Hey TD can you look again at the Corsair..

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Black_Sage29

The corsair doesn't go past 220mph-230mph tops in low alt flight..its not supposed to be that slow and thats with 30% fuel

Why do American planes not get any love in this game..I mean come on

Look up the differences between indicated air speed and true air speed and you'll find out why you "can't get above" 220mph. Different scale. IAS is the air flowing past regardless of altitude/density while TAS accounts for that discrepancy and gives you the actual ground distance travelled.

American planes have some of the best features, the greatest ranges (typically), and are usually amongst the toughest of the aircraft in-game relative to their opponents and even contemporaries. They are bigger, heavier, more powerful, and carry more rockets and bomb loads.

While German and Soviet aircraft were designed to support the armies (and are typically short ranged, small, light and fast), American fighters were designed to operate in a variety of theatres and conditions and I like to call them "war winning" with the range and munitions to really devastate a target on their own. No army support specifically required. This is extremely valuable when you fight in a theatre like the Pacific where air power enables you to conduct those island hopping campaigns.

The Corsair can carry 4000lbs of bombs in extreme conditions. More than most nations medium bombers.

The only issue I have with the Corsair is I wonder about is it's acceleration. The top speed in testing has been spot on to stated documents, the handling appears to match historical description (especially for a plane known as the Ensign Eliminator), but it does take a while to get to top speed. It may be spot on... that's the only area where I kind of feel like the Corsair is very difficult.

[Bearcat]

Hmmm I guess that's why a P-47 can be taken out with one shot. So can the Corsair which I believe has the same engine. Because it is so tough...... I do not see what you see in the Corsair in particular..I hope that someone in a position to do something at least gives the aircraft a serious look. I am not alone in my assessment of the Corsair and even if there are also over modeling issues with other aircraft the corsair deserves another look. like the previous poster said it's acceleration is suspect and it bleeds speed so fast that it is almost impossible to regain it once you loose it. I hope someone gives it a serious look.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Hmmm I guess that's why a P-47 can be taken out with one shot. So can the Corsair which I believe has the same engine. Because it is so tough......

Any plane can be destroyed by a single round in the right spot - and how often does this happen in this game? Most of the times Corsairs can take quite some punishment and stay afloat.

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I do not see what you see in the Corsair in particular..I hope that someone in a position to do something at least gives the aircraft a serious look. I am not alone in my assessment of the Corsair and even if there are also over modeling issues with other aircraft the corsair deserves another look. like the previous poster said it's acceleration is suspect and it bleeds speed so fast that it is almost impossible to regain it once you loose it. I hope someone gives it a serious look.

I think you expect too much from the Corsair. Just flight performance wise it is not at the top of the list. Its just too heavy for that. But it can carry up to 4000 pounds of bombs or a mix of bombs/rockets, has a range of 1000 miles+, can absorb some damage and make it home, and can start and land at a carrier. And I'd bet much of its reputation came from pilot quality, most US pilots were very well trained by the time Corsairs arrived in numbers, while the quality of Japanese pilots was decreasing.

[Bearcat]

The former is quite possible.. the latter is quite true.. I have been playing around with stick settings to try to find a better profile.. The engine in the Corsair is the same one in the P-47 .. and P-47s have been known to keep running with a blown cylinder.. Sometimes it seems as if the DM of the radials is the same as the inline engines.. From all accounts it should be more robust.

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

The former is quite possible.. the latter is quite true.. I have been playing around with stick settings to try to find a better profile.. The engine in the Corsair is the same one in the P-47 .. and P-47s have been known to keep running with a blown cylinder.. Sometimes it seems as if the DM of the radials is the same as the inline engines.. From all accounts it should be more robust.

I've always assumed the "golden bullet" engine seizure was not a blown cylinder but something like main fuel line destroyed?

[Luno13]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

The former is quite possible.. the latter is quite true.. I have been playing around with stick settings to try to find a better profile.. The engine in the Corsair is the same one in the P-47 .. and P-47s have been known to keep running with a blown cylinder.. Sometimes it seems as if the DM of the radials is the same as the inline engines.. From all accounts it should be more robust.

It is more robust. I've had hits in the engine on a P-47 and made it hundreds of miles back to base on reduced RPM. Don't expect to be able to fight like that though. Also, be aware of confirmation bias. How many stories are there of a P-47 surviving with a missing cylinder? Bear in mind that you will never read the stories about the ones that didn't make it.

It starts with a perfectly reasonable request to review the attributes of an aircraft that seems to be different in-game versus the documented facts.

Bear in mind that the original question was about the speed of the F4U.

That question has been answered at least three times with actual documentation. Are you stuffing your fingers in your ears and going "La la la" until you can find something that matches your preference? The rest of your post is invalid hooplah so I won't bother commenting on it.

Note that report above says the corsair should reach 300mph Indicated air speed. IN game it doesn't reach this..not even close to that ( 220-230mph is way off )..but ok...

This is your own problem, not the game's. It is easy to achieve 300 mph in game. I just got 340 mph at 1000m and 417mph at 7000 meters.

[Bearcat]

How long did that take to achieve?

[Luno13]

I didn't time it, but I would guess within a few minutes, which seems perfectly reasonable. You don't just hit your top speed like a brick wall. You have to work to get to it, and you have to be vigilant to keep it. Note that the combat report quoted earlier advises pilots not to get slow. This doesn't mean you can get slow for a bit to tease your Zero opponent and then turn on afterburners to whizz up into low earth orbit again.

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 manoeuvrability 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 A6M2-21 has a loaded power to weight ratio of .29 kW/kg while the Corsair has one of .23kW/kg which is a 26% advantage in favor of the Zero. The A6M3 hamp has even better power to weight ratio at .31kW/kg, loaded. Don't expect miracles.

[Black_Sage29]

We're talking about performance. Corsair is supposed to be maneuverable and it's not even when in top speed low alt flight ( 220-230mph ). Also bleeds off speed way to fast






http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/f4u/f4u.html

Note that report above says the corsair should reach 300mph Indicated air speed. IN game it doesn't reach this..not even close to that ( 220-230mph is way off )..but ok...


The corsair's top speed is supposed to be about 20mph slower than the P-51 also according to wikipedia..and it's not. P-51 reaches a top speed of roughly around 300-310mph IAS in game level flight


Here's another report: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...stangtest.html

^^^ P-51 reaches 363mph true airspeed low-alt flight

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...ZSEmP7iWljqfGg

^^ here you can see corsair has maximum speed of 343ph true airspeed in low-alt flight. That's about 20mph behind p51


Based on all of this the corsair should at least reach 260mph-280mph in level flight in game instead of 220-230mph

[Kittle]

'Maneuverable' is something one needs to take with a grain of salt. Absolutely no aircraft the US fielded in WWII could win a turning fight with a Zero unless both aircraft were at high speed. The Corsair is very maneuverable......at high speed. In a low/slow fight it's hopeless and should be shot down in short order. Over the Solomon's the Corsair was zeke bait just like everything else until the pilots learned how to fight it against Oscars and Zekes. If you keep your speed up, and make every effort to start the fight from an altitude advantage, you shouldn't have any problems.