1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-13-2012, 12:24 PM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaker View Post
http://www.aviation-history.com/vought/f4u.html

I am taking my info from the above link.

"It could outfight, outclimb and (if need be) outrun any prop driven enemy."
That link and statements are worth of nothing. Thats a product of a U.S. fansite, supported by bend oppinions of fighter pilots (who understandibly never would state "hey, our planes were all porked, but still we won!"). And you beliefe in it. Sorry to sound rude, but simply its that way.

As for the numbers: We have neighter the prototype, nor the F4U-4 in game.

"...any prop driven enemy.." - He forgot to add "...,that was available at that time." - wich in fact was (on fighters) an Ki-43, Ki-44, Ki-61 and A6M-3 and a little bit later an A6M-5, with almost the same performance as the A6M-3.

Now to the numbers in game. With the weakest of the Corsair versions - the F4U-1 - you can outrun a Zero anytime at any alt level, with a minimum advantage of 40km/h at 2000m and 6000m.
From 350km/h climb speed upward you can run away from any Zero as well.
Naturally you cannot turn with it below 440km/h neigher can you do slow-climbing below 350km/h.

To my eyes this gives quite a few possibilies to fight successfull against Zeros. Ki-61 may be a bit more difficult, but its almost the same there in all points.

Furthermore, the F4U series has all become sligthly more maneuverable.
To have said that, I don't see your problem, but maybe only in the way you use to fly.

Quote:
The stock F4U doesn't even meet these standards and now it appears to be worse.
Half true progaganda is no standard. "It could outfight everything." - Outfight? What is this? At least no value, that we can work with.
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-13-2012, 12:28 PM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h0MbrE View Post
They weren't even as fast as they were supposed to be to begin with but now.... useless. Which is very disappointing since I was SO looking forward to this patch. Sigh... back to 4.101 for now.
Translating:
"...not as fast as they were supposed to deliver you easy kills".

I can understand your dissapointment.
Seriously: read the numbers, I wrote above and think about.
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-13-2012, 01:07 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Regarding the F4U performance, I, as always, recommend to start with the data presented here. While not near complete, it contains much of the essential information and will allow you to adjust expectations to a reasonable level.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-13-2012, 02:30 PM
MrBaato MrBaato is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
Regarding the F4U performance, I, as always, recommend to start with the data presented here. While not near complete, it contains much of the essential information and will allow you to adjust expectations to a reasonable level.
To me the F4U seems a bit harder to judge when it stalls, but more manouverable for sure
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-13-2012, 03:37 PM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaker View Post
However in the current state it isn't playable and secondly the butcher job you have done to ally planes is insulting and inaccurate.
I cannot give reference numbers as I am not responsible for the tweaks - the one, who is and I do trust, gave them to you. I told you about actual numbers (IL-2 compare 4.11).

But feel free to create your plane to your liking - on a different place.
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-13-2012, 04:47 PM
sawyer692 sawyer692 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 31
Default

[QUOTE=EJGr.Ost_Caspar;379066]As for the numbers: We have neighter the prototype, nor the F4U-4 in game.

"...any prop driven enemy.." - He forgot to add "...,that was available at that time." - wich in fact was (on fighters) an Ki-43, Ki-44, Ki-61 and A6M-3 and a little bit later an A6M-5, with almost the same performance as the A6M-3.

Now to the numbers in game. With the weakest of the Corsair versions - the F4U-1 - you can outrun a Zero anytime at any alt level, with a minimum advantage of 40km/h at 2000m and 6000m.
From 350km/h climb speed upward you can run away from any Zero as well.
Naturally you cannot turn with it below 440km/h neigher can you do slow-climbing below 350km/h.

To my eyes this gives quite a few possibilies to fight successfull against Zeros. Ki-61 may be a bit more difficult, but its almost the same there in all points.

Furthermore, the F4U series has all become sligthly more maneuverable.
To have said that, I don't see your problem, but maybe only in the way you use to fly.
[QUOTE]



I look forward to testing this today against a breather in a Zero. It may take some time though as we'll be CTD every 5 minutes and overheating on takeoff. I fly the F4U almost exclusivley so I have a pretty good idea what to compare it to.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-13-2012, 11:23 PM
sawyer692 sawyer692 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
But feel free to create your plane to your liking - on a different place.
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:

Last edited by sawyer692; 01-13-2012 at 11:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-13-2012, 11:25 PM
ElAurens's Avatar
ElAurens ElAurens is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Great Black Swamp of Ohio
Posts: 2,182
Default

A more realistic speed for carrier air operations would be 30 Knots.

Try that.
__________________


Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-13-2012, 11:35 PM
76.IAP-Blackbird 76.IAP-Blackbird is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 167
Default

You know that carriers are turned into the wind during start and landings??? so a speed of 30 knots of the carrier + the wind inRL should make it easier.. and who start from a deck which is moving with only 16 knots... kamikazi???
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-13-2012, 11:44 PM
sawyer692 sawyer692 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 76.IAP-Blackbird View Post
You know that carriers are turned into the wind during start and landings??? so a speed of 30 knots of the carrier + the wind inRL should make it easier.. and who start from a deck which is moving with only 16 knots... kamikazi???
I understand that but the Corsair could also take off from a stationary carrier with no catapult during training at Pearl. I think your missing the point
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 04:28 PM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.