Do you realize??

[spinny]

F4UDOA, even if the 1D Hog's FM is improved, it's still not going to be a top killer. I've flown it in AW, WB, and now AH, and it was/is the same story in each case: the plane is competitive, but not outstanding. The -4 is another issue. You just have to accept that it's not going to live up to its historical record. In WBs my squadron, VF-17, gives an award called the Kepford (in honor of Ike Kepford, the JRs top ace) for 16 kills in the MA with no deaths. Now, that might not sound like a lot, given the high scores that some folks rack up, but in the Hog, it's not easy to accomplish. And from what I've seen in AH, it might be even harder here. So be it.

------------------
Spinny, VF-17, The Jolly Rogers 8X

[funked]

If you want to see the F4U shine, fill the arena with Ki-43 and A6M.

[Vermillion]

F4UDOA, like I said, I was mainly trying to make a point that its incorrect to take statistics like you quoted, and make FM adjusts. It wasn't personal at all  

Here is where your problem is.

You love the Corsair, and in Aces High we have the F4U-1D. Excellent aircraft, and the -1 (or Dash One as I call it) was easily the most representative model produced. However, the -1, is basically a 42-43 midwar variant.  

What aircraft in Aces High, is the Hog fighting against?

P-51D__Late War Variant
Me-109G10__ Very Late War Variant
Fw190A8__Late War Variant-Specialized bomber killer
Spit IXF__ Late War Mark IX Variant
N1K2__Very Late War Variant
C.205__ Mid War Variant
La-5FN__ Mid War Variant

Starting to see my point?

Put the -1D exclusively up against the C.205 or the La5, and it will start to take over the role that the Pony is currently filling in AH. It will dominate most any fight if flown intelligently. It will also do the same if matched up against a 109F or an early model 109G, or a Spit V.

Basically what is needed, and in my opinon more representative to the planeset, is the F4U-4. Late War variant versus Late War variants. Then you will see the results and matchups you are looking for.

But don't feel cheated, there are other "camps" of pilots out there in the same boat. 190 pilots feel they should have the Dora, Lavochin pilots feel they need the La-7, and even some Spitfire pilots want the Mark XIV.  And they all have a valid arguement.

Ahhh now to my favorite part   the N1K2 Shinden arguement. Basically, there are several pilots (myself included) that feel if anything the N1K2 is undermodeled in Aces High. Go back and read some of the older "N1K2 Flight Tests" threads in this forum. They are quite interesting.  

And just so you know, the Aces High N1K2, doesn't perform anywhere near as well as the Air Warrior N1K2. Not even close. It is lacking approximately 25%-30% of its top speed and climbrate throughout the altitude ranges.

What it really comes down to though is that there is a severe lack of accurate flight test data for this bird, or any late model Japanese Fighters.

Don't trust that 380 mph number you are throwing out. It is quite possible it is an error, that has propagated over the years.

Another example, read the Ki-84 Frank section of Francillons, "Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War". Easily the most definitive Japanese aircraft book. FYI the Ki-84 and the N1K2 both had the same 2000hp Homare engine in them.

In it he himself lists the top speed of the Ki-84, at aprox. 390-400 mph (at work don't have the book in front of me), which is the commonly given top speed of the plane that you see in the "reference books" most of us use.

But then he immediately goes on to tell of how a captured Ki-84 was Flight Tested in Pennsylvania in 1946, and it reached a speed of over 420 mph.

So until someone can come up with some definitive flight test data for either of these birds, I will be quite skeptical.

Hey if you want to start a "We Need the -4 Corsair" campaign, I will back you up.  But until we get it, you just won't be seeing the kind of performance that you are expecting in relation to the other aircraft in Aces High.




------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires "

[juzz]

Me-109G10__ Very Late War Variant - Spring '44 is "Very Late War"?!

Spit IXF__ Late War Mark IX Variant - Ahh, because Spring '42 is "Late War"...  

[Vermillion]

Juzz:
I will have to check some references, but the G10 or even the K4 was in combat strength in spring 44? I was under the impression that it was a winter 44 aircraft.

And on the Spitfire, well go do some Spitty research. And then reread what I wrote "Late War IX variant"   Which means that it was the late war variant of the Mk IX.

On the Spitfire Mk IX, there were 3 seperate subvarients, the LF, F, and HF each optimized for different altitude bands. And in addition there were 3 different Merlin engines (from memory) the Model 60, 61, and 66. And I am not even going to go into the clipped wings and such.

The Aces High Spitfire Mk IX is a unclipped F variant, with a Merlin 66 I believe (See FdSki's post on Spitfires to Pyro, and the answer). Which was the 1944 variant of the aircraft.

So yes I consider 1944 Late war in relation to other aircraft  

------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires   "

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 12-29-1999).]

[F4UDOA]

I'm exhausted,

All I am asking for is a realalistic Flight model for the F4U. Does anyone realize that
the F4U-1D was a late war fighter and did not enter service until 1944? It's contemperaries
are the P-51D and the Focke Wolf Fw-190A-8 and D-9. The only single important factor in the flight model can be flight test data.
The F4U was tested extensivly against the likes of P-47D, P-51D, F6F-3 and 5 and yes against the Niki and Ki-84. Even the Fw-190A4. Remember the F4U flew against far more maneaverable A/C than were in the Euro-theater of operations. But in fact it had lower wing loading than the P-51 and Fw-190. The F4U could easily out turn either of these a/c in the virtical or horiziontal planes. It also had better HP to weight ratio below 15k. These are facts based on test data. Not my opinion.

Anyway I want to give everyone a required reading assignment. Try reading from the Shiffer military publications book, the
"Report of joint Fighter Conferance"
NAS Patuxant River MD 16-23 OcT. 1944.
This is not a book or an opinion. This is a report on the joint test of Army, Navy, British and Contract pilots determining the future of fighter A/C. These are the actual meeting notes and flight cards. Not someones brothers webpage were the Niki or Ki is a superplane.
Also try reading "Focke Wolf Fw-190 Work horse of the Luftwaffe". It has the actual flight test data from the test of a 190-A5 VS
an F4U-1 and F6F-3. Read this report and tell me what you would rather go to combat in.
And by the way, the A-5 was a much faster climber than a A-8 which was much heavier.
I am not asking for and uber plane.
Just and acurate description of the real thing.

F4UDOA

[juzz]

I did some Spitty research, and look what I found:

Boscombe Down 22 October 1942 F Mk IX BF274 Merlin 61 AUW 7,480
BF274 carried an incorrect serial number thoughout its entire service life. Actual number was BS274. Converted from MK V to MK IX.

from the url provided in the Spit IX thread by fd ski http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html  So

As for the Bf109G-10, I don't know when it entered service in "combat strength", but it was available in early/mid 1944 at least. The K-4 was in service by the first month of 1945 I think(btw; of the 14000 Bf109's manufactured in 1944, only 754 were designated as K's).

[Vermillion]

Juzz:
hehe read your OWN quote    

   

October 1942 F Mk IX BF274 Merlin 61

See where it says Merlin 61? We have the Merlin 66 Spitfire.

<rasberries Juzz>    

And at least according to Messerschmitt Bf 109 in Action, Part 2. Aircraft No. 57 Squadron/Signal Publications page 44 "The G-10 was issued to units in early fall 1944, coinciding with a slight resurgence of the Luftwaffe day fighter units."

<rasberries Juzz again>

heheh Just kidding Juzz      

I'm starting to think its a matter of "He with the most aircraft books wins"?

PS: I got a Spitfire Pilots Manual for Christmas if any of you Nancy Boy Spitfire Pilots are interested (j/k)

[For those with general thin skins, note that I am kidding with Juzz thru most of this post]

------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires   "



[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 12-29-1999).]

[juzz]

 

Pyro
Administrator   posted 12-19-1999 01:23 PM              
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AH Spit is a F.IX with a Merlin 61.

See where it says Merlin 61? We have the Merlin 61 Spifire.  

And read this too  

And at least according to Messerschmitt Bf 109 in Action, Part 2. Aircraft No. 57 Squadron/Signal Publications page 44 "The G-10 was issued to units in early... ...1944, coinciding with a slight resurgence of the Luftwaffe day fighter units."

I win! I win! I win!  

------------------
When the light was right it was actually possible to see the 30mm(1.18ins) shells in flight. - Heinrich Beauvais(Test Pilots, W.Späte).

[Vermillion]

Corsair's , Corsair's, Corsairs.... *sigh* The real Corsair experts like Windle or Spinny are gonna eat me alive on this one, but here goes  

Ok, F4UDOA, I give you that the F4U-1D was first issued to the Navy in April 1944, just in time for the Marshall Islands Campaign.

But dig deeper, and ask the question "What is the F4U-1D?"

Essentially, the -1D model is a Fighter/Bomber conversion of the -1A model.

Specifically, the changes from the -1A to the -1D model are as follows: Two wing pylons replaced the single centerline pylon. Provisions for 8 rockets were added. The internal wing fuel tanks were removed (but drop tanks were usually carried instead). Also changes to the tail gear and the layout of several cockpit instruments were made. Otherwise they were the same aircraft, including the R-2800-8W powerplant.

So performance wise, you added quite a bit of drag for the external stores attachment points, and kept the same powerplant. You might convince me that the -1D would roll better (due to the wing tank deletion) than the earlier -1A and -1, but otherwise its gonna perform very very similarly.

Also it should be understood, that the big performance difference between the -1A and the -1, was that the R-2800-8 engine was changed to the R-2800-8W . Which meant that water injection was added, which would only change the WEP characterisitics in our game. (also the canopy and some aileron modifications/stall characteristic changes were made)

So basically if you are flying the F4U-1D, you are flying a F4U-1 with better visibility, milder stall characteristics, and a more powerful WEP, (the only real difference in the two), but with increased drag.

The F4U-1 was first issued to VMF-124 in December 1942, and arrived in combat in the South Pacific in January 1943.

So maybe you disagree, but I think my statement that the F4U-1D is basically a midwar (1942-1943) aircraft has quite a bit of merit. Especially when you look at performance.



------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires "

[Vermillion]

Oh Yeah almost forgot ....

Before you start throwing out references and handing out "required reading assignments" to make yourself and your arguements sound better. In this case, the NAS Joint Fighter Conference. I would suggest that you actually READ them.

The only German or Japanes aircraft tested at the conference was a single Japanese A6M-5 Zero. And it was restricted to very small portion of the pilots present, due to fears of losing it in an accident.

There was not a N1K2, Ki-84, or even a FW190 tested at the conference, all of which you insinuate in your post.

The only foreign aircraft(all British designs) tested at the conference were a Seafire MkIII, a Firefly Mk I, and a Canadian Mosquito Mk BXX.

And your calling Rene Francillon's book,  "someones brothers webpage were the Niki or Ki is a superplane. ?? LOL!!! now your just showing your own ignorance. Do an author's search on Barnes & Nobles, and enlighten yourself.

I guess we do agree on one thing, lets forget about anecdotal evidence or pilots opinons, only flight test data is acceptable.  

And so far I haven't seen any hard numbers on how the Aces High F4U-1D is significantly different from flight test data.

<throws down a broken and bloodied club>

Ok Curly bring me a fresh club !! This one is still twitching  

 

I'm kidding... I'm kidding


------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires   "

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 12-29-1999).]

[funked]

"All I am asking for is a realalistic Flight model for the F4U."

That would be cool!

[Sorrow[S=A]]

<hands verm a club>

------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.

[jmccaul]

Sorry to dissapoint you vermillion but i will defend my spitfire.

============================================= The Mk IX Spitfire was also an adaption of the Mk V, and used the Merlin 61 engine with a four bladed propeller. The early Mk IX aircraft were delivered in June 1942 to 64 Squadron based at Hornchurch. Timing could not have been better because the Germans had just developed the Focke-wulf 190 fighter, and it was at least 30 mph faster than the RAF's Mk V Spitfires. The Merlin 61 gave the Mk IX an increase of 70 mph over the top speed of the older Mk V. It was soon found that the Fw 190 operated best between 14,000 and 20,000 ft, a height that the Spitfire Mk IX did not handle at its best. So the HF and LF series was adopted by the Mk IX. The HF Mk IX carried a Merlin 61 or 63 engine whilst its LF sister aircraft carried a Merlin 66. Within months of entering service the Mk IX replaced almost all the serving Mk V Spitfires and became the new workhorse of most fighter squadrons.
============================================

and also try this

============================================
But the Mk.IXs built in late 1944 are actually very different, with a  larger rudder, fuel tanks in the aft fuselage, and the E-wing with two 20mm cannon and two .50 guns. Another addition is a gyro gunsight, which greatly improves combat effectiveness.
===========================================


   As you can see our version is the first(and worst?) version.

  Mabye if you want to give us spitters a better chance we could have this '43 jobby
===========================================

On the 8th August 1942 the first Griffon 61 engined Spitfire took to the air. It had a top speed of over 450 mph and could reach 30,000 ft in less than eight minutes. This new Spitfire, the Mk XII, was to take on a fighter role and fifty were ordered to be built by the end of that year. This was an impossible task and the first production aircraft was not to fly until October. Only five of the fifty ordered were ready by the end of 1942 and only 100 Mk XIIs were ever built.
============================================
 
 this by the way is a joke   i wouldn't be that cruel.
 

[spinny]

Maybe this will bring this thread to an end.
Last night there was an "historical" matchup between Hogs and Niks. My impression was that it was pretty much of a draw, but I don't have any hard numbers (are there any?). I do know this, and this reaffirms something Verm wrote earlier, above 20K, the Hog outmatches the Nik. The first wave of Niks came in high, and I don't think they did very well. As the fights got lower, the balance shifted toward the Nik. I made the mistake of chasing Nicolai down low, and he flew me into the ground...nice flying there pal (and he was out of ammo, too!! Superb flying on his part).

I've said this in other fora, but what we have in the arenas in these online flight sims is essentially World War II aircraft fighting in a World War I environment: low-alt furballs. Certain planes do well in this environment, others do not...the Hog is one of the ones that doesn't. Up high, though, I think I can hold my own against any plane in the set, with the exception of the 109, but against him, I always have my dive  

------------------
Spinny, VF-17, The Jolly Rogers 8X