PDA

View Full Version : P47-N



AFJ_Locust
04-12-2006, 01:08 PM
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved?

AFJ_Locust
04-12-2006, 01:08 PM
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved?

J_Weaver
04-12-2006, 01:13 PM
I think it would require a new model due to the differences in tail and wing shapes. Maybe, but I'm not sure.

We can always wish! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

WOLFMondo
04-12-2006, 01:13 PM
Your wrong unfortunately. The wing is different and it would also need a fillet added to the tail. The DM would also have to change as the wing was weaker than the D models, by all accounts.

Texan...
04-12-2006, 01:44 PM
Which means they would just leave the P47N DM as is, and make the current P47s tougher...because they are too weak as-is. And yes, we would need a new model for an N.

I would rather see 1C:

Make the R2800 tougher
Make the P47 airframe tougher
Give the Jug its true diving and zoom capabilities
Rework both the early and late cockpits


http://acn.waw.pl/sturm/Obrazki/P47N.jpg

vladward3050
04-12-2006, 01:44 PM
No modifications to the 3D model needed for a 47M. It's basically a D airframe with the N's engine. Came earlier too.

Texan...
04-12-2006, 02:01 PM
Supposedly the Late D we were given is supposed to perform like the M...but I don't know.

I am pretty happy with the last P47D that was added, except for:

Dive
Zoom
R2800 durability
Cockpit
Rear Visibility

Lol, on second thought it suks!

WOLFMondo
04-12-2006, 02:07 PM
It was never said it would perform just like a P47M. Do you really want engine failures every few minutes? :P

As planes go the last P47 addition is one of the best fighters in this sim, no doubt about it.

Texan...
04-12-2006, 05:55 PM
Don't add words, I never said JUST like. I said like, which means similar. I belive Oleg's words were "close" to P47M performance.

Re: P47M engine failures, Republic techs ironed the bugs out in due time with items such as a new engine wiring harness.

VW-IceFire
04-12-2006, 06:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hi Locust,

I think you may be confusing the P-47M with the P-47N. The P-47N is quite different from the P-47D...

Looks like this:

http://www.jetplanes.co.uk/vintageaircraft/p47n.jpg

It does away with the elipitical wings with redesigned clipped ones as well as some changes to the tail section and greater internal fuel capacity. The P-47N had greater range than the P-51D and it had the ability to carry 6 or 8 HVAR rockets and a pair of 1000lb bombs to boot. Roll rate was much improved over the other P-47 models although compared to the P-47M it did not climb as well.

As a fighter-bomber and long range escort fighter the P-47N is the sort of plane I'd love to fly.

The P-47M looks like a late D model...and what we've got in terms of the P-47D Late that they gave us recently its supposed to be very close to a M model. Not sure how close it is to be honest but it is nice.

WTE_Galway
04-12-2006, 06:01 PM
see what Gibbage has to say about the P47M here

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4511020924/p/10

carguy_
04-12-2006, 06:09 PM
Really I have no idea why are ppl so interested in late `45 planes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif


I thought having the earliest Messerchmitts,Spitfires,Hurris,Yaks,P39,P47,P51 etc would be the coolest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif

Divine-Wind
04-12-2006, 06:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Texan...:
Supposedly the Late D we were given is supposed to perform like the M...but I don't know.

I am pretty happy with the last P47D that was added, except for:

Dive
Zoom
R2800 durability
Cockpit
Rear Visibility

Lol, on second thought it suks! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The P-47D's rearward visibility is pretty good, actually. Just hit Shift+F1 and look behind you, and swing the rudder left or right as needed. But the Jug's durability seems off. A few MG hits from the Zero seems enough to take you out... But then the AI might very well have Realistic Gunnery turned off. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
My only other gripe is the dive rate, it reminds me of like the Mustang's, IMO.

GBrutus
04-12-2006, 07:36 PM
The P-47N is an awesome looking machine. I love the Thunderbolt and would really like to see more versions added to this sim. Sadly, as has already been mentioned, we are not likely to see the N due to the reworking involved with the 3D model. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

GBrutus
04-12-2006, 07:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Divine-Wind: My only other gripe is the dive rate, it reminds me of like the Mustang's, IMO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You really think so? I'm scared to push the P-51 into a dive but I'm always confident the Jug will hold out.

Divine-Wind
04-12-2006, 07:51 PM
I'm not worried it'll fall to pieces on me, but the way it dives, seems kind of slow. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

GBrutus
04-12-2006, 08:21 PM
Ah, see what you mean. Yeah, It maybe feels a tad slow, what with all the weight it's carrying. When I'm leveling out during a bounce I tend to lean forward in my seat in a vain attempt to pick up more speed LOL. Could be the way drag is modelled with the P-47.

Divine-Wind
04-12-2006, 08:39 PM
Slow with all the weight? The Jug's great weight is what made it a great diver.

But then I may have read it wrong, correct me if so.

WarWolfe_1
04-12-2006, 08:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

New model would be needed.

With that said you can forget any new US A/C being added.

Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C).

Look at the P-61 thread for the reasons behind this.

VW-IceFire
04-12-2006, 09:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

New model would be needed.

With that said you can forget any new US A/C being added.

Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C).

Look at the P-61 thread for the reasons behind this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not 1C's fault...they publish games in Russia. Not too much of Oleg's fault either...aside from being screwed by some very bad legal advice from the sounds of it. The blame squarely lies in the Ubisoft marketing and legal departments.

GBrutus
04-12-2006, 09:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Divine-Wind:

Slow with all the weight? The Jug's great weight is what made it a great diver. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that's what I meant - it's a tad slow for such a heavy plane. Must have worded it poorly...

Nimits
04-12-2006, 09:52 PM
Actually, there have been new flyable US aircraft since the release of Pacific Fighters, including the F2A-2, the P-38L Late, and the P-47D boosted. The F2A-3 may be still planned for on add-on or patch.

FA_Whisky
04-13-2006, 02:22 AM
Adding a high boost P51d would be even more easy.... No 3D model change. The engine is already there(Mustang III). I think it would take them about one hour to do it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

jasonbirder
04-13-2006, 02:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm no Fanboi - but the facts just don't bear this out...since the release of PF we have had new US planes added (P38 Late, P47 late, a version of the F2F) and are waiting on a completely new US plane in the Il10 Add-on.
As an alternative to FB/AEP/PF as a WWII prop sim...where would you spend your money? CFSIII - I bought it with Firepower cos the Do217 has always been one of my favourite planes - but it gets about 5% of my play time against this games 95% Even with the add ons and for all its good points its just not a patch on FB/AEP/PF...

WOLFMondo
04-13-2006, 02:46 AM
I'd actually prefer a new P51D, not with a higher boost or anything uber like that, but a mirror, like the one in your sig Whiskey. Mirrors are so underated in this sim.

JG52Karaya-X
04-13-2006, 02:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, no US planes added... other than the P38L_Late, MarkIII Mustang, P47D-27_Late

What a shame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Guys we have 200 flyables, about 150 of them fighters. Last thing we need is another fighter! I'd trade in the Bf109Z, Go229, BI1, I185, MIG3U for some more 2 engine planes (Ju188/388, Do17, Me410, A20C, early B25, B5N, Avenger, ...)

Badsight.
04-13-2006, 02:54 AM
this is a P-47 thread

no need to bring up other plane complaints

stathem
04-13-2006, 03:09 AM
Didn't the M carry only six 0.50s? That at least would require some model changes.

mynameisroland
04-13-2006, 04:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

New model would be needed.

With that said you can forget any new US A/C being added.

Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C).

Look at the P-61 thread for the reasons behind this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup 20 dollars wasted for 18 months plus worth of fun http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Cajun76
04-13-2006, 04:23 AM
Generally all P-47's had eight fifties.

The changes to the P-47 for the N were more extensive than anything previous.

18 inch inserts in the wing containing integral fuel tanks for 100 gallons.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> The modifications ... were considerable. Aside from simply installing the wing inserts and fuel tanks, the flaps were required to be redesigned, and the ailerons had to be modified to fit with the new squared-off wing tips. Due to spacing the wings out from the wing root, the landing gear track increased by more than 3 feet. The overall wing span had increased to just over 42 ft 6 inches. The empty weight of the fighter had gone up by nearly half a ton to 12,950 lbs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.cradleofaviation.org/history/aircraft/p-47/8.html

Someone mentioned the wings being weaker, but I highly doubt it. This is a P-47 after all, and that increase of half a ton of empty weight for 36 inches added at the wingroots sounds pretty solid to me.

There's also the new, larger fin fillet, previously mentioned.

When comparing the M to the N, keep in mind the N is carrying 1200lbs more fuel at takeoff than the M, and this is how they're tested. If both were carrying 370 gallons (max for M, 65% load for N) the performance gap, which was rather small, would be even less. Couple that with the fact that the N had a higher rollrate than the M due to the squared off (not clipped) wingtips and redesigned ailerons. The larger span also helped maneuverability at higher altitudes.

Pilot comfort was also addressed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Habitability improvements included an automatic pilot, an armchair seat, and folding rudder pedals to give the pilot increased leg room. These improvements were intended to increase the pilot's comfort on long escort missions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.chuckhawks.com/p47.htm

Although I've heard that the autopilot was problematic and that pilots usually didn't use it.

Keep in mind, the following actually includes Franks (Ki-84) not Oscars.

The P-47N in Combat: Oscar F. Perdomo - The Last Ace In a Day of WWII (http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/perdomo/perdomo.htm)

My choice would definitely be the N. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif

RCAF_Irish_403
04-13-2006, 05:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, no US planes added... other than the P38L_Late, MarkIII Mustang, P47D-27_Late

What a shame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Guys we have 200 flyables, about 150 of them fighters. Last thing we need is another fighter! I'd trade in the Bf109Z, Go229, BI1, I185, MIG3U for some more 2 engine planes (Ju188/388, Do17, Me410, A20C, early B25, B5N, Avenger, ...) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude, you read my mind.

one of the things that i'm looking forward to is the ability to fly heavy bombers in BoB.

Slickun
04-13-2006, 08:11 AM
Cajun76, you are dead on.

As a few of us know, my Dad flew, and loved, the P-47N.

As Cajun stated, it had a higher roll rate than the other P-47's. Dad compared it to a Cadillac, and the P-51 to a Chevy, as far as pilot comfort.

Dad also had several anecdotal stories comparing it to the Corsair, which he had many mock dogfights with.

Basically, the -4 could out roll and out zoom the D's. Not so the N. The N could outroll and out zoom the -4.

According to Pop, below 15,000 feet or so, the Corsair (which he respected) was superior. Above, the N. He felt above 25,000 feet the P-47 was the best US plane.

He flew the Mustang as well, a lot, and basically said the Mustang was a sweert bird, dove as well as the P-47, zoomed and rolled better, turned better. Had less firepower, was less robust.

luftluuver
04-13-2006, 08:26 AM
Thanks Slickun. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Did your dad have any comments on the Mossie and(vs) the P-38?

BRASSTURTLE
04-13-2006, 10:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Slickun:
Cajun76, you are dead on.

As a few of us know, my Dad flew, and loved, the P-47N.

As Cajun stated, it had a higher roll rate than the other P-47's. Dad compared it to a Cadillac, and the P-51 to a Chevy, as far as pilot comfort.

Dad also had several anecdotal stories comparing it to the Corsair, which he had many mock dogfights with.

Basically, the -4 could out roll and out zoom the D's. Not so the N. The N could outroll and out zoom the -4.

According to Pop, below 15,000 feet or so, the Corsair (which he respected) was superior. Above, the N. He felt above 25,000 feet the P-47 was the best US plane.

He flew the Mustang as well, a lot, and basically said the Mustang was a sweert bird, dove as well as the P-47, zoomed and rolled better, turned better. Had less firepower, was less robust. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



I would like to convey my most deepest and heartfelt jealousy.
Do you have any pics?
Do you know if his Jug was an RA or an RE?
Only about 150 P47N-RA's were built.


IF your dad is still around, please pass along my thanks. Both for doing the job & doing it in a Jug.

I'm sure many here would love to read some of your dad's stories.

WarWolfe_1
04-13-2006, 08:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, no US planes added... other than the P38L_Late, MarkIII Mustang, P47D-27_Late

What a shame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Guys we have 200 flyables, about 150 of them fighters. Last thing we need is another fighter! I'd trade in the Bf109Z, Go229, BI1, I185, MIG3U for some more 2 engine planes (Ju188/388, Do17, Me410, A20C, early B25, B5N, Avenger, ...) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I stated this to the fact that there has been no "New Model" for US plane set. The planes that have been added for the US are existing models with different DM and FM. (the reason being brought up in the P-61 thread)

I agree with you about the planes missing. I bought PF thinking I would get to fly the Avenger, SB2C, B5N, B-26, A-26, PV-1/2, PBY, P-61, G3M, Ki-27, B6N, F4U-4, P-40F-L-N, P-51H and many more that are missing from PF, which was what I bought first and then bought the Gold Pack IL2-FB to merge. All of planes You and I bring up were present in numbers and all played a large role.

@Ice fire, I brought up the P-61 thread to show why I thought my money would have been better spent elsewhere. I felt screwed, and say sorry to 1C. Not about 1C and its game, but because the US leagal system has left PF far from complete. Had I just bought IL2 gold pack it would have been worth the money.

VW-IceFire
04-13-2006, 09:15 PM
Not disputing that you and I and everyone else was screwed I just felt that the blame should be appropriately placed. 1C is a games publisher in Russia so they have little to do with it. Maddox games has more to do with it because thats Oleg's company and they develop it. But the real blame, as I say, is Ubisoft Legal and Marketing...Marketing for doing what they did with the box that created the problem in the first place and then Legal for what it sounds like was a horrible defense where the defense companies walked all over them. Its a shame really that it even happened.

Although I never suspected that we'd actually be able to fly the P-61 since the game doesn't model radar but as an AI it would have been great. Others like the Helldiver and Devastator do open serious holes in our list of aircraft. Again...a shame but a reality we'll have to live with.

_VR_ScorpionWorm
04-13-2006, 09:32 PM
Ever notice how one thread starts about an aircraft we would like to see, yet the lawsuit event always shows up and nobody can seem to DROP IT ALREADY. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PlaneEater
04-13-2006, 09:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by _VR_ScorpionWorm:
Ever notice how one thread starts about an aircraft we would like to see, yet the lawsuit event always shows up and nobody can seem to DROP IT ALREADY. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because we shouldn't have to. That 'lawsuit' is a morally bankrupt multi-billion dollar defense contractor throwing its weight around with a legal claim that has little to nothing backing it up except them saying "because".

AFJ_Locust
04-13-2006, 10:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
Really I have no idea why are ppl so interested in late `45 planes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif


I thought having the earliest Messerchmitts,Spitfires,Hurris,Yaks,P39,P47,P51 etc would be the coolest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blush.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I begged for Bombers, Since we didnt get much in that line Ill go with P47N Whineing LOL

As a fighter-bomber and long range escort fighter the P-47N is the sort of plane I'd love to fly.

AFJ_Locust
04-13-2006, 10:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WarWolfe_1:
Check the facts. No new US A/C since I bought bought PF, a shame to be sure. Looking back now I think my money would have been better spent somewhere else (Sorry 1C). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, no US planes added... other than the P38L_Late, MarkIII Mustang, P47D-27_Late

What a shame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Guys we have 200 flyables, about 150 of them fighters. Last thing we need is another fighter! I'd trade in the Bf109Z, Go229, BI1, I185, MIG3U for some more 2 engine planes (Ju188/388, Do17, Me410, A20C, early B25, B5N, Avenger, ...) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I agree, I want the bombers/nightfighters

We arent getting them so I thought Id pick on the P47N http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

VW-IceFire
04-13-2006, 10:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by _VR_ScorpionWorm:
Ever notice how one thread starts about an aircraft we would like to see, yet the lawsuit event always shows up and nobody can seem to DROP IT ALREADY. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Because usually those threads are about US aircraft and that legal event is what the answer is, regardless of anything else.

fordfan25
04-14-2006, 12:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
Hi rember last patch K4-C was added & explanations were given that its so easy too add this AC because we already have K4 so just tune it up and make the K4-C Model...... And so its here.

Soooooooooooo with this spectacular Idea in mind why dont we have P47-N, It should be fast & relitivly easy too TUNE up the D and make an N ?

Am I wrong or is there alot more work involved? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>while there were deffernce's that would have to be made for it to be 100% correct to things comes to my mind. it does not have to LOOK like a N just fly like the N. 2 it will never happen. remember the massive bi*** fest that acourd from some memberes when we got the p-38late that was just bairly as good as the L should have benn all along just think what would hit the fan if thay put out a N moddle that was correctly moddled. lol.

luftluuver
04-14-2006, 02:16 AM
But surely the P-47M could be done.

Performance of the P-47M-1-RE included a maximum speed of 400 mph at 10,000 feet, 453 mph at at 25,000 feet, and 470 mph at 30,000 feet. Initial climb rate was 3500 feet per minute at 5000 feet and 2650 feet per minute at 20,000 feet. Range (clean) was 560 miles at 10,000 feet. Armament was six or eight 0.50-inch machine guns with 267 or 425 rpg. Weights were 10,432 pounds empty, 13,275 pounds normal loaded, and 15,500 pounds maximum.