Author Topic: Pyro, FM data (Read 359 times)

F4UDOA · « **on:** March 14, 2001, 11:30:00 AM »

Based on the test data I have provided for the F4U-1D are there any plans to increase the climb rate? Specifically at sea level military power.

I have been posting on this subject since the beta and have provided multiple sources of reference data.

If you are not going to I will stop posting and reposting the data. Otherwise I may be forced to change my ID to F4Udeadhorse

Thanks
F4UDOA

juzz · « **Reply #1 on:** March 14, 2001, 11:51:00 AM »

That last .pdf you posted is really good stuff.

But it also indictates that the F4U-1 should be 5mph slower than the one in AH... you want that too I suppose?

What gets me is that the F6F-5 has +500fpm on the F4U-1D in AH. Of course it could be because it's indicating 67" MAP for some reason!!

F4UDOA · « **Reply #2 on:** March 14, 2001, 01:15:00 PM »

Juzz,

Some people had a hard time reading some of the data, glad you enjoyed it though

I will do another copy with better resolution and repost it.

Anyway I did notice the 5mph difference from that chart to AH. However there are two charts I am looking at which seem to agree with one another if you read the small print.

This report is dated aug 1945 and superseeds the Jan1945 report.

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id71.htm

It shows this

combat condition
combat power climb at sea level= 3370fpm
military power climb at sea level=2930fpm
Combat power speed at sea level= 358mph
mil power speed at sea level= 343mph

Clean condition, no pylons or rocket stubs
speed at sea level =366mph

The report I recently posted is dated Jan1944
Which shows

Combat condition
combat power climb at sea level=3120fpm
military power climb at sea level=3000fpm
* AH combat power matches this chart.

combat power sea level speed = 355mph
miltary power sea level= 339mph

No clean condition listed

Notice the difference between these two reports is only 3mph and 200FPM. Considering they were based on flight test of different A/C at different dates and conditions some variation is to be expected.

However my beef is the Aces High FM military power setting being so low at 2700fpm, then quickly dropping to 2500fpm. This is not shown on either report and is approx
300fpm low.

Also consider that this A/C has the same eny value as the

La7
FW190D-9

It could use every FPM it was capable of.

[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 03-14-2001).]

juzz · « **Reply #3 on:** March 14, 2001, 01:50:00 PM »

I think I see what's going on.

3,370fpm - yes - for about 2 seconds before it starts dropping rapidly, and by 2,000ft it's down to 3,000fpm.

Know why?

Neutral blower.

It would appear that in Aces High you don't get the neutral blower when you engage WEP. It shows on the speed curves too.

Otherwise the actual climb performance of the F4U-1D in AH matches those charts quite well(Unless the AH ASI is faulty or I can't read it right

).

F4UDOA · « **Reply #4 on:** March 14, 2001, 03:03:00 PM »

Yes, for combat power that's true. Although it the mil power settings that really bug me. It takes so long to get to 10K in a -1D at mil power it's just a joke. Plus when WEP runs out your acceleration and sustained turn rate really suck bad at sea level where you really need it. That 3400fpm spike may not seem like much but when your low and slow on the deck it is your accleration from a stall that moves you through a sustained turn quickly. And sea level is where it matters the most.

Both reports and the AH charts are the same above around 5,000ft. But below that the F4U-1D really insn't represented well in AH.

Like I said, all I really want is to know if they plan on fixing it or not. So I can get off of my soap box.

BTW, the Cdo for the F4U I posted from Vought are much lower than those in AHT. Another reason the acceleration is so poor in AH depending on how the FM is created.

juzz · « **Reply #5 on:** March 14, 2001, 03:33:00 PM »

Maybe, but it took forever to climb for the real thing too. In AH it's like 10 seconds slower to 10k, and less than that at 20k. :\

Just start asking for the F4U-4. It's the proper Corsair for the "new improved" 1944/45 AH 1.06+ planeset anyway.

niklas · « **Reply #6 on:** March 14, 2001, 04:22:00 PM »

the really interesting point from F4UDOA´s charts is that the F4U had only 2250Hp for fast flight near sealevel, and 2000HP for climb. It looks like a not limited boost near sealevel. Brake horsepower for climb is alway lower near sealevel like for max. speed.

Maybe this is the reason why the F4U did not have a good initial climbrate

niklas

F4UDOA · « **Reply #7 on:** March 16, 2001, 12:08:00 PM »

Punt!!!!!!

SageFIN · « **Reply #8 on:** March 16, 2001, 12:47:00 PM »

I want to see Lavochkins get their missing bombs (rockets too?) and FW's get their roll rate reported in the NACA test etc etc blahblah

Sorry

. I wasn't quite able to resist the temptation.

------------------
---
SageFIN

"I think I´ll believe in Gosh instead of God. If you don´t
believe in Gosh too, you´ll be darned to heck."
---

F4UDOA · « **Reply #9 on:** March 16, 2001, 02:19:00 PM »

I don't mind

It's just when you are told to produce documents to prove a point to get something fixed, you expect a little feed back.

Frankly HTC has been so quiet lately I think they planned there vacations around the 1.06 release.

Frost · « **Reply #10 on:** March 16, 2001, 07:38:00 PM »

On a related note...I would like HTC to look at the ENY numbers for the -1D. Like F4UDOA said, it is the same as the LA7, D-9 and P-51. It is a good solid plane, but comparitively the ENY number seems low.

Tac · « **Reply #11 on:** March 16, 2001, 09:43:00 PM »

*remembers he has to send F4UDOA some kind of bribe to find P-38 data and post it*

p p p p ork...ed...

*remembers he's broke*

Auuuugh...