

Yeah, diff wing and all, but, c'mon, really. How much worse could it have been. Wouldn't someone have raised an eyebrow at that in the US military? Was Grumman just a mage? (granted, he did work magic....awww baby, gimme an F8F-1 and bring on those (then) pesky La7s! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif )


Dives better, clibms better, flies faster, rolls better. But then, when you are at 0, it's hard to not improve, ya know?

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 06:14 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-
- Jug experts - some questions, IRL and in game, what
- is it's cruising speed and top speed on the deck,
- what is it's ideal climb, and what is it's ideal
- alt? In game specifically, and mix/prop tricks? I'm
- finding dropping to 95% early on then down to about
- 80% around 3Km (pitch) and trying to run LoP mixture
- helps performance a bit, but, it could be my
- imagination.
-
- 'Nother question. The F6F had the same engine. Was
- damn near the same weight. But it not only routinely
- got over 250mhp on the deck, but it held and fought
- at those speeds, and TnBd with Zeros. How bad could
- the Jug have *possibly* been for a few hundred extra
- pounds? Probably more power too with the T/SC rig.
-
- Yeah, diff wing and all, but, c'mon, really. How
- much worse could it have been. Wouldn't someone have
- raised an eyebrow at that in the US military? Was
- Grumman just a mage? (granted, he did work
- magic....awww baby, gimme an F8F-1 and bring on
- those (then) pesky La7s! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif )
-

Top speed on the deck for the P-47 was around 350mph TAS.
Top speed for the P-47 at 9100m is 425mph TAS or around 270 IAS.

Top speed for the F6F was 380 mph TAS at 7000m, or around 280 IAS. This is very similare to the P-47's top speed at that altitude. The advantage of the F6F was that it was around 30 mph faster than the Zero at all altitudes, and with its large wing (the largest wing installed on any single engined WWII fighter, I am told), it had a low enoug hwing loading it could have good turn performance, and could easily operate from carriers.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 06:32 AM
Please don't flame but this bears repeating IMHO. One has to remember that in FB the Jug is out of it's element, it's performance was excellent up high but not that great down low. I think most planes should be superior to the P-47 at low and medium altitudes, and the P-47 should be very strong at high altitudes. But FB does not model high altitude performance very well and this hurts the P-47 as bad as any plane in the game. At low altitudes many planes will, and did; out-run (or run with), out-turn, and out-climb the Thunderbolt. The P-39 should be much better than the P-47 at low altitude, and comparing/presenting the Jug's actual combat record is irrelevant as the situations in FB do not even remotely resemble those in real-life. Unfortunately, the P-47 is a victim of sorts concerning the nature of online play (low altitude fighting).

Stil, I think planes like the 190s, Yaks, and La's (which are in their element in FB) should out-class the P-47 at low altitudes in FB, but who knows, the next sim could be a Western one with significant attention to high altitude performance given and the tables could be turned, with the 190 being out of it's element and suffering. IMHO the P-47 should be one of the worst planes in FB because of the situations most frequently encountered and limitations in the game engine. Still, I don't pretend to be a technical wizard with charts, graphs, and physics explanations for a plane's performance, and I respect those who are trying to make the P-47 as accurate as it can be. This post is not directed at anyone in particular, its just my thoughts.

I just wanted to say that the P-47 was a very capable plane in the right conditions, but these conditions are not found often in FB and may not even be able to be replicated at present. Every dog has its day, and I'm sure the P-47 will have it's day if not in this sim (correct or not), then maybe in the next.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

Message Edited on 09/05/0305:34AM by kyrule2

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 07:01 AM
Nobody has ever said it should be "UBER", we just hope for it to closely match what was known about it eg; the rollrate at speed and altitude, the dive speed and zoom climb, and the fact that one of the reasons it was so good at ground attack was that it could take a serious beating.

I was just flying on the TX server and got jumped by a Hurricane I never saw, as it zoomed by it got a couple rounds in me, I never heard or felt the shots,there was no external damage, yet all my controls locked up and and I suddenly lost power. and this was just from a quick offhand burst. I'm not sure what he hit, or if this is correct, but it's frustrating and seems wrong.

<center>http://www.goobage.com/pics/D_Rat.gif </center>
<center><font><font size=1 ><font color=000000>Visit RatFinks Screaming Pile of Sin and Confusion</font></font size> (http://www.goobage.com/forum.php)</center>

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 07:14 AM
OK BUzz, now your P-39 REALLY IS going to be jealous! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://members.cox.net/miataman1/WAR-08.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-05-2003, 07:34 AM
TurboCrotch wrote:
- Nobody has ever said it should be "UBER", we just
- hope for it to closely match what was known about it

I never said that anybody wanted it to be uber, that was not the point of my post. And I stated that I respect those that are trying to get the P-47 model in FB as close and accuarate as possible. Like I said, I'll leave it to those in the know to point out exactly what is off. I just wanted to post my take on the P-47 issue, nothing more.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 02:59 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- Top speed on the deck for the P-47 was around 350mph
- TAS.
- Top speed for the P-47 at 9100m is 425mph TAS or
- around 270 IAS.

What are you getting in the game?

I did a QMB mission tonight to see if I could defeat an average early MiG. Still was nervous about even that much of an opponent.

I did eventually beat him, after using all my ammo, taking what felt like forever, and basically picking him apart bit by bit till he finally crashed.

Anyway.... after that I headed for home. At 650m I could only manage about 300mph IAS. About 470kph I think it was. I didn't save the track.

I had no damage at all. Arcade mode was on, there were never and arrows in me. (used externals a lot too)

I had the cowl closed, 100% throttle, and 100% mix. I started the mission with only 25% fuel load, and was out of ammo by this point, and probably down to about 2/3 of the fuel I started with.

I had it trimmed out and everything. After seeing no increase from 100% engine RPM, I tried every 5% step down to 85%. I found that at 95% I had no difference in speed at all, going lower slowed me down.

It was the D-10. I like the lack of pylons. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


- Top speed for the F6F was 380 mph TAS at 7000m, or
- around 280 IAS. This is very similare to the P-47's
- top speed at that altitude. The advantage of the
- F6F was that it was around 30 mph faster than the
- Zero at all altitudes, and with its large wing (the
- largest wing installed on any single engined WWII
- fighter, I am told), it had a low enoug hwing
- loading it could have good turn performance, and
- could easily operate from carriers.
-
- Harry Voyager

All the more reason we NEED that beast. 200-2500(water)hp, rock solid P&W engine, self sealing tanks, super range, loads of armor, 6 .50s, and the handling to take on Zeros (ok, not saying it could turn as well at the Zeros best speed, but, come on, that's an accomplishment no matter how you look at it really), and Grummans famous overengineering. Tested by the factory to survive an 18 (or was it 22...? forget now) foot static drop (from a hoist on the rafters in the test hangar) onto it's gear with no damage.

It's run rings around the Corsair, and when facing them, shoot the hose nose down in droves due to all the above plus the over the cowl vis advantage. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif



Sorry, just a fan of the F6F. heh heh /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 03:45 AM
The limitation of the F6F was that it had a relatively slow roll rate. It wasn't such a problem against the Zeke, which had a considerably slower roll rate at high speeds, but it does pose problem against the aircraft it will face in FB.

However, since, as I understand, it used a variant of the R-2800 with lower power turbo-supercharing system, it had more power avaliable to it at lower altitudes, and combined with it's lighter weight, and considerably lower wingloading, it have very good turn performance relative to most of these aircraft. I have read some sources that indicate the aircraft could hold an 18 second sustainable circle, making it very compeditive in a turn fight.

Late model fighters that get into turn fights with it are very likely to lose, and even the late model Yaks and Lavochkins would have have a handful, but it would be relatively weak in energy fights.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 04:12 AM
Well....we're only talking about a couple hundred pounds in weight. Not that much, It should have a killer dive and good zoom. Plus, if the wings were that large and provided that much lift, then it should climb reasonably well (better than the Jug at least - then again, what in FB can't? lol). So maybe it wouldn't be so bad in E fights.

But, who gets into E fights on HL anyway? lol!


So about the P-47s speed on the Deck in FB. What is the best you get? I don't see the 350mph you listed. That is probably the remanining piece of the puzzle. Speed it up a bit and it might be able to actually compete.

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 05:34 PM
Bump++

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 06:05 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Most of turbosupercharging duct work in the P-47 was
- made of stainless steel.
-

That`s pretty much meaningless, because it had neither the thickness or the qaulity of armor grade steel to stand up vs. fragments or direct hits from rounds.

For example, 20mm HE shells emmited fragments that would pierce even 4-6mm armor plate. That`s ARMORED GRADE steel. Conventional steel contstruction would need double the the thickness... I doubt it was THAT thick. It would weight several tons then.

Direct hits from rounds, esp. from AP rounds would cut through it like butter... at typical ranges (100-300m) a 7.62mm AP round would pierce 8-9mm armor. Even the relatively weak 13mm MG131 could pierce 18mm or so. The low muzzle velocity MG-FF already above 20mm, the MG 151/20 would pierce 24mm... again, vs. ARMOR GRADE steels. Ordinary steel needs about double the thickness, which it doesn`t have.

In brief, regardless of how "though" the ducting was, or that it was made from stainless steel, it wasn`t even nearly thick or resistant enough to stand the slightest chance vs. cannon fragments or direct hits from MG or HMG rounds...

Results of damage is of course another question.

http://vo101isegrim.piranho.com/FB-desktopweb.jpg
'Only a dead Indianer is a good Indianer!'

Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 06:14 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:

- That`s pretty much meaningless, because it had
- neither the thickness or the qaulity of armor grade
- steel to stand up vs. fragments or direct hits from
- rounds.
-
- For example, 20mm HE shells emmited fragments that
- would pierce even 4-6mm armor plate. That`s ARMORED
- GRADE steel. Conventional steel contstruction would
- need double the the thickness... I doubt it was THAT
- thick. It would weight several tons then.
-
- Direct hits from rounds, esp. from AP rounds would
- cut through it like butter... at typical ranges
- (100-300m) a 7.62mm AP round would pierce 8-9mm
- armor. Even the relatively weak 13mm MG131 could
- pierce 18mm or so. The low muzzle velocity MG-FF
- already above 20mm, the MG 151/20 would pierce
- 24mm... again, vs. ARMOR GRADE steels. Ordinary
- steel needs about double the thickness, which it
- doesn`t have.
-
- In brief, regardless of how "though" the ducting
- was, or that it was made from stainless steel, it
- wasn`t even nearly thick or resistant enough to
- stand the slightest chance vs. cannon fragments or
- direct hits from MG or HMG rounds...
-
- Results of damage is of course another question.


The purposes of my post was not to say that it would hold up against a direct hit. The point was that it was LESS vulnerable that some people suggest. Puching holes in duct work won't necessarily caused serious problems, especially in intake duct work.

And the fact that much of the duct work was made of stainless steel certainly didn't hurt.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/corsairs.jpg

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 06:48 PM
Salute Isengrim

Of course bullets are going to go through sheet metal if they strike the surface at a 90 degree angle. However, as even the most limited study of ballistics will tell you, bullets which would penetrate an object when they strike its surface directly, are quite easily deflected when they strike at an angle. And a small calibre bullet would stand a good chance of being deflected if it was fired from longer ranges and struck at a 45 degree angle or less.

Since there are multiple layers of the sheet metal on the underside of the aircraft, the likelyhood of a bullet being deflected is great.

Plus the frame of the P-47 is so heavily built, with so many crossmembers, a bullet has to travel through them as well.

http://rwebs.net/avhistory/images/P47cutaw.jpg


This plane is densely built. To suggest a small calibre round is going to be able to penetrate all these layers is dubious.

http://rwebs.net/avhistory/images/lwrfuslg.jpg


While we're at it, why don't you post a comparable cutaway of a 109 and 190 so we can compare?


RAF74 Buzzsaw

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 07:07 PM
Ow come on... Luftwaffe who is blaming that the VVS has uberplanes and vice versa.

Above all, Americans have won the war (historical fact) but, that doesn't mean all of their aircraft excelled in these parts:

A: Durable
B: fast
C: deadly
D: Manouvreable

Just face it. BTW, I find the P-47in the 'final' patch quite good. It has good firepower (at convergence range) and has reasonable good rollrate, speed and durablillity.



1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php)

Message Edited on 09/06/0307:09PM by Platypus_1.JaVA

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 07:21 PM
- Above all, Americans have won the war (historical
- fact) but, that doesn't mean all of their aircraft
- excelled in these parts:
-
- A: Durable
- B: fast
- C: deadly
- D: Manouvreable
-
- Just face it. BTW, I find the P-47in the 'final'
- patch quite good. It has good firepower (at
- convergence range) and has reasonable good rollrate,
- speed and durablillity.
-
-
-
-
- 1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
- 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
- shall be judged: and with what
-
- measure ye mete, it shall be
-
- measured to you again.


I absolutely agree with your opinion !





Message Edited on 09/06/0306:33PM by Jeopardy