Author Topic: P-47M  (Read 5276 times)

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23871
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: P-47M
« Reply #105 on: May 13, 2009, 05:41:06 PM »
I've only just read this last page but I noticed something. The 190A-8 should be between the 262 and 163. 163 has 2x 30mm, 190a8 carries 2x30mm, 2x20mm, 2x13mm. When compared to the 110G with 4x20mm and 2x30mm, it would be a little less than that, but more than the 163, no?

I guess it depends which package you load these things out with. Without the extra 2-gun gondola option, the 110G falls below the 190a8 WITH 30mm option.

In my chart, the A8 has the 4x20mm pack, which is the only one I take.
With the 2x30mm package, it's ranked 3rd, at about 1700.

Further notes:
The 110G has the biggest gun pack
109's no gondolas, the G-14 has the Mk108 option
P-39Q with 37mm and 4x .50 cal
C.202 the "big" gun pack too.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 05:43:29 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: P-47M
« Reply #106 on: May 13, 2009, 05:51:11 PM »
http://www.littlefriends.co.uk/gallery.php?Group=56&Style=item&origStyle=list&Item=61&Temp=745&searchString=

Those are "drop tank shackles".    :D

Pg. 401 of Warren Bodie's Republic's P-47 Thunderbolt:
Quote
Most of the airplanes were, initially, flown without drop tank pylons, but at a slightly later date that condition was altered.

Also, same page on the YP-47M:
Quote
Factually, the YP-47M was an XP-47N with short range wings.


wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
Re: P-47M
« Reply #107 on: May 13, 2009, 08:03:59 PM »
I haven't laughed this hard in a long time.   Keep the idiotic charts coming.     :rofl
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23871
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: P-47M
« Reply #108 on: May 13, 2009, 08:05:20 PM »
If you're gonna sit here and tell the Community a 202 has "Better firepower" than a Ki-61, you're off of your rocker.   

And where exactly I am doing that? As far as I can see the C.202 is on the last place on that chart...

Nice edit btw...
« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 08:06:51 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
Re: P-47M
« Reply #109 on: May 13, 2009, 08:06:38 PM »
And where exactly i am doing that?

You tell me.   The Ki-61 isn't even on that initial chart.   I'm still laughing.   
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23871
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: P-47M
« Reply #110 on: May 13, 2009, 08:07:35 PM »
You tell me.   The Ki-61 isn't even on that initial chart.   I'm still laughing.   

The Ki-61 is on my chart and always was.

Now I'm just waiting for you to tell me what's making you laugh :)




« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 08:09:35 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Motherland

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8110
Re: P-47M
« Reply #111 on: May 13, 2009, 08:09:13 PM »
You tell me.   The Ki-61 isn't even on that initial chart.   I'm still laughing.   
The Ki61 is on Gavagai's chart between the Spitfire 14 and the Bf 109K and on Lusche's chart between the Ki-84 and the P39Q.

What someone should do is make a formula based on gun hitting power, muzzle velocity, RoF, and mounting placement, and compare all of the aircraft. I imagine it would take a while to create a formula that churns out practical data though. I'll leave that up to someone with a longer attention span than myself.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 08:12:09 PM by Motherland »

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
Re: P-47M
« Reply #112 on: May 13, 2009, 08:13:23 PM »
The Ki-61 is on my chart and always was.

Now I'm just waiting for you to tell me what's making you laugh :)



Again Lusche, read my first post in this thread.   There isn't a faster cycling cannon in the game.   I take these charts with a grain of salt and this one proves my point.   

I'm still laughing.   I'm also not reading the BBS (telling everyone offline while I lurk either).   
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
Re: P-47M
« Reply #113 on: May 13, 2009, 08:15:49 PM »
The Ki61 is on Gavagai's chart between the Spitfire 14 and the Bf 109K and on Lusche's chart between the Ki-84 and the P39Q.

What someone should do is make a formula based on gun hitting power, muzzle velocity, RoF, and mounting placement, and compare all of the aircraft. I imagine it would take a while to create a formula that churns out practical data though. I'll leave that up to someone with a longer attention span than myself.

This is a whole hell of a lot more accurate.    I'll never understand why one airframe is a mystery to some of the "chit hot sticks" in this game.   It shoots 20mm's faster than any other plane and the MG's are almost equivalent to .50 cals.   

But some would put forth misleading information and foist it off as something else. 
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23871
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: P-47M
« Reply #114 on: May 13, 2009, 08:16:27 PM »
The Ki61 is on Gavagai's chart between the Spitfire 14 and the Bf 109K and on Lusche's chart between the Ki-84 and the P39Q.

What someone should do is make a formula based on gun hitting power, muzzle velocity, RoF, and mounting placement, and compare all of the aircraft. I imagine it would take a while to create a formula that churns out practical data though. I'll leave that up to someone with a longer attention span than myself.

For the most part this has been done. "cartridge power" is Mr Williams analysis based on shell weight and muzzle veloctity (thus kinetic energy), and explosive filling (=chemical energy). "Gun power" is simply cartridge power times ROF.
In other words: It's the amount of destructive energy leaving the muzzle within one second.

For a planes firepower value I simply added the firepower for all the guns.

No kind of judgement had been made by me.

Unfortunately I see no way to factor in gun placement in any reasonable way.

This is a whole hell of a lot more accurate.    I'll never understand why one airframe is a mystery to some of the "chit hot sticks" in this game.   It shoots 20mm's faster than any other plane and the MG's are almost equivalent to .50 cals.   

But some would put forth misleading information and foist it off as something else. 

Please notice that computing the firepower was done by going strictly by hard data on the weapons.
But if some of that data Mr. Williams provided is misleading or plain wrong, it should be no problem to point it out and correct it.

http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm




« Last Edit: May 13, 2009, 08:41:19 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: P-47M
« Reply #115 on: May 13, 2009, 08:44:11 PM »
It shoots 20mm's faster than any other plane and the MG's are almost equivalent to .50 cals.   

No it doesn't.

KI-84's Ho-5s shoot faster as they are free firing unlike the ones that are on the cowl of the KI-61.

At least that is the case IRL.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
Re: P-47M
« Reply #116 on: May 13, 2009, 09:05:28 PM »
No it doesn't.

KI-84's Ho-5s shoot faster as they are free firing unlike the ones that are on the cowl of the KI-61.

At least that is the case IRL.

Funny, I run out of cannon in a Ki-61 than any Ki-84 I've flown in this game.   61's are faster.   
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: P-47M
« Reply #117 on: May 13, 2009, 09:06:15 PM »
No it doesn't.

KI-84's Ho-5s shoot faster as they are free firing unlike the ones that are on the cowl of the KI-61.

At least that is the case IRL.

That is accounted for in the game.  The Ki-84 has greater lethality for a 1 second burst than the Ki-61.

Funny, I run out of cannon in a Ki-61 than any Ki-84 I've flown in this game.   61's are faster.  
The Ki-61 has less 20mm ammunition.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: P-47M
« Reply #118 on: May 13, 2009, 09:07:24 PM »
Funny, I run out of cannon in a Ki-61 than any Ki-84 I've flown in this game.   61's are faster.   

KI-61 has 30 rounds less per gun. The other has them firing through the prop and other has them free firing.

It really isn't rocket science.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: P-47M
« Reply #119 on: May 13, 2009, 09:08:07 PM »
That is accounted for in the game.  The Ki-84 has greater lethality for a 1 second burst than the Ki-61.

Yep...just tested it, KI-84 guns fire faster.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!