Author Topic: Poll time: F4U4 and 152  (Read 1460 times)

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2003, 04:45:54 PM »
Duedel, I've made acceleration tests with those two at deck level and WEP and without WEP. Ta152 is nowhere near LA7. Nor can it climb with it. Turn rate is about the same while the LA7 is ALOTY friendlier to fly.

Ta152 has nothing on the La7 at deck level. Well, ok, it does have a 30mm.
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2003, 06:10:48 PM »
Keep the perk tags so that people go after em... Also... increase the perks earned for killing pee 51's, dee 9's and la7's aong with the g10.
lazs

Offline SirLoin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5707
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2003, 06:50:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
Keep the perk tags so that people go after em... Also... increase the perks earned for killing pee 51's, dee 9's and la7's aong with the g10.
lazs


Let's keep the PERK tags and add NME player name TAGS......

I just don't see the difference.
**JOKER'S JOKERS**

Offline Lazerus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2159
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #48 on: June 09, 2003, 01:14:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SirLoin
Let's keep the PERK tags and add NME player name TAGS......

I just don't see the difference.


Now THAT is a great idea!!!

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #49 on: June 09, 2003, 02:59:21 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by F4UDOA
Widewing,

Was that Corkey Meyer who flew the F4U-4 for Grumman?

You wouldn't happen to have any other info on that report or interview?

I just ran into Bob McClurg from the Blacksheep squadron over the weekend at the Reading Pa WW2 Airshow. He has a new book coming out. It is very hard to get subjective aircraft opinions from those guys. The more you talk to them the more you realize the were just regular guys (very Young) who were doing a job. The Aircraft were really secondary to survival and friends.


I only have what Corky told Bodie. However, I believe Corky has written about this testing. I know that Grumman tested the F4U-4 against the F7F-1 and F8F-1. Both were far more agile (especially the F8F, which was considered more maneuverable than the Hellcat, but with staggering acceleration and climb). Like the F4U-4, the Bearcat could push 390 mph on the deck, and climb at better than 4550 fpm. Picture this monster in AH. Hellcat turning ability, faster and better climbing than the La-7, it would dominate the Tempest, easily in fact. How good was acceleration?
Grumman testing showed that when the F6F-5 and F8F-1 took off together, the F8F was passing 2,000 ft before the Hellcat had its gear up. Indeed, the F6F-5 required 800 ft of runway to get airborne, whereas the F8F-1 was up in half that distance.

Now add in the F7F, similar climb to the Bearcat, even better acceleration, and it was reportedly a better turner than the P-38L. Oh, it also managed 394 mph on the deck!. Even more daunting is the fact that the F7F-1 was armed with four Hispanos AND four .50s! The F7F-2N, which was the predominate version in service at the war's end, was a bit slower on the deck, and lost the 4 fifties. However, it was as fast as the F4U-4, Spit XIV or 109G-10 at altitude (445 mph at 26,400 ft).

Now, some will argue that neither of these fighters saw combat. However, more of them were in service with frontline squadrons than Ta 152s. Unlike Germany's situation (where the war came to them), they had to be transported with all the required logistics from the east coast to the western Pacific. Moreover, the F7F-2N WAS flying combat patrols, they just had no targets and the war ended days later. F8Fs where aboard carriers inbound to Japan. Both types were operational. Likewise, the P-51H had begun combat ops about a week before the surrender. Once again, the lack of enemy aircraft prevented them from getting blooded before Japan tossed in the towel. I'd like to see all three types added to this game some day, albeit heavily perked.

Of course, there are many others that should be developed first, especially Japanese aircraft. There's a few German aircraft missing that were relatively common, same for Soviets. A few Italian A/C are needed too. We should also have some more early-war types as well as the late-war P-47N. Personally, I'd like to see the P-63A added as it was a mid-war fighter, made in fairly large numbers and saw considerable combat.

My regards,

Widewing
« Last Edit: June 09, 2003, 03:01:26 AM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #50 on: June 09, 2003, 04:19:00 AM »
NME player name tags would be awsome.
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #51 on: June 09, 2003, 08:14:19 AM »
yep wide... seems that if kurt tank was drawing an aircraft and his blueprints got bombed then that plane "saw combat" in most sims.
lazs

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #52 on: June 09, 2003, 12:30:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
yep wide... seems that if kurt tank was drawing an aircraft and his blueprints got bombed then that plane "saw combat" in most sims.
lazs


Those German aircraft I'd like to see would be mostly early war types, such as the Bf109D, Fw 190A-1, Dornier Do 17 and He 111.

For the Italians, I'd like the Fiat CR.42 and G.55. Add the S.M.79 too.

Japanese need the Ki-84, Ki-43, Ki-44, J2M3, Ki-100 for fighters. Add the Ki-45-KAI for attack and the H8K "Emily" flying boat.

Soviets need the MiG-1 or MiG-3, Yak-1, Yak-9D, Yak-3 and Pe-2 for attack.

The Brits could use a bomber version of the Mosquito, such as the B.IV model. Give them the Spitfire LF.Mk.VIII (Clipped wing, low altitude version) and the Mustang Mk.1A too.

I'd like to see the French Dewoitine D.520 too.

For the U.S., I'd like to see the Brewster F2A-1/329, P-39D or P-39Q. I've already mentioned the rest, except for the P-47M and P-38G.

Of these listed, 13 are early-war aircraft. I am also of the opinion that at least one map should be in the rotation where two large land masses exist, separated by as many as 6 sectors. On one land mass, everything is enabled. on the other, only aircraft in service prior to July of 1943 will be enabled. Any idiot willing to fly 6 sectors to bring in a late-war fighter is welcome to waste his time. A string of small, closely set islands will keep CVs from crossing to the other half of the map, keeping the hotrod F4U-4 and its kin away from the early-war side.

Certainly any map can be modified to restrict late-war fighters to specific fields, as they regularly do in the CT now. This could provide a buffer in each corner of the map where early-war fighters will have fewer encounters with La-7s and the like. However, the first idea is less restrictive and allows for everyone to do their favorite thing limited only by a 150 miles of open water.

Once AH2 is up and running, perhaps HTC can address the concept of divided maps.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #53 on: June 09, 2003, 12:44:11 PM »
I would like to see the f4f-3 and the early f6f.  the bearcat and tigercat would make great perk rides.
lazs

Offline Zippatuh

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 963
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #54 on: June 10, 2003, 03:50:55 PM »
Widewing,

Rudder input on most of the Russian stuff at slow speeds causes problems doesn’t it?

Here is where I was coming from.  Even though your testing showed that with similar conditions the 4 was much better at stall speeds than the yak I would never think to bring it to a turn fight.  Also by saying “a bit of fuel in her belly”, I’m suggesting at least 50% if not 75%, not 25%.

You did the testing and having flown the yak a little I know what you are talking about with the rudder.  Stall fighting better than a yak, yes.  Turn fighting better than a yak, no.

Reading what you had I got the impression someone new would take it that stall or turn fighting is the best way to fly the ensign eliminator and it’s not.  It is much better as an energy fighter with its E retention and roll characteristics.

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #55 on: June 10, 2003, 04:43:58 PM »
at stall speeds, the Yak can kill the -4 easily, it is much lighter and can bounce around while the -4 is too heavy to follow. No way the -4 kills the 9U in any set of maneuvers under 200mph at least.

Maybe if you are doing vert on-offs, but even then the lighter plane can pull out for an overshoot or go from lag to lead stall position easily.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Innominate

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2702
Poll time: F4U4 and 152
« Reply #56 on: June 10, 2003, 05:25:12 PM »
The f4u4 has some of the worst prop torque of any plane in AH(the spit14 is the only plane i can think of which has worse torque)  It's an even tougher beast to keep flying than the other f4u's.

While slow and with flaps out the f4u4 is a rather maneuverable plane, able to at least easily turn inside of an la7.  Provided the pilot is good enough not to spin the corsair.

The problem is, behind that la7 is the pack of spits and nikis with perk tags in thier eyes.