Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About Zirashi

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Best sim for consoles: Battlefield 5 Cons: Not really a flight sim. Could use more focus on flying. This is what it looks like when you have no integrity. Not a coincidence that it’s filled with what I assume are most likely affiliate links (buying DCS from Amazon lmao).
  2. High six was in my mind from reading one of the B-25 charts and that was incorrect. I should’ve proofread what I was typing lol. I wasn’t second guessing the data of the report, I was second guessing my interpretation of it. That’s why I started with “amateur math ahead” and “can someone point out glaring mistakes.” I am not scrutinizing the report to dispute it, I am doing so to learn what I can from it. For example, I still do not understand why theIr P-47 CDF would be formulated in such a way that makes it capable of producing probabilities greater than 1 and less than 0.
  3. Interesting formula in that. Be forewarned, there's going to be amateur math and I really hope someone can point out some glaring mistakes I made because this seems unbelievable. If my understanding of statistics and interpretation of this text is correct, they have a cumulative distribution function showing the probability of a P-47 suffering a class "A" damage in 'n' hits. Something that sticks out to me in this is that because of the π in the formula, it is capable of producing values greater than 1 and less than 0, both of which are not possible (probabilities can't b
  4. Speaking from only the perspective of an end user, I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be technically possible, especially with the new hardware coming at the end of this year. But possible doesn’t mean probable. I highly doubt that any console ports are anywhere in their plans at all right now. This will most likely stay PC only.
  5. Actually yes, yes you absolutely can. That’s literally the purpose of mathematics: to develop the tools that allow us to explain the reality we live in. This is why it is the universal language of physicists. It’s the reason agencies like NASA can land a functioning rover on Mars despite never having been there. With the correct formulas, and the correct data inserted into those formulas, you can most certainly simulate an aircraft in atmospheric flight accurately. This is why sim devs don’t give a damn about the 70 year old personal anecdotes from Hauptmann Deutschland or Captain
  6. Fun fact Top 5 Allied aces of WW2 and the aircraft they scored the majority of their kills in: Ivan Kozhedub - La-5/La-7 Alexander Pokryshkin - P-39 Grigory Rechkalov - P-39 Nikolai Gulayev - P-39 Kirill Yevstigneyev - La-5/La-7
  7. Could be by design. Ambient temperature at 30,000 feet is right around -50C according to Google. Coincidentally, or perhaps incidentally, 30,000 feet is just past the P-51D’s high blower critical altitude.
  8. The program knows all those things at all times. There is nothing that happens in game that the program doesn’t know about. That’s how it generates the game world for you to interact with. Under the hood, all games are literally all numbers. What could have been a potential target or your intended target is irrelevant. All that matters is the data representing the virtual bullet and the data representing whatever game object that bullet actually intercepted in the game world.
  9. When people hear “Bf109,” they think impressive climb rate. When people hear “Spitfire,” they think impressive turn rate. When people hear “Tempest,” they think impressive speed. When people hear “P-47,” they think impressive durability. When people hear “Fw190” they think impressive roll rate. There’s a reason for that.
  10. There’s an August 1945 manual that says early D mustangs vented into the left wing tank and later versions vented to the fuselage tank. Venting in to a full tank would cause it to be drained overboard. Edit: Probably better to show rather than tell. This is the April 1944 flight operating instruction manual for the P-51D-5. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/P-51D-manual-5april44.pdf Fuel management is on page 15. This is the August 1945 AAF pilots training manual for the North American P-51D/K. https://www.scribd.com/doc/34
  11. The D-5’s manual says if the fuselage tank is filled, take-offs and climbs to “safe altitude” are to be done with the fuselage tank first. If there is no fuel in the fuselage tank, then use the left wing tank instead. Once “safe altitude” is established, pilots are to switch to external drop tanks until empty, then back to fuselage until 25 gallons remain, and then finally to wing tanks, manually alternating between left and right to maintain wing balance. When all of the other tanks are drained, then pilots are to switch back to the fuselage tank to use the last 25 gallons that were kept in r
  12. Fellow War Thunder player here (I think I’m at over 1k hours played by now), all of these are objectively false. The only things WT has over BoX is variety, player count, and the fact that it’s technically free.
  13. That report is nuts. Out of 90 men, only 4 escaped the attack and the rest basically had a 50/50 chance to either have been captured or killed. And this is in mid 1944 when the allies were basically wrapping it up and the Luftwaffe was on its last legs. Bomber crewman must’ve been one of the most insane duties to have.
  14. That Yak-1b's engine instantly seized and started leaking on the left wing with a single shot to the center right wing. Only 1C knows the extent of the damage on the right wing, but regardless of that, it's literally a one shot kill. The second shot on the P-47 severed right wing controls and ripped out a gear leg, rendering it combat ineffective and in a state that I would consider effectively dead. Best the pilot can hope for is a crash landing. Also note that reports posted by others on these forums showed that probability of a single shot kill (with kill being defined as failure to RTB) on
  • Create New...