Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Zigrat on December 15, 2000, 07:22:00 PM
-
either our f4u is too bad or our p51 is too good?
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jandkh/page1.html (http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jandkh/page1.html)
-
Outstanding stuff! How do you find this type of material?
Andy
-
Its a USN test. They were biased by the blue paint, radial engine, and the large, manly stature of the Corsair. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
that test is easy to explain. look at what all was done to the corsair.
1: the corsair is a F4U-1 it pulls 65" mp instead of 59.5" so it has a power advantage over a stock corsair.
2 the aircraft was specially prepaired. it had the gap in the wing faired over and special attention was given to the engine cowling fit. tail hook was removed. if they were willing to admit these perks, how many others did they do with out saying what they did to them?
I am sure the 51 even had some perks done to it.
[This message has been edited by bolillo_loco (edited 12-15-2000).]
-
But they also had the second F4U-1A with no mods running production stats against the pristine 1B stang. The way I read it both F4Us had advantages over the 1B stang and is noted to be a better gun platform ;p
S!
Rocket
-
The mod in the F4U-1 was to simulate the F4U-4 suface finish and higher manifold pressure. The P-51B performance was right on the money with no "perks" done to it.
Side note, this report was given to me by Francis Dean Author of "America's Hundred Thousand". He is a neighbor of mine and a heck of a nice guy. He also gave me the F4U/F6F vs FW190 report.
-
America's Hundred Thousand, this is one of the BEST book's I have ever read on WW2 aircraft,I am always pulling it out and looking at it.
F4UDOA,sir if u get a chance thank him ,for such a fine work, for me i will enjoy it for years to come.
Brady
------------------
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwCwcPsI127zdfQrpnUcxlA3JwdurswdyuKkL2b1oC9IifgHlGH10m2*!jtTQ!E7)
[This message has been edited by brady (edited 12-16-2000).]
-
take a look at those speeds of the P-51B/C in aht and then look at the A/C's weights. you will notice the lighter the plane the faster they went. the 51B/C that weighed around 9,600 was about 15 mph slower at altitude than the other two 51B/Bs that were lightened for the test.
-
loco.. it was common practice to remove the tailhook on corsairs since they were used as land based planes at first. Many goodyear Hogs didn't even have the heavy wing folding mech. Imagine how much better they handled. Face it... the Hog was one of, if not the best, fighter of the war. It was at the very least the most versitile. Your silly prejedice is so apparent and unfounded that it is laughable. The corsair really shines in any real life side by side comparrison tests I have ever seen. If you read those tests and the one that TAIC did against other U.S. planes and a captured Zero the picture becomes even more clear.
lazs
-
Aces High F4U1C v P51D at Sea Level, 25% fuel and both on full military power.
(http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~badboy/PDF/P51DvF4U1C.gif)
Badboy
[This message has been edited by Badboy (edited 12-17-2000).]
-
no I think it is common around here to make the corsair super to its highest numbers found. when you find a report that says the F4U-1 does 440 mph and then say this is how it should be modeled to represent a normal corsair that is laughable. then you down play and minimize the modes done to the corsair. " it was normal practice to remove the tail hook" like that was the only thing they did to that plane.
what is laughable is how 5 of you want the corsair modeled. If you want corsairs modeled to their highest numbers, then all the other planes should also be this way, but this is not so.
this will come back to haunt you. I have seen it at other sims. model planes that are not popular so that they dont even meet their lowest published figures, then model the favorites to slightly above their highest figures. everybody looses intrest but a few people.
-
It says 436mph - looks like you're the one inflating the figures...
-
you guys kill me, anybody that asks any question as to why the planes you dislike does this he is attacked, ask a question why your favorite plane is modeled to its highest figures and he is attacked again.
dont be supprised when there are only 5-10 of you guys playing cause the corsair F4U-1 does 440 or 436 what ever you choose and just flies circles around every plane here and people are tired of yet another biased sim.
there has never been even a decent attempt to explain why the 38 spins out and does it worse than the other planes here, nor why it doesnt even achieve its lowest speed or rate of climb as per ath.
also for those of you out there who are affraid to challenge these people and their inflated figures for corsairs, do it on your own. I get tired of icqs and e-mails cause you are scared to oppose these guys. there is really no point. they will model their plane what ever way they want.
-
NONE OF US CHOOSE THE PLANES!
NONE OF US MODEL THE PLANES!
PYRO DOES!
WE DON'T!
IS THAT CLEAR?!
-
Nah juzz - you've lost me round about line 3... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) Try using shorter words... it may hel.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Is bolillo_loco, RAM's brother?
They certainly have the same style, and both seem to blindly follow an agenda.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
More like "anti-lazs" I think. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by juzz:
More like "anti-lazs" I think. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
There must be a balance between the light and the dark. Or in this case, between the dark and the dark (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
---
SageFIN
"I think IŽll believe in Gosh instead of God. If you donŽt
believe in Gosh too, youŽll be darned to heck."
---
-
loco... no one asked for the corsair -1 to do 436... I would like the Hog to handle well tho. the tests that I have seen are comparison tests so your point about taking the best tests is assinine. We have the poorest performing Hog but it has better bomb capacity. I don't care about bombs.
sage.. a painter once told me that there were over 400 shades of black when I asked for a black paint job on my car. BTW, what does sage mean in finland? Inane? drivel?
lazs
-
Lazs,
Bolillo_Loco has no interest in educating himself about anything. In fact he is just disgruntled about the P-38 performance being so poor. But since he doesn't know what the P-38's performance should be or what is wrong with it he attacks the F4U. I am willing to bet if he flew it for a tour he would have a negative K/D.
BadBoy,
That is another great chart<S>!!
Is that an AH chart or is it based on real life numbers? Did you get your copy of the Test pilots Association on WW2 fighters?
Later
F4UDOA
-
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000864.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000864.html)
um... ive tested the shrecking plane over and over
P-38L loadout:
100% fuel
200rpg 50cal, 150rds 20mm
no external ordnance
top speeds wep/mil 1.04 AH P-38L vs AH chart
30k 400wep, 385 (chart 405wep, 390)
25k 415wep, 390 (chart 415wep, 400)
20k 395wep, 385 (chart 403wep, 388)
15k 385wep, 370 (chart 387wep, 372)
10k 370wep, 360 (chart 374wep, 360)
05k 355wep, 345 (chart 357wep, 345)
00k 345wep, 330 (chart 345wep, 332)
time to climb, feet per minute, mil power
01k 0:18 3333
02k 0:37 3158
03k 0:56 3158
04k 1:15 3158
05k 1:35 3000 4-6k avg: 3053 chart 3200
06k 1:55 3000
07k 2:14 3158
08k 2:35 2857
09k 2:55 3000
10k 3:16 2857 9-11k avg: 2952 chart 3050
11k 3:36 3000
12k 3:58 2727
13k 4:20 2727
14k 4:42 2727
15k 5:05 2609 14-16k avg: 2648 chart 2850
16k 5:28 2609
17k 5:51 2609
18k 6:15 2500
19k 6:40 2400
20k 7:05 2400 19-21k avg: 2369 chart 2600
21k 7:31 2307
22k 7:58 2222
23k 8:25 2222
24k 8:53 2069
25k 9:22 2069 24-26k avg: 2024 chart 2300
26k 9:53 1935
27k10:25 1875
28k11:01 1667
28k11:40 1538
30k12:23 1395 29-31k avg: 1394 chart 1700
31k13:11 1250
time to climb, feet per minute, WEP
01k 0:17 3529
02k 0:34 3529
03k 0:50 3750
04k 1:07 3529
05k 1:24 3529 4-6k avg: 3529 chart 3700
06k 1:41 3529
07k 1:58 3529
08k 2:15 3529
09k 2:32 3529
10k 2:50 3333 9-11k avg: 3398chart 3500
11k 3:08 3333
12k 3:27 3158
13k 3:46 3158
14k 4:06 3000
15k 4:26 3000 14-16k avg: 3000 chart 3200
16k 4:46 3000
17k 5:07 2857
18k 5:28 2857
19k 5:50 2727
20k 6:13 2609 19-21k avg: 2648 chart 2800
21k 6:36 2609
22k 7:00 2500
23k 7:25 2400
24k 7:51 2308
25k 8:19 2143 24-26k avg: 2150 chart 2350
26k 8:49 2000
27k 9:21 1875
28k 9:55 1765
29k10:33 1579
30k11:15 1428 29-31k avg: 1428 chart 1700
31k12:02 1276
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/charts/p38lspeed.gif)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/charts/p38lclimb.gif)
http://home.worldonline.dk/~winthrop/p38op7.html (http://home.worldonline.dk/~winthrop/p38op7.html)
HT was meaning to look into the P-38 FM was curious if there is any word on it.
I was reading the operating manual for the P-38 particularly the stall/spin section and dive flaps section:
STALLS
a. With power off., the airplane stalls at the following air speeds and gross weights noted.
15,000 lbs 17,000 lbs 19.000 lbs
Flaps and landing gear up 94 mph 100 mph 105 mph
Flaps and landing gear DOWN 69 mph 74 mph 78 mph
b. As stalling speed is approached, the centre section stalls first with noticeable shaking of the airplane, however the ailerons remain effective.
c. In either power ON or power OFF stalls with flaps and landing gear up the airplane rushes straight forward in a well controlled stall. With flaps and landing gear down there appears to be a slight tendency for one wing to drop. There is however no tendency to spin. Under these conditions, the nose drops slightly and as the speed increases, the wing will come up.
d. On airplanes equipped with rocket installation the stall characteristics are the same.
SPINS
a. Spin Characteristics
The spin is fast, but recovery is prompt and easy if the proper technique is used.
b. Recovery
The airplane can be brought out of the spin any time by kicking full rudder against the spin for a minimum of half a turn then easing forward the control column. The procedure is as follows:
1. Close throttles.
2. If flaps are down pull them up.
3. KICK FULL RUDDER AGAINST THE SPIN AS BRISKLY AS POSSIBLE, WAIT AT LEAST HALF A TURN BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO PUSH THE WHEEL FORWARD. Recovery is slower by one turn with flaps down. If the flaps are down or on their way up the rudder should be held against the spin for at least one full turn before pushing the column forward.
4. After half a turn, with rudder full over the control wheel may be eased forward as the rotation stops. Recovery can be accomplished in one-and-a-half turns under any condition except with flaps down when two turns will be required. The airplane will come out of the spin in a vertical dive and recovery from the dive should be made slowly in order to avoid a highspeed stall which may cause a spin in the opposite direction. Any attempt to push the wheel forward before kicking full opposite rudder will immediately increase the speed rotation and the acceleration to which the pilot is subjected. If this is encountered pull the wheel full back and hold full rudder against the spin for a minimum of half a turn. Then push the control column forward.
DIVE RECOVERY FLAPS
The airplane without these flaps becomes very nose heavy and starts to buffet above diagram dive speeds (Dia.2.). The dive recovery flaps which are installed under the wings between the booms and tile ailerons restore the lift to this portion of the wing and thus cause the uncontrollable nose heaviness to occur at a higher speed. The flaps also add some drag to the airplane which in conjunction with the higher allowable dive speed permits safer dives at a much steeper diving angle. The dive recovery flaps should be extended before starting the dive or immediately after the dive is started before a buffeting speed has been reached. If the airplane is buffeting before the dive recovery flaps are extended the buffeting will momentarily increase and then diminish. With these flaps extended, the nose heaviness is definitely reduced but the diving speed should never be allowed to exceed the placard by more than 15 or 20 mph. With the dive recovery flaps extended before entering the dive, angles of dive up to 45 degrees may be safely accomplished. Without dive recovery flaps extended the maximum angle for extending dives is 15 degrees. Diving characteristics are better with power off than power on.
the 1.03 stall model was more in line with the p38 stall but still wasn't great. now with 1.04 our AH p-38 will always torque roll to the right and directly into a spin. the P-38 should have no tendancy to spin in a level stall if both wings are stalled equally. but in AH there is no way to get a full blown stall without spinning.
also dive flaps should induce a 10 degree nose up attitude at low speeds with the excess lift and drag they create but in our AH p38 their is no nose up tendancy and no noticeable drag from the flaps.
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 12-19-2000).]
-
Originally posted by -lazs-:
sage.. a painter once told me that there were over 400 shades of black when I asked for a black paint job on my car. BTW, what does sage mean in finland? Inane? drivel?
What I said was in jest, though a bit too offensive I see. I have nothing personal against you. And "sage" doesn't exactly mean anything in finnish but it can easily be pronounced "Sakke", which is a Finnish (nick)name.
As for some constructive input, I wonder how a P-38J or F would manage in the arena if modelled correctly. Yeah, they would have compression problems but at least they would have better turning performances while still retaining a rather good speed.
------------------
---
SageFIN
"I think IŽll believe in Gosh instead of God. If you donŽt
believe in Gosh too, youŽll be darned to heck."
---
-
I would love to see the P38 performance improved but not by making all the other planes perform worse. The numbers don't seem to be too far off to me tho. The main reason I don't like the P38 has to do with the views and the compression. I can't believe that the braces were that hard to see around. I realize that any view system is limited tho and that AH is at least as good as anything out there. The plane seems to compress very badly and very quickly tho. you can get used to it but it does seem excessive. With better vision and a little better climb and less compression... I would enjoy the P38.
lazs
-
raise head position, brace problem solved...
only view issue is them damn big wings/engines,
AKskurj
-
Great Citabria,
Now check the stall speeds in the manual against the stall speeds in the game. Are they the same? If so what are the differences? Does the P-38 snap roll on a level flight condition or does it in level flight? Have you done any testing against other A/C in the SEA or H2H area's?
Great, then tell Pyro about it and maybe he'll fix it. But attacking other A/C because yours is porked makes no sense.
BTW, are you and Bolillo_Loco the same person??
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Great Citabria,
Now check the stall speeds in the manual against the stall speeds in the game. Are they the same? If so what are the differences? Does the P-38 snap roll on a level flight condition or does it in level flight? Have you done any testing against other A/C in the SEA or H2H area's?
Great, then tell Pyro about it and maybe he'll fix it. But attacking other A/C because yours is porked makes no sense.
BTW, are you and Bolillo_Loco the same person??
F4Udoa,
I read and reread Citabria's post about the 38 FM. I didn't see a single word about porking ANY other plane in it. As a matter of fact he didn't mention ANY plane except for the 38L.
Now in the same manner of your post. Is F4UDOA the same person as fishu or ram?????
Mav
-
Maverick I can't believe you missed it, if it was a snake it woulda bit ya. The "f" in shreckin, there's a "4" in 400 and the "u" in minute. It's a conspiracy I tell ya!
[This message has been edited by BigJoe (edited 12-19-2000).]
-
Mav,
Hmm, I guess this is the first thread you've read in AH. Welcome to the message boards.
This is what you've missed.
ahah the emperor has no clothes.
turn performance of the p38 and f4u have been accidentally switched!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
heh I bet f4udoa would have a cow if the f4u turned like the p38 does in 1.04.
i also find it curious that the f4u1c has such a large turn performance edge over the f4u1d.
yes very curious.
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 12-14-2000).]
Maverick,
If you want to flame me at least make sure you know what you're whining about.
Notice the complaint is about the P-38 stall speeds but the test data is about speed and climb. I'm just asking that he post the data on the AH stall speeds of the P-38 before ripping other A/C.
And Fishu or RAM? First I am obviously not a Luftwabble and second I have data to back up my whining. Please (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
-
Skurj:
Concerning braces and visibility:
Real pilots have binocular vision. Often when view of an object might be blocked for one eye, the other eye would still be tracking it. Compared to what a real pilot had to do to keep something in view, moving one's head in AH is very cumbersome indeed IMO. Real pilots didn't have to shuffle hats around and push arrow keys etc... to keep tracking a target. What they did in terms of moving their eyes and head was simple and intuitive. Unfortunately in this area I believe that we suffer from unrealistically difficult problems in AH that the real pilots did not suffer from. And it is worse in aircraft with lots of canopy framing like the P-38 or C-205.
Hooligan
-
stall speeds AH p38L 100% fuel small ammo load (19000lbs)
flaps up, power on, 3g: 200mph
flaps up power off, 1g: 115mph
flaps down (3 notches), power on, 3g: 175mph
flaps down (3 notches), power off, 1g: 100mph
flaps down (full flaps), power off, 1g: 90mph
P-38L POH:
19.000 lbs
Flaps and landing gear up 105 mph
Flaps and landing gear DOWN 78 mph
sustained turns
p-38L turn time sea level 100% fuel full flaps: 22 seconds
p-38L wep turn time sea level 100% fuel 3 nothces of flaps: 20 seconds
p-38L wep turn time sea level 100% fuel, full flaps: 20 seconds.
hi g speed bleeding turn:
turn time from 340mph 100% fuel wep, flaps up (tunnel vision max g pull): 14 seconds
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 12-19-2000).]
-
Citabria,
How did you do your testing?
I just did 100% fuel and ammo auto level and waited for it to depart.
It went at 100MPH power on and very slightly less with flaps. Not good, but closer than what you got.
What are you estimating a for the weight of a fully loaded P-38?
What's POH?
[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 12-19-2000).]
-
the stalls above are at 1g and 3g and the conditions are given for each: ie power on/off, flap settings etc.
pilots operating handbook = POH
watch the accelerometer... hold 1g, once it drops below 1 g the plane has stalled and you are about to spin (this is the only noticeable transition between stall and spin in level stalls in Aces High)
normal loaded p38 (max internal fuel and small 50cal ammo load) weighs about 19,000lbs
the level power off stall speed difference is annoying.
what really bothers me is the accelerated stall that is an instant spin.
with the 1.03 p-38 this wasn't so terrible but now its downright rediculous in 1.04
it totally ruins the p-38s high speed turn ability and makes it very dangerous to turn in.
The 38 was an interceptor and with both engines, you always knew you could outclimb any other airplane, and that's what wins dog fights. When you are in a dog fight below tree tops, It is way more comfortable in a 38 with its power and stall characteristics and, for that matter at any altitude. -Art Heiden p38 pilot ETO
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 12-19-2000).]
-
Citabria,
1. I don't have enough information on the P-38 accelerated stall to give an opinion either way. However in straight ahead stalls it does seem very unusual that the 38 departs onto the right wing as it does.
2. I would really try to get the weight the P-38L in AH is modeled verified when loaded with full fuel and Ammo. Then measure stall characteristics as far as 1G and 3G stalls.
So far from the pilots manual I believe that weight to be 19,400LBS. However from America's Hundred Thousand it looks to be only 17,600LBS. It makes a huge difference in performance weather that extra 2,000lbs is coming from an external drop tank or internal fuel. If it is 17,600LBS then the Loaded P-38L stall with flaps need to be lowered considerably. If it is 19,600LBS then the Military power rate of climb is way to high in AH. It is listed as being 2600FPM at Mil power at 19,600lbs in the manual.
3. You mentioned that you thought the F4U FM was switched with the P-38FM. Well try your test on the F4U-1D which should stall with 50% fuel at 11,300lbs at 96MPH and 76MPH full flap. It is like the P-38L close to 100MPH in a 1G no flap stall and Just under 100MPH in a full flap stall. The moral of the story is that flaps in AH do not provide enough lift in ANY FM. This was supposed to be fixed in 1.04. Oh well, I wouldn't even bother complaining until 1.05 is out and debugged.
Later
Good luck
F4UDOA
-
Citabria,
A quick note. Look at Badboy's chart of Aces High performance of the F4U-1C and P-51D in AH. Notice 25% fuel. The F4U-1D/C carries 1422lbs of fuel fully loaded and weights 12,000lbs(About 50lbs less actually). Anyway with 25% fuel the F4U should weight 10,933LBS. According to the chart in the back of the F4U manual (The P-38 doesn't have one) that shows weight changes affecting climb, stall and range. The F4U should stall at 74knots or 85MPH power off!!
Thats significantly lower than about 101MPH where Badboy's chart clearly indicates.
Also it should climb to 20,000FT in just over 7min in military power. I won't even get into that one.
F4UDOA
-
Originally posted by Hooligan:
Skurj:
Concerning braces and visibility:
Real pilots have binocular vision. Often when view of an object might be blocked for one eye, the other eye would still be tracking it. Compared to what a real pilot had to do to keep something in view, moving one's head in AH is very cumbersome indeed IMO. Real pilots didn't have to shuffle hats around and push arrow keys etc... to keep tracking a target. What they did in terms of moving their eyes and head was simple and intuitive. Unfortunately in this area I believe that we suffer from unrealistically difficult problems in AH that the real pilots did not suffer from. And it is worse in aircraft with lots of canopy framing like the P-38 or C-205.
Hooligan
Hooligan... look right press pgup key hit F10, Look left hit pgup key hit F10 and repeat
No more brace probs
AKskurj
-
Originally posted by -lazs-:
Face it... the Hog was one of, if not the best, fighter of the war.
Agree, and as the best fighter of the war it MUST be perked.
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Mav,
Hmm, I guess this is the first thread you've read in AH. Welcome to the message boards.
This is what you've missed.
Maverick,
If you want to flame me at least make sure you know what you're whining about.
Notice the complaint is about the P-38 stall speeds but the test data is about speed and climb. I'm just asking that he post the data on the AH stall speeds of the P-38 before ripping other A/C.
And Fishu or RAM? First I am obviously not a Luftwabble and second I have data to back up my whining. Please (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
f4udoa,
You are still sounding a lot like fushu and ram.
I reread (again) the post cit made in this thread (which was started on the 15th) about the 38. I still find no mention of porking any other planes FM in it. Please note I don't spend a lot of time memorizing other threads and cross referencing them.
I noted a quote in cit's post regarding stall characteristics. Seems there was some data in it. As to the actual minutia of the game figures, I don't know and don't care.
Finally if you haven't guessed yet the main reason I posted was the "tone" and comments you made about cit. You have much data or figures on the bollili-loco (sp?) reference?
Lighten up, this is a game not real life.
Flame away all you like now, as if it will have any impact on anything.
Mav
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
BadBoy,
That is another great chart<S>!!
Is that an AH chart or is it based on real life numbers? Did you get your copy of the Test pilots Association on WW2 fighters?
Later
F4UDOA
That is an Aces High chart.
Yep, they sent me a copy of the report and it arrived the same week. It has provided useful validation data for my own analysis.
Thank you for the contact.
Badboy
-
almost all actual ww2 fighting by american fighters was done with significant amounts of fuel on board, especially during bomber escort missions. the U.S. fighters would drop their drop tanks before combat but still had almost full internal fuel tanks after entering the fight.
there are some exceptions to this such as the rear main in p51 being used first and the outer wingtip tanks on the 38 being used ahead of time but overall these guys were going to the battle on external tanks leaving the main internal tanks full so they could return to base.
-
Originally posted by Citabria:
almost all actual ww2 fighting by american fighters was done with significant amounts of fuel on board, especially during bomber escort missions. the U.S. fighters would drop their drop tanks before combat but still had almost full internal fuel tanks after entering the fight.
there are some exceptions to this such as the rear main in p51 being used first and the outer wingtip tanks on the 38 being used ahead of time but overall these guys were going to the battle on external tanks leaving the main internal tanks full so they could return to base.
Not to mention that alot of the centerline tanks could not be jettisoned do to standing orders from the brass.