Jump to content

Ehret

Members
  • Content Count

    1377
  • Joined

Community Reputation

446 Excellent

1 Follower

About Ehret

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1028 profile views
  1. No... How? The extreme loudness of aero engines is the thing which makes difficult to record and reproduce sounds of them.
  2. I have question - would you prefer to fly with +100 victories ace or a wing-man who had 0 recorded victories but was always there to do some posturing/marginal shots forcing your 6 bandit to break? Which one you would prefer to fly with? That's an exaggerated comparison but it shows there is more to quality of a fighter pilot than victories alone. Then there is a survival bias - if you had to fly to the end (of war or your own) then just by chance many of survivors would accumulate big scores. That's one side which is talked about; the other (masses of killed pilots) is just ignored...
  3. Another effect in the plane like the P-51D (compressor is driven by a fix ratio of engine RPM) is that if you lower the RPM then you also lowering supercharger boost thus the manifold pressure governor may open throttle more to maintain the same MP (assuming you are at low enough altitude). Thanks to that there will be less excess heat from compression and more useful HP available. Radiators may also close by some amount reducing drag further. One way to extract extra performance from engine if you have some extra MP control ability like the P-47D is to open the throttle fully and use combination of turbo-boost/RPM to get the desired MP. In the other game where the P-51D has the ram-air boost lever implemented you can do a similar thing. There is funny trick with the in game's P-38J too - set RPM to about 50-60% range (the green range on the RPM dial) and open throttle 100% (and if temps are allowing set mixture to lean as well - the trick is awesome in winter maps). You will be amazed with the speed it gives and how much it extends the timer both at once... IRL low RPM, high boost + lean mixture is inviting combination for a detonation, thought. However, that's ok in the game so there is no reason to not use it.
  4. The P-47D in the game is still an ample turn fighter as long flaps are deployed over 50%. The major cons is that Jugs flaps are slow to open/close thus the enemy can disengage easily if noticed "the tactic". The flaps in the P-38J are quick to open/close and the Lighting offers better acceleration thus it's not so easy to evade.
  5. That's not only IL-2 fault but an inline cooled by pressurized liquids (all inline powered fighters basically) could seize after a moment after a coolant leak. However, just imagine protests if that was in the game.... Perhaps, that's why the Jug "feels" fragile. The P-47 was robust for a fighter indeed - the plane was big and the pilot had the extra protection of a twin radial in the front, the turbo/intercooler unit in the back and the extra air/exhaust ducking in the bottom. The Jug had the safest ditch and that's actually in the game. Of course it wasn't a tank and even tanks have some surprising vulnerabilities like getting disabled by shots in the back by 25-30mm rounds.
  6. For "this out-turned that" anecdotes it's important to re-check if possible what kind of turns are talked about. There are quotes that "the P-40 out-turned Zeros" which sounds unbelievable but then you get the part that the out-turning took place in fast downward spirals thus it was possible as Zero's ailerons locked badly at faster speeds. So if there is a claim that "this out-turned that" but nothing is told about speeds and what kind of turn it is (instantaneous or continuous or struggling for control in a stall fight perhaps) then the claim tells very little as any plane can out-maneuver another if the right parameters are met.
  7. Have you set mix to the 100% when using the water injection? Otherwise the WEP will be weaker and I'm not sure if that's realistic. Said that 15m of ADI should be usable at full boost in one go if needed. The workaround is to lower MP to 58-60" which is... workable if you are very careful but that should not be necessary. Another benefit would be easier use of the plane - as now to get best of the P-47D (and not kill the engine in a short order) if you want WEP "alike" power it's convoluted: turn on ADI injection, change mix to 100%, set throttle (use turbo-throttle link) for 60", set RPM for 2600rpm and repeat inverse for WEP off. So +1 for the 150 "mod" - if the current system has to stay then it would be relatively simple way for correct and accessible use of the 65" WEP at least.
  8. Forcing an overshoot is a valid tactic... However, it's the last resort type of thing when you are sure that you won't out-maneuver (or outrun) the enemy. It's far easier to do in a computer game because if it worked then great; if not (got hit anyway or didn't recover) then you can just re-spawn seconds later... no such "luxury" was available IRL.
  9. Ehret

    Spotting.

    I barely can see anything in few km range unless there is smoking or tracers flying. Only when very close (under 1000m or so) planes render but if the target will go further it just disappears (or look that way - the result is the same for me thought). Others have the issue too because as long I keep my plane no smoking I'm rarely getting followed at all and that's when orbiting at 10K ft over hot-spots... When I try this with trailing exhaust plumes it takes just a moment to get a six. That's at ranges in few km only. The old system had problems with the 9.5km visibility sphere and occasional bugs related to clouds. However, it was consistent but the current is anything but. I can get objects (including ships as well) just to be gone at some ranges just by changing the zoom settings... Really?! No one asked for that - only to have extended the 9.5km max visibility so there wouldn't be sudden "on/off" for contacts. Now that's is fixed but we (at least some of us) have "on/off" problem at closer ranges.
  10. "...unless you have a hun on your tail" - 15m of ADI supply for nothing in the game and historic pilots were told to not hesitate after 5m when they were fighting for live(s). Go to QMB and set the "unbreakable" flag - and the stuff start to perform only because you won't subconsciously throttle down all the time. Thanks to the 150 octane boost scaling the BOBP's P-51D has enough of time for 60-67" and that's far more beneficial than peak transient performance. You can now put a competitive fight in time domain aka as tactics. There was a chase in one match where I could stay with P-47Ds in the P-38J at SL. That's how hard people are throttling down in Thunderbolts.
  11. IMHO the Thunderbolt also can be called a heavy fighter... with one (18 cylinder double radial + all air ducks, air-air inter-cooler and turbo) engine but still big and heavy. In the game P-47D has limited use for ADI - only for 5m for straight use but carries 15m of supplies. The WEP has 2600hp in the game but +2800hp settings were also available. But most important are tactics - now with the 9.5km visibility sphere gone it should be possible to use some altitude to good effect. Staying very low without cover of other friendly fighters is ill advised. That's true even if you are driving the 150 octane Spitfire.
  12. Truism by the definition is true... jeez. And you just said it yourself - "It is not only the biglyness that matters." - yet when I provided some ideas and backed up them with something then you object. Go to and complain to the guy from the Vietnam or the WW2 pilots from videos like this. You can see strafing runs with firing times 5-6s and the "walking" I mentioned. This is at 15:38 good example of 5-6s of firing P-47 at target defended by flak. I think you were severely underestimating Allied pilots. Or this at 15:55 strafing for about 10s at targets defended by flak as well. Yes - you right - they all are no match for the P-47s as an attack plane simply because they are vulnerable in-lines. My mistake.
  13. That a higher caliber rounds provides more destructive power that is just a truism. Is 20mm bigger than 12.7mm - yes it is. It's only when you compare complete applications something more elaborate can be said. Otherwise why continue the topic at all - only to repeat such (20mm > 12.7mm) basic assertion? For the Tempest vs the Thunderbolt they are of similar size and both were used to strafe. Imho, there are no better platforms to compare actual historic real life use of 0.50" and 20mm guns than those. It seems that for in-wing mounted armament you can mount up to 4x 20mm or up to 8x 0.50" and so on. They are good match.
  14. That's exactly why because precise aimed fire is so difficult any technique which makes that easier is welcome. Just watch some P-47s gun camera footage where pilots do very long bursts using visible incendiary hits on the ground to direct fire. They can do because they have 400rpg and battery of 8 harmonized guns. Thunderbolt can expend 3200 (4000 in the N) rounds where the Tempest can only 800. If the Tempest driver would strafe the target shooting for 3s then the Jug's one can (and will) for 6s (4.5s only needed for similar destructive result as Tempest's) and use the same percentage of ammo reserves. Or the Jug will be able to strafe twice number of targets on the same sortie for the same time each. (targets don't have to be in exactly the same place strafed at the same moment so don't tell that this must result in extra exposure to AA threats). You arguments is like that a single 1500 pound bomb must be so much better than two 1000 pounders dropped at two different occasions. (The Tempest has 1.5x more raw destructive power; the Jug has twice the firing time) Maybe; maybe not - probably that's depends on the mission which every may differ. Perhaps it was missed but in this video the author talks about tests they performed in the Vietnam. The results was that HE explosion from 20mm alone couldn't disable a truck for good; even 40mm was not satisfactory (can be found in the video comments by the author). They had to mount 105mm cannon in gunships to have reliable weapon for the task.
  15. I counted only one clean shoot at the 9:40 mark in the video. The rest were partial hits or even missed. The Sabre had (as I understand) 4x 20mm rotary cannon prototypes (early M39 I think) so up to 4x 1500 cycling rate/m. Even after the 9:40 shot it's hard to assess the damage. Was it a killed truck? Now those tests were done in safe controlled environment. Add stress, AA fire and average level of marksmanship. The challenge will not be to kill the target but to land hits - any hits. That's easier with in-wing harmonized gun battery like in the Thunderbolt with big ammo reserves. Sure, the maximum damage potential per second is lower but you will have fewer total misses. You can see that in historic gun camera films - pilots were opening fire early and "walking" the burst on the ground to the target.* edit: * do you agree that such modern systems like CCIP are beneficial, right? If so then the "walking" technique serves pretty much the same purpose (but at cost of extra expended ammo which you can afford in the P-47 or P-38) as the CCIP.
×
×
  • Create New...