4.11 F4U Performance

[jameson]

The F4U-4 is a different plane which didn't enter service until Oct 1944, sorry for any confusion. I found this for f4u-1
F4U-1
Fighter Bomber Fighter
(Normal) (Overload)

Gross Weight (lbs.) 11,142 11,399 12,656

Take-off distance in calm, ft. 482 507 664
Take-off distance in 15-knot wind, ft. 313 332 447
Take-off distance in 25-knot wind, ft. 217 232 318

Note that plane weighs less, and has less powerful engine, hence longer calm take off distance.

[MadBlaster]

Just to be complete.

Here's the link to the pilots manual I was using:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/42209938/F...ok-FOI-1944pdf

page 7 say the bit about F4U-1 being ~ 800 lbs heavier than the F4U-1C/1D under full fuel and ammo loadout with no external loading (i assume this means no droptank) also, you figure the pilot weighs ~ 200 lbs and that probably isn't included in the figures.

page 65- the takeoff chart under varying scenarios (hard surface, soft...etc.)

it looks like the information from different sources differs a bit. not sure what is considered "official" for the game.

[Tolwyn]

It is allowed "in game" but would never be done "in real life." So yes, it wouldn't be a cheat, just not even close to realistic.

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

okay. just to be really really clear. when you move the pp axis from 100% to 0% suddenly, there is a built in delay in the game. you have no control over that rate of change. that is hard-coded in the game I assume based on historical rate of change on the blade pitch for typical constant speed prop. so it is not a cheat imo. the prop pitch is a control the player maps to and can move it up or down at will. all your doing is moving the power band as fast as the game will allow to try to get as much additional acceleration as you possibly can to get off the carrier. I guess it's like a car. you cruise around in first gear, push the clutch in, step on the gas to get the revs up,if your engine is torquey enough, you can burn rubber in second gear. But I think in a plane the prop blade stalls out after a certain point when your out of the power band. something like that.

[MadBlaster]

you want me to talk about my three way switch for the vdm props??? just joking, kinda of.

[Pursuivant]

Ah, nothing like a chart war to go with the new patch.

It's nerfed! It's uber! Oleg's biased against Western Allies! Oleg's biased against the Axis!

re: Ship size. Other people have tried to claim that tanks and ships in the game are the wrong scale. It's not true. Just get the length of your favorite plane and measure it against the scale of whatever it is that you think is too big or too small. The comparative sizes will come out fairly close to reality.

Modelers bust their butts to make their models realistic. They're not going to screw up something as basic as length or width, since that will make the entire model look wrong.

re: F4U performance.

Originally Posted by IvanK

Also read the title of that report .. it refers to a test for max performance at War Emergency Power of a "Cleaned up version"

The words that jump out at me are "Cleaned Up Version." Operationally, the F4U-1 mostly operated from primitive airstrips carved out of some of the most unforgiving terrain on earth. They sure as hell weren't "cleaned up." They were constantly exposed to salt spray, mud, sand and tropical weather, maintained by overworked and relatively untrained mechanics, and regularly abused by their pilots.

Charts and tables showing prototype and test plane performance are ideals, as far removed from actual combat performance as "miles per gallon" figures in car advertisements.

That's why I'd love to see a feature within IL2 which allows users, or server hosts, to tweak aircraft performance slightly. That way you can nerf or uber your own plane as you wish.

[h0MbrE]

"They were constantly exposed to salt spray, mud, sand and tropical weather, maintained by overworked and relatively untrained mechanics, and regularly abused by their pilots."

Ahhh I get it now... that's why the F4U is too weak to even make it off the deck now. Well that makes it okay then. LOL

[mmaruda]

It's not to weak to take off, you can take off from large carriers that are moving with a load of bombs and go straight up from the deck, takes some skill, but it's possible. Static small carriers are impossible though, but I'm not sure the Corsair operated from those.

Still, for a 2300HP engine, acceleration is a bit poor, but maybe that's the way it was.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by h0MbrE

"They were constantly exposed to salt spray, mud, sand and tropical weather, maintained by overworked and relatively untrained mechanics, and regularly abused by their pilots."

Ahhh I get it now... that's why the F4U is too weak to even make it off the deck now. Well that makes it okay then. LOL

Not sure what the issue is... it's already been stated that the takeoff distance is wrong but pretty much been proven otherwise that the new performance levels match the documents that you previously provided.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by mmaruda

It's not to weak to take off, you can take off from large carriers that are moving with a load of bombs and go straight up from the deck, takes some skill, but it's possible. Static small carriers are impossible though, but I'm not sure the Corsair operated from those.

Still, for a 2300HP engine, acceleration is a bit poor, but maybe that's the way it was.

Absolutely. All of this discussion has made me go back and replay an old campaign I did (called Facing The Wind) which follows VF-84 and VF-85 during the Okinawa campaign. I haven't finished the campaign but so far every mission works just as it did before... and the first couple of missions including some fairly normal and realistic loadouts that were used during attack missions.

Taking off from a stationary deck right now does appear impossible... but with a ship underway at normal speeds everything appears to be working quite well. That includes the AI. I've had zero mishaps on takeoff (and I've been watching!).

So far the only issue I see is that takeoff distance is a bit long. Maybe something to do with low speed acceleration. Everything else seems to be fine... and working as normal. To be honest, I'm not even sure what a couple of people are up in arms about. We hear that TD broke it so they should fix it but I'm not sure what they broke or what they should fix. I'll get onboard that bandwagon as soon as someone makes sense!

[dpeters95]

Hey all,
Here is a fun fact. Not sure I understand why but...

Since I have multiple installations of each version on my computer, I thought I would go back to V4.07m and check the F4U-1A's ability to take off from the CVE-55 escort carrier using the AI in the "Carrier Take-Off 1" mission. Well, to make a long story short in the 6 different versions, (4.07m, 4.08m, 4.09m, 4.10m, 4.10.1m, and 4.11m) it doesn't.

Here is the item of note, by accident I was fooling around with some difficulty settings and found that I can get it to take off in EVERY version, if I turn off the "Realistic Gunnery" and "Limited Ammo" settings! Now, we don't want that obviously, at least for those of us playing with realistic settings. I just thought I would pass along the info to those who know more about the programming end of it than I do to try and resolve this Take-Off issue in case they didn't already know, which they may.

I am assuming by turning these settings off that it removes the "weight of the ammo" from the plane's overall weight since you don't know what an unlimited amount of ammo weight would be???