P47 review

[Sheriff88]

11 hours ago, Sublime said:

Are you DerSheriff on youtube?

This is what I feared.  Well.. Im still gonna try to finagle a P38. And a tempest. But looks like I may be lookong for at the Kuban and those 2 collectors planes... (FN and 1b)

No that's not me.!

[smink1701]

Beautiful to behold, a nightmare as a dogfighter.  FM is a mess.  Gabby would not have had 0 kills with this Peterbilt FM.  Only good thing is it make the P40 feel like a Spit!

Needs some major love. 

[Legioneod]

1 minute ago, smink1701 said:

Beautiful to behold, a nightmare as a dogfighter.  FM is a mess.  Gabby would not have had 0 kills with this Peterbilt FM.  Only good thing is it make the P40 feel like a Spit!

Needs some major love. 

 

Come on now, Peterbilt aint bad. If you woulda said international I'd have agreed?

I agree though FM does need some love.

[Rattlesnake]

2 hours ago, Legioneod said:

 

 

Overall the P-47 does feel ok, but there are a few glaring issues that need to be looked at (engine, dive, and elevator).

Literally the things which make or break the 47’s ability to be effective, and right now it’s broken.

[Legioneod]

1 minute ago, Rattlesnake said:

Literally the things which make or break the 47’s ability to be effective, and right now it’s broken.

Agreed. Thats the reason I started the P-47 FM thread, so I can do a full review of the FM. That way maybe we can come up with solutions/corrections for the problems.

[Psyrion]

I sometimes feel like these FM threads could do with more actual facts and less "expert" opinions. Reading through them leaves you about as clever as before. 

[Rattlesnake]

24 minutes ago, Psyrion said:

I sometimes feel like these FM threads could do with more actual facts and less "expert" opinions. Reading through them leaves you about as clever as before. 

Thanks for the opinion.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20090022749.pdf

 

P-47 and 190 high speed elevator authority relating to each other, reality versus game:

 

 

 

Also this. The game P-47 could never damage itself pulling too much G out of a high speed dive, it can’t even make the pilot begin to grey out.

7 and a half hour WEP test.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[Rattlesnake]

The P-47 chapter in Flying to the Limit also says that speeds above 250mph IAS below 10K feet the Jug out-turned the 190, the 190 winning at speeds below 250. As high speed turning  is largely a matter of having the control authority to pull the G this also strongly hints at better high speed elevator response for the Jug than the 190, the opposite of what we see in-game.

[Legioneod]

11 hours ago, Psyrion said:

I sometimes feel like these FM threads could do with more actual facts and less "expert" opinions. Reading through them leaves you about as clever as before. 

 

You could always provide evidence refuting what we are saying.

 

Ive already started a FM thread of the P-47 detailing some of its inaccuracies. I’ll be adding documentation and in-game test to it as time goes on.

[Ehret]

20 hours ago, Rattlesnake said:

Also this. The game P-47 could never damage itself pulling too much G out of a high speed dive, it can’t even make the pilot begin to grey out.

 

Do we have a plane with a G-meter, yet? I thought the P-47D would get one; or the 262 but I couldn't find the dial in released cockpit pictures. Perhaps, the Mustang will have it.

[Rattlesnake]

35 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

Do we have a plane with a G-meter, yet? I thought the P-47D would get one; or the 262 but I couldn't find the dial in released cockpit pictures. Perhaps, the Mustang will have it.

That’s one instrument that should be added to every sim cockpit whether historically present or not to make up for the lack of body feel.

 

Lacking a G-meter I can only guesstimate at max G the game Jug is capable of pulling at 400-450mph IAS, but I have been playing this sort of games for a decade and a half. From the rate of pull up I’d say no more than 4. Nothing that’s going to cause fuel tank rupture.

 

Wish I knew where blackout threshold was in game. Feels higher than 6 though.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[LukeFF]

32 minutes ago, Rattlesnake said:

That’s one instrument that should be added to every sim cockpit whether historically present or not to make up for the lack of body feel.

 

We've gotten by this long without such a crutch, and we'll continue to manage just fine without it. 

 

No way, no how, no thank you. 

[Bert_Foster]

Some P47s were fielded with G meter's

 

[LukeFF]

1 minute ago, Bert_Foster said:

Some P47s were fielded with G meter's

 

Well, not in the model we have. I've seen all the original blueprints for the D-28 dashboard, and it isn't there. 

 

If it was there historically, sure (like in most American bombers), but leave it out if it wasn't there in reality. 

[Rattlesnake]

22 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

We've gotten by this long without such a crutch, and we'll continue to manage just fine without it. 

 

No way, no how, no thank you. 

Having some indication of the same information every real pilot in every real aircraft has (by virtue of having physical body to feel the forces) is a “crutch”? ?

 

Tell me, have you ever heard of a practice called unloading? How do you propose to learn do it with any accuracy in a given sim when you neither feel the weightless sensation nor have an instrument  replacing the missing sensation? That’s only one example.

 

You might as well say force feedback is a “crutch” because the shaking can warn of impending stall.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[Guest deleted@83466]

Quote

Lacking a G-meter I can only guesstimate at max G the game Jug is capable of pulling at 400-450mph IAS, but I have been playing this sort of games for a decade and a half. From the rate of pull up I’d say no more than 4. Nothing that’s going to cause fuel tank rupture.

 

Get yourself a copy of Tacview.

[40plus]

It's a big fat airplane that handles like a big fat airplane.

 

Nice guns though.

[Legioneod]

40 minutes ago, pfrances said:

It's a big fat airplane that handles like a big fat airplane.

 

Nice guns though.

Yes but it didn't actually handle like a big fat airplane in reality. That's why you hear first hand accounts from German pilots and how they were surprised at how maneuverable it really was for such a large aircraft.

 

The biggest drawbacks for the P-47 were it's slow acceleration, turn radius, and mediocre climb speed (which actually isn't that bad and isn't much of a disadvantage at altitude.) The things that the P-47 was known for (dive, zoom, roll) it did rather well and in some cases better than anyone.

 

I think the main reason we don't see the P-47 doing better in game (beside the FM inaccuracies) is because we don't have any mid-high altitude objectives, so we rarely get a chance to use the P-47 where it excelled (high altitude).

[40plus]

16 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

I think the main reason we don't see the P-47 doing better in game (beside the FM inaccuracies) is because we don't have any mid-high altitude objectives, so we rarely get a chance to use the P-47 where it excelled (high altitude).

 

Agreed. If only we had high altitude strategic bombers to attack/defend. Then I think the Thunderbolt would show it's strengths.

[LukeFF]

10 hours ago, Rattlesnake said:

Having some indication of the same information every real pilot in every real aircraft has (by virtue of having physical body to feel the forces) is a “crutch”? ?

 

Tell me, have you ever heard of a practice called unloading? How do you propose to learn do it with any accuracy in a given sim when you neither feel the weightless sensation nor have an instrument  replacing the missing sensation? That’s only one example.

 

You might as well say force feedback is a “crutch” because the shaking can warn of impending stall.

 

If you cannot properly / effectively control your plane with the audio and visual cues we have right now, along with helpful tools like TacView, then I don't know what to tell you. Somehow, in all the years I've been playing flight sims, this is something I cannot honestly recall ever coming up as a serious feature request. Maybe that should tell you something about your skills.

[Rattlesnake]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

If you cannot properly / effectively control your plane with the audio and visual cues we have right now, along with helpful tools like TacView, then I don't know what to tell you. Somehow, in all the years I've been playing flight sims, this is something I cannot honestly recall ever coming up as a serious feature request. Maybe that should tell you something about your skills.

So again, how do you "unload" with accuracy in a flight sim with no G indication?

2 hours ago, pfrances said:

It's a big fat airplane that handles like a big fat airplane.

 

Nice guns though.

It doesn't. It turns like a Hurricane with the magic flaps deployed. What it doesn't do, as an airplane known for being a diving boom and zoomer, is handle well at speed.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, Rattlesnake said:

So again, how do you "unload" with accuracy in a flight sim with no G indication?

 

We’ve all been doing it for 20 plus years.

Audio and visual cues as Luke indicated.

 

Like him in all that time I've never seen this brought up - for good reason.

[Rattlesnake]

26 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

We’ve all been doing it for 20 plus years.

Audio and visual cues as Luke indicated.

 

Like him in all that time I've never seen this brought up - for good reason.

What is the audio or visual cue in Il-2 Box that you are unloaded to ~0G, as opposed to say -1?
I'd also be curious to know the audiovisual difference between say 3 and 5 positive G.
Also how did the players come to learn that X audiovisual cue=5G or the like in the first place with no indication of the actual number?
 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[Gambit21]

I’ve never needed to know if I was at 1g vs .056g’s. Neither has anyone else.

[Rattlesnake]

5 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

I’ve never needed to know if I was at 1g vs .056g’s. Neither has anyone else.

That's not an answer to either of my questions. For some reason you seem to be attempting to exaggerate the accuracy I'm asking for. Seems like a rhetorical device, rather than a straight answer.

I'm still curious about the audiovisual G cues you were speaking of. What is the approximate accuracy of these cues? Can you tell the G loading on the airplane to within plus or minus 1G with these cues? Less, more?

 

[Ehret]

15 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

I’ve never needed to know if I was at 1g vs .056g’s. Neither has anyone else.

 

Try between 4 vs 6 at speeds +600km/h. There is reason why P-51s got the G-meter in the cockpit. If you like the 262 then you should want one even more.

[Guest deleted@83466]

 

4 minutes ago, Rattlesnake said:

That's not an answer to either of my questions. For some reason you seem to be attempting to exaggerate the accuracy I'm asking for. Seems like a rhetorical device, rather than a straight answer.

I'm still curious about the audiovisual G cues you were speaking of. What is the approximate accuracy of these cues? Can you tell the G loading on the airplane to within plus or minus 1G with these cues? Less, more?

 

 

Well, put your stick somewhere between level flight and redout, and there ya go.  There is a time to stop flying the slide rule, and just do it.  Use The Force.

[Gambit21]

35 minutes ago, Rattlesnake said:

That's not an answer to either of my questions. For some reason you seem to be attempting to exaggerate the accuracy I'm asking for. Seems like a rhetorical device, rather than a straight answer.

I'm still curious about the audiovisual G cues you were speaking of. What is the approximate accuracy of these cues? Can you tell the G loading on the airplane to within plus or minus 1G with these cues? Less, more?

 

 

With respect..why are my arbitrary values not as valid as your arbitrary values?

I can hear/feel what is going on with the air-frame to the extent that it's useful to me during combat - this was true going all the way back to EAW and the old IL2.

If I'm starting to black out, I know that the rate of turn has to be managed and if there's someone on my tail then I have to make a business decision.

 

If I'm starting to red-out, then likewise I know I need to mitigate that state or else.

 

I've never been in a position where I need to know exactly what G state I'm in beyond the cues I'm getting from the aircraft, again both audio and visual.

37 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

Try between 4 vs 6 at speeds +600km/h. There is reason why P-51s got the G-meter in the cockpit. If you like the 262 then you should want one even more.

 

 

Well then the P-51 should have a meter.

In the context of flying the sim however the Mustang and Jets have never been any different with regard to useful feedback.

[Rattlesnake]

37 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

 

Well, put your stick somewhere between level flight and redout, and there ya go.  There is a time to stop flying the slide rule, and just do it.  Use The Force.

 

 

The accuracy of this method would depend on exactly when redout begins in a given sim. If visible at -1 then conceivably “good enough for government work”, but I think the figure is higher in most sims . Can’t say for sure about BoX because darnit no G indication ?

 

Unloading  to about zero, as opposed to “just point your nose at the Earth” presumably exists as a technique for a reasons, yes?

 

I still want to hear what the audiovisual cues for G loading in BoX are in real numbers, what the margin of error is, etc.

 

Anyway fairly accurate G indicators of *some* sort are a good idea in a sim because otherwise the virpils are entirely denied a physical sense that provides real pilots a lot of information about what the plane is doing. It’s a lot like force feedback in that way, only I’d argue that G loading information is more important than most of what a FFB stick provides you. Sims can be played without it of course, and it’s all fair because everyone has the same handicap in that case, but exactly the same thing could be said of FFB. And a G-meter can be fitted into WWII fashion cockpits without being aesthetically intrusive.

 

 

 

[Gambit21]

I see what you're after.

I can tell pretty quickly by looking at my speed if I have the stick in the right spot - for the purposes of what you just posted I mean.

The Zero G condition (sustained) means your nose is pointing at the ground...more...and more...again easy to see visually.

 

 

[Guest deleted@83466]

@Rattlesnake

You don't need to explain to me what unloading an airframe means.  I've probably been familiar with it and doing it in flight sims since Microprose F-15 Strike Eagle v. 1

Edited April 9, 2019 by SeaSerpent

[Legioneod]

The amount of g you are able to pull in the P-47 is lacking at high speeds, it's impossible to black out the pilot without heavy flap and trim use.

Is the G suit modeled? 

[Rattlesnake]

48 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

With respect..why are my arbitrary values not as valid as your arbitrary values?

I can hear/feel what is going on with the air-frame to the extent that it's useful to me during combat - this was true going all the way back to EAW and the old IL2.

If I'm starting to black out, I know that the rate of turn has to be managed and if there's someone on my tail then I have to make a business decision.

 

If I'm starting to red-out, then likewise I know I need to mitigate that state or else.

 

I've never been in a position where I need to know exactly what G state I'm in beyond the cues I'm getting from the aircraft, again both audio and visual.

 

 

Well then the P-51 should have a meter.

In the context of flying the sim however the Mustang and Jets have never been any different with regard to useful feedback.

I say about 0 and about -1 because there is enough difference between those two figures to be non-trivial in application. In most planes both your most efficient acceleration and absolute fastest roll rate should occur at about 0g loading. And experience shows that in a sim it takes practice and feedback from some sort of indicator to learn to push to about 0 consistently when you want, as opposed to overshooting it by a fair margin. Because you can’t simply feel yourself getting light in the seat, as a real pilot can. The practical range for positive G maneuvers in WWII airplanes is even greater, and the amount you pile on correlates with how much energy you’re burning in that maneuver.

Thus G loading is useful information, and I would appreciate a video or the like of the audiovisual G cues of BoX correlated to specific G loadings at which they occur. A little esoteric of a system, but potentially very useful once understood.

34 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

@Rattlesnake

You don't need to explain to me what unloading an airframe means.  I've probably been familiar with it and doing it in flight sims since Microprose F-15 Strike Eagle v. 1

You say that, yet act flabbergasted when I say having some sort of G-indicator in a sim (where by definition you have no way to just *feel* the G-loading like a real pilot) is a good idea. Now about these audiovisual G cues in BoX...what is each one, for say -1 thru 6g? 

18 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

The amount of g you are able to pull in the P-47 is lacking at high speeds, it's impossible to black out the pilot without heavy flap and trim use.

Is the G suit modeled? 

Per the passage from “Flying to the Limit” the P-47 is capable of pulling enough G out of a dive to destroy itself. Per the game information the ultimate load capability is 11G. Therefore I think we can safely say that the Jug should be able to exceed that limit, at a speed high enough to give the plane the aerodynamic capacity to pull that much G.  

 

Such a capability would explain why the Jug’s rep was maybe not the best turner or climber, but great in a dive, as opposed to our situation not being the best turner (without magic flaps anyway) or climber, and also you can’t aim the thing very well in a high speed dive because control issues.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake

[Guest deleted@83466]

Quote

You say that, yet act flabbergasted when I say having some sort of G-indicator in a sim (where by definition you have no way to just *feel* the G-loading like a real pilot) is a good idea. Now about these audiovisual G cues in BoX...what is each one, for say -1 thru 6g? 

 

I thought I just explained...somewhere in between redout and level flight.  Close enough.  And on the high end, I'm either riding the buffet, or the blackout.  I don't care about anything in between...I'm pointing my nose where I want it to be, turning at the rate I need to turn, and couldn't care less about what the G numbers are.

[Ehret]

51 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

With respect..why are my arbitrary values not as valid as your arbitrary values?

 

With mine you are close to blacking-out and when at very high speeds in a plane with sensitive controls (like P-51D) it's easy to pull too much. In a jet this is much worse still because G loads increase velocity squared. It's possible to get unconscious in an instant with very little warning.

[Requiem]

A semi-reliable cue I use when unloading without a G-meter is relying on the gunsight reticule. As I push the nose over my head position goes higher and the top part of the reticule disappears so I hold the required stick pressure to keep the reticule in that position until I'm done.

Edited April 9, 2019 by SYN_Requiem

[Gambit21]

2 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

With mine you are close to blacking-out and when at very high speeds in a plane with sensitive controls (like P-51D) it's easy to pull too much. In a jet this is much worse still because G loads increase velocity squared. It's possible to get unconscious in an instant with very little warning.

 

Yes but you learn the muscle memory to deal with that very quickly...even flying an F-16 etc.

[Rattlesnake]

12 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

I thought I just explained...somewhere in between redout and level flight.  Close enough.  And on the high end, I'm either riding the buffet, or the blackout.  I don't care about anything in between...I'm pointing my nose where I want it to be, turning at the rate I need to turn, and couldn't care less about what the G numbers are.

So after all this talk of audiovisual cues you’re saying there’s nothing between redout and blackout? And no one seems to have any idea what numbers they represent in-game anyhow.

 

Buffet and blackout? I thought you didn’t like furballing? Seriously though, if I take your statement literally it means you use pure angles tactics only, which I doubt is the case. Pulling more G than you need to for a given purpose wastes energy, but how do you get a feel for what stick inputs have what effect  it if you have no reference at all?

 

Btw, don’t you think having the buffet to warn us of stall is a crutch?

[Guest deleted@83466]

16 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

With mine you are close to blacking-out and when at very high speeds in a plane with sensitive controls (like P-51D) it's easy to pull too much. In a jet this is much worse still because G loads increase velocity squared. It's possible to get unconscious in an instant with very little warning.

 

Then you're probably being too ham-fisted on the controls.  I don't even see experience insta-blackouts in DCS, and good practice or bad, I'm not looking at a G-meter; I've got my eyes on a bandit or a missile.

 

EDIT:  Same thought as Gambit had on this

 

*******************************************************

 

11 minutes ago, Rattlesnake said:

So after all this talk of audiovisual cues you’re saying there’s nothing between redout and blackout? And no one seems to have any idea what numbers they represent in-game anyhow.

 

Buffet and blackout? I thought you didn’t like furballing? Seriously though, if I take your statement literally it means you use pure angles tactics only, which I doubt is the case. Pulling more G than you need to for a given purpose wastes energy, but how do you get a feel for what stick inputs have what effect  it if you have no reference at all?

 

Btw, don’t you think having the buffet to warn us of stall is a crutch?

 

Sorry, man, I've tried to be helpful and constructive, but I just never seemed to have the problems that you appear to be having, and therefore, am in no need of a solution.  From the last couple of exchanges, it appears you're most interested in nitpicking peoples' advice to demonstrate your "expertise" than anything else, and that's really not the basis of a constructive discussion. 

Edited April 9, 2019 by SeaSerpent

[Rattlesnake]

15 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

 

Then you're probably being too ham-fisted on the controls.  I don't even see experience insta-blackouts in DCS, and good practice or bad, I'm not looking at a G-meter; I've got my eyes on a bandit or a missile.

 

EDIT:  Same thought as Gambit had on this

 

*******************************************************

 

 

Sorry, man, I've tried to be helpful and constructive, but I just never seemed to have the problems that you appear to be having, and therefore, am in no need of a solution.

None of this is an answer to my questions.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Rattlesnake