PDA

View Full Version : Is the Tempest modelled wrong?



ReligiousZealot
02-03-2006, 12:06 PM
I was browsing the screenshots section having seen the news post regarding the new patch, and I came across this screenshot:
http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/Tempest_MKV_cockpit_021.jpg

Upon first glance, that looks as if the Tempest is going have 8 20mm cannons, but I am assuming that those are rocket mounts and not cannons. Hopefully we won't have a Red plane zooming around with 8 cannons, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

It's sort of hard to see, but I'm guessing they are rocket mounts just from this pic: http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/Tempest_MKV_cockpit_041.jpg

Aside from that minor concern, WHOOPIE! Now I must eagerly await the release http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ReligiousZealot
02-03-2006, 12:06 PM
I was browsing the screenshots section having seen the news post regarding the new patch, and I came across this screenshot:
http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/Tempest_MKV_cockpit_021.jpg

Upon first glance, that looks as if the Tempest is going have 8 20mm cannons, but I am assuming that those are rocket mounts and not cannons. Hopefully we won't have a Red plane zooming around with 8 cannons, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

It's sort of hard to see, but I'm guessing they are rocket mounts just from this pic: http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/Tempest_MKV_cockpit_041.jpg

Aside from that minor concern, WHOOPIE! Now I must eagerly await the release http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ATLAS_DEATH
02-03-2006, 12:45 PM
Yes they are for rockets...But don't worry.. you're not the first to ask this.. there are too many to count.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

UncleReiben
02-03-2006, 02:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ATLAS_DEATH:
Yes they are for rockets...But don't worry.. you're not the first to ask this.. there are too many to count.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Personally I don't see how the mistake is made to begin with.

hobnail
02-03-2006, 02:13 PM
Also why is the gunsight in the Bf109 off centre?

tigertalon
02-03-2006, 02:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hobnail:
Also why is the gunsight in the Bf109 off centre? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To be adjusted for pilots right eye.

jds1978
02-03-2006, 02:23 PM
could you imagine the can of whoop @ss 8 X .20mm cannons would unleash?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Corsair_Fanatic
02-03-2006, 02:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jds1978:
could you imagine the can of whoop @ss 8 X .20mm cannons would unleash?!?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if it had been put into production, the XP-62 (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p62.htm) would have been fitted with 8x20mm cannon. I'd be happy with something with 4 or 6 with a decent ammo supply myself, but thats just me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

ATLAS_DEATH
02-03-2006, 02:49 PM
Yes but you'd probably have 5-10 rounds for each gun.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif err... cannon

berg417448
02-03-2006, 02:51 PM
Even more unusual...the XP-72 was supposed to be armed with four 37mm cannon.

Corsair_Fanatic
02-03-2006, 03:06 PM
Well, the XP-72 was supposed to be used to intercept V-1 buzz bombs. Its not like they can dodge so well, so I guess they didnt care about the low rate of fire of the 37mm guns so much. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VW-IceFire
02-03-2006, 05:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Corsair_Fanatic:
Well, the XP-72 was supposed to be used to intercept V-1 buzz bombs. Its not like they can dodge so well, so I guess they didnt care about the low rate of fire of the 37mm guns so much. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Doesn't make much sense really....I think you'd rather have the .50cals or 20mm than a 37mm. You want something rapid fire that puts out alot of bullets with a good trajectory to take down a V-1 because you want to be able to:

1) Reliably hit the target

2) Hit the target from range

The Hispano 20mm is ideal for this.

Charos
02-03-2006, 07:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hobnail:
Also why is the gunsight in the Bf109 off centre? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

playing with fire again?

Put the matches down Hob - you'll burn your fingies. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Corsair_Fanatic
02-03-2006, 08:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:

The Hispano 20mm is ideal for this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont disagree. The 37mm never made alot of sense to me. I was just saying that might have been their reasoning. Damned shame we didnt use 20mm hispanos on more aircraft. 20mm armed mustangs and thunderbolts would be nifty to see. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VW-IceFire
02-03-2006, 09:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Corsair_Fanatic:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:

The Hispano 20mm is ideal for this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dont disagree. The 37mm never made alot of sense to me. I was just saying that might have been their reasoning. Damned shame we didnt use 20mm hispanos on more aircraft. 20mm armed mustangs and thunderbolts would be nifty to see. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah strange choice of armament....I think maybe it was more meant to blast bombers from the sky but instead was developed towards intercepting the V-1's instead. But it sounds like it was a pipedream at Republic anyways. VERY cool looking tho...sort of P-47 like but sleaker http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Grey_Mouser67
02-03-2006, 09:24 PM
RAF...maybe US...took out the two inboard M2 Brownings out of their Hellcats and replaced them with Hispano's...wouldn't that be a cool addition to our game! Many F6F-5's were configured this way including the ones that flew on the Sharnhorst raid IIRC....

I don't think there is any visual differences in the aircraft either so it would be very easy for Oleg to make this change...so how bout it Oleg???

D-Mentier
02-04-2006, 03:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I don't think there is any visual differences in the aircraft either so it would be very easy for Oleg to make this change...so how bout it Oleg??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sure there is - theres one less hole.

Corsair_Fanatic
02-04-2006, 08:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think there is any visual differences in the aircraft either so it would be very easy for Oleg to make this change...so how bout it Oleg??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I guess that would depend on if they were using the short barreled hispanos or not. But if they wont put in a F4U-4, somehow I doubt we'll be seeing Hellcat variants http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. I'm glad we're finally getting a flyable Tempest, tho. I really need to get myself more flying time. The way real life keeps intruding, I'm never going to improve my skills any.

VW-IceFire
02-04-2006, 08:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Corsair_Fanatic:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't think there is any visual differences in the aircraft either so it would be very easy for Oleg to make this change...so how bout it Oleg??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I guess that would depend on if they were using the short barreled hispanos or not. But if they wont put in a F4U-4, somehow I doubt we'll be seeing Hellcat variants http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. I'm glad we're finally getting a flyable Tempest, tho. I really need to get myself more flying time. The way real life keeps intruding, I'm never going to improve my skills any. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think we're going to find that the Tempest in many ways behaves like a Corsair in terms of FM. Both are somewhat similar in size, weight, and power with similarly loaded wings and engine horsepower. Not indentical by any means but I think this would be a fair comparison. Also if you place the AI Tempest and F4U-1C beside each other you can get a sense that the cannons are roughly mounted in the same location so gunnery will be very similar.

I can't see a modification to the Hellcat. Its somewhat underused anyways. I like it but its not flown very often.

AFJ_Locust
02-04-2006, 09:31 AM
People would fly the hellcat if it could shoot anything down.

IMO .50 cal bullets are borked in this sim......

and now with all this bobeling about the skies like a ship on water you cant aim them long enough to kill anything f6f is a nice ac be sure 50 sux tho !!!!!!!!!

VF2_Sarge
02-04-2006, 10:33 AM
Good post Locust....But that really sucks for me since thats about all that I fly. Just have to learn to deal with it I guess. But I have found that working with Gun Coverage helps a little.

Cheers

Aaron_GT
02-04-2006, 02:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">could you imagine the can of whoop @ss 8 X .20mm cannons would unleash?!?! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

An Airspeed project from about might have been projected to have 6 20mm cannon per wing, but it might have been 6 total. Several RAF specifications in WW2 called for 6 20mm cannon aircraft, and a few existing types used were very nearly fitted with 6 20mm cannon - e.g. Typhoon, Spitfire, and Meteor. One thing I never understood, though, was why not put more cannon in the Mosquito FB.VI, or just remove those .303s.

vanjast
02-04-2006, 04:17 PM
Too much cannon, etc in the plane would..

- make it fly backwards, like a Storch.
- tear the plane apart.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

vanjast
02-04-2006, 04:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
People would fly the hellcat if it could shoot anything down.

IMO .50 cal bullets are borked in this sim......

and now with all this bobeling about the skies like a ship on water you cant aim them long enough to kill anything f6f is a nice ac be sure 50 sux tho !!!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your forgetting that when the Hellcat arrived the allies held the advantage in airpower, and TACTICS of the pilots, is what made it a formiddable weapons platform.

The old lesson of "if alone and you see a zero, you are outnumbered, run like hell" still applied.

'Bobeling' might be a symtom of your joytick, or settings. Another key issue with flying is "let the plane fly itself', don't push it around. Trust me once 'Karma' sets in, all will be well. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

VW-IceFire
02-04-2006, 05:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vanjast:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
People would fly the hellcat if it could shoot anything down.

IMO .50 cal bullets are borked in this sim......

and now with all this bobeling about the skies like a ship on water you cant aim them long enough to kill anything f6f is a nice ac be sure 50 sux tho !!!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your forgetting that when the Hellcat arrived the allies held the advantage in airpower, and TACTICS of the pilots, is what made it a formiddable weapons platform.

The old lesson of "if alone and you see a zero, you are outnumbered, run like hell" still applied.

'Bobeling' might be a symtom of your joytick, or settings. Another key issue with flying is "let the plane fly itself', don't push it around. Trust me once 'Karma' sets in, all will be well. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The bobbing is a legitimate problem that is not fixable by user configuration. I have tried six ways from sunday and aircraft like the Hellcat wobble about on their own accord.

The .50cal bullets on the other hand lay down the smackdown on Zero's with no problem.

ATLAS_DEATH
02-04-2006, 09:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The .50cal bullets on the other hand lay down the smackdown on Zero's with no problem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was gonna say that.. I'm no 'ace' but a quick snap shot and down she went... it seems that from any other angle then the rear of the plane.. the .50 can be pretty good.
I didn't notice the Hellcat wobbling about... just use smooth inputs and don't try to make it do back flips and cartwheels http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

berg417448
02-04-2006, 09:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ATLAS_DEATH:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The .50cal bullets on the other hand lay down the smackdown on Zero's with no problem. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was gonna say that.. I'm no 'ace' but a quick snap shot and down she went... it seems that from any other angle then the rear of the plane.. the .50 can be pretty good.
I didn't notice the Hellcat wobbling about... just use smooth inputs and don't try to make it do back flips and cartwheels http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Believe me, smooth inputs have nothing to do with it if your system is one afflicted with the "wobbles". I've tried all of the suggested fixes and none have worked for me. Just be glad you don't have the problem.

Unknown-Pilot
02-04-2006, 09:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vanjast:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AFJ_Locust:
People would fly the hellcat if it could shoot anything down.

IMO .50 cal bullets are borked in this sim......

and now with all this bobeling about the skies like a ship on water you cant aim them long enough to kill anything f6f is a nice ac be sure 50 sux tho !!!!!!!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your forgetting that when the Hellcat arrived the allies held the advantage in airpower, and TACTICS of the pilots, is what made it a formiddable weapons platform.

The old lesson of "if alone and you see a zero, you are outnumbered, run like hell" still applied.

'Bobeling' might be a symtom of your joytick, or settings. Another key issue with flying is "let the plane fly itself', don't push it around. Trust me once 'Karma' sets in, all will be well. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Say what?

The Hellcat is the plane that TURNED the tide of the war, and GAINED the allies the aerial advantage. The Wildcat mearly held the line. The Hellcat did the job, and the late, over priced, overbudget, bent wing, hose nosed, ensign eliminator got all the glory workin clean-up detail.

Most, if not all, of the Japanese Aces feared and respected the Hellcat. The reason was that it would stay and fight. The Corsair could only hit and run. At 250mph, the Hellcat held all the cards over the Zero. And it could hang with it in a turn down to 180mph (of course it would be suicide to do so 99.9999% of the time because you couldn't recover quickly enough once you got that slow).

But, I have to sadly agree that we won't see the Hellcat variants. It's been borked since the first patch (only having been right in PF 1.0 - in terms of FM), took forever to get the pi$$ stains of the windshield, rather conveniently has less effective (and harder to use) guns than the UFOrsair, has worse visibility over the nose than the UFOrsair (now - you wanna talk plan effed up?!), breaks too easily in landings (real thing withstood a 21' static drop on to it's gear and didn't break - was a test done at the request of the Navy), and most glaringly (visually at least) doesn't have anything close to an accurate cockpit. What we have is an amalgamation of the -3 and -5 'pits that isn't accurate to either one. Not even close.

Aaron_GT
02-05-2006, 03:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">UFOrsair, has worse visibility over the nose than the UFOrsair (now - you wanna talk plan effed up?!), </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


The Corsair SHOULD have good visibility over the nose EXCEPT when landing. It is the length of the nose and the landing attitude that is the issue, but in standard flight, the Corsair should have good visibility.

WOLFMondo
02-05-2006, 04:45 AM
I'd fly the Hellcat more if it wasn't for one thing, its top speeds, which are correct. Its so damn slow.

Unknown-Pilot
02-05-2006, 10:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aaron_GT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">UFOrsair, has worse visibility over the nose than the UFOrsair (now - you wanna talk plan effed up?!), </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


The Corsair SHOULD have good visibility over the nose EXCEPT when landing. It is the length of the nose and the landing attitude that is the issue, but in standard flight, the Corsair should have good visibility. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No.

That mile long nose prevents you from seeing forward and down. This is what makes it so damn hard to land (the real thing, not this joke we have that was made to appease the fanbois). That ALSO makes deflection shooting much more difficult - for the exact same reason.

In BOTH cases, what we have simply could not BE more wrong.