Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-16-2012, 11:56 PM
mmaruda mmaruda is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 43
Default

Did some testing on take off missions for carriers.

Corsair, all versions: stationary carrier take off training missions work, it's possible to get off the deck and fly, but those are large carriers. Moving carriers however are the small ones - impossible to take off, no matter engine setting (tried even with superchargers).

Same thing goes for the Hellcats.
Wildcats have no problem with any carriers.

Now, people say that US Navy planes got the nerf.

Let's try the Seafire!
British carrier in the missions is larger than the small US ones, bigger wingspan and all - should be easy. Nope!
On a moving carrier the seafire barely gets off the deck, if you forget flaps (landing only), you're going for a swim.
Static carrier is impossible.

Now, several things that come to my mind.

1. In the first IL-2 Pacific Fighters versions there were also problems with carrier take-offs. This is funny because since the first Forgotten Battles, the planes got a bit of a power boost, and some realism fans were outraged by the too easy FMs (the Polish website Yoyosims.pl still has the reviews, that criticise the FMs of FB and PF significantly and the guys who wrote them really know a lot on WWII aviation).
2. Both the small carriers and the British one have catapults which do not work in the game, maybe historically the heavier planes were launched with these when the travelled slow and with no wind?
3. The missions are old, probably don't feature wind and most probably were carelessly designed just to show carrier take-offs.
4. Every campaign you start positions you on a large carrier and has you take off with the ship going at max speed and into the wind. This is the impression I got after several hours of testing.

Conclusion: apart from the training missions and user made missions with the same conditions as the training ones, there is no real problem with taking off from carriers in the campaigns. So the Corsair performance isn't necessarily wrong.

Our problem has several solutions:
1. TD works on a hotfix covering take-off acceleration for all the navy planes, so they can get off the deck (as clearly it's not only the F4U that has problems).
2. TD works on a hotfix that enables catapults for carriers (there is a mod for this available for some time now, and it even features AI using the catapult, so it should not be too hard).
3. Someone finally provides proof that small carriers did not launch the heavier planes without catapult or at all, or whatever, so we could finally close the deal on navy planes and "learn to like it" the way it is.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-17-2012, 12:03 AM
F19_Klunk's Avatar
F19_Klunk F19_Klunk is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmaruda View Post
2. TD works on a hotfix that enables catapults for carriers (there is a mod for this available for some time now, and it even features AI using the catapult, so it should not be too hard).
That would be the solution
__________________
C'thulhu's my wingman
F19 Virtual Squadron, The Squadron that gave you the J8A
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-17-2012, 06:07 PM
Janosch's Avatar
Janosch Janosch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmaruda View Post
Did some testing on take off missions for carriers.

Let's try the Seafire!
British carrier in the missions is larger than the small US ones, bigger wingspan and all - should be easy. Nope!
On a moving carrier the seafire barely gets off the deck, if you forget flaps (landing only), you're going for a swim.
Static carrier is impossible.
A certain kind soul on mission4today gave a tip regarding landing gear in a discussion about the F4U fm: only raise landing gear after you begin to get altitude - not right after the deck ends. I haven't done many tests regarding this method versus raising gear immediately, but it seems to work.

In the builtin carrier takeoff missions, I managed to take off the Seafire with ammo and 100% fuel load from both static and moving carriers. Lower flaps no later than the 420 marker, keep nose slightly above horizon and the plane will take off. It's very hairy with a static carrier though, as the lowered landing gear almost hit water. Needless to say, I used 110% wep!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-14-2012, 11:32 AM
EAF331 Starfire's Avatar
EAF331 Starfire EAF331 Starfire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Denmark
Posts: 68
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaker View Post
http://www.aviation-history.com/vought/f4u.html

I am taking my info from the above link.

"It could outfight, outclimb and (if need be) outrun any prop driven enemy."

"The XF4U-1 first went aloft on May 1, 1940 and five months later flew the 45 miles (73 km) between Stratford and Hartford, Connecticut at a speed of 405 miles per hour (651.8 kph), becoming the first production aircraft to exceed 400 mph in level flight. The US Navy was very pleased with the performance of the Corsair and, in June 1941, ordered 584 copies. Over the next 11 years that figure would grow to over 12,500 F4Us. "

The stock F4U doesn't even meet these standards and now it appears to be worse.
I have been outturning the A6M5 in a Corsair(1944 version) in patch 4.10.1 and looking at the realworld numbers this ain't possible in rl. I have yet to try the Corsair out in patch 4.11 but I doubt that the performance can be more less simmed in patch 4.11.
I love flying Carrier operations so thanks for pointing it out; I will be my next a/c to test throughly.
__________________
Windows 7 Pro 64 bit EN
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 (2x3GHz), 8GB RAM
ATI 7970, Intel X-25M SSD


EAF331 are recruting.
We are a nordic Sqd (Norway, Sweeden, Finland, Denmark) within European Airforce. www.europeanaf.org . Please pm me if you are interested.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-14-2012, 09:12 PM
Erkki Erkki is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Finland
Posts: 220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaker View Post
http://www.aviation-history.com/vought/f4u.html

I am taking my info from the above link.

"It could outfight, outclimb and (if need be) outrun any prop driven enemy."

----

The stock F4U doesn't even meet these standards and now it appears to be worse.
Lol.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-14-2012, 10:39 PM
302_Corsair 302_Corsair is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 21
Default

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-14-2012, 11:04 PM
Airway Airway is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 14
Default

I and several other members of the German Il-2 community from Sturmovik.de had the opportunity to see the development on the restauration of a real F4U last year at Meier Motors GmbH, one of the few companies in Germany, that is allowed to restore and license historic warbirds.

And so while we were visiting them during Europe's biggest oldtimer airshow, the 16th Oldtimer Fliegertreffen at Hahnweide (http://www.wolf-hirth.de/ott11_en/home.php), last year, we were able to meet the boss of MeierMotors and he showed us the company and the planes they were working on.
They had Messerschmitts, Mustangs and Spitfires beside the Corsair. We were overwhelmed.

Regarding the F4U everything seems to be alright within Il-2 4.11 as far as it can get to this point of time.
I didn't know to the time we that the gear of the F4U was used and capable to work as dive brake.
I liked the F4U since the TV series "Black Sheep Squadron", mostly because of the shape of the wings.
But to see it in real life and to be told about it's history, it's technology, mechanics, and the experience MeierMotors had while restoring the plane, was awesome.
I was amazed how small sized the actuator of the wings folding mechanism was.
I would never have thought that it could withstand such forces in flight.
I don't see a big difference between the Il-2 version of the Corsair and the real one. Sure, there are some, but don't forget, this is just a simulation, no the real thing.

See some F4U pictures we were able to make in their hangars, here:




Don't forget, that this simulation can just get as far as the computer technology up to date.
Don't complain about 10 knots or mph, or seconds of accerelation.
Take it as it is. Everybody has the same situation.
Make the best out of it.
Learn to handle the plane ingame and make it's disadvantage to your advantage.
The F4U is a big and heavy bird. Not a Japanese wood fighter.

See the plane we've seen in it's first flight tests in moving pictures and with sound, here:



Taxi checks a few months later:



It was a honourable experience to see such a plane getting restored, learning about it's technology and finally see and hear it back in the air.

Take that as confirmation that the development in Il-2 is as good as the developers are able to implement.

And finally here is the website of the Chance Vought Corsair F4U at MeierMotors GmbH in Germany:
Sadly no translation, but the pictures speak for itself:

http://www.meiermotors.com/index.php...mid=70&lang=en

A lot of pictures and videos.
Enjoy!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-14-2012, 11:41 PM
h0MbrE h0MbrE is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 22
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Airway View Post
I and several other members of the German Il-2 community from Sturmovik.de had the opportunity to see the development on the restauration of a real F4U last year at Meier Motors GmbH, one of the few companies in Germany, that is allowed to restore and license historic warbirds.

And so while we were visiting them during Europe's biggest oldtimer airshow, the 16th Oldtimer Fliegertreffen at Hahnweide (http://www.wolf-hirth.de/ott11_en/home.php), last year, we were able to meet the boss of MeierMotors and he showed us the company and the planes they were working on.
They had Messerschmitts, Mustangs and Spitfires beside the Corsair. We were overwhelmed.

Regarding the F4U everything seems to be alright within Il-2 4.11 as far as it can get to this point of time.
I didn't know to the time we that the gear of the F4U was used and capable to work as dive brake.
I liked the F4U since the TV series "Black Sheep Squadron", mostly because of the shape of the wings.
But to see it in real life and to be told about it's history, it's technology, mechanics, and the experience MeierMotors had while restoring the plane, was awesome.
I was amazed how small sized the actuator of the wings folding mechanism was.
I would never have thought that it could withstand such forces in flight.
I don't see a big difference between the Il-2 version of the Corsair and the real one. Sure, there are some, but don't forget, this is just a simulation, no the real thing.

See some F4U pictures we were able to make in their hangars, here:




Don't forget, that this simulation can just get as far as the computer technology up to date.
Don't complain about 10 knots or mph, or seconds of accerelation.
Take it as it is. Everybody has the same situation.
Make the best out of it.
Learn to handle the plane ingame and make it's disadvantage to your advantage.
The F4U is a big and heavy bird. Not a Japanese wood fighter.

See the plane we've seen in it's first flight tests in moving pictures and with sound, here:



Taxi checks a few months later:



It was a honourable experience to see such a plane getting restored, learning about it's technology and finally see and hear it back in the air.

Take that as confirmation that the development in Il-2 is as good as the developers are able to implement.

And finally here is the website of the Chance Vought Corsair F4U at MeierMotors GmbH in Germany:
Sadly no translation, but the pictures speak for itself:

http://www.meiermotors.com/index.php...mid=70&lang=en

A lot of pictures and videos.
Enjoy!
Looks like an awesome vacation and a wonderful experience! I'm envious. Still I really don't see anything relevant to the issue other than your opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-13-2012, 01:07 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Regarding the F4U performance, I, as always, recommend to start with the data presented here. While not near complete, it contains much of the essential information and will allow you to adjust expectations to a reasonable level.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-13-2012, 02:30 PM
MrBaato MrBaato is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
Regarding the F4U performance, I, as always, recommend to start with the data presented here. While not near complete, it contains much of the essential information and will allow you to adjust expectations to a reasonable level.
To me the F4U seems a bit harder to judge when it stalls, but more manouverable for sure
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.