Discuss: F6F-5 Performance

[Krusty]

The issue is that a lot of the testing itself was flawed. The placement of the air intake for airspeed had a flaw in it and was later moved, but when flown side-by-side with an F4u corsair, it matched its speed almost identically. The test pilots thought there was no difference in the plane performance, other than the F6F turned a little tighter, and one of them (F4u?) climbed a little faster.


But, then, they were flying the real deal, and did not have Aces High Brand (TM) uberflappen. Excessive use of flaps in this game totally throws the F6Fs manuverability into the trash bin when compared to the flaps-down F4u in-game.

[Charge]

"So what's the rub then?  What's the stated reason they don't bump the speed up?"

Did you look at the link I posted Stoney?

It shows that despite significant power increase by using WEP practically did not increase level speed. To me it tells that the only way for F6F to be faster would be flying higher to overcome its drag and the supercharger it has does not support that.

"This test: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/ptr-1111.pdf
409 mph @ 21,600 feet, tested at Patuxent Naval Air Station, November 1944."

That is the test I was referring to earlier.

And comparison test between F4U and F6F is valid if it can be confirmed that the F4U was performing up to average to begin with. Test setup with with a particularly slow F4U and particularly fast F6F may produce such phenomenons.

-C+

[Stoney]

"So what's the rub then?  What's the stated reason they don't bump the speed up?"

Did you look at the link I posted Stoney?

Uh, yeah...  I meant, why hasn't HTC bumped the speed of the plane?  Has anyone heard from them about why 391 mph is pegged as top speed?

[SgtPappy]

The issue is that a lot of the testing itself was flawed. The placement of the air intake for airspeed had a flaw in it and was later moved, but when flown side-by-side with an F4u corsair, it matched its speed almost identically. The test pilots thought there was no difference in the plane performance, other than the F6F turned a little tighter, and one of them (F4u?) climbed a little faster.


But, then, they were flying the real deal, and did not have Aces High Brand (TM) uberflappen. Excessive use of flaps in this game totally throws the F6Fs manuverability into the trash bin when compared to the flaps-down F4u in-game.

Not to mention the fact that they really didn't test  planes in combat with flaps down, and when they did, they tested like 10 degrees.

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

Stoney, look how long it took to get the moss changed. 

[ReDeViL2]

I will say that the F6F is a helluva an Aircraft, but on more than 1 occasion I have heard that it is way overmodeled.  For instance, the other day I dove on one that was low on the deck and after watching another pilot rake him with fire I proceeded to hit him with over 50-20mm cannon rnds from a C-Hog and suprise suprise, he kept on flying.  I have noticed this more and more lately, having to chase down planes I have just pummeled with more than enough rounds to take them down, only to be killed by one of their buddies as I have to put more rounds into them after the fact.  I think this is an issue that more and more pilots are expressing dissatisfaction with and should be addressed. 

[Chalenge]

Have you got film of a F6F taking 50 hits from 20mm? 

[Ghosth]

All I can say is that if you did indeed hit him with 50 rounds of 20mm, you also scattered those 50 all over his airframe.

Because 15 rounds in one place will break whatever it hits.
I'd be willing to bet that over half of those 50 missed clean.

Pick one point and hammer them all into the same spot. They'll die every time.

[SgtPappy]

I still think it's undermodeled. Since proof has already been shown regarding the errors in testing and corrections made in the performance of the aircraft, the plane should be upped in top speed.

Chances are people would notice its superiority in clean maneuverability vs. a clean F4U more easily.

[The Fugitive]

I think only Greebos F6 is over modeled, everyone else is fine. 

[Steve]

I
Plus, the P-38 is widely known in tests to out turn a P-51 with 10 degrees of flaps. In this game it will do so, but only momentarily since its turn radius is larger, so 'out turn' is pretty subjective.

I don't know what game you are playing but the 38 will out turn a 51 handily in AHII, pilots being equal.

[Karnak]

It takes 2 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Bf110G-2.  It takes 3 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Mosquito Mk VI.  It takes 14 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Lancaster.  It takes 17 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a B-17G.

I highly doubt that you could actually hit an F6F-5 with 50 rounds of 20mm ammo and not fatally injure it.

[Charge]

"I highly doubt that you could actually hit an F6F-5 with 50 rounds of 20mm ammo and not fatally injure it."

Maybe he was talking about MG151/20... 

-C+

[Karnak]

"I highly doubt that you could actually hit an F6F-5 with 50 rounds of 20mm ammo and not fatally injure it."

Maybe he was talking about MG151/20... 

-C+

I'm including Type 99 Model I, let alone MG151/20.

[Chalenge]

It takes 2 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Bf110G-2.  It takes 3 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Mosquito Mk VI.  It takes 14 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a Lancaster.  It takes 17 rounds of Hispano II 20mm to take the tail off of a B-17G.

I highly doubt that you could actually hit an F6F-5 with 50 rounds of 20mm ammo and not fatally injure it.

Yet if you hit the cockpit with just two any of those planes are toast.