Does P40 really s**k, or is it just me?

[Matt]

The real problem for the P-40 in BoM is, that the combat limit is incredibly short (probably even bugged). I think the current limit of ~2-3 minutes for 55+ "hg is aceptable, since we have other planes that have similarly restricted time limits, but when you use WEP, your time limit for combat power will also decline. So you'll have 2-3 minutes of 55 "hg and then less than ~2 minutes of combat power left, at which most other planes easily outperform it already. And then you're stuck with continuous power, at which the P-40 is a sitting duck. So you can fight for around 4-5 minutes overall.

 

 

 

I used to love it. But now I'm not so sure anymore with what they did to it. You have to constantly adjust your manifold and RPM's every 5 seconds or you'll risk blowing your engine, and you'll risk blowing your engine maintaining 40''.

 

They got rid of the automatic manifold pressure regulator, since the real plane didn't have it either. That means that there's a constant need to adjust the manifold pressure when you change altitude, however, the RPM control doesn't need to be adjusted.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Matt

[Sgt_Joch]

On fuel quality, most of the aviation fuel used by Russia came from lend-lease.

 

http://archive.is/WbrPK

 

an average of 500,000 tons for each year. Soviet domestic production was mostly of 70-74 octane gas which was only used on older models, like the I-16.

 

http://www.oilru.com/or/47/1006/

 

So in game, you can safely assume that all U.S./U.K. models and even many Russian models are running on high octane western aviation fuel.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Sgt_Joch

[Falco_Peregrinus]

On fuel quality, most of the aviation fuel used by Russia came from lend-lease.

 

http://archive.is/WbrPK

 

an average of 500,000 tons for each year. Soviet domestic production was mostly of 70-74 octane gas which was only used on older models, like the I-16.

 

http://www.oilru.com/or/47/1006/

 

So in game, you can safely assume that all U.S./U.K. models and even many Russian models are running on high octane western aviation fuel.

 

 

 

The amount of help that the Allied gave to the Soviet Union was impressive. We always think about endless hordes of T34s roaming the battlefields, or about masses of Il-2s strafing german forward lines and wonder in amazement at how many war machines were being produced by the soviet all

throughout the war. Thousands of Mig-3s in just a few years, thousands of Sturmoviks, thousands of T34s and of every tank design imaginable.

 

Yet, we often tend to forget or underestimate that there was a huge logistics behind. Trucks to "move the country", trains, fuels for everything, food for soldiers,

and al the basic stuff to make a nation survive.

And if it's true that an excellent logistics win wars, and not the availability of 1000 Tiger I tanks, then... everything is put more in perspective.

 

Very interesting info in those links, thank you.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Ioshic

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Zhukov himself said that lendlease was what allowed the Soviet industry to focus on producing front line equipment and vehicles in the scale they did by not having to distract itself with all the stuff going on in the rear.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

Reinstalled game and that seemed to give me back time limit warnings (seems one of the last updates got rid of them for some reason) and so I did a series of  runs (3 runs each)

Real life "War Emergency Power" 50"+ @3000rpm        

WEP time exceeded 2:00

Combat time exceeded 3:20

Engine damage ~3:40

Notes: Real life limit 56"@3000rpm 5 minutes (1942), numerous cases of extended time use of 60"+, numerous enough to have Allison themselves give a response.

 

Real life "Military Power" 45"@3000rpm

WEP time exceeded 2:15

Combat time exceeded 3:15 (really surprised at this one)

Engine damage ~4:05

Notes: Ingame this powersetting is classed as "War Emergency Power", when no document calls it such and it cannot even do the 1941 requirement of 5 minutes, never mind 15 minutes that was given in 1942

 

1942 "Take off Power" 45"@2800rpm (Climb at 160mph as per manual)

WEP time exceeded 3:20

Combat time exceeded 3:25 (Combat power time seems to be unnaffected by things like RPM or Manifold Pressure)

Engine damage ~5:15 (note: engine unable to keep 45" after 5 minute mark (~9,500ft) as altitude increased, engine damage at 41")

 

Stalingrad autumn

 

All series of tests auto rads (but checked guages to check within parameters) and first two were level flight at 1000m. 3rd test was takeoff from runway.

 

 

 

Seems, that WEP uses also eats up Combat power time which doesn't seem to be a thing for other engines, or that Combat power seems to be about 3:20 indeterminate of what MP or RPM is.

 

Overall, Allison V-1710-39 is modelled as fragile as a chandelier when it was a tough engine that was extremely reliable even when used overboosted in Africa without the need for sand filters like the Merlin or DB, VVS seemed have filled the engine with oil and fuel filled with pieces of sticks in them or something. Never would of thought it was so bad, P-40 is essentially unplayable when your military power setting has barely more life then WEP in the DB 601, and that seems to corroborate with my online experience; you cannot use anything over 40"@2600rpm for any substantial period of time.

 

I was honestly worried when I heard of the P-40E coming and how I wondered how screwed over it would be by the devs engine time limit bollocks (knowing how Allison were extremely conservative with the settings they gave out, pretty much throughout the war), I seriously didn't think it was this bad.

Edited January 9, 2016 by RoflSeal

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

Remember reading an account of a 23'rd fighter group (ex AVG) running out of altitude in a fight against Oscars in Burma or China, don't remember who it was atm but he was running scared with them behind him shooting on the deck. Might actually have been Robert Scott in a P-40E. Anyways he was running scared like a little school girl running away from a wolf copple and he thought he only managed 10" on the manifold pressure gauge for the 10 minutes he was running. Afterwards he realized that the gauge went through the "stop" to 10" and the wonderful Allison was performing 75 inches for him, for 10 minutes before he had succeeded outrunning the Oscars on his tail.

10 minutes on 75 inches!

I was looking forward to the P-40E, was a reason to buy BOM pity I did.

I fly BOS with quite a few NA friends that was about to go for BOM as well, not now though. We were suspicious beforehand, US plane in a Russian game = P-40E in the current state! Needles to say we weren't wrong. A real pity we'd had loved to fly BOS more than we do, now we hardly fly it at all. Loads of Russians flying Yaks (with flaps down) and Pe-2's instead.

[Dakpilot]

I don't feel too bad about engine limits in P-40, they are not too far off from what was used in 1941/2, maybe a little on conservative side

 

trouble is when you allow 70" for ten minutes, this is what will be used all the time, every time.

 

With little need to make an engine last (ingame), and most aircraft not even lasting 10 minutes in 'airquake' servers, historical performance (a very few real life exceptions noted) becomes very unrealistic, even in expert servers (personal opinion) see above line

 

same with the much complained/debated over 'restricted boost' in Luftwaffe a/c, DB series engines were much higher compression than similar M105 Russian engine which was designed to operate at full available boost (taking into account engine cooling limits) DB series were not designed to run at 1.42 indefinitely, M-105 had much shorter projected lifetime and much higher manufacture numbers.

 

I would like the P-40 to be 'de-restricted' a little but consider that it is ,in this game, operated by foreign pilots and groundcrew  few if any manuals, and maybe with Russian oil, In a Western theater there would be more room for this argument, perhaps if Med comes around with no change to modeling there will be room for even greater discussion 

 

please stop with the US plane (hobbled) in Russian game bias theory (that belongs in FM discussions  ) 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Matt]

 

 

DB series engines were much higher compression than similar M105 Russian engine which was designed to operate at full available boost (taking into account engine cooling limits) DB series were not designed to run at 1.42 indefinitely, M-105 had much shorter projected lifetime and much higher manufacture numbers.

 

Compression ratio of the DB 601 and M-105 was basically the same. Also not sure why a higher compression would make an engine less durable in general, the DB 605 had a higher compression than the DB 601 and basically the same restrictions.

 

It's true that the Russian engines had a lower projected life time of course, but that's not what's modelled in BoS. It's modelled like the DB 601 and BMW 801 are way more fragile in general. Usually, the DB engines were not overhauled before 25 flight hours and only if they noticed wear (wear in the engine itself wasn't even checked before that, unless the pilot noticed anything), so they were durable enough for more than a few minutes of WEP.

[Dakpilot]

I was thinking of the DB601N which had significantly higher than M-105, you are right DB601E fitted to F4 had similar to Klimov

 

But I still find it interesting that earlier 601's had the clockwork timer that restricted max boost to 1 minute, until 42,  there must have been a reason for Daimler Benz and the Luftwaffe to physically 'control' the pilots engine use while fighting some of the most hotly contested air battles, the DB600 series did have a well known history of oil supply issues

 

but we are getting a bit off topic from P-40 (sorry)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited January 10, 2016 by Dakpilot

[LukeFF]

 

 

I fly BOS with quite a few NA friends that was about to go for BOM as well, not now though. We were suspicious beforehand, US plane in a Russian game = P-40E in the current state! Needles to say we weren't wrong.

 

Oh yes, the never-ending conspiracy that Russians are intentionally nerfing American-made planes.   

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Oh yes, the never-ending conspiracy that Russians are intentionally nerfing American-made planes.

For the last time Luke, we're supposed to keep it a secret - by acknowledging it exists they might get suspicious and start digging deeper. I don't even want to think about what would happen should they discover that we are planning to nerf the C-47 to the point that it can't even outroll a Fw-190!

[Gump]

Using anything except the absolute best in icon servers(and anything other than a fighter period) is asking for heartbreak.  If you're flying it in expert servers, the #1 thing you can do is fly it like the Tigers did and use your intellect.  Being successful with it is a labor of love.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I love how you have the audacity to call the plane "dumb", seeing as you're a master at aerodynamics and engineering and could produce something airworthy compared to the P40?

 

Beyond that, it sounds like you are flying the plane to its disadvantages. From what I've read recently it certainly wasn't on even ground matched up against 109's but could overcome that with the use of its rugged nature, firepower and teamwork. Luckily the devs have created a game that represents the aircraft's performance relatively well (Please no FM arguments), I think a lot more people would be mad if the p40 was zoom climbing after 109's and turning on a dime without bleeding any energy.

 

As I'm sure you're aware it doesn't climb or manoeuvre particularly well, though if you considerably lower the amount of fuel you take out on a sortie, as well as the x4 50cal option and take it out for a ground attack mission with a friend that may help. 

 

Staying under the radar and sneaking up on unsuspecting opponents turning and burning with Yaks down low and generally trying to keep yourself in as an advantageous position as possible will probably help, I notice there are usually huge blankets of thick cloud hanging around at low alt for people to hide/run away in as well.

 

If you're struggling to find people to fly with/cover you then jumping on TS is always a solution, they're a friendly bunch as far as I can tell. If you're looking for a war winning machine that can muscle out of most situations I think you're flying the wrong bird

 

.

even at its best, the p40 is not competitive with a 109 (or190, or 110, or probably even a stuka, he111?), head-to-head. the OP complained about it being VERY doggy.

but some of the advice is how to use it in teamwork tactic. of course, ANY plane employed in a "teamwork" tactic is going to be stronger... that is, IF the enemy isn't a "team" coming against you.

.

but there is a sort of paradox that happens in these games/sims, and that is that they portray a sort of history, and try to represent that history to an extent, but the "game" nature, requiring paying customers who play just for fun at their convenience, is not normally/typically conducive to the same kind of tactics and strategies.

.

....flying as a "group" in the game is actually NOT the norm and is easier said than done. IRL it was forced and normal. there are a lot of reasons why this is just how it IS and it MUST be a factor that is considered in a MP game/sim. anyways, creating plane models that simply MUST be flown as a group/squad/flight might satisfy a historical authenticity and experiential curiosity, but it such become mere hangar paraphernalia in a competitive MP game normative play. players want to play WHEN they want to play, HOW they want to play. trying to form a "group/team" requires all the stars to be aligned, and the player can just choose the easy alternative. EVEN IF, teams were easier, the idea that the enemy wouldn't have a team of more capable planes seems rather naïve.

.

the p40 LOOKS cool. gamers should be glad they don't have to fly one to live.

.

[7.GShAP/Silas]

I ONLY play IL-2 with at least one other guy(flying solo is pointless to me), so I don't feel such limitations.  I would recommend anyone to do everything they can to find other like-minded people to fly with.

[ACG_Kraut]

[Edited]

Edited January 22, 2016 by Bearcat

[Monostripezebra]

yeah, the P40 suffers probably most from the stricly restrictive engine modeling aproach in BoS, but it is still fun to fly..  however I would support an "millitary power" setting max-time expansion, as it would be both: more historical and benefical to gameplay

 

it also seems to benefit from setting the joystick input noise filter in the options, I go as high as 0.09 and it seems to fly better with those settings, give that a try, if you´re having trouble with that plane.

 

 

What I would also really recomend to the developers is a central information repository for engine data.. like max rpm, power settings for each plane.  AND preferabably even in game. Like in an info tab or so, like RoF had infos in each plane... IF accessibility for new players is an issue (mouse control...) then having all the players wanting into advanced play always search the data on the forums is probably another less helpful side which could really be remedied easy... and it would entice playes to switch to different aircraft fast (ie:not just flying the one you got figured out) which would be likely to benefit MP.

[LukeFF]

 

 

What I would also really recomend to the developers is a central information repository for engine data.. like max rpm, power settings for each plane.

 

That's what's already in the manual and - for the time being - what can be found on the forums here for the BoM planes released so far.  

[bokepacha]

That's what's already in the manual and - for the time being - what can be found on the forums here for the BoM planes released so far.  

I didn't find in the manual anything about P40, I-16, Bf-110 etc...

[LukeFF]

I didn't find in the manual anything about P40, I-16, Bf-110 etc...

 

Please re-read the last part of my sentence.

[Dakpilot]

That's what's already in the manual and - for the time being - what can be found on the forums here for the BoM planes released so far.  

 

Perhaps for a while, until BoM manual, your cockpit/performance guides for BoM  Aircraft could be stickied, or links to the threads in one stickied post in the manuals section would be enough, there is enough traffic to drop them off the first page quite quickly

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[bokepacha]

Please re-read the last part of my sentence.

Yes, I already did that and  I have information for each one of them. But for the rest of the aircrafts there is a  beautifully ordered excel table with climb, max and cruise performances, RPMs and ATAs, climb, take off and landing speeds, etc...

 

That's what I would like to see for the rest of the aircrafts.

[Monostripezebra]

Yes, I already did that and  I have information for each one of them. But for the rest of the aircrafts there is a  beautifully ordered excel table with climb, max and cruise performances, RPMs and ATAs, climb, take off and landing speeds, etc...

 

That's what I would like to see for the rest of the aircrafts.

 

and having it ingame would also make it userfriendlier..  Imagine, beeing on a server, trying out a new plane and just wanting that max. rpm.. and then RoF crashes again because it doesn´t like tab-ing out. It happend to me more then once. Don´t get me wrong, the manual is good.. but having the few infos, one who is allready going in the game, really needs to know to be able to operate accessible in-game would be far more coherent.

 

 

so, back to the P40.. if you´re reading this and haven´t found the vital engine management bit:

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

Edited January 14, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[-TBC-AeroAce]

p40 is like owning an old, rabid dog that has dementia. You love the dog and it loves you even though it cant do anything and sometimes it forgets who you are and bites you subjecting you to a horrible death

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Well, one thing I experience even on the summer maps is complete lack of effect on engine coming from air temperature, flying anything more than 20 % of outlet open is pointless since you may rather overcool the engine. Oil cooling is not a problem either. And in the meantime extended usage of more than 75 % of throttle (or more like any time you go over 2600 rpm) leads to engine damage, which eventually after less than a minute results in seizure of operation. If the AAA wont kill me than some fighter will because even if I would like to be fast I cant due to scripted limits. And it does not correspond to the temperatures engine is experiencing ... 

Edited January 19, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[BSS_Sniper]

You're not the only one OP. It should be a stable gun platform, but it's par for the course and all over the place. Don't mind the bandwagon kiddies in here. In their eyes this is more realistic than a real plane. lol The P40 definitely needs work, probably more than the ground handling in this game.

[Feathered_IV]

You're not the only one OP. It should be a stable gun platform, but it's par for the course and all over the place. Don't mind the bandwagon kiddies in here. In their eyes this is more realistic than a real plane. lol

 

Didn't the later models of P-40 have their tails moved further aft to try and remedy the poor lateral stability?

[Dakpilot]

Why should the P-40E be a 'Stable' gun platform?

 

It is well documented (by its designer) that it had longitudinal and lateral stability issues 

 

The K model introduced larger tail, which did not cure it, the fuselage was extended with the M model which still did not entirely fix the issue

 

Don Berlin wanted to redesign the engine cowling and radiator cowling shape as he felt that this was where the root of where the problem lay, but Curtiss chose the tail mods due to less interference with meeting wartime production contracts

 

don't mind the bandwagon kiddies who promote the Legend (although very deserved) rather than the actual flying qualities 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[bivalov]

i have seen several mentions that late series of P-40E also got "dorsal fin" (i.e. like P-40K-1/5).

it is really true, and how much/when? i mean, could we get "P-40E late" in North Africa add-on (El-Alamein 1942), for example?

Edited January 20, 2016 by bivalov

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Speaking of instability, some of it at least can be countered by trimming the aircraft but I was having some issues finding the best configuration. Anyone would be kind enough to share how he adjust the rudder/ailerons ?

[J4SCrisZeri]

LOL, ok I gave this plane more than one chance during the last weeks, but this bird is a joke

Slow, heavy, prone to stall. Always struggling to get some decent speed (average is 230-250 kmh)

Soon I loose altitude and I find myself brushing the top of the trees in ANY dogfight. It's silly.

 

Probably the WWII aces could get the best out of this plane, but I am a 2016 average PC player, not an ace, and just can't use it except for taking beautiful screenshots every now and then, when I go for a panoramic flight with no enemies.

Edited April 6, 2016 by J4SCrisZeri

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

That is one way of seeing things. The way I fly it in campaign is ... I always try to escort the bombers having at least 2000 feet alt advantage, so when they are attacked I can drop and have at least 350 mph, I try to kill the target in a first pass and extend. If you dogfight you will loose, 109 has twice as much energy. I've also seen Ai pulling in those F-2s and F-4s ludicrous turns, they say in books that P-40 could keep up in horizontal turn with 109 but when Ai goes for super tight turn it turns twice as fast as I do, no matter what speed I have. If you have speed you can try to do 1-2 loops.

 

But most of the time just try to extend.

 

Unless you of course talk about multi, where this aircraft has no other place than as a ground attacker.  

[Jade_Monkey]

I've tried multiple times, i give up on the p40.

[-IRRE-Icare]

In the bom campaign if you learn how to use engine you can treat your mission because AI is very predictible.

 

So right know I just want to try this plane in multiplayer only with bom planes even if you can't turn fight with a bf110, this plane is very capable if you keep your energy and maybe with more enginepower but saldy we don't have the engine upgrade.

Edited April 6, 2016 by -IRRE-Icare

[J4SCrisZeri]

I would never dare trying multiplayer on a P40, I was talking about my little QMB sorties, when I have time to play. P40 has a nice, aggresive design and I love seein' it in flight, but that's it. Not my cup of tea. I am a decent killer on a MC202 though, not to mention BF109 and others.

The other beast I really can't handle is FW190, very difficult in my opinion.

[-IRRE-Icare]

Yeah I understand it's a very hard plane to pilot but, like you, I love too much his aggressive design to him sleep in my hangar. Maybe we can dream of the engine upgrade that RflSeal was talking about.

[Finkeren]

Just remember folks, that in the Pacific and East Asia, where the P-40 was used the most and had the most success, it was battling aircraft which lie closer to the I-16 than to the Bf 109 in terms of performance.

[wtornado]

Well the Americans sent what they did not really use for the lend-lease program with Russia and a few allied countries in the Pacific

and the Allison V-1710-81 engine performance was not that great.

 

If it has the Merlin engine of fine British design in Battle of Moscow  then you could say that the plane under performs.  

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Just remember folks, that in the Pacific and East Asia, where the P-40 was used the most and had the most success, it was battling aircraft which lie closer to the I-16 than to the Bf 109 in terms of performance.

Now this is a massive depreciation of P-40 and Japanese aircraft. Starting from the latter ones, both A6M and Ki-43 were at least a generation ahead of I-16, which especially the first one proved in China completely wiping the Chinese/Soviet opposition flying not only I-15s or Curtiss Hawks but also the mentioned I-16. Hell, even contemporary Ki-27 proved to be able to deal with I-16 during the Khalkin-Gol events.

P-40 certainly was fighting aircraft not far from 109 E in terms of performance (exception again, Ki-27) and while its achievements are quite a lot exaggerated in the Far East and Pacific, to "trash" it like that is unfair.

 

It's portrayal in BoM is not perfect, mainly due to extremely rigorous limits imposed on the engine.   

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

It's portrayal in BoM is not perfect, mainly due to extremely rigorous limits imposed on the engine.   

 

This, all day long.

 

The engine limits currently in place are peace time training limits placed on the P 40 by the Army Air Corps.

[Finkeren]

Now this is a massive depreciation of P-40 and Japanese aircraft. Starting from the latter ones, both A6M and Ki-43 were at least a generation ahead of I-16, which especially the first one proved in China completely wiping the Chinese/Soviet opposition flying not only I-15s or Curtiss Hawks but also the mentioned I-16. Hell, even contemporary Ki-27 proved to be able to deal with I-16 during the Khalkin-Gol events.

P-40 certainly was fighting aircraft not far from 109 E in terms of performance (exception again, Ki-27) and while its achievements are quite a lot exaggerated in the Far East and Pacific, to "trash" it like that is unfair.

 

It's portrayal in BoM is not perfect, mainly due to extremely rigorous limits imposed on the engine.

Well you're certainly right, that the Zero was a more modern design than the I-16 and propably overall a more effective fighter.

 

In terms of performance however, the difference between early A6Ms and late I-16s is rather insignificant. The A6M2 is slightly faster (less than 10km/h) and climbs slightly better (less than 1 m/s). The A6M2 has a significantly lower wing loading but the I-16 has a solid lead in power/weight ratio.

[[TWB]Pand]

Unless you of course talk about multi, where this aircraft has no other place than as a ground attacker.  

 

Unfortunately, the most popular multiplayer server doesn't allow ordnance on the P-40s.