PDA

View Full Version : Here's a Corsair problem that CAN be fixed



SkyChimp
11-23-2004, 07:29 PM
The loadout options are wrong.

The F4U-1/Corsair I wasn't built with fuselage and inner-wing racks. It could not carry big bombs or extra fuel tanks. The only provisions for external ordnance were two removable bomb racks on under the outer wings directly beneath the guns and directly ahead of the gun ejection ports. These racks could accomodate 100 lb bombs.

The F4U-1A was not produced with inner wing racks. It had only the Brewster designed center-line bomb rack which could accomodate a bomb up to 1,000 lbs, or an extra fuel tank. Not both at the same time.

The F4U-1D was the plane that could haul all the stuff listed for it.

Right now, I don't think there is enough difference between the loadouts.

SkyChimp
11-23-2004, 07:29 PM
The loadout options are wrong.

The F4U-1/Corsair I wasn't built with fuselage and inner-wing racks. It could not carry big bombs or extra fuel tanks. The only provisions for external ordnance were two removable bomb racks on under the outer wings directly beneath the guns and directly ahead of the gun ejection ports. These racks could accomodate 100 lb bombs.

The F4U-1A was not produced with inner wing racks. It had only the Brewster designed center-line bomb rack which could accomodate a bomb up to 1,000 lbs, or an extra fuel tank. Not both at the same time.

The F4U-1D was the plane that could haul all the stuff listed for it.

Right now, I don't think there is enough difference between the loadouts.

Wolf_Fangs1381
11-23-2004, 08:04 PM
Hello SkyChimp,

Excellent eyes! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif I also asked my friend about this and he said the same thing pretty much. I myself didn't think the F4U-1 had those inner racks. But I wasn't sure and is why I asked my friend about it. He's a Corsair nut! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Do you know if the Corsair carried just 2xNapalm in combat? I know in the game it has the option with 1xDrop Tank and 2xNapalm. I wish we had the option just to use 2xNapalm,but I'm not sure Corsairs flew historically with it. Could you enlighten me some on it? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif =S=

SkyChimp
11-23-2004, 08:14 PM
The F4U-1 shouldn't be able to carry anything on the centerline.

The F4U-1A should be able to carry one thing on the centerline rack. If Oleg wants that to include napalm, so be it. But the F4U-1A didn't have multiple racks down there. It could carry one thing at a time. Even F4U-1A in late servie only had the one centerline rack. I've nevere seen one retro fited with more than one rack.

The F4U-1D certainly could carry napalm, and could carry ordnance on all three reacks at once. I've seen photos of all sorts of mixes. One I liked was napalm on one rack, a 500lb bomb on the other.

A.K.Davis
11-23-2004, 08:55 PM
While we're talking about napalm, P-38s and P-47s should have napalm tanks as an option also.

DRB_Hookech0
11-23-2004, 09:13 PM
FWIW,

Development
Soon after production began, wing leading edge tanks of 235 liter were again installed outside of the gun bays. Later provisions were made for the carriage of external fuel tanks, first on the centreline, then on the starboard wing and finally on both wings. At that stage, the wing leading edge tanks, which were not self-sealing, were eliminated again.

The cowling gills on top of the fuselage were soon fixed in the closed position, to avoid the deposition of oil on the windscreen. For similar reasons, the joints of the fuselage fuel tank in front of the cockpit were often covered with sealing tape.

To cure the tendency to drop a wing, a small spoiler was installed on the starboard wing.

From the 759th aircraft onwards, the framed canopy of the F4U-1 was quickly replaced by a much neater plexiglass "bulb" with small frames. The raising of the seat by 18cm slightly improved the view over the nose, and the new type also offered some rearward vision. Later this modification was associated with a change of designation to F4U-1A, which was not used at the time.

An important change, from the 1550th aircraft, was the installation of the -8W engine with water injection, which allowed higher emergency power to be used at low altitude.

The F4U-1B designation seems to have been used for the F4U-1As delivered to Britain.

The F4U-1C had four 20mm cannon instead of the six .50s. These guns were the British Hispano Mk.II cannon, known in the USA as the Hispano M2. These weapons protuded far from the leading edge. Production of this version remained limited to 200. They entered combat in April 1945.

In early 1944, bomb racks for the F4U-1 were developed by personnel of VMF-222 and VF-17. The modification was rapidly applied by other squadrons. The F4U-1D was a factory-built fighter-bomber model, powered by a R-2800-8W engine with water injection. The F4U-1D had three pylons, one on the centreline and two on the wings. Later small stubs on the outer wing panels, to carry rockets, were added.

Also in early 1944, longer oleos were installed in the main landing gear legs. They cured much of the tendency of the Corsair to "bounce". A longer tailwheel leg raised the fin, and reduced the directional stability problem.

These improvements were essential in making the Corsair suitable for carrier operations, and in April 1944 the Corsair was finally qualified for carrier operations.

An F4U-1 with a special mount in the rear fuselage for a K-21 camera was known as F4U-1P. The F4U-1P was used mainly to assess the results of air strikes. No F4U-1Ps were produced by the factories, they were all modified in the field by USMC or USN units.

Wolf_Fangs1381
11-23-2004, 09:16 PM
Hello SkyChimp,

Sorry if I misslead you about the 2xNapalm on the F4U-1A. It didn't mean for it to sound like I was talking about the -1A. What I meant was if any Corsair carried a loadout of 2xNapalm without anything else loaded. I'd also like to see the 1xNapalm and 1x500Lb bomb. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif =S=

P.S. Does anyknow if the Mustang carried napalm during the war? I'm just curious. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SkyChimp
11-23-2004, 09:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DRB_Hookech0:
FWIW,

_Development_
Soon after production began, wing leading edge tanks of 235 liter were again installed outside of the gun bays. Later provisions were made for the carriage of external fuel tanks, first on the centreline, then on the starboard wing and finally on both wings. At that stage, the wing leading edge tanks, which were not self-sealing, were eliminated again.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK, this paragraph summarizes the development of the F4U-1, -1A, and -1D.

The F4U-1 had a 237 gallon self-sealing fuselage tank with a 50 gallon standpipe reserve. It also had a 57 gallon unprotected tank in each wing. There was no provision for external fuel.

The F4U-1A had the same tanks as the F4U-1, but added a centerline rack to which a 175 gallon non-self-sealing drop tank could be attached.

The F4U-1D maintained the fuselage tank and a provision to mount a centerline tank, but dispensed with the wing tanks. It also inner wing racks, each of which could cary a USN 154 gallon tank, or a Lockheed 170 gallon tank.

--

I'm not saying that planes weren't retrofitted with racks and tanks and all sorts of things. There may even have been some overlap in features between models. But the above generally holds correct and I believe that is the way it should be in PF.

--

BTW, there really wasn't a F4U-1A until after -1A production started, AFAIK. I think the "A" part is a later nomenclature that as given to distinguish the early -1 from later -1s. During production, F4U-1s and F4U-1As were all called F4U-1s.

A.K.Davis
11-24-2004, 12:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Squirral:
Hello SkyChimp,

Sorry if I misslead you about the 2xNapalm on the F4U-1A. It didn't mean for it to sound like I was talking about the -1A. What I meant was if any Corsair carried a loadout of 2xNapalm without anything else loaded. I'd also like to see the 1xNapalm and 1x500Lb bomb. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif =S=

P.S. Does anyknow if the Mustang carried napalm during the war? I'm just curious. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

U.S. Army Air Forces in World War II:
Combat Chronology

12/23/44

Fourteenth AF

8 B-25's pound points along Burma Road. 13 B-25's hit town areas, trains, and other T/Os at Vinh, from Dap Cau to Lungchow, and from Lang Son to Yungning. In China 3 B-25's and 5 P-40's damage about 50 railroad cars in area S of Yellow R. 16 P-51's over Wuchang and Hankow damage 2 ferry ramps and blast 3 oil dumps. 12 P-51's and P-38's damage 2 hangars at Heho A/ F, 12 P-51's pound railroad shops at Chenghsien, and bomb Houmachen with napalm.

5/22/45

Fourteenth AF

15 B-25's and 7 FBs knock out rail bridge at HeiShih Kuan, damage bridge approach at Hwayuan, and hit a variety of tgts S of Kuo-lueh-chen. 10 P-51's drop napalm on trucks, barracks, storage, trains, and town areas at Sinyang, and Shanyangchen. 45 other FBs and photo rcn airplanes attack railroad tgts, bridges, troops, and other tgts at several S and E China points and survey enemy movements.

---

Also add B-25 and B-24 to list.

Copperhead310th
11-24-2004, 01:24 AM
need HVAR's for p-51 & P-47 as well.

what about naplam on P-38's? used at all on lightings?

Oh and here's a question for you Chimp.
What is the "WEAKEST" ponit on the wing of a
p-38L?

Aaron_GT
11-24-2004, 09:41 AM
"While we're talking about napalm, P-38s and P-47s should have napalm tanks as an option also."

There are all sorts of bomb loadouts missing from Allied and Axis planes!

For example - no 30lb bomb clusters for the P47.

A whole range of napalm, phosphorous, etc bombs for the Beaufighter.

Missing delayed action bombs, panzerblitz, etc., etc for the Fw190, etc.

And then again we have some loadouts that are apparently extraneous, like the F4U ones noted, and things like the torpedo on the Beaufighter Mk. 21.

Maybe we should make a super load out deficiency list for all aircraft. Maybe we need one thread for the list, one for discussions on what should be on the list, and a third thread for the flames :-)

Aaron_GT
11-24-2004, 09:42 AM
P.S. We should probably get options for different weights of rockets and AP rockets too for the Beaufighter. Plus we could do with the rocket loadouts for the Hurricane IIc as well.

Extreme_One
11-24-2004, 11:47 AM
According to the object viewer the Hellcats should be carying TinyTims but they're not available in game.
Is the loadout wrong or the object viewer?

Stiglr
11-24-2004, 12:05 PM
And here I thought he was gonna say, "The Pilot". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
11-24-2004, 12:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Extreme_One:
According to the object viewer the Hellcats should be carying TinyTims but they're not available in game.
Is the loadout wrong or the object viewer? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The loadout is wrong.

Extreme_One
11-24-2004, 12:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Extreme_One:
According to the object viewer the Hellcats should be carying TinyTims but they're not available in game.
Is the loadout wrong or the object viewer? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The loadout is wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm glad you said that.

Does Oleg know - and will it be addressed?

I'm sure you don't have all the answers but it's worth asking... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Daiichidoku
11-24-2004, 01:58 PM
First use of napalm was by corsairs at saipan/tinian

Wolf_Fangs1381
11-24-2004, 02:05 PM
Hello A.K.Davis,

Thank you very much for that bit of information. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I wasn't sure if the Mustang carried napalm in action during the war.

I wish Oleg and crew would make a patch that adds new loadouts that are missing from this amazing sim.

As for the Mustang carring HVARS,I believe no one could find informaion that stated the varients we have carried them. Not sure if this was about all the varients or just the D models. But I do remember reading the discussion on it. Thanks guys for the info! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif =S=

A.K.Davis
11-24-2004, 02:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
First use of napalm was by corsairs at saipan/tinian <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, it was by P-47Ds of the 318th FG at Tinian.

Edit: oops, maybe that was first USAAF use:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>On Saturday, July 27th 1944, the 318th became the first Pacific Air Corps unit to use a terrible new weapon: napalm. The 318th had gotten some napalm powder from the Navy, experimented until they got a good mix and put it in 300 or 165 gallon belly tanks rigged with a detonator. (No I will NOT post the recipe on this web site!). The result was a sheet of liquid fire about 300 feet long, 100 feet wide and 50 feet high that burned away cover, and penetrated pillboxes, caves and other strong points. This was first used on Tinian, just 3 miles away. When ground personnel went down to the beach to watch, the results were clearly visible across the water. The marines were quite enthusiastic about this new weapon. Reports from captured Japanese defenders indicated quite the opposite: they were both terrified and demoralized by it. Soon napalm was dropped on enemy strong points on Guam, Rota, Pagan, and Ascuncion Island as well. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

JG53Frankyboy
11-24-2004, 04:01 PM
change of loadouts seems to be causing proplems in campaigns. i rmemeber the loadout change with the IAR81s , well, old comapaigns ore missions didnt work anymore if the "wrong" loadout was selected http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

that could be a reason why there are very seldom loadoutchanges.

just as an example , the Bf109Gs should not be able to carry a SC500 - it was never deleted.
ore the Fw190A-6 , this version was never used as U3/U8/U17 JABO , they were just coppied from the A-5 loadouts http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

but yes, sometimes the loadoutchoices are very strange. espacially i also wondered about the Corsair differences ?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
having 4 differnt US Corsair variants would be great:
-F4U-1 without loadouts, birdcage canopy
-F4U-1A only centerline rack
-F4U-1C & F4U-1D with all possible stuff http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

i realy hope for BoB to get a new loadout screen where you can select every weapon station itself . and that counts the max weight in comparison to fuel.

JG53Frankyboy
11-29-2004, 04:37 PM
well , after seeing absolutly no differences in the performances betwenn the Corsairs while cheking YOUSS new IL2 Compare for PF , i would give theat a bumb

more differences in armament
and ad a F4U-1 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif .i know , looks like same as Corsair MkI , hows about "rename" that bird , actually the Corsair MkI saw no combataction , at least in the pacific,so far i know