PDA

View Full Version : When are we geting the P-47



XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 02:53 PM
Any one know when we will see the actual P-47.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 02:53 PM
Any one know when we will see the actual P-47.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 02:57 PM
Where have you been?

I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 02:57 PM
lol

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 03:01 PM
lol very very good question.!
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif (but is's soo true)

<CENTER>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p837.jpg
<CENTER>><FONT COLOR="blue">Please visit the 310thVF/BS Online at our NEW web site @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER>A proud member Squadron of IL-2 vUSAAF
<CENTER>310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW">
Proud Sponsor of IL-2 Hangar Forums
<CENTER> Visit the Hangar at:
http://srm.racesimcentral.com/il2.shtml
http://www.brunching.com/images/hellweather.gif (http://www.brunching.com/toys/hellweather.html)
<FONT COLOR="Green">Slainte Mhath- Good Health to you!

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 03:04 PM
Maple_Tiger wrote:
- Any one know when we will see the actual P-47.
-
-



I think he means an non Gelded 47. The rough an tumble fighter that it was in WW2. The one that took on the best of the LW and pushed them back to the Rhine in the air. The one that can actualy out dive anything roll like it was suppose to, and use its energy to get back up. The one that has guns that saw off the wing of a 190 in one 3 second burst. That one.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid79/p9141f290fa1c1c59a2dc382c77af21f3/fb1a8321.jpg


Lead Whiner for the P-47D-40, M and N and Hvars

Hawgdog
10-06-2003, 03:05 PM
Maple_Tiger wrote:
- Any one know when we will see the actual P-47.
-
-

tweested senior, but very truuuuue

<center></script>A better game?
http://home.surewest.net/michaellb/sniper2.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 03:42 PM
Sniper762x51 wrote:
-
- Maple_Tiger wrote:
-- Any one know when we will see the actual P-47.
--
--
-
-
-
- I think he means an non Gelded 47. The rough an
- tumble fighter that it was in WW2. The one that took
- on the best of the LW and pushed them back to the
- Rhine in the air. The one that can actualy out dive
- anything roll like it was suppose to, and use its
- energy to get back up. The one that has guns that
- saw off the wing of a 190 in one 3 second burst.
- That one.
-

What Hollywood propaganda movie have you been watching?

<center>
---------------------------------------
Fokker G.I
http://www.defensie.nl:30280/home/pictures/7370.jpg
http://www.uvika.dn.ua/av/PLANE/HOLLAND/FOKKER_G-1/Fokker_G-1b_03a-n.jpg
</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:11 PM
Red, it's called historical documentation. Try it sometime. It's fascinating. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:14 PM
DDT have you seen REAL P-47 fly? If you did, please don`t tell me you were impressed. Comparing to pony it`s a flying ...umm a house?

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:17 PM
Red_Storm wrote:

- What Hollywood propaganda movie have you been
- watching?


The one that was specifically made to pi$$ off Europeans who think that the Fokker G.I was actually used for much more than trainers and target tugs after the Luftwaffe captured those that they had not destroyed already.

That one.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:20 PM
no one has actually flown a p 47 in here im guessing? including me.

none of us can criticise the FM without evidence.

flying online as 25th_Inmate



http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/inmate.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:23 PM
Oleg has already adjusted the P-47 roll rate. Give him more figures to work with showing that it is still not correct and I'm sure he will adjust it again.

What do you expect a 12,000 pound a/c to fly like? It's not a Spitfire! Figure it out!



Message Edited on 10/06/0307:29AM by faustnik

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:23 PM
LilHorse wrote:
-
- Red_Storm wrote:
-
-- What Hollywood propaganda movie have you been
-- watching?
-
-
- The one that was specifically made to pi$$ off
- Europeans who think that the Fokker G.I was actually
- used for much more than trainers and target tugs
- after the Luftwaffe captured those that they had not
- destroyed already.
-
- That one.
-

Uh, that movie isn't Pi$$ing me off really. But really, I Always assumed that the P-51 did take the best of the LW and pushed it far back over the rhine (or however you've said it)

The P-47's main role, EVENTUALLY, was ground attack. Yes?


1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php)

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:30 PM
It´s all about skill and practise. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_113_1064841282.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 04:56 PM
Platypus_1.JaVA wrote:
But
- really, I Always assumed that the P-51 did take the
- best of the LW and pushed it far back over the rhine
- (or however you've said it)
-
- The P-47's main role, EVENTUALLY, was ground attack.
- Yes?

Actually, it's main role was that of a high altitude escort fighter. It was only later when it was supplanted in that role by the P-51 that it showed itself to be a great ground pounder.

It's been argued here (and I think quite convincingly) that much of the tough work in the high alt. escort area was already done by the time the P-51s arrived on the scene. That the guys flying the Jugs had already dealt with the best that the LW had to send up.

Mustangs replaced the Jugs for two major reasons: they had a longer range on internal fuel and they were much cheaper to manufacture than the P-47 (by more that half). The P-51 had a slight performance edge in speed and more than that in manuverability at lower altitudes. But way high up the Jug still beat it power-wise. And the Jug was surprisingly nimble compared to other a/c at very high altitudes because it could still produce it's sea level hp up there when other a/c were wallowing about underpowered.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 05:04 PM
The data was already provided to Oleg on the rates of roll for the P-47. While the D-10 and the D-22 seem to roll and behave much better than previously...the D-27 seems like it has not been touched.

Add this to the fact that .50 cals still do not work (and I'm becoming incrasingly convinced that the spread on the .50 cals is MUCH bigger than any other gun in the game meaning that even precisely tuned convergence and well aimed shots do not cause the damage they would otherwise do).

I agree with the vast majority that the P-47 is still not performing like it should. Although its become much better in the energy fighter arena like it should (nobody is asking for a P-47 that behaves like a Yak-3) it still has problems. Its just like the issues with Yak's, La's, Bf 109's, and the FW 190's. All of those and more have flight modeling issues...the impetus for change is there, through re-evaluation of the stats, through checking the stats versus the historical records and then cross corellating them to the game engine itself.

Oleg knows there are issues...I sincerely hope he makes further efforts to try and fix the problems. They are there, its a matter of how much and when.

Again, data has been provided for P-47 roll rates. Two of the three versions appear to have been largely fixed...the D-27 still has problems.

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 05:49 PM
DDT truly is a dedicated FB P-47 pilot

just think how good he could do with an accuratly modeled 47 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<center>http://www.blitzpigs.com/john/BP-johann-9-4-03.gif <center>

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 06:02 PM
I am sure he could do fine with either J, if he`ll find his pray /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

Buzz_25th
10-06-2003, 06:07 PM
I don't think the P-47 is that bad now. A little more roll rate is not going to turn it into a killer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25th_Buzz
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/sigs/buzz.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 06:14 PM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- I am sure he could do fine with either J, if he`ll
- find his pray /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



uhhhhh, slammin DDT

well he does fly the earlier model and you cant see sh*t out of those cockpits /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif witch I think is very accuratly modeled by the way

thats my only salvation for shootin him down, if he misses me on the first pass and looses sight of me, I can pepper him with my 109

<center>http://www.blitzpigs.com/john/BP-johann-9-4-03.gif <center>

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 06:49 PM
I'm still waiting for 5" HVARS and a P-47M...

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:01 PM
Ivan, you are among those that think the real thing sucked? Historical record shows that it didn't in comparison to it's contemporaries. So, if it sucked, so did everything else. Or the enemy pilots really sucked ***, which I think we can agree was not the case until the very end.

Faust, as was pointed out, Oleg was given data about the -27. You know, the one that wasn't touched?

It needs roll improvement to bring it more inline with accuracy, but the whole series also needs less dispersion on the gun spread, better E retention and better dive acceleration (which might actually be linked - a 2-fer, effectively), and better climb on the -22 and -27 (-10 is about right). That's for starters. If we get that, then we can start looking into the "little" issue of the turbo not working (depsite official statements to the contrary - either it's not working, or *every* other plane is *seriously* over modeled over 4Km), the lack of a 10,000's indicator on the altimeter, and reduction of that center bar (It wasn't that bad on the real thing Johann. Pilots complained about rear vis, that is what brought about the bubble top, not front vis).

Ivan, I take it "pray" was an intentional "misspelling"? Funny. Actually, I tend to do quite well......all things considered. I lone wolf and still get several kills, inspite of the fact that the netcode sucks, and that the plane is handicapped in so many ways that it shouldn't be. If I had something accurately modeled I would, as Johann suggested, do even better. And even better still if I had an M. But that won't happen, and it's pretty apparent as to why, but, I'll get lynched if I say it. lol

Johann, you might pepper me with your 109 after I over shoot, only if there aren't any clouds nearby. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:01 PM
While top speed and the D-27 still need alot of tweaking, the D-10 and 22 are very nice and quite realistic. To note that the top speed thing rather affects all a/c of FB, let's just hope that planes will fly faster than 300 Mph in the next sim./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I must say that the Jug we have in this game is light years ahead of any other game ever. The only other sim that had a Jug that made me smile was Janes. This game makes my giggle and do back flips whenever I fly the Jug. Now let's see the Mustang, I need my Pony fix and hurry. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
~S!
Eagle
CO 361st vFG

<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center> <center> www.361stvfg.com</center> (http://www.361stvfg.com</center>)
<center>
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1003.jpg

</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:09 PM
The reason I use the -10 is because the -22 and -27 don't climb like they should, and the -27 doesn't roll like it should.

According to IL2Compare, the -10 and -22 actually have the same FM. So I choose the -10 due to the lack of pylons. Think it looks better and am hoping (cause I can't prove it) it has less drag modeled.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:19 PM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:-
- Faust, as was pointed out, Oleg was given data about
- the -27. You know, the one that wasn't touched?
-
-

All I've been flying online is the D-10. I didn't realize that the D-27 had not been changed at all. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Maybe it will be adjusted in 1.2.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:27 PM
I give up. I just can't convince any of you guys that the P-47 is a very good fighter in FB.

Dammit, someone get me a P-38. I'm tired of hanging out with these guys!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:37 PM
Koro, "good" isn't the issue. Being successful isn't the issue. I noticed last time this came up you and Ivan tried to hold up some dude racking up kills as proof of something. It's not. It's irrelevant.

You are correct, the -10 is good in FB. The -22 as well. However, they all have problems that need to be addressed, because being good doesn't mean being accurate. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:43 PM
Yes DDT, but thats the point!

You're saying its not accurate BECAUSE ITS NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

I'm saying it IS good enough!

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:47 PM
LilHorse wrote:

- It's been argued here (and I think quite
- convincingly) that much of the tough work in the
- high alt. escort area was already done by the time
- the P-51s arrived on the scene. That the guys flying
- the Jugs had already dealt with the best that the LW
- had to send up.

Its been said that the war started in 1939 and the Luftwaffe had been fighting continuously for 4 years before the Amis started to present themselves in ernest in 1943.

Perhaps the P-47 took on a stronger Jagdwaffe than the Mustang, but what about those Spitfires, Yaks and Morane-Saulniers before them?

Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

Message Edited on 10/06/0308:48PM by rhorta

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 07:50 PM
DDT By all means i am no one of those who thinks that P-47 was crap. It just doesn`t add in my head...all this data, numbers and ratios...and then seeing perform in the real life...i donno mate. Makes me sceptical. Needless to say that in the airshow darn thing didn`t even have ammo and probably not even full tank of gas. Those are just my observations, maybe rather sceptical /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

- Ivan, I take it "pray" was an intentional
- "misspelling"? Funny. Actually, I tend to do quite
- well......all things considered. I lone wolf and
- still get several kills, inspite of the fact that
- the netcode sucks, and that the plane is handicapped
- in so many ways that it shouldn't be. If I had
- something accurately modeled I would, as Johann
- suggested, do even better. And even better still if
- I had an M. But that won't happen, and it's pretty
- apparent as to why, but, I'll get lynched if I say
- it. lol
-

That was a joke silly /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif You know how you always get on my case for no externals or very limited icons and having difficulty to spot your targets... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 08:07 PM
I can see where people do get frustrated with the Jug in a DF server. It takes time to climb to 5K meters to set up a good run. It's also not always convenient to get a wingie. Without these two items (altitude and a wingman) the P-47 is going to be tough.

I've tried to fly the Jug on Korolov's wing in your DF server Ivan and we did quite well, even without voice comms. Flying against Korolov, when he had no wing, I could easily identify the Jug's weaknesses. (I'm using Korolov as an example here because he has a handle on flying the Jug)

The lone pilot joining a DF server is going to have a very negative impression of the Jug. In a proper COOP, there are very few situations that the Jug flight will not excel in.

The other issue is that many P-47 pilots have been flying Soviet a/c before the Jug. The same tactics are not going to work. FB 1.0 and IL-2 1.2 Fw 190 pilots should be very at home in any P-47.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 08:59 PM
I was a 109, then 190, then 109 again pilot before picking up the P-47 after the D-10 had been fixed.

In all honesty the issue isn't based on context or success for me. It's based on the damn thing not doing what it should. (or not having the vis it should, in the razorback's case)

Koro, the -22 and -27 are not "good enough" because they are not as accurate as is possible under the current limitations of the interface (the PC). Other planes are closer, and the changes that I suggested would being it far closer to that goal.

Ivan, half the time I fly around forever on your server all by myself. I don't know how it happens. For some reason, on Johann's, El's, and Gemini's server, even on forgottenserver, the fight is easier to find. I'm not knocking you, just commenting on my observations. I do like externals because it helps pass the time on long, lonely flights. I've gotten used to being trapped inside though, it's no biggie. I would like to see longer range icons though. Well...check that, the triangle thingy is what I'd like to see longer range really. Loss of that doesn't seem to deter anyone else. So might as well put it back since it only hinders me. lol /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Could be my 17" monitor at 1024x768. I imagine everyone else is on 19s by now.

Also, I know that the human tendency is "seein' is beleivin'" but, that's not really a good thing to go by anymore. "Looks can be decieving" came about for a reason y'know. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif Seriously though, there are so many questions - what was the condition of that plane, what was it's history, who were the owners and how paranoid about it were they, who was the pilot and how good was he, what were the regulations of the organization that put the show together.... those are just off the top of my head. Any number of reasons would have prevented that from showing much of what it could do.

We do have one person here, a Luckyboy (his username), that claims to have flown a real P-47 (and Mustang and Corsair). He says the real deal was far more potent than what we have in FB. Now, take that for what you will, it doesn't necessarily mean a damn thing, but, thought I'd toss it out there anyway.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 09:18 PM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-
- We do have one person here, a Luckyboy (his
- username), that claims to have flown a real P-47
- (and Mustang and Corsair). He says the real deal was
- far more potent than what we have in FB. Now, take
- that for what you will, it doesn't necessarily mean
- a damn thing, but, thought I'd toss it out there
- anyway.


His opinion is the most wieghty of any in here...it carries more validity than all the charts, graphs and specs in the world...... although I must admit from other pilot accounts I have read the real Jug was more lethal and more agile than what we have here still what we have here can do the job in the rignt hands.





<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 09:26 PM
Sniper762x51 wrote:
-
- I think he means an non Gelded 47. The rough an
- tumble fighter that it was in WW2. The one that took
- on the best of the LW and pushed them back to the
- Rhine in the air. The one that can actualy out dive
- anything roll like it was suppose to, and use its
- energy to get back up. The one that has guns that
- saw off the wing of a 190 in one 3 second burst.
- That one.

oooh, youre talking about the one that could kill tigers with its guns?

no, i dont think you'll ever get it.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 09:37 PM
DeBaer.534 wrote:
-
--oooh, youre talking about the one that could kill
- tigers with its guns?
- no, I dont think you'll ever get it.


Never mentioned tiger tanks, guess u can't read? have seen the gun camera film of a 47 just doing what I said. It is known that 50's can't take out heavy armor. Beat up a Panzer III yes, an aircraft wing, definately. But not w/ the shotgun spread given them in FB.


http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid79/p9141f290fa1c1c59a2dc382c77af21f3/fb1a8321.jpg


Lead Whiner for the P-47D-40, M and N and Hvars

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 09:59 PM
Bearcat99 wrote:
-
- BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
--
-- We do have one person here, a Luckyboy (his
-- username), that claims to have flown a real P-47
-- (and Mustang and Corsair). He says the real deal was
-- far more potent than what we have in FB. Now, take
-- that for what you will, it doesn't necessarily mean
-- a damn thing, but, thought I'd toss it out there
-- anyway.
-
- His opinion is the most wieghty of any in here...it
- carries more validity than all the charts, graphs
- and specs in the world...... although I must admit
- from other pilot accounts I have read the real Jug
- was more lethal and more agile than what we have
- here

Only if it's true. And we can't validate that in anyway. I'm not calling him a liar, and I don't necessarily disbeleive him, just bare in mind that anybody can come in here and make such claims.

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 10:01 PM
If you don't mind me saying so, that guncam footage so commonly shown of wings getting blown off, etc. are probably actually from P-38 armanent.

BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
-Koro, the -22 and -27 are not "good enough" because they
-are not as accurate as is possible under the current
-limitations of the interface (the PC). Other planes are
-closer, and the changes that I suggested would being it
-far closer to that goal.

You've already stated you fly the D-10 more than the D-22 and D-27. How do we know that you simply just got unlucky with the -22 and -27?

Honestly, until we get a D-30, D-35, D-40 or a M, I don't think much should be expected of these birds. I doubt we'll see these either, because they have so many different cockpit changes over the D-27.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 10:04 PM
rhorta wrote:
- Its been said that the war started in 1939 and the
- Luftwaffe had been fighting continuously for 4 years
- before the Amis started to present themselves in
- ernest in 1943.

That is just plain wrong. At the latest, the "Amis" presented themselves in autumn '42. North Africa ring a bell? Sorry but I just don't like it when people try to say that the Americans didn't enter the war until there was nothing left to fight. There was plenty to fight, in the pacific, MTO and ETO.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 11:00 PM
Korolov wrote:
- You've already stated you fly the D-10 more than the
- D-22 and D-27. How do we know that you simply just
- got unlucky with the -22 and -27?

Man, you have a one track mind, don't you? lol

We know the -27 roll rate is wrong. That is the main reason I don't use it that much. However, the -22 had the paddle prop and was the best climber of the 3. The -27, with the same prop and power was a bit worse of a climber (but not much) than the -22 due to extra weight, but still climbed better than the -10. The -10 is fairly close to data provided by Butch2K from soviet testing.

They all share dive and zoom and gun spread characteristics.

For it to be a case of me being unlucky in the latter 2, I would have to be complaining based on my success or lack thereof online, which I am not.


- Honestly, until we get a D-30, D-35, D-40 or a M, I
- don't think much should be expected of these birds.
- I doubt we'll see these either, because they have so
- many different cockpit changes over the D-27.

Cockpit changes would be minor. The is a reason we aren't likely to get the M, and it almost certainly has nothing to do with 3D modeling.

Regardless, the 3 we have were, IRL, potent performers and the ones that did much of the initial fighting against the LW, the -10 in particular (of our 3).

Why does it stick in your craw that we are insisting corrected climbs and rolls and spreads and E retention? I don't get it.

Hell, we aren't even asking for everything they were actually capable of in the field (like overboosting.....) /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 11:55 PM
Korolov wrote:
- I give up. I just can't convince any of you guys
- that the P-47 is a very good fighter in FB.



Since the patch, I've come to love the D-27. Once
you get the hang of it you'll find that high roll
rates are unnessesary. The Thunderbolt is all about
speed and firepower and in FB it has both in abundance.
It just takes patience and an understanding of its
strong points.

It's a great fighter. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://home.si.rr.com/skywolf/moonlight2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-06-2003, 11:57 PM
IMO the stall rates are all wrong. the roll is pretty much ok on the D10 & D22. But the stall rate DOES NOT match the real FM of the p-47. No ones asking for an Uber plane .....just the correct FM & DM. I make my judgements by compareing it to acutual training films i watched. in those they talk about the stall rate directly. So does anyone have the info on the stall rate of the p-47?
Skychimp? Annyone?

<CENTER>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p837.jpg
<CENTER>><FONT COLOR="blue">Please visit the 310thVF/BS Online at our NEW web site @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER>A proud member Squadron of IL-2 vUSAAF
<CENTER>310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW">
Proud Sponsor of IL-2 Hangar Forums
<CENTER> Visit the Hangar at:
http://srm.racesimcentral.com/il2.shtml
http://www.brunching.com/images/hellweather.gif (http://www.brunching.com/toys/hellweather.html)
<FONT COLOR="Green">Slainte Mhath- Good Health to you!

Message Edited on 10/06/0305:59PM by Copperhead310th

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 12:06 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Man, you have a one track mind, don't you? lol

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

- We know the -27 roll rate is wrong. That is the main
- reason I don't use it that much. However, the -22
- had the paddle prop and was the best climber of the
- 3. The -27, with the same prop and power was a bit
- worse of a climber (but not much) than the -22 due
- to extra weight, but still climbed better than the
- -10. The -10 is fairly close to data provided by
- Butch2K from soviet testing.

Jeeze man, just how often DO you fly the D-22 and D-27? Thats all I ask. In my experience, of the three, NONE climb better than the D-27. The D-27 seems quite capable of reaching altitude faster than the D-10, and the D-22 is quite faster than the D-10 as well in climb. I could care less about roll rate, the P-47 does afterall share a similar wing design to a Spitfire. Theres a reason the P-47N rolled better.

- They all share dive and zoom and gun spread
- characteristics.
-
- For it to be a case of me being unlucky in the
- latter 2, I would have to be complaining based on my
- success or lack thereof online, which I am not.

I for one, am GLAD to have that gun spread. Know why? It means on aircraft that are lightly armored, you can score more hits and thus can achieve kills! Its less useful on armored aircraft like the Fw-190, but I NEVER have any serious trouble from them unless the pilots are truly elite (like the JV44).

Also, if you don't mind me saying so, I have seen very little of your success. You do just about as well as any average player. I have seen FAR more successful P-47 pilots.

- Cockpit changes would be minor. The is a reason we
- aren't likely to get the M, and it almost certainly
- has nothing to do with 3D modeling.

Have you seen the cockpit of a D-35 and onwards? Let me get a pic of a D-40...

http://www.flightjournal.com/gallery/gallery_images/P47/p47_5lg.jpg


Thats quite a big difference in cockpit from the D-27, wouldn't you say? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

And I doubt that it has anything to do with the P-47M's performance. I'd rather have a late D over the M, because the D's are vastly more versatile.

- Regardless, the 3 we have were, IRL, potent
- performers and the ones that did much of the initial
- fighting against the LW, the -10 in particular (of
- our 3).

No, the early P-38s did most of the initial fighting against the LW. Along with P-40s.

P-47s were potent performers because they had what ESCORT FIGHTERS and FIGHTER BOMBERS needed.

Lets make a small list of what the P-47 can do in RL and in FB...

Fastest dive speed, IRL and in FB. Check.
Fastest TRUE AIRSPEED at 9100m, IRL and in FB. Check.
Longest range of all fighters except Mustang featured in FB. Check.
BETTER climb in FB than IRL.
Machine guns that will slice and dice just about anything on the ground and in the air IRL, in FB. Check.
Ground attack capabilities that rival the IL-2. Check.

Overall, one of the BEST <U>ESCORT</U> fighters in FB, not to mention a very versatile one at that.

- Why does it stick in your craw that we are insisting
- corrected climbs and rolls and spreads and E
- retention? I don't get it.

Because I don't see anything wrong with them as is. This is a 5 ton fighter EMPTY, 8 tons fully loaded! The engine generates 2,800hp at WEP with WATER BOOST. At combat power of 100% or 80% at lower altitudes, do you really think you'll get to use that power ALL the time? I wouldn't want to wreck my engine like that!

You have to understand, a 8 ton fighter fully loaded won't handle like a P-63 at low altitude. It booms and zooms better than any other allied fighter, its high speed control authority rivals everything except the Fw-190.

You're lucky its as good as it is, if Oleg were really biased, hed make its armanent pure cr@p on everything except parachutes. He'd make it stall if you looked at it funny, break apart at 500kph, and not be able to fly higher than 6,000ft.

- Hell, we aren't even asking for everything they were
- actually capable of in the field (like
- overboosting.....)

Put the engine to work well beyond factory specs? If I were a flight mechanic and my pilot asked me to do that, I'd tell him hes not going to do that with my baby.

I'm going to take a lot of flak for this, but here goes...

You want my true opinions? The P-47 is OVERMODELLED. Yes, you heard me - OVERMODELLED! It climbs better than it should, it doesn't have any high speed compressability problems, nothing can outrun it at 9000m, nothing can outdive it, and nothing works better on SEAD and ATG missions!

You can't strafe a Whirlebewind with a Yak3 and live, much less a IL2 and live. A P-47 can go in there and let loose some 50 cal, and that tank is toasted. I don't think so. Powerful machine gun the M2 may be, but I doubt it could do that to a tank based off of the Tiger chassis.

The only bird thats undermodelled in this game is the IL-2.

Ok, flame away... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

P.S. DDT, you're a P-38 pilot, not a P-51 or P-47 pilot. P-38 has everything you want in it.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 12:19 AM
Copperhead310th wrote:
- IMO the stall rates are all wrong. the roll is
- pretty much ok on the D10 & D22. But the stall rate
- DOES NOT match the real FM of the p-47. No ones
- asking for an Uber plane .....just the correct FM &
- DM. I make my judgements by compareing it to acutual
- training films i watched. in those they talk about
- the stall rate directly. So does anyone have the
- info on the stall rate of the p-47?
- Skychimp? Annyone?


This is qouted from the fall issue of FLIGHT JOURNAL...


From a test flight:

..."I slowly reduced the P-47's airspeed with the flaps
and landing gear retracted. At 120 mph, it started to
buffet, and at 110, it stalled. Surprisingly, it had
very little wingdrop, so I recovered and rechecked it
several times with similar results. Then I tried the
accelerated stall at 125 mph and found that even when
I pulled the stick fairly hard, its stall was also
preceded by a pronounced buffeting and very little
wingdrop. It seemed too good to be true. With the wheels
and flaps down, it again stalled very gently, and the
stall was preceded by an even stronger buffet warning
and with absolutely no wingdrop".

Hope this helps...

http://home.si.rr.com/skywolf/moonlight2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 12:54 AM
Korolov wrote:


You want my true opinions? The P-47 is OVERMODELLED.
- Yes, you heard me - OVERMODELLED! It climbs better
- than it should, it doesn't have any high speed
- compressability problems, nothing can outrun it at
- 9000m, nothing can outdive it, and nothing works
- better on SEAD and ATG missions!


wow Korolov, you realy are biased.

Basicaly your saying that the 47's are to fast or over modeled, But Fact is they cant even reach there top speed in FB, or there top alt.

Basicaly your saying the P-47 DM is over modeld, lol ur crazy.

Basicaly your saying the roll rait is over modeld, lol, it sounds like you dont even fly the P-47 much.


Fact is, if the 47 was FM and DM properply you guy's would be complaining that it's a UFO.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 01:15 AM
Korolov wrote:
- Jeeze man, just how often DO you fly the D-22 and
- D-27? Thats all I ask. In my experience, of the
- three, NONE climb better than the D-27. The D-27
- seems quite capable of reaching altitude faster than
- the D-10, and the D-22 is quite faster than the D-10
- as well in climb. I could care less about roll rate,
- the P-47 does afterall share a similar wing design
- to a Spitfire. Theres a reason the P-47N rolled
- better.

Often enough to emphatically disagree with that statement. Also, whether ot not YOU care about the roll rate, it IS wrong. Period.


- I for one, am GLAD to have that gun spread. Know
- why? It means on aircraft that are lightly armored,
- you can score more hits and thus can achieve kills!
- Its less useful on armored aircraft like the Fw-190,
- but I NEVER have any serious trouble from them
- unless the pilots are truly elite (like the JV44).

Again, you are on about what YOU like. It doesn't match anything I've seen from the historical record. There's a lot of us that share that view. If it does match historical record, please point it out to us. Otherwise, keep your personal opinions about what you like or would rather have out of this, because this is about a quest for accuracy, not preference.


- Also, if you don't mind me saying so, I have seen
- very little of your success. You do just about as
- well as any average player. I have seen FAR more
- successful P-47 pilots.

Actually, I do mind you saying so because you haven't seen much of me at all lately. In short, you just don't know what you are talking about - when it comes to me. And I don't know where you get off with that crap anyway. This proves that I'm right, you do have a one track mind. You simply can't beleive that someone (or at least me) can have complaints about an aircraft while also doing well with it.


- Have you seen the cockpit of a D-35 and onwards? Let
- me get a pic of a D-40...

Yes, I have. Nice shot. Part of my collection now. And it shows that it's still not that big a deal. We aren't talking a totally new 'pit.


- Thats quite a big difference in cockpit from the
- D-27, wouldn't you say?

We obviously have different ideas of "big". But I also can't help but suspect some of your stance is based upon defending Oleg. Which means you'd say that for anything, unless it was like just a different clock or something.


- And I doubt that it has anything to do with the
- P-47M's performance.

Of course. I'd expect no less.


- I'd rather have a late D over
- the M, because the D's are vastly more versatile.

Versatility doesn't mean squat in pure A2A. And people certainly seem to want the M. Maybe it's about more than just you. Take a look at the 10 page thread in the ORR.


- P-47s were potent performers because they had what
- ESCORT FIGHTERS and FIGHTER BOMBERS needed.

Read this slowly - potent performers in the air to air role. That means against other fighters. The needs of "fighter-bombers" are largely oriented at ground pounding. Other than armor, those are meaningless in air to air.


- Lets make a small list of what the P-47 can do in RL
- and in FB...
-
- Fastest dive speed, IRL and in FB. Check.

In FB? 262s dove faster in terms of top speed. Did this change in 1.11? Takes a long time to reach those speeds and people don't fall behind either. They hit their critical speed and fall apart. It's acceleration we are concerned with.


- Fastest TRUE AIRSPEED at 9100m, IRL and in FB.
- Check.

You've spent time testing *every* FB plane? I some how doubt that. How about barely staying above stall speed at only 10Km though? 32,800' was not the ceiling. Also, the K-4 was going much stronger at that point, without the benefit of a turbo. Interesting, don'cha think?


- Longest range of all fighters except Mustang
- featured in FB. Check.

Irrelevant to this discussion.

- BETTER climb in FB than IRL.

Wrong. It is not better. Cube is WAY off. It's close, but just under - according to the tests I've seen.


- Machine guns that will slice and dice just about
- anything on the ground and in the air IRL, in FB.
- Check.

In very specific situations only. Far more specific than the more lightly armed P-40. Rather interesting that. Also, don't forget to mention the right yaw tendency. Guess the right wing guns are more powerful huh?

- Ground attack capabilities that rival the IL-2.
- Check.

Questionable, and a matter of opinion. The IL2 is tougher (in this game at least), and has many, many more ordanance options.


- Because I don't see anything wrong with them as is.
- This is a 5 ton fighter EMPTY, 8 tons fully loaded!

Yeah? And? What, do you think we are calling for a Yak3 here?


- The engine generates 2,800hp at WEP with WATER
- BOOST.

2600.


- You have to understand, a 8 ton fighter fully loaded
- won't handle like a P-63 at low altitude.

Start reading what we, or at least I, say, not what you THINK we mean. We HAVE said we don't expect Exta 300 handling. This isn't about handling. Handling isn't mentioned at all in this thread as a problem. Certainly not by me at least. So where are you getting this from? The voices in your head?


- It booms
- and zooms better than any other allied fighter,

Err...not on equal footing. The blessed will out perform it in every regime (except top dive speed (not acceleration))


- You're lucky its as good as it is,

I'm lucky? WTF kind of BS is that? Is this a simulator or not?

- if Oleg were really biased, hed make its armanent pure
- cr@p on everything except parachutes. He'd make it stall
- if you looked at it funny, break apart at 500kph, and
- not be able to fly higher than 6,000ft.

Sounds almost like the 1.0 version. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


- Put the engine to work well beyond factory specs? If
- I were a flight mechanic and my pilot asked me to do
- that, I'd tell him hes not going to do that with my
- baby.

You'd run the risk of a dead pilot. Have you bothered to read the overboost thread? It happened. A lot. Sorry.


- It climbs better than it should,

This is BS, once again.


- it doesn't have any high speed
- compressability problems,

It does. What you are looking for is currently a limitaiton in the sim, not an overdone FM.


- nothing can outrun it at 9000m,

Ok, I'll bite, and what should out run it at those speeds?


- nothing can outdive it,

See the previous 262 comment. And learn to differntiate between top speed and accleration. We aren't arguing what speed it can reach in a dive, we are arguing how quickly it can get there.


- You can't strafe a Whirlebewind with a Yak3 and
- live, much less a IL2 and live. A P-47 can go in
- there and let loose some 50 cal, and that tank is
- toasted. I don't think so. Powerful machine gun the
- M2 may be, but I doubt it could do that to a tank
- based off of the Tiger chassis.

Problem with the tank DM, not the gun. You can hit and kill almost anything with almost any VVS laser at unheard of ranges. Where is your righteous indignation about that?


- P.S. DDT, you're a P-38 pilot, not a P-51 or P-47
- pilot. P-38 has everything you want in it.

Don't presume to tell me what I am or want.



OOC - will you suffer sleepless nights if you feel that Oleg is being attacked or something?

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 01:26 AM
Korolov wrote:
-
- You can't strafe a Whirlebewind with a Yak3 and
- live, much less a IL2 and live. A P-47 can go in
- there and let loose some 50 cal, and that tank is
- toasted. I don't think so. Powerful machine gun the
- M2 may be, but I doubt it could do that to a tank
- based off of the Tiger chassis.


OOPSIE!

Wrong wrong wrong.


The Wirbelwind was based on the Panzer IV chassis, NOT the Tiger, and the multi-sided turret was very thinly plated to allow a minimum of protection for the crew against small arms fire. The M2 was fully capable of shredding this vehicle. Also, haven't you looked at the wirbelwind? It's kind of open topped which makes a nice little catcher's mitt for all those .50s raining down.

And for the record, successful strafing runs on German tanks was accomplished by hits to the rear engine deck area where there are openings for cooling. Lots of vital stuff back there such as the radiators. Hence, late model Tigers and Panthers featured field mods such as wooden planks just over the radiators and spaced metal plates over the rear deck. A Tiger isn't much good sitting out in a field with punctured rads and no water in the engine. Tanks don't have to be flipped over on their side without a turret to be considered "knocked out".

OK, Back to the Thunderbolt talk!!

PS: You're full of hooha to say the Jug is overmodeled.



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 02:43 AM
Wow...now I'm really confused. Agree 100% with DDT's points on FB Jug undermodeling and yet Korolov is the BEST FB Jug pilot I've ever seen. What up??!!

For me the guns are a big issue. I have many hours in both the Jug and the P40 (sim of course) and I'll take the P40's 6 x 50s any day over the Jug's 8 x 50s. With the P40, I can get those oh-so-satisfying disintegration kills (FW, IL2 included). Yet with the Jug, 109 notwithstanding, I have to settle for inflicting minor to moderate damage that manifests as kills only some of the time. No condesending lectures on convergence please. I've experimented both off and on-line with this. So either the P40's guns are overmodeled or the Jug's are seriously undermodeled given the extra two guns. Based on historical accounts, I'd say it's probably the latter.

The P51 will be looking good if we are lucky enough to get the P40's guns. Hopefully the code developers simply do a "copy/paste" of the P40 gun code into the P51 file. (it's only software..lol)

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 03:03 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Often enough to emphatically disagree with that
- statement. Also, whether ot not YOU care about the
- roll rate, it IS wrong. Period.

It is wrong huh? So, have you flown a P-47? I don't mean whether or not you have charts here and there, or know people who have. I mean have YOU flown the EXACT same P-47s the USSR was given in 1944?

- Again, you are on about what YOU like. It doesn't
- match anything I've seen from the historical record.
- There's a lot of us that share that view. If it does
- match historical record, please point it out to us.
- Otherwise, keep your personal opinions about what
- you like or would rather have out of this, because
- this is about a quest for accuracy, not preference.

More like a quest to bash Oleg, methinks. Would I complain if the 50 cals lost the dispersion and behaved like they do with realistic gunnery off? No. Do the current guns match historical accuracy? Well, how would I know? I've never had the honor to fire the M2, much less the version used on aircraft. We're not talking historical accuracy here, we're talking about what <U>YOU *think*</U> the P-47 should be like. I could care less what it would/could be like, I'd use it for the simple fact that it's the only american bird in FB that I actually <U>LIKE</U>.

- Actually, I do mind you saying so because you
- haven't seen much of me at all lately. In short, you
- just don't know what you are talking about - when it
- comes to me. And I don't know where you get off with
- that crap anyway. This proves that I'm right, you do
- have a one track mind.

Wanna duel? P-47 vs. P-47. Ivan's settings. Then we'll see how good you really are, m'kay? Last I saw you, you couldn't fly the P-47 nearly as well as some of those ~353~ guys, or some of those JG777 guys. Heck even JV44 can fly it better than you could.

- You simply can't beleive that
- someone (or at least me) can have complaints about
- an aircraft while also doing well with it.

Of course I'd believe it. I just <U>think</U> your complaints are unjustified. And I also don't think you're all that good with the P-47. Get your hands off it. You don't deserve it. Wait a couple weeks and play with your Mustang. (hey that could have two meanings! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif )

- Yes, I have. Nice shot. Part of my collection now.
- And it shows that it's still not that big a deal. We
- aren't talking a totally new 'pit.

Actually it would be a big deal. The instrumentation is vastly different from a stock D-27. Different compass, different avionics, positioning, etc.

BTW, the site that pic came from is http://www.flightjournal.com/ . I'd recommend you guys check it out, it has some nice stuff on it.

- Of course. I'd expect no less.

Yup, right, I'm in defense of Oleg... Hmm, no, I'm in defense of my P-47. Wait, did it ever occur to me that the P-47M just wouldn't be worth all the extra work? Could we possibly already have it? Might it be in the works? Who knows... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- Versatility doesn't mean squat in pure A2A. And
- people certainly seem to want the M. Maybe it's
- about more than just you. Take a look at the 10 page
- thread in the ORR.

Versatility in a fighter means everything to a army. One that could strafe and murder the ground forces as well as the air forces.

Would I whine and moan if we got the M? Certainly not! Heck, I'd even fly it! But WTH am I going to do when I need to haul iron? It'd be a lot easier if I could pick one type, load up some bombs, vulch somebody, then shoot his teammates our of the air.

The P-47N would be better in this case, even if it didn't see service in the ETO.

- Read this slowly - potent performers in the air to
- air role. That means against other fighters. The
- needs of "fighter-bombers" are largely oriented at
- ground pounding. Other than armor, those are
- meaningless in air to air.

Read this carefully - potent performers in the escort role. The P-47's job was usually escort. Damn straight its going to fair well if the enemy is busy trying to shoot down bombers while the P-47s pick them off. Thus that makes it a good escort fighter, as well as good in the air to air role. So, remove the bombers and give the P-47s a alt advantage, and they'll win every time. Even in FB. But you have to remember, you need pilots on the axis side with 30-50 hours of flight time and the pilots on the allied side with 100-150 hours of flight time. Like it or no, thats the way it was.

- In FB? 262s dove faster in terms of top speed. Did
- this change in 1.11? Takes a long time to reach
- those speeds and people don't fall behind either.
- They hit their critical speed and fall apart. It's
- acceleration we are concerned with.

You don't dive a whole lot with 262s do you? Ask BlitzPig_Spets sometime, I dove on him and nailed his 262 good. I also got another 262 in a same flight with equal alt advantage, and caught him in level flight! Was going 550kmh INDICATED! Thats about 600-630kmh true airspeed. Just slightly shy of 400MPH.

- You've spent time testing *every* FB plane? I some
- how doubt that. How about barely staying above stall
- speed at only 10Km though? 32,800' was not the
- ceiling. Also, the K-4 was going much stronger at
- that point, without the benefit of a turbo.
- Interesting, don'cha think?

I haven't tested every FB plane, you dunce! I don't play the game for that. I can manage about 350kmh indicated at 1000m, and when you switch to the true airspeed, you get well above 700kmh. I've tried to catch P-47s at 9000m with a 109K - never could catch him.

- Irrelevant to this discussion.

Fudge nuts. Its not irrelevant. I can't even fly a 190 or a 109 at combat power for an hour straight on a half tank of gas. With a P-47, I can loiter at 7000m over the enemy territory and engaged & disengage at will.

- Wrong. It is not better. Cube is WAY off. It's
- close, but just under - according to the tests I've
- seen.

Go in and try the airplane yourself, don't use any flight data or charts or that sort of thing. Make yourself a dogfight server, load up the P-47D-27, give it 100% throttle and watch it. That bugger can CLIMB. (Not to mention SEE... LOL)

- In very specific situations only. Far more specific
- than the more lightly armed P-40. Rather interesting
- that. Also, don't forget to mention the right yaw
- tendency. Guess the right wing guns are more
- powerful huh?

Very specific situations my ***. It happens in at least 50-60% of kills I've seen by just about every P-47 pilot out there. They do a quick burst and bam, something has lost its tail.

- Questionable, and a matter of opinion. The IL2 is
- tougher (in this game at least), and has many, many
- more ordanance options.

Heck no, the IL-2 ain't tougher. Have you seen what a Mk108 will do to it? Or a MG-151/20 for that matter? P-47 can take a lot more hits than the IL-2 can, especially in the tail.

Ordiance amount doesn't mean much either. Sure the IL-2 has all those wonderful toys. But not all of them pack the same amount of "oomph" like a 1000lb bomb.

- Yeah? And? What, do you think we are calling for a
- Yak3 here?

Sure as hell seems like it. If not in turn, then in climb.

- 2600.

Got me there. 2,535hp with WEP.

- Start reading what we, or at least I, say, not what
- you THINK we mean. We HAVE said we don't expect Exta
- 300 handling. This isn't about handling. Handling
- isn't mentioned at all in this thread as a problem.
- Certainly not by me at least. So where are you
- getting this from? The voices in your head?

Acceleration and climb *are* part of handling, like it or no. If you can accelerate better and climb better than your opponent can, then you have a clear *handling* advantage, see?

And since we're slinging insults, where you getting your data from? Comic books?

- Err...not on equal footing. The blessed will out
- perform it in every regime (except top dive speed
- (not acceleration))

Right. The P-51 outperforms it in every aspect. Pardon me. Well you'll get that one soon.

- I'm lucky? WTF kind of BS is that? Is this a
- simulator or not?

Simulator? Oh come on. It's a game. You're supposed to have fun. A simulator wasn't for fun last I checked. It was for training.

But what I'm trying to say is, you could have it worse, and I think you just might get it worse. I won't say much more.

- Sounds almost like the 1.0 version.

The 1.0 version? Meh. The 1.0 needed a boost in roll. It got that. I will admit the D-27 didn't, but it was looked at. Aside from that the 1.0 version had weaker 50 cals. But that doesn't mean they weren't effective.

- You'd run the risk of a dead pilot. Have you
- bothered to read the overboost thread? It happened.
- A lot. Sorry.

Happened a lot huh? So maybe it did. Not if I were in charge of the aircraft. Now, if I had been ordered and had seen numerous examples of it working I might do it. But the fact is, as the aircraft was, it worked just fine without the boost. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

- This is BS, once again.

Yeah. Unfortunately, I'm not a bull. So you'll have to change that to Korolov sh*t. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

- It does. What you are looking for is currently a
- limitaiton in the sim, not an overdone FM.

OK, so it does have compressability. You win. I'll find a way around that problem... Oh wait I already have. Nevermind. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

- See the previous 262 comment. And learn to
- differntiate between top speed and accleration. We
- aren't arguing what speed it can reach in a dive, we
- are arguing how quickly it can get there.

And it gets there awful damn fast.

- Problem with the tank DM, not the gun. You can hit
- and kill almost anything with almost any VVS laser
- at unheard of ranges. Where is your righteous
- indignation about that?

The laser cannon 7.62s don't. The 12.7mms might. I think they both need to be toned down, but I have never shot any of those machine guns before. So how do I know what they shot like? They could have been inaccurate as hell or they could of had laser like accuracy... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- Don't presume to tell me what I am or want.
- OOC - will you suffer sleepless nights if you feel
- that Oleg is being attacked or something?

I say you're a tooth fairy. You must give me money now. You want only teeth.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And no, on the Oleg thing. This isn't about Oleg numb nuts, its about a P-47.

All that aside, I'm tired of this. I'm staying out of this topic from now on - if you have something in mind for the duel, PM me.

And don't take it too seriously. Just a friendly duel. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 03:24 AM
Dang Koro... even i am scared of you now /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 03:47 AM
This thread is of great interest to me, but jeez each post is like a friggin book. I realize you guys have points you're trying to make and...yes...I've read it all.

keep it coming, but practice an exercise in brevity...please!

At my age it's getting tougher to stay awake long enough to maintain focus. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif




http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 04:51 AM
Korolov wrote:
- It is wrong huh? So, have you flown a P-47? I don't
- mean whether or not you have charts here and there,
- or know people who have. I mean have YOU flown the
- EXACT same P-47s the USSR was given in 1944?

So...by saying this you are implying that historical record is not an accurate measure of an a/c's performance. That in turn means that it's impossible to document an a/c's performance. Which also in turn makes simulation on any level for any reason, impossible.

If you didn't mean that, then you don't say what you mean. If you did mean that, then you are in conflict with many scientists and engineers. Either way, it's impossible to debate with you.


- More like a quest to bash Oleg, methinks.

Which is why you come on so strong trying to stand up for him. While he could keel over and die tomorrow for all I care, I'm not going after him for the sake of doing so. And uh, you also imply that everyone stating the spread is wrong is also "bashing Oleg".

- Would I complain if the 50 cals lost the dispersion and
- behaved like they do with realistic gunnery off? No.
- Do the current guns match historical accuracy? Well,
- how would I know? I've never had the honor to fire
- the M2, much less the version used on aircraft.

Does this mean you don't care how it's modeled? If so, why bother saying *anything* in these threads? Seems like a waste of time and effort. Especially if you aren't trying to defend "poor Oleg".


- We're not talking historical accuracy here, we're
- talking about what <U>YOU *think*</U> the P-47
- should be like.

Me and MANY other people, many of whom are typically considered neutral, and some of whom I'd even say need to wipe their noses occasionally.


- I could care less what it
- would/could be like, I'd use it for the simple fact
- that it's the only american bird in FB that I
- actually <U>LIKE</U>.

Aha. Either you get a kick out of arguing, are trying to defend Oleg, or don't manage your time very logically (as in wasting it in arguments you care nothing about). And if you are trying to defend him....why? What's in it for you?


- Wanna duel? P-47 vs. P-47. Ivan's settings. Then
- we'll see how good you really are, m'kay? Last I saw
- you, you couldn't fly the P-47 nearly as well as
- some of those ~353~ guys, or some of those JG777
- guys. Heck even JV44 can fly it better than you
- could.

Whoah, big man here. Look out everyone.

This would prove nothing, and you know it. Once again, read for comprehension. I have not said I am Sierra Hotel with that plane. I have said I "do well". Do you know, or care, what that means? It means I am satisfied. It indicates that I am not complaining because I get beat. That would be "unsatisfied".

You might well beat me. So what? When was the last time we were on the same server? Weeks ago, at least. I have come a long way, and I don't need any condescending $hit from you, you a$$hole. YOU started with this, and then act surprised over "insults". Unbeleiveable.


- Of course I'd believe it. I just <U>think</U> your
- complaints are unjustified. And I also don't think
- you're all that good with the P-47. Get your hands
- off it. You don't deserve it. Wait a couple weeks
- and play with your Mustang. (hey that could have two
- meanings!

Feck off and die. I don't need holier than thou crap like this from you. I don't know who the hell you think you are, but it's a fantasy. You'll learn that sooner or later I'm sure, if you anything like this off line.


- Actually it would be a big deal. The instrumentation
- is vastly different from a stock D-27. Different
- compass, different avionics, positioning, etc.

None of which is a big deal. That's the point. You don't get it. Or maybe don't want to get it. Or maybe are just arguing it because doing so means arguing me, which inturn means defending Oleg to you because you think I'm bent on "bashing" him or some stupid crap.


- Yup, right, I'm in defense of Oleg... Hmm, no, I'm
- in defense of my P-47. Wait, did it ever occur to me
- that the P-47M just wouldn't be worth all the extra
- work? Could we possibly already have it? Might it be
- in the works? Who knows...

Any and every plane is worth the effort. This would take less than many others. And clearly it's strongly desired.



- Versatility in a fighter means everything to a army.
- One that could strafe and murder the ground forces
- as well as the air forces.

Which isn't what we are talking about here. But in Huckebein style you are trying to deflect the argument.


- Would I whine and moan if we got the M? Certainly
- not! Heck, I'd even fly it! But WTH am I going to do
- when I need to haul iron? It'd be a lot easier if I
- could pick one type, load up some bombs, vulch
- somebody, then shoot his teammates our of the air.

You have something for that. So what's the problem?


- The P-47N would be better in this case, even if it
- didn't see service in the ETO.

Which we are not kinda getting.


- Read this carefully - potent performers in the
- escort role. The P-47's job was usually escort. Damn
- straight its going to fair well if the enemy is busy
- trying to shoot down bombers while the P-47s pick
- them off. Thus that makes it a good escort fighter,
- as well as good in the air to air role.

Pilot accounts say not only that, but also "otherwise" - that things like bomber fixation on the part of the enemy was not required. You should, and probably do know that. Doesn't stop you from not acknowledging it though. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


- But you have to remember, you need pilots on the axis
- side with 30-50 hours of flight time and the pilots on
- the allied side with 100-150 hours of flight time. Like
- it or no, thats the way it was.

Late war, yes.


- You don't dive a whole lot with 262s do you?

Not 'ny more. Not many of them around lately. Which patch version?


- Ask BlitzPig_Spets sometime, I dove on him and nailed
- his 262 good. I also got another 262 in a same
- flight with equal alt advantage, and caught him in
- level flight! Was going 550kmh INDICATED! Thats
- about 600-630kmh true airspeed. Just slightly shy of
- 400MPH.

And you're point is what exactly? 630kph is not fast. What speed did you start that at, and how long did it take to get there?

In 1.0 the 262 went over 1000kph in a dive, remained intact, and got there hella quick. Even the -47 couldn't go that fast, and it sure as hell took a lot longer to get there.


- Fudge nuts. Its not irrelevant. I can't even fly a
- 190 or a 109 at combat power for an hour straight on
- a half tank of gas. With a P-47, I can loiter at
- 7000m over the enemy territory and engaged &
- disengage at will.

Last time I flew LW (1.1b) the 190 could go all day with rads closed and 100%. Maybe it's just your technique that is lacking.


- Go in and try the airplane yourself, don't use any
- flight data or charts or that sort of thing. Make
- yourself a dogfight server, load up the P-47D-27,
- give it 100% throttle and watch it. That bugger can
- CLIMB. (Not to mention SEE... LOL)

Sure it can climb. Just not as well as the D-10 last I checked, and that was just a few nights ago. Between that and the roll rate, it feels like a slug.

Eventually I'll get around to testing it for # recording. There is a possiblility you could be right here. I just doubt it strongly. I'm used to climbing and BnZing since I refuse to fly commie crap, so I do trust my gut here. And the difference is close either way.


- Very specific situations my ***. It happens in at
- least 50-60% of kills I've seen by just about every
- P-47 pilot out there. They do a quick burst and bam,
- something has lost its tail.

63.75% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Ever think it might just be that you are seeing similar situations often? It happens you know. Doesn't make them any less specific.

Why is it that nearly everyone here agrees the spread is massive and that the P-40 hits harder?


- Heck no, the IL-2 ain't tougher. Have you seen what
- a Mk108 will do to it? Or a MG-151/20 for that
- matter? P-47 can take a lot more hits than the IL-2
- can, especially in the tail.

Not much will do much dead 6. And yes, I've seen every plane detonate (or nearly so) from single 108 rounds. Even the P-47.


- Ordiance amount doesn't mean much either. Sure the
- IL-2 has all those wonderful toys. But not all of
- them pack the same amount of "oomph" like a 1000lb
- bomb.

Sure it does. a 1000lb-er isn't really necessary here. A 250 will do just fine if you are a good aim. Having done DB exclusively for awhile, when it comes to dropping iron, I tend to be. Many little bombs are actually more effective than a few big ones in FB simply because the big ones are all too often overkill.


- Sure as hell seems like it. If not in turn, then in
- climb.

Once again, from where do you pull this crap?


- Got me there. 2,535hp with WEP.

D-15 was 2500 for sure. Some sources cite 2600 for the 20's series.


- Acceleration and climb *are* part of handling, like
- it or no. If you can accelerate better and climb
- better than your opponent can, then you have a clear
- *handling* advantage, see?

Hmmm....drag cars accelerate exceedingly well and brake hard, but are considred to have pi$$ poor to zero handling quality.

In a broad sense one could include those things, but, nobody here associates acceleration or climb with handling. Even the commies will say that the 109 could climb but not handle well.

And accelration I am calling for is for when you are pointed down. Not level.


- And since we're slinging insults, where you getting
- your data from? Comic books?

Apparently better comics than you read. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Once again, see the above, your tone and statements started this crap, so don't act surprised or innocent.


- Right. The P-51 outperforms it in every aspect.
- Pardon me. Well you'll get that one soon.

Not according to pilots. And the blessed here refers to Lavochkin and Yakolev products.


- Simulator? Oh come on. It's a game. You're supposed
- to have fun. A simulator wasn't for fun last I
- checked. It was for training.

So you don't know what a game is then. A game is something done for fun. Even top dollar mil-sims would be games to us if we could use them for fun.

Only thing that seperates a training tool from a game is it's use. If you have a career or life riding on it, it's not a game. If you do it for fun, it is a game. Even if it's the same exact product.


- But what I'm trying to say is, you could have it
- worse, and I think you just might get it worse. I
- won't say much more.

Yes, you and Ivan have said that you have the alpha patch(es), or know very well someone who does. Big whoop. You can dispense with the cloak and dagger crap.


- The 1.0 version? Meh. The 1.0 needed a boost in
- roll. It got that. I will admit the D-27 didn't, but
- it was looked at. Aside from that the 1.0 version
- had weaker 50 cals. But that doesn't mean they
- weren't effective.

We were told it was looked at (maybe, I'm not even sure we were told that much). Doesn't mean it happened, or was more than cursory at best.


- Happened a lot huh? So maybe it did. Not if I were
- in charge of the aircraft. Now, if I had been
- ordered and had seen numerous examples of it working
- I might do it. But the fact is, as the aircraft was,
- it worked just fine without the boost. If it ain't
- broke, don't fix it.

So you'd leave a pilot hangin his a$$ out all alone because he couldn't keep up in a pressure situation since the rest of his unit had hot rodded theirs. Good.

The engine ran at 3600hp for 250 hours without fail. 72" was so common some high up (can't remember the rank) wrote a letter asking why every single plane didn't do it. Chimp has and posted a scan of it.


- And don't take it too seriously. Just a friendly
- duel. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Friendly? After your last 2 posts? You gotta be kidding.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:30 AM
crazyivan1970 wrote:
- DDT have you seen REAL P-47 fly? If you did, please
- don`t tell me you were impressed. Comparing to pony
- it`s a flying ...umm a house?
-
- Regards,
- VFC*Crazyivan
- http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif
-
- "No matter how good the violin may be, much depends
- on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy
- pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub
-

Ivan, I have seen a T-Bolt fly, and I've also ridden in the back seat of a Mustang with the fuselage tank taken out, and I've seen them both fly with a Hellcat, which could almost the size of a P-47, and the Hellcat could easily outmaneauver both of the AAF birds, but warbirds are not usually pushed to their limits these days, so seeing them go through an airshow routine isn't exactly revealing.

The early P-47 was a bit of a pig at low altitudes, but that was partly due to the inadequate props they mounted. Putting on the paddle blade props appeared to transform the Jug, although part of the transformation was no doubt due to the pilots who had already faced the best the Jagdwaffe had to offer and came out ahead (or at least alive); without the handicap, they were just that much more effective and confident.

As for the size, well, it was necessary in order to accomodate the toilet facilities (for those long cross continent trips at high altitude). That's the real reason American aircraft were generally bigger than everyone else's birds-not even a Texas sized bladder could handle those long, cold flights.

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" - LCOL Don Blakeslee, CO, 4th FG, March, 1944

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:49 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- Korolov wrote:

-- And don't take it too seriously. Just a friendly
-- duel. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- Friendly? After your last 2 posts? You gotta be
- kidding.
-
-

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif You mean.. you gonna.. like kill poor Korolov and stuff?

Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 06:02 AM
In the Autumn of '42 the Americans were active, in '43 they made a real impact on the ETO.

North Africa was on the periphery in strategic terms in the war against Germany.

key word in the previous post - earnest



Ruy "SPADES" Horta
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
-----------------------------
Il-2 - VEF JG 77
-----------------------------
'95-02 - WB Jagdgeschwader 53
'99-00 - DoA Jagdstaffel 18
-----------------------------
The rest is history...

http:\\www.xs4all.nl\~rhorta\brother.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 06:08 AM
This only goes to prove my point that the stall rate is wrong and that THAT is what the problem is with the Jug.
Fix the stall abd the jug will be right. in excess of 250 kph the d-27 should be able to handle a 180 degree combat turn with combat flaps engaged. it does not.
Ok to prove my point further let's try this simple test.
Preform the stall manuver as described below in all 3 models of the FB p-47 and see what happens.

Skywolf-PBNA wrote:

- From a test flight:
-
-
- ..."I slowly reduced the P-47's airspeed with the
- flaps
-
- and landing gear retracted. At 120 mph, it started
- to
- buffet, and at 110, it stalled. Surprisingly, it had
- very little wingdrop, so I recovered and rechecked
- it
- several times with similar results. Then I tried the
- accelerated stall at 125 mph and found that even
- when
- I pulled the stick fairly hard, its stall was also
- preceded by a pronounced buffeting and very little
- wingdrop. It seemed too good to be true. With the
- wheels
- and flaps down, it again stalled very gently, and
- the
- stall was preceded by an even stronger buffet
- warning
- and with absolutely no wingdrop".

In FB the wing will drop. try it and see.


<CENTER>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p837.jpg
<CENTER>><FONT COLOR="blue">Please visit the 310thVF/BS Online at our NEW web site @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER>A proud member Squadron of IL-2 vUSAAF
<CENTER>310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW">
Proud Sponsor of IL-2 Hangar Forums
<CENTER> Visit the Hangar at:
http://srm.racesimcentral.com/il2.shtml
http://www.brunching.com/images/hellweather.gif (http://www.brunching.com/toys/hellweather.html)
<FONT COLOR="Green">Slainte Mhath- Good Health to you!

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:39 AM
The P47D10 is a Wonderfull AC !!! The 50.s are a lil week IMO but beyond that its awsome!!!

HUGE TIP !!!

Fly it in the sky up in the thin air @ 9000m or higher
That is where it kicks all kinds of azz I mean all of it!!!

The main problem is that most people wont take the time to climb up to 8000m or higher thus the real advantages of the p47 are never experienced by the people flying it in the weeds.

You people have no concept of a hard deck ? to you the hard deck is when you smack the Turf LOL...

This AC didnt roll around in the sand It was an Air master its huge wing is Ideal for providing Lift in the thin atmosphere & thus can outturn most other ac @ altitude.

Get a clue already Fly above 4000m where AC belong not @ 500m!!!

No disrespect intended but Im tired of hearing how bad certain ac when the fact is that your not flying it right period!!!

see u in the AIR !!!

<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:43 AM
Sniper762x51 wrote:
The one that can actualy out dive
- anything roll like it was suppose to, and use its
- energy to get back up. The one that has guns that
- saw off the wing of a 190 in one 3 second burst.
- That one.
-

I will agree with some of that.... especialy the zoom after the boom & the guns power/effectivness

<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:46 AM
LilHorse wrote:
- It's been argued here (and I think quite
- convincingly) that much of the tough work in the
- high alt. escort area was already done by the time
- the P-51s arrived on the scene. That the guys flying
- the Jugs had already dealt with the best that the LW
- had to send up.
-
- Mustangs replaced the Jugs for two major reasons:
- they had a longer range on internal fuel and they
- were much cheaper to manufacture than the P-47 (by
- more that half). The P-51 had a slight performance
- edge in speed and more than that in manuverability
- at lower altitudes. But way high up the Jug still
- beat it power-wise. And the Jug was surprisingly
- nimble compared to other a/c at very high altitudes
- because it could still produce it's sea level hp up
- there when other a/c were wallowing about
- underpowered.


Amen !!



<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:51 AM
in 1944 the jug was faster than all the p51s the M and N model of jug were both faster than the Mustang. thats why we all want the M and N models...faster means also a little better in climb too than previous jugs.

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of the 11 time Champions Team AFJ. 6 Years Flying. Semper Invictus! <img src ="http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509047.jpg">

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:55 AM
BlitzPig_DDT wrote:
- The reason I use the -10 is because the -22 and -27
- don't climb like they should, and the -27 doesn't
- roll like it should.
-
- According to IL2Compare, the -10 and -22 actually
- have the same FM. So I choose the -10 due to the
- lack of pylons. Think it looks better and am hoping
- (cause I can't prove it) it has less drag modeled.


DDT The 10 is definataly much better in all aspects we have been testing them extensivaly by flying them @ Altitude the 10 is a killer compared to the 22/27 also play with your pp @ alt and the fuel mix it makes a differance in top end preformance you probly already know this but I dont mind spreading the word maybe that way there will be more people flying in the sky instead of below the hard deck

I use the 22 for ground raids I dont even bother with the bubble canopy


<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>


Message Edited on 10/07/0302:08AM by AFJ_Locust

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 07:58 AM
*sigh* /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif
Again I say the P-47 still has some things to work out, but many and or all planes suffer from the same thing. I really think we are talking about the limitations of the physics model in reference to high altitude flight characteristics and dive acceleration. The roll rate on the D-27 does need to be re-worked but I have faith that Oleg will get it fixed Skychimp and many others have posted and sent countless pieces of facts to Oleg to review. As I understand it they will be addressed within the limitations of the game engine itself. I can't say it enough, but this game has given us the best FM/DM for the P-47. Can it be improved? Sure, but what can't? I would of course like to see it totally fixed in a perfect world. But I really believe that won't happen until the next sim is released with the new physics engine and code.
~S!
Eagle
CO 361st vFG

<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center> <center> www.361stvfg.com</center> (http://www.361stvfg.com</center>)
<center>
http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1003.jpg

</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 08:22 AM
Agreed Eagle its not perfect but its very good in the right hands ask anyone that comes into AFJ Fricks server /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

IMO Oleg has been trying to cater to many differant styles of online DF you have the T&BnWeeds you have the B&Z

Then you have the Pilots who Dogfight at Altitude with High Altitude AC against each other @ CO Altitude..

These are the most challanging and rewarding DF IMO

When im @ 9000m I am the master of the sky when you see some poor lil yak reaching for altitude above 5000m hes gona die. la has no chance only the k4 & Dora present problems

and even then its not that much because theres usualy 3 or 4 of us @ Altitude in P47s & that equals death for the rest.

Sure the ac is not modled perfectaly but these limitations can be overcome by Altitude & Teamwork.

Thx God for awsome wingmen !!!

Thx to the people who are trying to get the P47 corrected in a constructive maner.

<CENTER> http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_109_1065290873.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 10:55 AM
RedDeth wrote:
- in 1944 the jug was faster than all the p51s

At high altitude only.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 11:02 AM
Eagle_361st wrote:
- acceleration. The roll rate on the D-27 does need to
- be re-worked but I have faith that Oleg will get it
- fixed Skychimp and many others have posted and sent
- countless pieces of facts to Oleg to review.

I suspect the lack of attention to the D-27 was
an oversight. The physics model probably changed
requiring reparameterisation of a lot of aircraft,
and I suspect that the D-27 slipped through the
net, unfortunately. I can see why, given the need
to reparameterise, why the next sim will have less
aircraft.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 11:57 AM
Sniper762x51 wrote:
-
- DeBaer.534 wrote:
--
---oooh, youre talking about the one that could kill
-- tigers with its guns?
-- no, I dont think you'll ever get it.
-
-
- Never mentioned tiger tanks, guess u can't read?
- have seen the gun camera film of a 47 just doing
- what I said. It is known that 50's can't take out
- heavy armor. Beat up a Panzer III yes, an aircraft
- wing, definately. But not w/ the shotgun spread
- given them in FB.

guess you cant understand hyperbolas.
i just wanted to say, what youre talking about is the maximum performance, you saw a guncam movie with a jug ripping of the wings of a 190. i saw that, too. but its ONE kill out of hundreds, do you think this happens all the time you hit a planes wing? and now, if 8 12mm machingun can do this, what do you think 4 20mm + 2 13mm of a fw190 can do? did you ever notice how hard it is to chop a yak or la in FB even with this armament? (dont get me wrong, im not whining about this, i just want to point out that not only the p47 is made crappy)

adlabs6
10-07-2003, 05:31 PM
AFJ_Locust wrote:
- Fly it in the sky up in the thin air @ 9000m or
- higher
- That is where it kicks all kinds of azz I mean all
- of it!!!
-
- The main problem is that most people wont take the
- time to climb up to 8000m or higher thus the real
- advantages of the p47 are never experienced by the
- people flying it in the weeds.


Very true. But on many servers, you'll never see a soul up there. A great many players never break the 1500m mark, and with DF maps the way they are on many servers, engagement happens under 2000m most of the time.

But yea, your right. The most fun I've had in a DF was up near what must have been 6000 to 7000 meters. We were leaving contrails here and there.

<html>
<body>
<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="600" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><font color="000000">adlabs<font color="#ff9900">6</font></font>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#42524e">
<div align="center"><font color="#999999">
http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigtemp.JPG (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skins_historical_adlabs6.htm)
<small><font color="#ff6600">NEW</font> at mudmovers! Click the pic to download my skins from mudmovers.com!</small>
</font>
Skinner's Guide at mudmovers (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skinnersguide.htm) | Skinner's heaven (http://www.1java.org/sh) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com)
<font color="#999999">
My Forgotten Battles Webpage (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/index.html) Current Wallpaper: <font color="#999999">Bf-109 Morning Run</font></font>

<A HREF="http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zhiwg" TARGET=_blank>"Whirlwind Whiner"
The first of the few</A>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:33 PM
I back, yes i dont give up on my Jug.

Note:

I realy like FB, it's the first sim i have bought. The only reason i am doing this is becasue i reay like the this sim. But i know it can be better.

For example, the Jug. It's C/P is awsome, i think it has the best and most detaild C/P in the game. Flying the jug, for those that have and fly it half the time will know what i mean when i say this. I think the Oleg team has done a great job on this plane, i mean when your in the air or just taking off you can feel the wheight of this bird, feels so real. Unlike some other planes that give very little feeback. It's hard to explain realy, lol

Any way some of us know that the Jug is lacking several things. We have read alot about this bird and will continue to do so. Yes we may whine a bit, but it's only because we whant the real Jug or the correct FM, for it.


Here is some info that is not only on the FB CD but in books and online.



Republic P-47 "Thunderbolt"
(P-47D-10, P-47D-27)
Engine: 2,000 HP
Take-Off Speed: 175 km/h
Landing Speed: 150 km/h
Combat Engine Setting: 3,000 RPM
Best Cruise: 2,550 RPM
Economy Cruise: 2,400 RPM
Prop Pitch Control: Manual
Mixture Control: Manual
Boost: Yes, 5-minute maximum
Supercharger: Two Speed
Pilot Notes:
P-47 is best used as an energy fighter against most fighters, with the
possible exception of the Me-262. It is second to none in power dives
and will lose any opponent in a dive with enough altitude. When
starting a high-speed dive with a 109 at the same altitude and
airspeed, a P-47 can actually out-climb most 109s in a subsequent
zoom climb and end up at higher altitudes.
Primary means of attacking ground targets is in 15-45 degree dives.
Rockets should be fired from 200 meters or less. Bombs should be
dropped from 100 meters or above without delay, or from any
altitude with 3+ second delay. Machine guns are ineffective against
tanks but very effective against softer ground targets.
P-47 is a very stable gunnery platform. The wing machine guns are
best used at the convergence range, and usually take a 2-3 second
burst to bring down a target.
Supercharger speeds need to be switched at 4,500 meters. Best
performance altitude is between 3,500 and 4,800 meters for speed 1,
and 6,500 and 7,500 for speed 2. Worst performance is between 0
and 2,000 meters.


Notice the Combat RPM, 3000RPM. well in FB we donot get 3000RPM, mayby 2700RPM.

Or what about the 5 min Boost? where is that? we dont have that.

What about the 2 speed turbocharger? We dont have that ether.


ill post this in Olegs ready also.


Tiger out...

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:40 PM
adlabs6 wrote:
- Very true. But on many servers, you'll never see a
- soul up there. A great many players never break the
- 1500m mark,

First thing I do is get to 3000m or more! I don't
feel safe until I am up there. Maybe it is because
it is safer at an alt where there is noone else!

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:51 PM
adlabs6 wrote:
-
- AFJ_Locust wrote:
-- Fly it in the sky up in the thin air @ 9000m or
-- higher
-- That is where it kicks all kinds of azz I mean all
-- of it!!!
--
-- The main problem is that most people wont take the
-- time to climb up to 8000m or higher thus the real
-- advantages of the p47 are never experienced by the
-- people flying it in the weeds.
-
-
- Very true. But on many servers, you'll never see a
- soul up there. A great many players never break the
- 1500m mark, and with DF maps the way they are on
- many servers, engagement happens under 2000m most of
- the time.
-
- But yea, your right. The most fun I've had in a DF
- was up near what must have been 6000 to 7000 meters.
- We were leaving contrails here and there.


Good point guy's, i love too take up there too where she belongs too. even when you have some dude follow you up to 7500m, you can see that you have a higher speed avanatage. 8000m and there is a deffinate speed advanatage. You just level out and say by by.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 05:52 PM
THe 4th fighter pilots didnt think much of their Jugs when they first received them. In fact most of the pilots down right hated them. However, over time the 47 earned their grudging respect with the prinicpal comment being the Jug could dive like a hammer and take great battle damgage and still return home. Very rarely did these pilots comment on the plane being a great ACM bird. When the 4th finally transitioned to the P51B many a pilot were glad to say good bye to the Jug and were most often glad they did transition to the P51.

The 56th Fighter group and its pilots who continued to fly the Jug would probably have a different opinion about the ability of the Jug to mix it up with the luftwaffe.

I think the 4th guys were more inclined to want to dogfight with the luftwaffe seeing as a lot of them came from the Eagle Squadrons that flew spits while a higher proportion of the 56th boys did not come from the eagle squadrons but directly from the States where they were more trained in B&Z tactics which the Jug was very good at.

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 06:32 PM
LilHorse wrote:
-
- Platypus_1.JaVA wrote:
- But
-
-- really, I Always assumed that the P-51 did take the
-- best of the LW and pushed it far back over the rhine
-- (or however you've said it)
--
-- The P-47's main role, EVENTUALLY, was ground attack.
-- Yes?
-
- Actually, it's main role was that of a high altitude
- escort fighter. It was only later when it was
- supplanted in that role by the P-51 that it showed
- itself to be a great ground pounder.
-
- It's been argued here (and I think quite
- convincingly) that much of the tough work in the
- high alt. escort area was already done by the time
- the P-51s arrived on the scene. That the guys flying
- the Jugs had already dealt with the best that the LW
- had to send up.
-
- Mustangs replaced the Jugs for two major reasons:
- they had a longer range on internal fuel and they
- were much cheaper to manufacture than the P-47 (by
- more that half). The P-51 had a slight performance
- edge in speed and more than that in manuverability
- at lower altitudes. But way high up the Jug still
- beat it power-wise. And the Jug was surprisingly
- nimble compared to other a/c at very high altitudes
- because it could still produce it's sea level hp up
- there when other a/c were wallowing about
- underpowered.
-

Right, another point of discussion. The ground-pounding role is said to be more dangerous then just A-A missions. Because you had all those Machine guns and cannons on the ground aimed at you. Furthermore, the infantry could hit you with their weapons. You all had to ignore this when you are on a run to drop your bombs or aim your rockets. Your flight must be very stable if you want to hit anyting with your ordinance. Furthermore, when you are focussed on the ground targets, you cannot notice aerial targets very easily.

So ground-pounding was alot more dangerous and yet, they put their most expensive plane in that role. Either they missed the economic aspect or it wasn't really meant to be that way. Even in that role, the P-47 got one of the best kill-ratio's of the entire war.



1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye
shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be
measured to you again.

http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/templates/subSilver/images/logo_phpBB.gif (http://acompletewasteofspace.com/forum/index.php)

XyZspineZyX
10-07-2003, 06:42 PM
The P-47 (any model) was designed for high-altitude ops - at 30.000 feet it could kill anything - but down on the deck its a clumsy VICTIM - no matter how many updates Oleg provides us with. During the final months of the war, it performed very well as a fighter-bomber in low-level operations - BUT this was simply possible only because the allies had almost total air superiority, thus there were no axis fighters left to tackle them. Just give me a low flying P47 as a target and I'll have fun in ANY axis fighter.

XyZspineZyX
10-08-2003, 01:59 AM
Dose any one know what the actual roll rait is for the P-47D27, D10 and D22? and or what sight would have this type of information?

XyZspineZyX
10-08-2003, 10:07 AM
Dunno about the D versions, but PM me and I can email
you NACA 868 (or part thereof) with the roll rates
for the P47C1RE which should be close to the D10