PDA

View Full Version : F4U-1



MAILMAN------
08-03-2006, 08:00 PM
This isn't that big a deal, but seeing as the game made sure that many, many variants of various aircraft made it into the game for historical accuracy then this type of question is not out of line.

Any chance that in the future there will be a F4U-1 included as a choice or replace the CorsairMkI (skins) folder? Or at the very least place some default type USMC and USN skins for the F4U-1 in the Corsair Mk1 so when default only skins are requested by server hosts they will be shown?

I know the F4U-1 is represented by the Corsair MkI in the game, so I don't need to be reminded. And yes I know that I can put skins in there for the F4U-1, and I have them in there. Doesn't help when a server host requests default (original game) skins only.

From every source that I have found and read the British never used their CorsairI( 95 delivered) in combat, they used the clipped wing versions (to fit their hangar decks)of the CorsairII (F4U-1A; Vought, Brewster & Goodyear), CorsairIII (Brewster) and CorsairIV (Goodyear)from its carriers in the Home & Far Eastern Fleets.

The F4U-1 had its combat debut on February 9, 1943 at Guadalcanal flying from Henderson Field, VMF-124. In addition to VMF-124 it was flown in combat by the following Marine and Naval units (didn't have time to search for more units):

Marine: VMF-213, VMF-214, VMF-215, VMF-221
Navy: VF-17

(I have paint scheme illustrations [color]for all of these units from the book "Corsair Aces of World War 2" by Mark Styling.)

I don't know how difficult it would be to accomplish this. I don't know of another Forumn to post this so please bare with me.

Reasons for inclusion:

1. Missions where the host attempts historical accuracy in the Solomons area including early 1943 Guadalcanal.
2. Corsair Mk1 never flew in Combat.
3. F4U-1 flew combat from Guadalcanal through Okinawa even though the F4U-1A, F4U-1D, F4U-1
C & F4U-4 were put into service.

tigertalon
08-03-2006, 08:13 PM
Are they identical? IIRC corsair has a birdcage canopy, contrary to F4U-1. That's why I'm not sure whether their skins are interchangeable.

MAILMAN------
08-03-2006, 08:46 PM
The F4U-1 is the bird cage canopy version of the corsair made by Vought, Brewster and Goodyear. The F4U-1's that were sold to the British were called the Corsair MkI. They are identical right down to the rounded wing tips.

Builder designations:
Vought - F4U
Brewster - F3A
Goodyear - FG

Corsair MkI (RN)-Birdcage = F4U-I/F3A-1/FG-1(USN/USMC)- Birdcage
rounded wing tips

Corsair MkII (RN)-clipped wing tips = F4U-1A/F3A-1A/FG-1A (USN/USMC/RNZAF)
semi-bubble canopy with frames on top

F4U-1C - US only made by Vought

Corsair MkIII(RN)- clipped wing tips = F3A-1D: round wing tips
semi-bubble canopy with no frames on top

Corsair MkIV (RN)- clipped wing tips = FG-1D: round wing tips
semi-bubble canopy with no frames on top

F4U-1D/FG-1D USMC/USN/RNZAF
round wing tips
semi-bubble canopy with no frames on top

F4U-4 USMC/USN made by Vought only (2450 HP, P&W R-2800-18W, Double Wasp, 18 cylinder Radial with water-methanol injection. Not in the game. More F4U-4's 446 MPH) in the Pacific Theater(Okinawa/Japan)than its stablemate the F4U-1C. One of its primary missions was to run down the Kamikaze aircraft.

F2G - prototype, made only by Goodyear (Super Corsair,3000 HP, P&W R-4360 Wasp Major, 28 Cylinder Radial) was designed for low level intercept of Kamikaze, but only eight built from mid-1944 to the end of the war and saw no combat.

Hope this clarifies it.

Scharnhorst1943
08-03-2006, 10:45 PM
The skins are interchangable, because I have put skins from F4U1A, F4U1C, and F4U1D and they ALL work and appear on the CorsairI.

F19_Olli72
08-04-2006, 01:25 AM
Im afraid theres little or no hope for such requests... I mean, just look how long the no markings bug on the Fiat Cr.42 has been in the sim without beeing corrected. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

stansdds
08-04-2006, 03:16 AM
I don't expect to see this historical inaccuracy rectified as all attention is focused on Battle of Britain. I do wonder why the Corsair I was included, but the F4U-1 was not. Yes, they are the exact same except for markings and ownership and the British used the Corsair I for training, not for combat, yet the US Marines used them extensively in combat during 1943 and into the first couple of months of 1944.

I fly with an online squadron (VMF-124) and we put USN/USMC skins on the Corsair I and fly them. The lack of a Solomon Islands map is also a huge problem in Pacific Fighters as this area was the scene of much of the fighting in the Pacific. We have petitioned for such a map, but that isn't likely to happen either.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Gitano1979
08-04-2006, 06:00 AM
I agree with MAILMAN, F4U-1 was largely used in PTO, Corsair Mk.I saw little or no action... but as Stansdds said, there's no hope to have an update of these things missing. Maybe on SOW series...

Mj63
08-08-2006, 03:53 AM
Talking about the Corsair........according to officiel evaluation from back then the F4U-1 did 376 mph on the deck, I can't get more than 345 miles out of it all trimed out and with everything closed ??? Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

The -1a should do 359 mph on the deck, I can get it to 345 mph only, and yes trimed out as well and everything closed. Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

Maybe it's because they are modelled war weary and not as blue print planes as the KI84's ?

Thx for a great sim sir !

Chuck_Older
08-08-2006, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by Mj63:
Talking about the Corsair........according to officiel evaluation from back then the F4U-1 did 376 mph on the deck, I can't get more than 345 miles out of it all trimed out and with everything closed ??? Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

The -1a should do 359 mph on the deck, I can get it to 345 mph only, and yes trimed out as well and everything closed. Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

Maybe it's because they are modelled war weary and not as blue print planes as the KI84's ?

Thx for a great sim sir !

On which map did you test, and are you reading IAS or TAS? No war weary planes are modelled to my knowledge http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Also, was the evaluation plane carrying a full load of ammo and fuel?

ImpStarDuece
08-08-2006, 07:38 AM
Quick test of F4U-1 reveals:

576 kph @ 5 m / 358 mph @ 15 ft


Test criteria were:

Crimea map
sea level
180 deg heading
wind on
full ammo
full fuel
trimed level (or as close as I could get)
rads closed
100% mixture
100% prop pitch

Cruised along out to sea at 80% throttle and 10m. Popped the throttle to 110%/WEP and held it level at 5m. Easy.

So it *might* be 1 mph too slow.

I have two primary F4U-1 data sheets.

First is a USN data sheet dated March 1, 1944 which gives sea level speed of 359 mph.

Second is a comparison between USN and USAF fighters, which gives the F4U-1 a sea level speed of 355 mph at 60" of manifold pressure.

So what we have in the game seems perfectly reasonable and accurate, at least in terms of sea level speed.

As for the F4U-1 **** 376 mph on the deck...I don't think so. The data sheets I have for the F4U-4 give 333 knots/380 mph and 370 mph for sea level speed respectively, both with 2650 hp. So, unless the F4U-1 suddenly got a whole lot more horsepower, I find the 376 mph figure of dubious proprietary.

Viper2005_
08-08-2006, 10:08 AM
Why test with wind on?

JG53Frankyboy
08-08-2006, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Why test with wind on?

there is no wind when the weather is clear.

crazyivan1970
08-08-2006, 11:59 AM
You should ask luthier to do this. He`s your last hope. Dont expect anything from maddox crew, they are on BOB full time.

p.s. i thought it was request for addtional skins, not another performance thread.

Nimits
08-09-2006, 09:03 PM
But we do need additional ships (or at the very minimum, repaints of some of the Russian and German ones in game already).

BTW, if you apply a USN/USMC cammo scheme to the Corsair Mk. I, you have an F4U-1.

Of course, on the other hand, to include the F4U-1 in game, you would only have to duplicate the Corsair Mk.I and give it a new internal name and defeault skin . . . and voila, a "brand new" plane for the next add-on . . .

heywooood
08-11-2006, 12:14 PM
yeah - I believe the question was - why wasn't that done at the beginning..? F4u-1 not included in US folder and markings must have been an oversight ommission.

MAILMAN------
10-30-2006, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by Nimits:
BTW, if you apply a USN/USMC cammo scheme to the Corsair Mk. I, you have an F4U-1.

This is not the point of this post.

<span class="ev_code_RED">The point is that if the server only allows default skins and markings you can't put a correct custom skin of a USN/USMC F4U-1 with the correct markings already on the skin.</span> You end up getting a Russian Marking for the naitional insiginia witha white star replacing the red. See the next paragraph fot an explanation.

Historically the P-39's received by the Russian VVS were were painted in the olive drab green scheme and the US National Insignia consisting of a white star inside a dark blue roundel with out the white bars. The Russinan VVS field modified this insignia by painting over the white star with <span class="ev_code_RED">red paint</span> to where the star points extended past the border of the blue roundel. In the PF Stand Alone and PF Merged games this is what shows up for national insignia for the US when choosing the Corsair I or the P-39N and is incorrect.


Originally posted by Nimits:
Of course, on the other hand, to include the F4U-1 in game, you would only have to duplicate the Corsair Mk.I and give it a new internal name and defeault skin . . . and voila, a "brand new" plane for the next add-on . . .

This would be nice, but I don't have much faith in seeing this corrected http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif


<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">This is an old thread and if possible I would like to see it deleted since it has been superceded by a more detailed and updated thread.</span><div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-)-MAILMAN-

@={=MUSKETEERS=>

BigKahuna_GS
11-14-2006, 11:52 AM
Chuck_Older
Clashaholic

Posted Tue August 08 2006 07:26 Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mj63:
Talking about the Corsair........according to officiel evaluation from back then the F4U-1 did 376 mph on the deck, I can't get more than 345 miles out of it all trimed out and with everything closed ??? Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

The -1a should do 359 mph on the deck, I can get it to 345 mph only, and yes trimed out as well and everything closed. Evaluated plane taken from standard stock and not polished.

Maybe it's because they are modelled war weary and not as blue print planes as the KI84's ?

Thx for a great sim sir !


Chuck Older--On which map did you test, and are you reading IAS or TAS? No war weary planes are modelled to my knowledge Also, was the evaluation plane carrying a full load of ammo and fuel?

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________



He is refering to these Navy full combat loaded Corsair Flight Tests :

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/23d60700.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/23d60700.jpg

And these Navy Flight Tests:

Here is a great web site with Official Naval WW2 Flight Tests
http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/id3.htm

Notice the 38lb wing loading on a fully combat loaded Corsair. Also notice the emergency take off rating & distance. IL2 can't match these ratings at all.
http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/19128170.jpg


Navy 366mph sea level V-max in "Clean Condition"

http://www.geocities.com/slakergmb/19728170.jpg

http://us.geocities.com/slakergmb/1318f6f0.gif <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://airplanesandmore.com/prodimages/largeSting%20of%20the%20Yellow%20Jackets.jpg
The Yo-Yo is very difficult to explain. It was first perfected by the well-known Chinese fighter pilot Yo-Yo Noritake. He also found it difficult to explain, being quite devoid of English.
? Squadron Leader K. G. Holland, RAF.


It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed.

? USAF Manual

ICDP
11-14-2006, 01:06 PM
Kahuna you seem like a very knowledgable guy and you do present a lot of data to back up your claims. Unfortunately the devs will never accept the chart you keep posting as valid, as it is from non standard F4U1's. If the F4U1 is wrong I want it fixed, I fly it very regularly online and love it to bits despite the yaw bugs.

With regards to your attained SL speed of 345mph I find that a very low speed, I can get 355-357mph at SL out of it. According to official documented USN tests that is only 4-2 mph slower than a typical F4U1 in clean condition. What settings and map are you using?

MAILMAN------
11-14-2006, 08:41 PM
In Pacific Fighters our supercharger speed is at Stage 1 at Sea Level. At 8500 Ft. we switch supercharger speed from Stage 1 to Stage 2 and at 26900 Ft. we switch the supercharger speed from Stage 2 to Stage 3.

If you go to Zeno's Warbird site you can download and view an Official Navy Training Film (free) on Flying the F4U-1 Corsair.

In the real F4U-1 the Blower speed is in the Neutral Position at Sea Level. At 8000 Ft. the Blower Speed is switched from Neutral to Low Blower Position and at 13,500 Ft. the Blower is switched from Low Blower to High Blower position. There are no other Blower settings.

Is the Supercharger settings in Pacific Fighters the equivalent of the Blower settings on the Real F4U-1?

And if this is true why is there such a disparity in the different altitudes at which the supercharger/blower gets changed from the game to reality?

Lastly if the Supercharger (game) is the equivalent of the Blower (reality) is this causing the F4U-1 flight model in the game to be underpowered from 13,900 Ft. to 26,900 because we don't switch to Supercharger Stage 3 at the correct altitude as the real aircraft did? In other words is the Horse Power for this altitude range lower than what it should really be? This could make a difference in an energy fight at those altitudes.

And notice that all speeds referred to in the film are in Knots Indicated Air Speed. Our gages in the game for the US Naval Aircraft are in MPH not KIAS. I know some aircraft in the game have speed indicators in KIAS of which the Hurricane IIb is one.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-)-MAILMAN-

@={=MUSKETEERS=>

ICDP
11-15-2006, 01:40 AM
For me the best alts to switch supercharger stages is 6,000ft (s2) and 17000ft (s2).

JG53Frankyboy
11-15-2006, 08:04 AM
Originally posted by ICDP:
For me the best alts to switch supercharger stages is 6,000ft (s2) and 17000ft (s2).

yep, the 2.shift altitude in the PF README for the F4U and F6F are wrong - much to high

F4U
2.600 Meter (8.500 Fuß) and 8.200 Meter (26.900 Fuß)

F6F
2.500 Meter (8.200 Fuß) and 8.100 Meter (26.570 Fuß)

after looking at the speed curves in IL2compare im using 5500-6000m to shift.

vocatx
11-15-2006, 05:48 PM
Actually, the indicated airspeed on USN aircraft IS in knots, not miles per hour. If you doubt it, turn on the speed bar, set it to knots, and compare it to the ASI in the plane. The speed bar reads only in units of ten, so if you are doing 148 knots, the speed bar will show 140.

As far as the supercharger is concerned, this IS what is referred to in many period writings a the "blower". Watch the guages in the cockpit. The manifold pressure is what is boosted by the blower. If you shift it too early you will see a decrease in MAP (Manifold Air Pressure). If you shift too late you will see the needle jump. You want to shift at a point where the needle either moves very little upward, or doesn't move at all.

Moreover, it seems that the loudest whining about aircraft performance on EITHER side comes from those who fly predominantly or only one side.

I rarely get the opportunity to fly red on ZvW, but I did last night and was astounded by the performance of both the Corsair Mk.1 (representing the F4U-1) as well as the Wildcat after hearing so many complaints about them. No, you can't turn with a Zero, but I out-ran Zeros anytime I needed to with ease, and could pull away from Ki61s in a dive or level flight. I got shot down on several occassions, but this was due to mistakes due to my unfarmiliarity with the aircaft that I made which put me in a bad position. Though the 61 does have the edge in acceleration from a co-energy state, the Corsair IS faster. I'm not even going to comment on the much greater amount of damage that most Allied planes can obsorb when compared to Japanese aircraft.

Anyone who thinks that their favorite plane(s) is (are) under-modeled, try flying for your usual opposition for a while. You might find it eye-opening.

Edit:

Original post stated Corsair Mk.1 was a stand-in for the F4U-1A. I meant F4U-1.

OMK_Hand
11-16-2006, 01:53 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MAILMAN------:
'In the real F4U-1 the Blower speed is in the Neutral Position at Sea Level. At 8000 Ft. the Blower Speed is switched from Neutral to Low Blower Position and at 13,500 Ft. the Blower is switched from Low Blower to High Blower position. There are no other Blower settings.

Is the Supercharger settings in Pacific Fighters the equivalent of the Blower settings on the Real F4U-1?'



In the F4U-I, Corsair I, II, III manual that Zeno includes on his Corsair DVD, the RECOMMENDED Blower settings are (at 2550 rpm, climb speed of 124 knotts I.A.S):

'From SL ? 7000? : 44? boost
Shift to next stage blower when boost falls to 41.5? at full throttle.'

(Maintaining the recommended boost on early U.S. aircraft means steadily opening the throttle as you climb, up to full throttle. i.e. 100%)
In the game flying the Corsair Mk.I, using the Smolensk map, the fall to 41.5? boost at full throttle occurs at around 9,300?.

'From 7,000? to 18,000? : 49.5? boost
Shift to final stage blower when boost falls to 47? at full throttle.'

In the game, the fall to 47? boost at full throttle occurs at around 18,600?.

'From 18,000? to 22,000? : 49.5? boost'

At 22,000? you?re at full throttle.

Not bad.

Changing gear in the blower involved reducing the throttle and rpm before changing up or down, to avoid possibly over revving the engine, then opening the throttle and rpm to the desired new settings.

I've just read a little book called 'P-40 Warhawk Aces of the CBI' by Carl Molesworth, and I'm staggered by the U.S. pilot combat reports. According to them, those Japanese planes burned...

MAILMAN------
11-25-2006, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by vocatx:
Actually, the indicated airspeed on USN aircraft IS in knots, not miles per hour. If you doubt it, turn on the speed bar, set it to knots, and compare it to the ASI in the plane. The speed bar reads only in units of ten, so if you are doing 148 knots, the speed bar will show 140.

First, I have done that and I disagree. I know the speed bar is in 10 degree increments. I alos see that it is not close to matching the KIAS, but is close to MPH. Secondly, I got it straight from Oleg a long time ago that the gages are in MPH, because at first I thought the were in KPH.


As far as the supercharger is concerned, this IS what is referred to in many period writings a the "blower". Watch the guages in the cockpit. The manifold pressure is what is boosted by the blower. If you shift it too early you will see a decrease in MAP (Manifold Air Pressure). If you shift too late you will see the needle jump. You want to shift at a point where the needle either moves very little upward, or doesn't move at all.

Again I know how it works. I was calling into question the game paramaters as set in the game manual for switching supercharger/blower positions. As a result does this affect whether the supercharger is working correctly in the flight model to maintain the rated horse power for the altitude for that blower position.[/QUOTE]


Moreover, it seems that the loudest whining about aircraft performance on EITHER side comes from those who fly predominantly or only one side.

"Whining" this comment gets overused as much as the phrase "cut and run". I pointed out two facts: The Pacific Fighters Game Manual states that the F4U-1 changes to Supercharger 3 / High Blower at 26,900 Ft. and the USN Training film states that at 13,500 Ft. you switch to High Blower / Supercharger 3. The question was about whether or not the Power (HP) rating was accurate in the game if we changed the Blower / Supercharger at a lower altitude than what the Pacific Fighters manual states. In other words we can see whether or not the manifold pressure changes when we shift to a higher blower / supercharger speed because this reflects the effect of compressing the air going into the cylinders to compensate for the thinner air as we climb, but by changing it at a lower altitude does the flight model of the game accuratley model the HP between 13,500 Ft and 24,600 Ft since the game calls for it to change at the higher altitude? The only person who can answer that with authority is Oleg or whoever actually worked on the flight model. A legitimate question in light of the fact that the fuel gage on the F4U-1D and Corsair IV does not indicate correctly when taking a full fuel load and hasn't since the game's inception even with repeated emails to the designated site for those bugs. We also have no working fuel gage in the P-40E, just a warning light that we are low on fuel.


I rarely get the opportunity to fly red on ZvW, but I did last night and was astounded by the performance of both the Corsair Mk.1 (representing the F4U-1) as well as the Wildcat after hearing so many complaints about them. No, you can't turn with a Zero, but I out-ran Zeros anytime I needed to with ease, and could pull away from Ki61s in a dive or level flight. I got shot down on several occassions, but this was due to mistakes due to my unfarmiliarity with the aircaft that I made which put me in a bad position. Though the 61 does have the edge in acceleration from a co-energy state, the Corsair IS faster. I'm not even going to comment on the much greater amount of damage that most Allied planes can obsorb when compared to Japanese aircraft.

The Wildcat in the game is faster than the A6M2 / A6M2-21 and that is wrong and I fly the Wildcat on ZvW all the time. The Wildcat should never be able to out run a Zero in level flight, period. The Wildcat should only out distance and out accelerate a Zero in a dive and maybe at altitudes above 18,000 Feet. So they got it wrong.

The actual performance of the two aircraft is:

<span class="ev_code_RED">F4F-4</span>

274 MPH @ Sea Level
320 MPH @ 18,800 Ft.

<span class="ev_code_BLUE">A6M2 / A6M2-21</span>

282 MPH @ Sea Level
331 @ 14,930 Ft.


Anyone who thinks that their favorite plane(s) is (are) under-modeled, try flying for your usual opposition for a while. You might find it eye-opening.

Edit:

Original post stated Corsair Mk.1 was a stand-in for the F4U-1A. I meant F4U-1.

A true statement. My eyes are opened every time I get in the cockpit of a KI-84 at high altitude. It was a dog at high altitude but in this game it is the equal to the P-51 and the F4U in performance above 20,000 Ft.



Again this THREAD was originally about switching from the Corsair I to the F4U-1 as the representive of this version of the Corsair in the game. Later there was a question about the supercharger / blower operation being so radically different between reaity and what is said in the game manual and if it affected the panes performance at the altitude range in question. How it got to whining about aircraft performances boggles my mind.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-)-MAILMAN-

@={=MUSKETEERS=>

MAILMAN------
11-25-2006, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by OMK_Hand:
quote:
I've just read a little book called 'P-40 Warhawk Aces of the CBI' by Carl Molesworth, and I'm staggered by the U.S. pilot combat reports. According to them, those Japanese planes burned...

I have the book and also "Tomahawk and Kittyhawk Aces of the RAF and Commonwealth" by Andrew Thomas.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-)-MAILMAN-

@={=MUSKETEERS=>

Nimits
12-07-2006, 10:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by vocatx:
Actually, the indicated airspeed on USN aircraft IS in knots, not miles per hour. If you doubt it, turn on the speed bar, set it to knots, and compare it to the ASI in the plane. The speed bar reads only in units of ten, so if you are doing 148 knots, the speed bar will show 140.


First, I have done that and I disagree. I know the speed bar is in 10 degree increments. I alos see that it is not close to matching the KIAS, but is close to MPH. Secondly, I got it straight from Oleg a long time ago that the gages are in MPH, because at first I thought the were in KPH.

I just took the Corsair Mk I up for the a spin. The speedbar speed lagged about 5-10 knots behind the instrument panal ASI in KIAS mode, but was a minimum of 20 mph fast in the MPH mode, so I conclude that the Corsair Mk I ASI is, indeed, indicating in knots as it should.

KIMURA
12-08-2006, 03:56 AM
BTW correction of the Bird Cage Corsair. It would be fine to cancel the Water Injection in the F4U-1 / Corsair Mk.I. Both variants were fitted with the R-2800-8. That engine had no water injection. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/Ki1.jpg

stansdds
12-08-2006, 04:27 AM
Originally posted by KIMURA:
BTW correction of the Bird Cage Corsair. It would be fine to cancel the Water Injection in the F4U-1 / Corsair Mk.I. Both variants were fitted with the R-2800-8. That engine had no water injection. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

It should not have the twin pylons of the -1C/-1D either and as far as I know, no Corsair I or F4U-1 carried bombs on the centerline hardpoint as this hardpoint was originally intended for a 178 gallon drop tank.

The last production batches of the -1A introduced water injection engines (P&W R-2800-8W). The centerline hardpoint of -1A's were fitted with a bomb rack by VMF-222 and VF-17 in early 1944.

Care to talk about the cockpit inaccuracies in the Corsair I cockpit?

I could go on, and have done so before, but none of these issues are going to be fixed.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

When you know as much as I do, you become a danger only to yourself. -Stans, 2006

S_p_l_a_s_h_1
12-08-2006, 06:11 PM
I think MAILMAN------ has a fair request, one that appears doable in a final patch.

All he's asking is for a USMC default skin when you choose USMC as the 'Air Force,' right? That would seem to be little more than a coding change. The game already provides this feature, because a nation-specific-skin option is available on most other planes. [With markings "off", try selecting RNZAF as the country for a Corsair Mk.I. Notice the skin is different from the RN one. These aren't simply different .tga markings ... these are different versions of the skin with markings painted on them].

So wouldn't the fix be to supply a default US-marked skin to show on the Corsair Mk.I when a US branch of service is selected as the country? -- rather than the unmarked British cammo we get now.

Will it be done? Doubt it. As mentioned, many other obvious skin/markings gaffes have been allowed to remain since Day 1 despite repeated requests for changes. But it's nice to dream.

heywooood
12-08-2006, 08:53 PM
man-law???

man-law! put it in the 4.08 please.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v250/heywooood/afewofTheFew-1.jpg

A few of The Few

stansdds
12-09-2006, 07:24 AM
Man-law!!!!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I guess I'd be happy if we had the F4U-1, even with its warts. The early war U.S. insignia thing is just plain silly and looks like it was a quick and cheap work around to creating a correct insignia. The late war U.S. insignias are better, but has anyone looked at the B-29? So much effort and detail went into that model and they put the wing insignias in the wrong places. Insignias should appear on the upper side of the left wing and the bottom of the right wing, but the B-29 has them in the opposite positions. This has never been addressed either. What it boils down to is that if it's a Pacific theater issue, it's not going to be fixed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

When you know as much as I do, you become a danger only to yourself. -Stans, 2006

S_p_l_a_s_h_1
12-09-2006, 09:07 PM
Just one more reason this is a reasonable request:
Many planes have multiple skins depending on the air force chosen. The Bf109-G2 has four axis default skins, for example. Not counting the winter versions of each.

BigKahuna_GS
12-12-2006, 01:28 PM
ICDP-Kahuna you seem like a very knowledgable guy and you do present a lot of data to back up your claims. Unfortunately the devs will never accept the chart you keep posting as valid, as it is from non standard F4U1's. If the F4U1 is wrong I want it fixed, I fly it very regularly online and love it to bits despite the yaw bugs.

With regards to your attained SL speed of 345mph I find that a very low speed, I can get 355-357mph at SL out of it. According to official documented USN tests that is only 4-2 mph slower than a typical F4U1 in clean condition. What settings and map are you using?
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ______________________


Hya ICDP,
I am familiar with testing and I am using 100% fuel on the crimea map. Corsair performance seems to be lumped sum together. I am getting pretty much the same speeds as you for all models of Corsair at sea level. Actualy If you look at the chart again the F4U-1A was hitting 366mph in "standard format" at 60"Hg. It was the F4U-1 model that was over boosted to 65"Hg. I am not asking for the overboosted speed, but 366mph is representative of wartime Corsair models. There is not a whole lot of difference between these 2 models except the canopy changes. Since my dad flew this plane and relayed his experiences with it, it was quite easy for the pilot to control boost levels and max speeds. So for example if you found yourself on the deck being chased by bandits that were hot on your tail, overboosting the engine to 65" Hg and more would be perfectly acceptable to the alternative of getting shot down. The pilots had complete confidence in the ruggedness of the P&W R2800 to bring them home even if it was pushed beyond it's normal operating limits for brief periods during combat.

This website has some great official US Navy flight test results from the Navy's Historical Center.

http://us.geocities.com/slakergmb/id3.htm

I like the Corsair Mark I, it's a fun plane to fly. I just think the speeds & take off with loadout power is off according to Navy flgiht tests.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://airplanesandmore.com/prodimages/largeSting%20of%20the%20Yellow%20Jackets.jpg
The Yo-Yo is very difficult to explain. It was first perfected by the well-known Chinese fighter pilot Yo-Yo Noritake. He also found it difficult to explain, being quite devoid of English.
? Squadron Leader K. G. Holland, RAF.


It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed.

? USAF Manual

Antoninus
01-21-2007, 08:59 AM
Since new default skins for many planes are currently included for the next patch this is maybe a good oportunity to bump the plea for a US navy and marine corps default skin for the Corsair Mk. 1