Author Topic: Corsair Propellor (humor me) (Read 296 times)

Ivedog · « **on:** December 04, 1999, 10:36:00 AM »

When I jumped in the arena last night to test out the new guncam, I heard some talk about the Corsair's propellor being too small. At first I thought it was probably just a matter of perspective, but I decided to check it out anyway.

What I found was, at least to me, it does appear as if the prop might be a little undersized. Whether this is a perspective issue or not, I'm not sure.

Ivedog

Windle · « **Reply #1 on:** December 04, 1999, 11:04:00 AM »

The prop is definately too small. The actual size should be 13 feet, 4 inches to scale.

------------------
~Lt. Jg. Windle~

VF-17 The Jolly Rogers 8X
Skychrgr@aol.com

funked · « **Reply #2 on:** December 04, 1999, 11:38:00 AM »

Ivedog is that a composite of 2 images?

Ivedog · « **Reply #3 on:** December 04, 1999, 12:00:00 PM »

Yes, funked. I took a standard Aces High image and laid over a prop image taken from a technical diagram of a F4u-1d. It's probably not exactly the same scale as the screenshot, but I think it's enough to illustrate the point.

Ivedog

[This message has been edited by Ivedog (edited 12-04-1999).]

Pyro · « **Reply #4 on:** December 04, 1999, 12:38:00 PM »

Thanks, it'll be fixed for the next version.

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

214CaveJ · « **Reply #5 on:** December 04, 1999, 07:16:00 PM »

is the prop size a factor in the flight model (as opposed to only being used for the visual model)? just wondering.. a smaller prop than what should be on it might explain why the hawg isn't meeting the performance some of us expect.

[This message has been edited by 214CaveJ (edited 12-04-1999).]

juzz · « **Reply #6 on:** December 04, 1999, 11:26:00 PM »

While you're at it, can it be repainted to a tri-colour scheme please? Isn't the one it has now the same as on WarBirds F4U-1D?

Yup, both have a yellow cowl ring, white arrows; #102 in WB, #167 in AH.

Windle · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 1999, 09:57:00 AM »

The F4U-1D didn't carry the tri-color paint scheme. That scheme was used on the F4U-1 & F4U-1A only. The F4U-1D's all carried the standard overall Gloss Sea Blue scheme (with added squad markings of course).

I rather like the current scheme since it is the aircraft that my uncle flew during 1945. I get to fly "his plane" in WB and AH.

------------------
~Lt. Jg. Windle~

VF-17 The Jolly Rogers 8X
Skychrgr@aol.com

juzz · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 1999, 10:40:00 AM »

Uh oh, how to save this one...
Ahhhhh... what I *meant* was; give us the F4U-1A! hehehe

How different is the performance of the A vs the D anyway? They built more A's yes?

Windle · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 1999, 06:54:00 PM »

The F4U-1A was a tad bit lighter and didn't have rocket hard points or twin bomb/tank pylons. Instead it had a single centerline hard point only which facilitated the use of a 175 gallon drop tank or up to a 1000 pound bomb. The F4U-1A also had the earlier canopy which still retained two cross braces. The start of F4U-1D production is when the wing fuel tanks were deleted, so the F4U-1A would have the added feature of an extra 82 gallons of fuel in each wing (361 gallons total for the plane). Other than these factors the F4U-1A and F4U-1D were basically the same plane.

I vote for the F4U-1A or the F4U-1 'birdcage' Corsair.

THe latter would really be an original as far as flight sims are concerned. The F4U-1 did suffer from not having water injection compared to later models. The F4U-1 also had two small bomb racks under each wing for 100 pound bombs (rather worthless but some good trivia nonetheless)

------------------
~Lt. Jg. Windle~

VF-17 The Jolly Rogers 8X
Skychrgr@aol.com