Game version 1.103 discussion: P-40E-1 in early access

[LukeFF]

Wasn't the p40 supposed to use a 2 point landing in real life?

No, the training manuals state it was to be landed 3-point.

[Y-29.SugaBizkit]

No, the training manuals state it was to be landed 3-point.

 

Alrighty good to know. Looked into it myself after I posted and saw that

[JtD]

I'm guessing all these guys are doing it wrong?

 

 

 

 

 

Training manuals are hardly the definite answer.

[JtD]

Thanks Matt for your answers. I'm guessing they are keeping the P-40 simplified like the Soviet planes they already included - I suppose if faced with realistic engine management, almost everybody would be flying Luftwaffe aircraft because of their simple engine operation.

[LukeFF]

I'm guessing all these guys are doing it wrong?

 

Training manuals are hardly the definite answer.

 

No need to get all smart. I'm just telling you what the official documentation from the USAAF had to say about the plane. 

 

 

Also, I've read on the forum that it only has four mixture settings, while the manuals states you could have anything you'd like in between these settings. Is it true it only has four mixture settings in game?

 

What manuals say they could set it to anything in between those four settings? 

Thanks Matt for your answers. I'm guessing they are keeping the P-40 simplified like the Soviet planes they already included

 

The thing is, the P-40 really was that simple to fly. I haven't really come across anything in the documentation that says it was a hard airplane to manage, when it comes to its engine.

[JtD]

No need to get all smart. I'm just telling you what the official documentation from the USAAF had to say about the plane.

One late war training manual is hardly "the" official documentation from the USAAF. Plus, the question wasn't what the documentation says, but how you were supposed to land the P-40. Which is two point, among others for the reasons given above.

 

 

What manuals say they could set it to anything in between those four settings?

About 9 out of the 10 I looked it up in. So I suppose you can pick any one you like. Just not your training manual.

[LukeFF]

One late war training manual is hardly "the" official documentation from the USAAF.

 

I'd hardly call a manual from 1943 a late war manual:

 

 

The British apparently didn't have a problem, either, with it being landed 3-point:

 

 

Plus, the question wasn't what the documentation says, but how you were supposed to land the P-40.

 

Er, what? I'd certainly hope the USAAF would know how their planes were supposed to be landed.

 

About 9 out of the 10 I looked it up in. So I suppose you can pick any one you like. Just not your training manual. 

 

So, you're saying the USAAF didn't know how to train their pilots properly? Another excerpt, which comes from the same manual referenced in my first image:

 

 

I could post excerpts from all my other manuals which say the exact same thing, by the way. 

Edited October 5, 2015 by LukeFF

[Alkyan]

No you can choose your mixture

Edited October 5, 2015 by Alkyan

[LukeFF]

No you can choose your mixture

 

Only one of four mixture settings. Don't let the animation of the mixture handle confuse you. That's straight from what were were told during beta testing.

[Maxyman]

Only one of four mixture settings. Don't let the animation of the mixture handle confuse you. That's straight from what were were told during beta testing.

Just to confirm... 60-70% mixture (according to the chat) is automatic?

[JtD]

The thing is, the P-40 really was that simple to fly. I haven't really come across anything in the documentation that says it was a hard airplane to manage, when it comes to its engine.

Depends on the reference. Not many systems, but all that are there except for the CSP and the automatic mixture correction over altitude, have to be worked manually.

I'd hardly call a manual from 1943 a late war manual

I would. The war lasted 6 years around here and late 1943 is the last third. Given that at least 90% of the P-40's manufactured had already been built when the manual was published, I'd also say it's also late war from a P-40 perspective.

The British apparently didn't have a problem, either, with it being landed 3-point:

If someone tells me "it's easy, but if" I certainly don't see the "but if" as the thing I am supposed to do.

Er, what? I'd certainly hope the USAAF would know how their planes were supposed to be landed.

The manual is for training pilots. Of course they need to manage a 3-pointer. It's the landing requiring the higher piloting skills and giving the lowest landing speeds and landing runs. Why would the book teach them 2 point landings instead?

So, you're saying the USAAF didn't know how to train their pilots properly? Another excerpt, which comes from the same manual referenced in my first image:

I already told you that I looked into that manual, and it's the only one not explicitly saying that intermediate settings can and should be used. Why did you post that? And what does your lack of understanding have to do with USAAF training?

I could post excerpts from all my other manuals which say the exact same thing, by the way.

Great. And how many do say "four 'marked' positions"? They also always say something along the lines of see attachment. Read the book, not just a single paragraph.

That's straight from what were were told during beta testing.

[Edited]

 

So, from my end that's all the one line quoting you'll see for the remainder of the topic.

Edited October 5, 2015 by Bearcat

[Bearcat]

Just because the training manuals say it should be landed 3 point does not make a 2 point landing incorrect. In practice a landing that does not damage the aircraft or injured the pilot would be a good one yes?

[Gump]

i've heard an american wwii pilot (p-47) saying that they'd have love to land 3-pointers, but there was no time for that - they had to land fast and get out of the way for the rest of the planes coming in. so they were usually 2 point main landings, fast.

[Dave]

Wasn't the p40 supposed to use a 2 point landing in real life?

I have no issues landing it. I fly a regular racetrack circuit and land it exactly the way I have done every tail dragger I've flown IRL.

My first flying instructor (a P-51 combat veteran) taught me to try for 3-points. If you [Edited] it up or can't get the tail down in the flare and touch the mains first, hold the tailwheel off as long as you can until it settles onto the runway. Once all 3 are down and you are decelerating add a little throttle to maintain airflow over the rudder and keep it tracking straight. This last step is important in the P40 as versions prior to M I think had a much shorter fuselage and were prone to ground looping.

Edited October 6, 2015 by Bearcat
Language

[tailwheel]

Just spent an unpleasant evening flying in campaign mode. The map settings are really making the game un-fun to play I'm spending more time fiddling with the map than actually flying. Can we get a patch to undo this?

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

just because it is written doesn't make it so...

[LLv24_Zami]

Just spent an unpleasant evening flying in campaign mode. The map settings are really

making the game un-fun to play I'm spending more time fiddling with the map than actually flying. Can we get a patch to undo this?

 

No, don't undo the new map completely. Leave the line marking the actual frontline. Or fade the colours so that map markings are clearly visible.

But I like to see which side of the front I'm flying at the moment.

[Alkyan]

Only one of four mixture settings. Don't let the animation of the mixture handle confuse you. That's straight from what were were told during beta testing.

What?! Really? Good to know. They need to release some flight manual, even short one. How are you supposed to figure out that by yourself

[Dakpilot]

What?! Really? Good to know. They need to release some flight manual, even short one. How are you supposed to figure out that by yourself

 

 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/18463-p-40e-1-cockpit-diagram-and-engine-operating-limits/

 

In the 'Manuals' section​

 

Cheers Dakpilot​

 

[Alkyan]

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/18463-p-40e-1-cockpit-diagram-and-engine-operating-limits/

 

In the 'Manuals' section​

 

Cheers Dakpilot​

 

Thanks !

[Gump]

Just spent an unpleasant evening flying in campaign mode. The map settings are really making the game un-fun to play I'm spending more time fiddling with the map than actually flying. Can we get a patch to undo this?

 

im gonna chime in on this again...i interpret "fiddling" meanding you have to keep zooming and recentering the thing. i can agree - it seems to get more aggravating as time goes on. it has caused me to get killed by enemies. i can see no good reason for the map acting like this...PLEASE FIX.

[tailwheel]

No, don't undo the new map completely. Leave the line marking the actual frontline. Or fade the colours so that map markings are clearly visible.

But I like to see which side of the front I'm flying at the moment.

Yes, very true, putting in the frount lines but much thinner and faded is a good idea. The arrows and other stuff don't really add information we would use in action. Since we don't get captured behind enemy lines like we did in 46, the frounts don't make as much difference. However knowing when to expect enemy action is helpful.  Currently some of the lines cover over most of rivers or towns or roads. I looked online for WW2 pilot maps. From what I saw most maps are for ground use. And for in flight use they would be useless. I would rather have useable maps than historically accurate ones.

 

Suggestion for future immersion; bleed occasional opposing units on either side of a frount to keep us on our toes. 

 

Doing navigation is a major immersion element. From using paper maps myself, the thing I found is that maps have to be quick readable. So details need to be crisp and with good contrast. Given you want to glance down at a map, read it quick and get back to looking out the windscreen, you don't want vague or poorly colored maps. I tried putting a map on a second screen, and I'm not really sure that is a better idea. Having a paper map allows you to look over the top of the map with your peripheral vision or glance up/down real quickly to get a good bearing. How to do that on one monitor or two might be something to R&D. In the long run. I started getting used to toggling the screen between map & cockpit and it was becoming more comfortable. But that requires the map to remember where I left it. If we could rotate it that would be even better. Doing that with a paper map makes nav much more intuitive.

[CSW_Hot_Dog]

Only one of four mixture settings. Don't let the animation of the mixture handle confuse you. That's straight from what were were told during beta testing.

So it will be best, if animation also has only these four position just like actual ingame mixture settings. Should not be hard to implement, what do you think? Devs?

[JtD]

Agree, if modelled wrong, at least make it totally wrong.

[LukeFF]

Agree, if modelled wrong, at least make it totally wrong.

If you think it's that bad, then by all means send a PM to the team explaining how it should be modeled.

[JtD]

I don't really care enough about what mistakes they make with the BoM P-40 to do that. I'm disappointed enough with the BoS campaign to not buy BoM for now.

 

I'm happy to point out obvious errors when they are mentioned on the forums. Feel free to pass on the information.

[tailwheel]

Actually maps and charts look different. Google aeronautical chart  and that's more what I would like to see in the map view. Are there such charts/maps in museums that could be referenced?

[Pilot_Rabbit]

Here is an interesting interview with a former Soviet P-40 series pilot (English version). 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/golodnikov/part2.htm

Only dual 50.cal brownings mounted on nose of Soviet P-40 in his regiment at least. Dont know if it was a trend back then.Could we have that armament option in game? 

Edited October 8, 2015 by Pilot_Rabbit

[Finkeren]

Here is an interesting interview with a former Soviet P-40 series pilot (English version). 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/golodnikov/part2.htm

Only dual 50.cal brownings mounted on nose of Soviet P-40 in his regiment at least. Dont know if it was a trend back then.Could we have that armament option in game? 

 

That's the P-40B and Cs he's talking about (those we know as 'Tomahawks') They had a default armament of 2x.50cals on the cowling and 4x.30cals in the wings, which the Soviet ground crews often took out to improve performance.

 

We have the P-40E, which had no armament in the cowling but 6x.50cals in the wings, of which 2 were often removed in VVS service.

[Flynco]

Hi I have a question, first in the cockpit the propeller device ( small black knob) no work back and next ? and how I can open and closed motor radiator ? I try with default setting but no work...

 

Bye

[L3Pl4K]

Hello maybe the devs close some memory leaks, but i have regulary crashes. Restart the client after one flight is in 9/10 cases  a workaround. Will we have some improvements in the next patch?

[216th_Jordan]

 Auto-rich gives best performance (as it should), but you can still get maximum RPM and full manifold pressure with auto-lean, which is surprising to me, but i've no idea if that's correct or not.

 

I think the engine will run pretty well on auto lean but it will overheat quite fast, maybe thats whats meant with performance. 

[-DED-Rapidus]

3 planes with bombs, target almost destroyed

Edited October 14, 2015 by -DED-Rapidus

[SR-F_Winger]

3 planes with bombs, target almost destroyed

If only the russian depots were that small:P

[L3Pl4K]

 

 

If only the russian depots were that small:P

 

Russian Depots are much larger,

 

Not large enough

 

[No601_Swallow]

 Great Vid. Must have been a nailbitter.

[-DED-Rapidus]

If only the russian depots were that small:P

nothing, its was germany depots and train

[SOLIDKREATE]

So, far as the bird stands I'm starting to like it. It's a little slow on the bomb release though. Other than that a fast plane for sure especially in a dive.

[Brano]

Hi I have a question, first in the cockpit the propeller device ( small black knob) no work back and next ? and how I can open and closed motor radiator ? I try with default setting but no work...

 

Bye

For cowl flaps to operate,you have to assign/check what key you have bound to operate "outer cowl flaps" in your settings (engine settings in particular)

I dont know exactly what you mean by "small black knob"

[Brano]

So, far as the bird stands I'm starting to like it. It's a little slow on the bomb release though. Other than that a fast plane for sure especially in a dive.

It is  the slowest fighter on deck (ok not counting ishak here) that can achieve max +/- 470km/h which is 30/40km slower then LaGG-3 and Yak-1.It can scratch some 560km/h at 5k,but above it is just losing performance.There is no ideal hight to fight with this plane on russian front.

Its acceleration is nowhere to be seen.It is just as poor as there is none

To achieve high speed in dive,you have obviously to climb up there first.Problem.Climb rate of 9-10m/s is on par with sturmovik I would say.Try to catch He-111 in a climb.

There is nothing this plane can offer to me that other VVS fighters cant do better.This is a real flying coffin for me,not LaGG-3