4.11 F4U Performance

[sawyer692]

Well, WWII US carriers were about 900 ft long. Available take distance was obviously limited by how many aircraft were stowed on deck or awaiting takeoff.

According to "America's Hundred Thousand", all Navy planes, with full load, could take off on an empty deck, using full length with no wind and no ship speed, except the F6F-3. Obviously, this was not an operational environment.

The sim, up to 4.101, portrayed this. Now it is not even close.

[h0MbrE]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

Well, WWII US carriers were about 900 ft long. Available take distance was obviously limited by how many aircraft were stowed on deck or awaiting takeoff.

According to "America's Hundred Thousand", all Navy planes, with full load, could take off on an empty deck, using full length with no wind and no ship speed, except the F6F-3. Obviously, this was not an operational environment.

The sim, up to 4.101, portrayed this. Now it is not even close.

Agreed.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

So you guys can create planes to your liking but when someone complains, they're told to shove off?

In the 10+ years this sim has been around, I've read of no complaints to the Corsair. It hasn't been touched in 10 years!! If was porked as someone said, why do you hardly ever see it in a HL game?

Run some tests off a carrier....It barely takes off. Forget about adding any ordinance. I set up a carrier at 16 knots and takeoff is a struggle.

I think the problem is the acceleration. It picks up speed like a bus climbing a hill. There are a lot of Navy squadrons out there who are not going to be happy you messed with their baby.

Please just fly the thing a little.....something is not right.

And you can't dispute real life footage. This guy is off the ground before the end of the deck, and he started from midship! He doesn't fall off it the sim plays now:

I sense some drama here.

The Corsair flight model has changed 3 times in the past. After the Pacific Fighters release the turn rate was somewhat reduced (it was a very good turner in the initial Pacific Fighters release), then when the new flight model was introduced in 4.01m, ALL aircraft received new flight models. Now in 4.11 the Corsair has changed a little bit again.

I also ran some tests from a carrier as well. With 100% fuel, default loadout, Essex class carrier and flaps in takeoff position I was able to lift off just before the edge of the deck (i.e. I did not dip below deck) with only 100% throttle. I did not go 110% WEP. This was a moving carrier at 10kph from one of the missions in my old Corsair campaign (on M4T).

So far the only real thing I've noticed with the Corsair is that it turns better.

If there are going to be complaining to do about this aircraft... lets do some actual by the numbers testing. But I think we need to cut through some of the BS and get to the actual heart of the problem. What has changed (in your view) specifically? What speed were you getting before at altitude and what speed are you getting now? By the numbers.

[Shaker]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I sense some drama here.

The Corsair flight model has changed 3 times in the past. After the Pacific Fighters release the turn rate was somewhat reduced (it was a very good turner in the initial Pacific Fighters release), then when the new flight model was introduced in 4.01m, ALL aircraft received new flight models. Now in 4.11 the Corsair has changed a little bit again.

I also ran some tests from a carrier as well. With 100% fuel, default loadout, Essex class carrier and flaps in takeoff position I was able to lift off just before the edge of the deck (i.e. I did not dip below deck) with only 100% throttle. I did not go 110% WEP. This was a moving carrier at 10kph from one of the missions in my old Corsair campaign (on M4T).

So far the only real thing I've noticed with the Corsair is that it turns better.

If there are going to be complaining to do about this aircraft... lets do some actual by the numbers testing. But I think we need to cut through some of the BS and get to the actual heart of the problem. What has changed (in your view) specifically? What speed were you getting before at altitude and what speed are you getting now? By the numbers.

We fly the Corsairs on a nightly basis so yeah we notice a difference. The numbers are moot as this mod team knows what they did to screw the pooch. I'm done with this debate as this so called "patch" doesn't even work anyways.

And the enemy AI are no better, they actually fly into the ocean quite often. I was highly looking forward to this patch but I am extremely disappointed. CTDs upon release are quite unacceptable and the butcher job done to the Corsair is inexcusable.

I'll stick to 4.101 since this isn't even open to discussion. There has been real world evidence provided for our defense however the mod team has provided nothing to back up what they have done.

The solution for me is simple.....4.101

There really is nothing more to see here.

[F19_Klunk]

glad you found yourself an answer.

[sawyer692]

Originally Posted by IceFire

I sense some drama here.

What has changed (in your view) specifically? What speed were you getting before at altitude and what speed are you getting now? By the numbers.

I appreciate you actually doing some testing. Your test, however, was with no ordinance. Put 2x500lb bombs on and test. Keep in mind the parasitic drag was increased so that, coupled with poor FM, could be the problem.

The issue is the acceleration, not the top speed. I admit I've had little time to test the before/after speeds but I'll gladly post them and some video if thats what it takes. The testing I did do showed straight and level flight near sea level was around 260-270knts which, historically, was pretty close http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...4u-1-02334.pdf

Taking off from a carrier and the time to get to 260 knots is what concerns me. Until I do more testing, I'm not going to post on the matter.

I will say this: I truely appreciate the time and effort put into this sim. TD has done wonders to keep it alive. My worry is our squad will not be able to utilize the F4U or the F6F any longer because it is nerfed and we are a Navy squadron.

Numbers to follow (and perhaps some more "drama")

[F19_Klunk]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

....

Numbers to follow...)

Great to see some Constructive criticism... Everbody are anxious to have a sim that is as close to reality as possible... pouting lips and playing "keep my breath 'til I go blue-game" helps noone"..

Thanx sawyer!

[CWMV]

Originally Posted by Shaker

We fly the Corsairs on a nightly basis so yeah we notice a difference. The numbers are moot as this mod team knows what they did to screw the pooch. I'm done with this debate as this so called "patch" doesn't even work anyways.

And the enemy AI are no better, they actually fly into the ocean quite often. I was highly looking forward to this patch but I am extremely disappointed. CTDs upon release are quite unacceptable and the butcher job done to the Corsair is inexcusable.

I'll stick to 4.101 since this isn't even open to discussion. There has been real world evidence provided for our defense however the mod team has provided nothing to back up what they have done.

The solution for me is simple.....4.101

There really is nothing more to see here.

See post #101 for the proper way to respond.

[IvanK]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

I appreciate you actually doing some testing. Your test, however, was with no ordinance. Put 2x500lb bombs on and test. Keep in mind the parasitic drag was increased so that, coupled with poor FM, could be the problem.

The issue is the acceleration, not the top speed. I admit I've had little time to test the before/after speeds but I'll gladly post them and some video if thats what it takes. The testing I did do showed straight and level flight near sea level was around 260-270knts which, historically, was pretty close http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...4u-1-02334.pdf

Taking off from a carrier and the time to get to 260 knots is what concerns me. Until I do more testing, I'm not going to post on the matter.

I will say this: I truely appreciate the time and effort put into this sim. TD has done wonders to keep it alive. My worry is our squad will not be able to utilize the F4U or the F6F any longer because it is nerfed and we are a Navy squadron.

Numbers to follow (and perhaps some more "drama")

Do you have any Real world test data that provides acceleration times to 260 knots ?

Also be aware that Drag values for external stores and pylons are now a lot more comprehensive than the simple model used previously. So Dont expect the same acceleration in 4.11 as you saw in 4.10.1 wheb carrying external stores.

Also in what way do you consider the F6F's to be "nerfed" ?

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Shaker

We fly the Corsairs on a nightly basis so yeah we notice a difference. The numbers are moot as this mod team knows what they did to screw the pooch. I'm done with this debate as this so called "patch" doesn't even work anyways.

And the enemy AI are no better, they actually fly into the ocean quite often. I was highly looking forward to this patch but I am extremely disappointed. CTDs upon release are quite unacceptable and the butcher job done to the Corsair is inexcusable.

I'll stick to 4.101 since this isn't even open to discussion. There has been real world evidence provided for our defense however the mod team has provided nothing to back up what they have done.

The solution for me is simple.....4.101

There really is nothing more to see here.

Well then have fun with 4.10.1...All I see is flippant responses to legitimate questions... so have a nice day then!

For me, if there is something wrong, I'd rather do the work and see where there might be a problem. So far I don't see one.