Hey TD can you look again at the Corsair..

[Bearcat]

I made a similar post before.. but guys.. Please take a serious look again at this plane when you get the chance.. Thee is something wrong there .. The plane is way too slow and it overheats way too fast.. I don't have any charts or facts.. but please .. just take a look at it. Fly it yourself and you will see what I mean. I know it was not a turn and burn plane but it's performance is lacking.

F4U-1C: The prototype F4U-1C, BuNo50277, appeared in August 1943 and was based on an F4U-1. A total of 200 of this variant were built July–November 1944; all were based on the F4U-1D and were built in parallel with that variant. Intended for ground-attack as well as fighter missions, the F4U-1C was similar to the F4U-1D but its six machine guns were replaced by four 20 millimetre (0.79 in) AN/M2 cannons with 231 rounds of ammunition per gun. The F4U-1C was introduced to combat during 1945, most notably in the Okinawa campaign. Aviators preferred the standard armament of six .50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns since they were already more than powerful enough to destroy most Japanese aircraft, and had more ammunition and a higher rate of fire. The weight of the Hispano cannon and their ammunition affected the flight performance, especially its agility, but the aircraft was found to be especially potent in the ground attack role.
A Goodyear-built FG-1D, with the later style "Malcolm hood" canopy used by the F4U-1D.

F4U-1D (Corsair Mk IV): Built in parallel with the F4U-1C, but was introduced in April 1944. It had the new -8W water-injection engine. This change gave the aircraft up to 250 hp (190 kW) more power, which, in turn, increased performance. Speed was increased from 417 mph (671 km/h) to 425 mph (684 km/h). Due to the U.S. Navy's need for fighter-bombers, it had a payload of rockets double the -1A's, as well as twin-rack plumbing for an additional belly drop tank. However, these modifications necessitated the need for rocket tabs (attached to fully metal-plated underwing surfaces) and bomb pylons to be bolted on the fighter, causing extra drag. Additionally, the role of fighter-bombing was a new task for the Corsair and the wing fuel cells proved too vulnerable and were removed. The extra fuel carried by the two drop tanks would still allow the aircraft to fly relatively long missions despite the heavy, un-aerodynamic load. The regular armament of six machine guns were implemented as well. The canopies of most -1Ds had their struts removed along with their metal caps, which were used — at one point — as a measure to prevent the canopies' glass from cracking as they moved along the fuselage spines of the fighters. Also, the clear-view style "Malcolm Hood" canopy used initially on Supermarine Spitfire and P-51C Mustang aircraft was adopted as standard equipment for the -1D model, and all later F4U production aircraft. Additional production was carried out by Goodyear (FG-1D) and Brewster (F3A-1D). In Fleet Air Arm service, the latter was known as the Corsair III, and both had their wingtips clipped - 8 inches (203 mm) per wing - to allow storage in the lower hangars of British carriers.

The Corsairs in IL2 do not even come close. Can you at least at some point take a look at it.. Maybe prop size is modeled wrong .. but something is not right .. That bird in this sim is now a terrible plane to fly.. It is worse than it has ever been. Just look at it when you have the time.. Please.

[Fenice_1965]

I agree, it is embarassing to build late war missions now, with this fighter against late war japanese fighters (like ki84). It hasn't a chance.

[Bearcat]

None whatsoever.. You can't even run in it. Zeros catch up to you in a dive.. This plane was called "Whistling Death" ... in this sim it is "Whimpering Death" and that death is usually the pilot of the Corsair..

F4U Performance

[JtD]

So the Ki-84 is the reference for the correct flight model of all other planes? I don't think so. It appears from you link that the fastest speed tested with a service condition F4U-1 was 400 mph, doesn't it?

[Luno13]

The Ki-84 was not around in huge numbers or with enough good-quality fuel to sustain its performance like in Il-2. The top speed of ~400mph is TAS. Il-2 Compare states this is about ~418mph in the game at 6000 meters. At sea level, top speed is only 356.

I really don't think there is anything wrong with the Corsair. Choose your fights wisely.

However, I do agree that the Zero dives far too well, and probably has a too good roll-rate at the top end of the envelope.

[Fenice_1965]

I wasn't using KI84 as a reference but as an example, not the best as you correctly argued.