omg steve lookie I can make the 51 sing kinda !

[BnZs]

Quite honestly, my 9 year old does well enough flying offline to make me suspect all the planes are too forgiving. 

MtnMan

9 year olds have flown airplanes before...

Everything is easier when death isn't on the line.

[stodd]

The 190 isnt even in the same LEAGUE as a P-51.

RAce

Excuse me?!?

[Gixer]

Sorry, my "silly poster" meter is blinking on this one...

Maybe I'm silly in your opinion but now to some points of interest.

The F4U may perform too well in slow flight, but it still can't compete with the Zeke.  Zeke enjoys a 20% turn radius advantage (significant, in my eyes) has better acceleration, etc...

I never said it could out turn a zeke, I said it has Zeke like performance at extreme low speeds.

To compare the performance of the F4U to an A6M immediately causes me to question the credibility (in my eyes at least) of the poster- sorry.

But you say yourself and every other F4U stick I know says the same "The F4U may perform too well in slow flight" So which is it?

For the record (again) I don't claim the F4U FM is necessarily correct (or any other plane, for that matter).  I have no way of knowing.  I do know that under some pretty intense scrutiny, nobody could point a definitive finger at what was wrong with it, and back it with any real data.  Could any plane in the set withstand similar scrutiny?

No other plane has the same bag of tricks as the F4U especially the perk versions post it's last patch. The F4U performs far too well for a plane of it's size and weight at extremely low speeds under flaps. Then there is it's landing gear added to the equation which acts as the best Air Brake in the game that can be extended and retracted within seconds while still maintaing exagerated level of roll and low speed handling.

Blaming your success/failure on your opponents choice of plane is lame (IMO).

Well this silly poster has 84 kills to 20 deaths over last 3 tours against all F4U varients. And 79 kills to 24 deaths against the Dweeb16. All sorties in the Yak-T a 25 eny ride. Maybe the only lame part is sticks in two of the most uber rides in the game getting killed on avarage by a Yak-T 4 to 1.

I fly the F4U because it's the F4U.  Personally, I have little/no interest in the vast majority of the other planes, both past and present.  I don't fly it because I like/dislike the FM, and I'd still fly "only" the F4U if the FM was changed.

I don't care reasons why you fly the F4U and your probably one of the best F4U sticks I've ever come across. I only care that we have a plane in the set that is so far overmodeled compared to any other ride. The F4U use to be (prior to last patch) a rare ride to see around. Now it's one of the more common amongst US fighters, especially with score potatos and for very good reason.

Quite honestly, my 9 year old does well enough flying offline to make me suspect all the planes are too forgiving. That might lead me to believe tactics and SA are more important components to success than the FM is, even in the F4UZeke...


MtnMan

Yes of course all the planes are dumbed down for a computer game compared to real flight, I have real flight experience in helicopters and I can tell you that any PC based simulator doesn't even come within a bees dick of represnting helicopter flight... But even in a computer game with FM as basic as represented here one expects a certain realistic (within game modeling) representation of any given aircraft and the F4U currently sits outside that with it's overly effective flaps at extreme low speeds and landing gear air brakes.

And yes of course tactics and SA are most improtant to success but flying something thats over modeled makes the first two a lot easier then it probably should be.



<S>...-Gixer

[Boozeman]

No other plane has the same bag of tricks as the F4U especially the perk versions post it's last patch. The F4U performs far too well for a plane of it's size and weight at extremely low speeds under flaps.

F6F... 

[Gixer]

F6F... 

I think you've had enough to drink for one day... 



<S>...-Gixer

[mtnman]

But you say yourself and every other F4U stick I know says the same "The F4U may perform too well in slow flight" So which is it?

Then there is it's landing gear added to the equation which acts as the best Air Brake in the game that can be extended and retracted within seconds while still maintaing exagerated level of roll and low speed handling.

The F4U use to be (prior to last patch) a rare ride to see around. Now it's one of the more common amongst US fighters, especially with score potatos and for very good reason.

When I say "may", I'm saying "maybe", "might" as in "I'm not positive one way or the other".  I'm using "may" instead of "does" or "doesn't".  There's no "which is it" answer, because I don't have enough facts to say "does or doesn't".  If I did, I'd say it "does" or "doesn't" perform to well, rather than "it may" perform too well.  For the record, I think it might perform too well at very slow speeds, but I have no way of proving it.  The same seems to be true for many others (can't prove it), or we'd have seen data supporting that fact (saying it does perform too well).  Do we have data proving that any of the other planes do or don't perform too well at low speed?  Or are our instincts/beliefs seen as good enough?

The gear thing I don't use enough to really be familiar with.  It's a last-ditch effort to slow down for me- a method I employ so extremely infrequently in a fight that I consider it a non-tactic.  I do use it to slow down for landing, and in the old days I used it while dive-bombing.  IMO, if I'm using gear in a fight I've screwed up big-time, and will soon be in the tower.  I certainly don't see it as affecting me positively in a fight.  When I teach people in the F4U, we use the gear for landing- it's never even crossed my mind to teach them to use it in a fight.

I don't see the F4U around any more than I ever have, but I don't keep an eye on usage stats either, so could easily be missing something.  The only time I see "high" numbers of them is when a CV is near.  I can only think of one score-driven person using F4U's a lot.  But again, it's not something I pay attention to...  Are there actually enough score potatoes using them to consider its use "common" for score potatoing?

MtnMan

[mtnman]

Gixer- you mentioned the gear being deployed and retracted within seconds, which is interesting because it brings to mind an issue I have with our "pilots".  The FM of the pilot we all use, if you will.  I'll post it in a different thread though rather than hijack this one further...

[Yenny]

My feeling about the F4Us is that it's way way overmodel. Under a good stick those things can out manuever most Spit5. Which is why I rarely fly them. I'm more of a LW bird, mainly because they are a lot harder to fly and master. 109K4 can take most F4Us in the vert, the only one that it couldn't is the F4U-4. I've spent countless hour in DA working on 109 v. F4Us, for my 109 to take on a good F4Us stick I'd have to take em vert. As soon as I drop flaps going into a stall fight I'm dead.

It's hard to believe that the F4Us are very stable at super slow speed, and they can point that nose straight up while doing 50mph and maintain control for a few seconds at that speed.

So I really really think that plane is overmodel, to me it's on the same caliber as spit 16s, just a bit better.

[mtnman]

It's hard to believe that the F4Us are very stable at super slow speed, and they can point that nose straight up while doing 50mph and maintain control for a few seconds at that speed.

So I really really think that plane is overmodel, to me it's on the same caliber as spit 16s, just a bit better.

Watching my films, I'd say the minimum "useful" speed for me in an F4U is around 120-130 mph.  By that I mean I can do more than subtly redirect my flight path.  Starting at a higher speed, sure, I can point my nose straight up, and let it drop to around 0mph.  So can any other plane in the set.  So can a 747.  At 50mph you're 25mph below stall in the F4U, you're not purposely pointing the nose anywhere (or maintaining control) at that point.

Here's a film to illustrate.  Watch my speeds.  Trying for my first shot, even at over 90 mph I don't have much control.  I'm coasting, and can't do anything beyond a subtle tweak of my planes "trajectory".  I try anyway, (expecting to get pounded by the A20 at any moment, whom I had killed twice, and who was currently l missing an elevator due to my antics.  I think he was holding a grudge...) and pay with a stall/spin that costs me 2400-2500 feet in recovery.  Even though my speed at the top is 42ish when I fall off, I had no control beyond some rudder once in the low 90's or high 80's (full throttle, airflow over rudder even at zero airspeed).  I can't pull out of my dive until I'm over 170mph.  The slow speeds are misleading, because I'm not really in control at those points.  I've directed my flightpath while at a greater speed so that in my low speed "coast" I'm pointing in a direction I want to be pointed in, but I'm not actually in control much below 107-110.  I'm basically a rock tossed on a planned arch.  I can't manuever comfortably much below 125, preferably not below 140.  This is again illustrated by the fact that I can't even get out of the A20's way while doing 120mph.  I knew he was there, but couldn't do anything... 

Also note that the 109 pilot (one I greatly respect as an opponent, BTW) could have done things differently to alter the outcome.

I guess I have trouble believing ANY plane should just fall out of the sky because they stall.  What should the F4U do when it gets slow?  It drops its nose, and it rewards poor control inputs with a spin.  The spin is recoverable with correct control inputs.  It stalls around 76mph, but loses effective control before that.  Basically, it does what the manual says it'll do.

I'll agree though, that it appears to be doing more at a slower speed than it really is.  For one, watching the film you'd think I was slower than I was, simply based on the perceived ground speed.  In reality, for a plane that stalls at 76mph to still have some control at 90mph, and "decent" control at around 120 is surprising how???  50mph above stall the plane should do what, exactly?

http://www.mediafire.com/?yqag4ygy2jz

MtnMan

[Yenny]

Where the hang prop becomes important is in whoever stall out 1st eat it. In 109k4 I almost can't keep my nose straight up at wep because torque will kick in and force me to roll left and I couldn't go up further. Which is usually around 100 knts that happen. In the F4Us w/ wep on you're literally going up all the way til 50mph before you roll left due to torque (maybe even lower) I can't remember the exact speed. This is where it plays out really critically. As you pulling G spiralling up or the F4U have the ability to maintain on its bandit's 6 until it stall out.

In the F4U, usually the fight is down at stall speed, so this is even more important as you go vert in a stall fight trying to squeeze every last possible alt u can get on the rolling scissors etc. It plays a big advantage for how the F4U is modeled.

[mtnman]

So you're saying that the F4U hangs on it's prop too well?  The 109 should be able to easily outclimb the F4U, especially once the F4U gets slow.  If the F4U has enough speed to do a zoom climb on the other hand, and if the 109 goes up at an angle allowing the F4U to "cut across the corner" though...

[BnZs]

For all the talk about the F4U's torque, one thing to keep in mind is that the engine power compared to the size of the plane is NOT all that much. ALL of these single-engine fighters could try to flip you over if you were trimmed near stall speed and idle and suddenly cobbed throttle.

The one that gets me is how the La7, a ~7,000 lbs. airplane with 1,800 HP up front, seems to behave so torquelessly sometimes.

[mtnman]

For all the talk about the F4U's torque, one thing to keep in mind is that the engine power compared to the size of the plane is NOT all that much. ALL of these single-engine fighters could try to flip you over if you were trimmed near stall speed and idle and suddenly cobbed throttle.

The one that gets me is how the La7, a ~7,000 lbs. airplane with 1,800 HP up front, seems to behave so torquelessly sometimes.

Well, I agree that maybe the effect of torque is over-emphasized, but I also find it odd that it's perfectly OK to start an engine on full throttle with no adverse effects in AH.  Or to go from idle to full throttle instantly on a take-off roll with no real problems either.  Of course, combat trim seems to always conpensate for the full torque effect, even when no torque is present (cutting throttle on landing reduces torque, but trim ignores this).  Maybe that dampens it enough that we don't see too many adverse effects.

And maybe that's necessary from a game standpoint.

I also wonder about the effect that the constant speed prop has on torque, since going to full throttle doesn't increase the RPM of the prop.  I know the pitch changes, but I wonder what effect (if any) that has on "felt" torque.

MtnMan