Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-05-2013, 03:32 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

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?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-05-2013, 03:52 PM
Luno13 Luno13 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 370
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-05-2013, 03:58 PM
Fenice_1965's Avatar
Fenice_1965 Fenice_1965 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Italy
Posts: 140
Default

I wasn't using KI84 as a reference but as an example, not the best as you correctly argued.
__________________
http://www.skiesoffire.org/downloads/images/FSfenice_1965.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-05-2013, 04:15 PM
Black_Sage29 Black_Sage29 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
I learned quickly that altitude was paramount. Whoever had altitude dictated the terms of the battle, and there was nothing a Zero pilot could do to change that — we had him. The F4U could outperform a Zero in every aspect except slow speed maneuverability and slow speed rate of climb. Therefore you avoided getting slow when combating a Zero. It took time but eventually we developed tactics and deployed them very effectively... There were times, however, that I tangled with a Zero at slow speed, one on one. In these instances I considered myself fortunate to survive a battle. Of my 21 victories, 17 were against Zeros, and I lost five aircraft in combat. I was shot down three times and I crashed one that ploughed into the line back at base and wiped out another F4U

the corsair is far from maneuverable in il2 even at high speeds....even worse in hsfx
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-05-2013, 04:44 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenice_1965 View Post
I wasn't using KI84 as a reference but as an example, not the best as you correctly argued.
Good reply, in particular looking at my tone of voice. Sorry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Sage29 View Post
the corsair is far from maneuverable in il2 even at high speeds....even worse in hsfx
The F4U is very manoeuvrable at speeds around 500-600km/h TAS. No A6M comes anywhere close at these speeds.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-05-2013, 06:19 PM
Fenice_1965's Avatar
Fenice_1965 Fenice_1965 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Italy
Posts: 140
Default

Quote:
Good reply, in particular looking at my tone of voice. Sorry.
Np mate .
Effectively my post wasn't the best to express what I was meaning....

Quote:
he corsair is far from maneuverable in il2 even at high speeds....even worse in hsfx
What I noticed is that F4U speed performances in HSFX expert mode are way more better. Do not know if they are more accurate or in excess on the other side...
__________________
http://www.skiesoffire.org/downloads/images/FSfenice_1965.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-05-2013, 08:15 PM
majorfailure majorfailure is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 320
Default

IL2compare4.11 gives ~650kph at wep for the F4u-1d.
Tried it myself, fully loaded F4u1-d, WEP, ~672kph at ~7000m.
Compare that with data given by Bearcat that states 416/421 mph at ~20000 ft(669/677 kph) (F4U-1 No. 17930 and No's 55937, 50030) for a late Corsair with WaterInjection.
I'd say thats really close to real world data isn't it?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-27-2013, 11:10 PM
DuxCorvan's Avatar
DuxCorvan DuxCorvan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cádiz, Spain
Posts: 86
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
Good reply, in particular looking at my tone of voice. Sorry.
Don't worry, I'm pretty sure he didn't hear anything at all...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-28-2013, 05:23 PM
zipper
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Interesting work, horseback. Is your feeling that acceleration is tied directly to, and only, drag? The reason I ask is because blade pitch was another major factor, in that as it increased more thrust was diverted from forward propulsion to resisting rotation. The result would then be a much faster drop off of acceleration at the top of the scale than the simple increase of drag. Curiosity only.

As for the 190, you're right, the trim in the real plane wasn't anywhere near twitchy and, bizarrely, the faster the plane went the less adjustment it needed for speed's sake. Above 260mph no adjustments in trim were needed at all if the only variable was speed. Sounds like you could use that characteristic - lol. As to its in game takeoff acceleration I've done standing start drag races between an absolutely empty (no ammo, 10% fuel) A8 closed cowl flaps (and auto prop) and an overloaded (1600lb, fully fueled) SBD with canopy and cowl flaps open and to 100mph it's practically a draw! lol. Fun times.

--- Trivia: Lowest drag D9 cowl flap setting was 23% open. ---
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.