4.11 F4U Performance

[MadBlaster]

the saratoga is 880 feet overall.

the rl chart for F4U-1 says - clean config with full load of fuel and ammo= weight ~ 12800 lbs. The chart also says for 13100 lb on hard surface and no head wind you need 910 feet.

So, that is a borderline situation. You need either:

1) some assistance from your carrier
2) some headwind
3) or lighten your fuel load.

On the other hand, if you fly F4U-1D or 1C, you probably don't need 1,2 or 3 because it is lighter plane(s).

This assumes the game is modeled correctly.

btw, 178 u.s. gal fuel ~ 1000 lbs.

btw, also saratoga top speed according to wikipedia 33-35 knots.

[sawyer692]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

the saratoga is 880 feet overall.

the rl chart for F4U-1 says - clean config with full load of fuel and ammo= weight ~ 12800 lbs. The chart also says for 13100 lb on hard surface and no head wind you need 910 feet.

So, that is a borderline situation. You need either:

1) some assistance from your carrier
2) some headwind
3) or lighten your fuel load.

On the other hand, if you fly F4U-1D or 1C, you probably don't need 1,2 or 3 because it is lighter plane(s).

This assumes the game is modeled correctly.

btw, 178 u.s. gal fuel ~ 1000 lbs.

btw, also saratoga top speed according to wikipedia 33-35 knots.

Awesome post, great info!

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

Awesome post, great info!

NP. But I wouldn't quite call him a liar. Maybe a smart ass is more appropriate. Like I said, if the carrier is going full tilt (30+ knots)...a little more than half a carrier you should be able to do it according to the chart. So maybe he did that.

[sawyer692]

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

NP. But I wouldn't quite call him a liar. Maybe a smart ass is more appropriate. Like I said, if the carrier is going full tilt (30+ knots)...a little more than half a carrier you should be able to do it according to the chart. So maybe he did that.

Thanks for the advice, I edited it.

Full tilt is doable but not without dipping below the deck. Like I posted before, top speed of the carriers at the time was 33.25 knots. I'm curious if he fudged that a bit.

[JtD]

I wish you guys would focus on something else but take off, it is a bit longer than it should be and it was said it is going to be changed a.s.a.p. So if that is your only worry, you don't need to worry any more at all.

[h0MbrE]

Originally Posted by JtD

I wish you guys would focus on something else but take off, it is a bit longer than it should be and it was said it is going to be changed a.s.a.p. So if that is your only worry, you don't need to worry any more at all.

How about an answer to this one:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD
"It says 409 mph top and this is what you get in game."


How is this achieved? Altitude, throttle, pitch, fuel, armament, difficulty switches (overheating on/off)? I have never been able to get this out of a Corsair in this sim in level flight with full real settings or otherwise. Please give me a scenario and I will try to duplicate it.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by h0MbrE

How is this achieved? Altitude, throttle, pitch, fuel, armament, difficulty switches (overheating on/off)? I have never been able to get this out of a Corsair in this sim in level flight with full real settings or otherwise. Please give me a scenario and I will try to duplicate it.

I achieved 660 km/h full switch minus
- unlimited fuel in order to keep conditions constant
- cockpit off so I could see the speed
- no wind and turbulence as this adds a random element
in a F4U-1D, standard loadout, 100% fuel at 20000ft on the Crimea map, noon, all out, rads closed, 3rd gear charger.

I could maintain that for a while before the engine gave in. 660 km/h is 410 mph.

[sawyer692]

Originally Posted by JtD

I wish you guys would focus on something else but take off, it is a bit longer than it should be and it was said it is going to be changed a.s.a.p. So if that is your only worry, you don't need to worry any more at all.

Excellent news! That will make a lot of carrier jocks happy!

[h0MbrE]

Originally Posted by sawyer692

Excellent news! That will make a lot of carrier jocks happy!

That's a start but the issue of the decreased speed of the aircraft still needs to be and addressed.