F4u-4 and F8F

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

I have to wonder if 0.30 caliber/5.62mm guns aren't overpowered in general in the game.

That's interesting... most people consider them to be chronically underpowered. Why would you think that?

The reason for the feeling of them being underpowered is due to the lack of a really complex damage modeling system so weapons that do a lot of structural damage are getting most of the benefit and other weapons that do internal systems damage are not getting as much of an effect. Example... radiator cooling systems are not fully modeled so you can shoot a 109 in the radiator with little real effect.

The problem with the Japanese guns is twofold:

1) Lack of sources of detailed information on weapons and correct belting

2) The in-game guns use close approximations of whatever the Japanese were using and often use the German equivalent.

The Type 99 20mm cannon in-game is a MG-FF/M benefitting from the German weapons slightly higher fire rate, much higher muzzle velocity (although still low), and is belted with the Mine round of which I doubt the Japanese were using. There were actually two Type 99 cannons used during the war and later model Zeros had the 99-2 fitted with an even lower fire rate but much higher muzzle velocity.

Sorry for the sidetrack

[pandacat]

Originally Posted by horseback

I've been flying Corsairs and Hellcats a lot lately, and I should make a few points about the FMs.

First, while the performance is there with full engine power (110% throttle), it often seems a bit sluggish if not downright weak at less than full power. It sometimes seems an all or nothing proposition with these two. I've found that changing supercharger stages appropriately (stage 1 from sea level to around 4500 ft/1500m, stage 2 from 4500 to 17500 ft, and stage 3 above 17500 ft) helps, keeping your cowl gills (radiator flaps) at 30%, and your prop pitch between 90 and 80% when you want to speed up without overheating are big helps. When you're cruising, drop your rpms to about 2250 and your manifold pressure to about 30-35 inches with your radiator at 30% at any altitude (and the higher you get, the better against the Japanese fighters).

Thanks for the tips. I have question on your PP usage. I read WD's writing on PP. He said it's ideal to always keep RPM with in the power band. For corsair, it's between 2700-2600. Within that band, you get highest thrust. If you drop PP down to between 80% to 90%, you will only get 2500 in level flight. With less thrust, how would you be able to go fast?

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by pandacat

Thanks for the tips. I have question on your PP usage. I read WD's writing on PP. He said it's ideal to always keep RPM with in the power band. For corsair, it's between 2700-2600. Within that band, you get highest thrust. If you drop PP down to between 80% to 90%, you will only get 2500 in level flight. With less thrust, how would you be able to go fast?

Not to put words in horseback's mouth... but I would assume he's talking about running the aircraft efficiently. So you can run at 100% pitch/throttle but you'll generate more heat. Either short bursts of top speed and then throttling back or longer sustained periods of almost top speed is faster overall.

[pandacat]

Oh, I see your point. But in terms of pure thrust and acceleration, higher RPM the better, right?

[pandacat]

Just a quick tactical example. I started off with low speed behind a cruising Zero at the same altitude. If I want to catch up with him, I would first throttle to max and RPM to 2700 to provide max thrust and acceleration. After I attain a high speed, I would lower RPM and throttle back to maintain it? Does my way make sense?

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by IceFire

The reason for the feeling of them being underpowered is due to the lack of a really complex damage modeling system so weapons that do a lot of structural damage are getting most of the benefit and other weapons that do internal systems damage are not getting as much of an effect. Example... radiator cooling systems are not fully modeled so you can shoot a 109 in the radiator with little real effect.

Examples:
Every aircraft in IL2 1946.







.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by IceFire

That's interesting... most people consider them to be chronically underpowered. Why would you think that?

Perhaps it's related to gunnery accuracy, but many times I've been shot down (PK or engine fire) flying against planes equipped with single 0.30/5.62 mm flexible gun positions. Sometimes I've been stupid and have been making almost dead astern attacks without manuevering, but a few times I've gotten zapped while doing things properly and making head-on or high-side high deflection shots.

Also, it seems like light caliber guns are a bit too effective at getting control surface critical hits.

Of course, on the other hand, flying planes like the Ki-43 or Hurricane Mk I is a challenge due to their light armament. But, that's sort of realistic since it reflects a conscious armament decision by the planes' builders which didn't work out so well in reality.

Originally Posted by IceFire

The reason for the feeling of them being underpowered is due to the lack of a really complex damage modeling system so weapons that do a lot of structural damage are getting most of the benefit and other weapons that do internal systems damage are not getting as much of an effect.

Hmm. I thought that each bullet is modeled as an "arrow" which penetrates through the plane model, like in "arcade mode". If it intersects with a vital system, there's a chance for a "critical hit." If it hits armor, it gets slowed or blocked. That's about as realistic as you can get without modeling things like explosive shell/bullet bursts, bullet fragmentation, or deflection/ricochet effects.

Originally Posted by IceFire

Example... radiator cooling systems are not fully modeled so you can shoot a 109 in the radiator with little real effect.

Isn't this a problem with individual planes (especially the older ones) rather than a systemic problem? Since I haven't looked at the DM for the various planes I don't know.

The problem with the Japanese guns is twofold:

Originally Posted by IceFire

1) Lack of sources of detailed information on weapons and correct belting

Strange. You'd think that the US military would have collected this sort of information. They did pretty extensive testing of just about every weapon they captured.

Originally Posted by IceFire

2) The in-game guns use close approximations of whatever the Japanese were using and often use the German equivalent.

Strange, since it's at least possible to get ballistic data for Japanese weapons.

[horseback]

Originally Posted by pandacat

Thanks for the tips. I have question on your PP usage. I read WD's writing on PP. He said it's ideal to always keep RPM with in the power band. For corsair, it's between 2700-2600. Within that band, you get highest thrust. If you drop PP down to between 80% to 90%, you will only get 2500 in level flight. With less thrust, how would you be able to go fast?

I don't know who WD is, so I cannot comment on his figures. I simply find that once I level off after a zoom climb and roll out at speeds under 130 knots that gradually (but not slowly) dropping prop pitch from 95% or so down to 80-85% has a noticeable effect on my speedometer dial without having to resort to going over 100% throttle. It may be my imagination, but in-game, the R-2800 seems to pick up speed a bit quicker while you're moving down in prop pitch through that range (hey, it might be an 'exploit' for all I know).

Obviously, there is no 'feeling' of increasing acceleration, so the best impression you can get is from watching the speed indicator unwind. It goes clockwise pretty quickly when you smoothly move your prop pitch axis back that little bit. In fact, keeping an eye on the speed dial will help you gauge how fast to move that lever/dial.

In any case, it does keep your engine much cooler and allows you to crank it up in an emergency without fear of burning it up. The main thing is to start with some altitude and use your stored energy to maintain the initiative (and trim! Stay in trim as much as possible).

cheers

horseback

[horseback]

Originally Posted by IceFire

That's interesting... most people consider them to be chronically underpowered. Why would you think that?

The reason for the feeling of them being underpowered is due to the lack of a really complex damage modeling system so weapons that do a lot of structural damage are getting most of the benefit and other weapons that do internal systems damage are not getting as much of an effect. Example... radiator cooling systems are not fully modeled so you can shoot a 109 in the radiator with little real effect.

The problem with the Japanese guns is twofold:

1) Lack of sources of detailed information on weapons and correct belting

2) The in-game guns use close approximations of whatever the Japanese were using and often use the German equivalent.

The Type 99 20mm cannon in-game is a MG-FF/M benefitting from the German weapons slightly higher fire rate, much higher muzzle velocity (although still low), and is belted with the Mine round of which I doubt the Japanese were using. There were actually two Type 99 cannons used during the war and later model Zeros had the 99-2 fitted with an even lower fire rate but much higher muzzle velocity.

Sorry for the sidetrack

In my experience, any gun is going to be underpowered if I'm the one firing it...and if it is being fired at me, then it is undoubtedly overpowered.

I recently was re-reading Fire In the Sky, by Eric Bergerud. In it, he mentions that the Zero's cannon were originally license built MG-FFs. If they were slower firing than the German models, he doesn't say, but the LW moved exclusively to MG151/20s pretty quickly when it became possible. I seem to recall from possibly other sources that later 20mm cannon models the Japanese used were literally scaled up Browning designs, identical to the US M2, just bigger. I recall that the display at the National Air & Space Museum in Washington DC certainly reflected this.

In any event, the Japanese had issues with their cannon having very different ballistics and trajectory from their light machine guns, and found that the cannon were less effective in their favored close-in maneuvering combat; it seems that the cannon rounds often went somewhere different from the MG rounds if you fired during high-G turns (they were slower firing and <probably> started firing a fraction of a second later than the MGs).

cheers

horseback

[pandacat]

Originally Posted by horseback

I don't know who WD is, so I cannot comment on his figures. I simply find that once I level off after a zoom climb and roll out at speeds under 130 knots that gradually (but not slowly) dropping prop pitch from 95% or so down to 80-85% has a noticeable effect on my speedometer dial without having to resort to going over 100% throttle. It may be my imagination, but in-game, the R-2800 seems to pick up speed a bit quicker while you're moving down in prop pitch through that range (hey, it might be an 'exploit' for all I know).

WD is whistlingDeath. Not sure if you know him. My PP control is +/- 5% increment. What about you? Btw, do you fly F4F? Does wildcat have similar powerbands?