Simple way to kludge a P-47 campaign?

[Voyager]

I'm wondering if there is a simple way to kludge in a P-47 campaign, either into the main mission generator campaigns, or using the PWCG? 

 

This is more of a practice/stopgap until the official one gets released; something to run through as I learn the aircraft and current flying dynamics. 

 

Thank you,

 

Harry Voyager

[PatrickAWlson]

I need to add the planes to PWCG before anything can be done.  There is some code around each plane.  After that they could be added.  Let me see if I can do something this weekend.

[sevenless]

2 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I need to add the planes to PWCG before anything can be done.  There is some code around each plane.  After that they could be added.  Let me see if I can do something this weekend.

 

Hey that would be great. An additional idea: Would it be possible to add to your excellent PWCG a submodule, which would allow the user to generate simplified missions? So to speak a quick-Mission generator Deluxe, where you can, say, generate a bomber interception mission with n planes (say P-47) on a map of choice (map and time of year) against n bombers (say Ju88) with optional amount of n escorts (say G14s) starting at a given height (n meters) and a given distance (n kilometres)?

Edited January 24, 2019 by sevenless

[Guest deleted@134347]

3 hours ago, Voyager said:

I'm wondering if there is a simple way to kludge in a P-47 campaign, either into the main mission generator campaigns, or using the PWCG? 

 

This is more of a practice/stopgap until the official one gets released; something to run through as I learn the aircraft and current flying dynamics. 

 

Thank you,

 

Harry Voyager

 

for what it's worth there's a way to change planes in the scripted campaigns... the fan made ones.. (not the official ones)..

 

however, i've only tried it with the bom/bos planes.. 

 

[Gambit21]

 

If you did do this, then of course don't post it publicly.

[Jade_Monkey]

P-47 AI has a lot of issues taking off. It's been hit or miss for me. Most of the time they just taxi to the runway and sit there.

[Voyager]

That would be very cool, but don't feel like you need to put yourself out. BoBp is still in pre-release phase, so quite a bit may change between now and release.

 

Re: Jade_Monkey: The takeoff problems do make sense. From what I've been seeing, depending on your load out, and take-off configuration, the aircraft can need a considerable runway to get up to speed. If I'm doing the non-WI takeoff (2800RPM + 45" boost), I've taken to starting my rollout on a taxiway that runs into the main runway, rather than starting at the start of the runway. This is doubly true if I'm going up with a full bomb and rocket load. BY that point, I'm generally even looking for clear ground beyond the runway, because I know I won't be up by the end of it.

 

Using 20 degrees of flaps is supposed to cut about 20% of the distance off of the run, and full WI power can cut that even further, but its still a long slow launch to get airborne.

[morron76]

Man, I clearly need to get BOBP just for the T'bolt. Sounds like fun! (I've always loved -47s/-84s/-105s & sounds like they got the groundhog effect going accurately ?)

Edited January 25, 2019 by morron76

[Jade_Monkey]

6 hours ago, Voyager said:

That would be very cool, but don't feel like you need to put yourself out. BoBp is still in pre-release phase, so quite a bit may change between now and release.

 

Re: Jade_Monkey: The takeoff problems do make sense. From what I've been seeing, depending on your load out, and take-off configuration, the aircraft can need a considerable runway to get up to speed. If I'm doing the non-WI takeoff (2800RPM + 45" boost), I've taken to starting my rollout on a taxiway that runs into the main runway, rather than starting at the start of the runway. This is doubly true if I'm going up with a full bomb and rocket load. BY that point, I'm generally even looking for clear ground beyond the runway, because I know I won't be up by the end of it.

 

Using 20 degrees of flaps is supposed to cut about 20% of the distance off of the run, and full WI power can cut that even further, but its still a long slow launch to get airborne.

 

 

No, i was referring to AI planes. They just taxi but many times wont even attempt to take off. I'll play around with the fuel load to see if that's the issue.

[Voyager]

3 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

 

No, i was referring to AI planes. They just taxi but many times wont even attempt to take off. I'll play around with the fuel load to see if that's the issue.

Sorry, I forgot to complete my thought. 

 

I would speculate that because the takeoff roll is so long, either the AI is seeing the runways as being to short and getting into an indecision loop, or that they are getting stuck on which of the four potential modes to take off in. 

 

I'd guess a way to check this would be to set up a fully loaded AI He-111 at an air field that is to small for it and see what it does. 

 

Conversely, trying a flight of stripped down, minimum load P-47s and see if the hesitation goes away. 

 

Third option is to go with e full load, but just cut the fuel to 1010 litres, so the auxiliary fuel tank is empty, and see if they behave differently. Having the aux tank full changes the cog of the plane. 

[Gambit21]

I have a couple P-47 test missions where the AI flights taxi and take off just fine with full fuel and bomb load.

 

I haven’t checked them in a few weeks but I boot them up later. 

[Voyager]

What sort of runways do the airfields have? I know the Eastern most one on the Moscow map is probably to short for a fully loaded P-40 to get out of without over driving the engine, but I haven't tried it with the Thunderbolt yet. 

[Gambit21]

I have them taking off from the short Moscow runways no problem. Unless a problem has arisen in the past few weeks which I don’t anticipate.

 

I’ll verify in a bit.

 

[Ribbon]

It would be cool if devs enable us to change/option opponent and our prefferable planes in available/current career.

So we don't need to wait official release or scripted campaigns which wont happen on different maps due to historical accuracy.

Something like we have in QMB.

I see no harm to product there!

 

[Gambit21]

How did I get to be 48 years old never having heard or read the word "kludge" before?

[LukeFF]

14 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

It would be cool if devs enable us to change/option opponent and our prefferable planes in available/current career.

So we don't need to wait official release or scripted campaigns which wont happen on different maps due to historical accuracy.

Something like we have in QMB.

I see no harm to product there!

 

 

Not gonna happen. It takes time to program that stuff, and frankly, something like that is a waste of time.

Edited January 26, 2019 by LukeFF

[AndyJWest]

12 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

How did I get to be 48 years old never having heard or read the word "kludge" before?

 

Really? I can only assume that you've lived a charmed life, of have found an equally appropriate word for the sort of fix that technically works, but you wish didn't given how ashamed you are of having to resort to it. What do you call that sort of thing?

[-TBC-AeroAce]

3 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

 

Really? I can only assume that you've lived a charmed life, of have found an equally appropriate word for the sort of fix that technically works, but you wish didn't given how ashamed you are of having to resort to it. What do you call that sort of thing?

 

A workaround. 

[Gambit21]

Jury Rigg