Jump to content
II./JG77_motoadve

P47 pilot flies Il2 P47

Recommended Posts

Interesting, thanks for sharing his impressions! Will be interesting to see what he thinks of the P-51 when it releases, and if he could play DCS P-51 to add to the comparison too :)

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing. Good to hear what someone who really flew the plane thinks about its digital representation. Seems like 1CGS has it spot on with the exception of the damage model. Maybe they can work on that to increase the specific ruggedness of that bird.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sevenless said:

Seems like 1CGS has it spot on with the exception of the damage model.

 

And the flaps lift needs a bit of work but I think they are aware of that already. I think we can expect to see that addressed in September.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Jaegermeister said:

 

And the flaps lift needs a bit of work but I think they are aware of that already. I think we can expect to see that addressed in September.

 

I sure hope so. The issue is abused constantly in MP.

Edited by Jade_Monkey
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sevenless said:

Thanks for sharing. Good to hear what someone who really flew the plane thinks about its digital representation. Seems like 1CGS has it spot on with the exception of the damage model. Maybe they can work on that to increase the specific ruggedness of that bird.

 

Right lol, because he probably gets shot at with 30mm everything he takes the real P47 for a spin.

Honestly though, in terms of FM I am sure he knows his stuff 110% but how is he supposed to have any experience regarding the DM?

Knowing OPs opinion on the DM, there might have been some bias in his opinion.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

 

And the flaps lift needs a bit of work but I think they are aware of that already. I think we can expect to see that addressed in September.

If the flaps are ballooning right then doesnt that say they are giving the correct lift? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Jade_Monkey said:

 

I sure hope so. The issue is abused constantly in MP.

 

Is this the "exaggerated elevator authority" (apparent) issue?

----

This was a really cool story to read about. Interesting that he's sold on a whole flying set up. Please keep us updated, e.g. re the '51.

Edited by FlyingNutcase

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for sharing motoadve !  👍

 

So, he didn't comment about the huge amounts of tail-heavy trim required for landing, under a quite wide weight range ( fuel + amno ).

I still think there is something strange with that aspect of the P-47 FDM.

 

Strangely, I seldom can play any of the glider simulators I have used - and I guess I used all available variants ever marketed. They all felt so far from reality that the only soaring sims I started using are those that come with my navigation softwares 🙂

 

But there are surely many examples of rw pilots, some professional, who use flight simulators as "simmers" too. We can find some excellent examples at the Aerowinx PSX forums.

 

I never tried VR with the modern technologies. I believe I will skip it in this life. I'm almost 100% sure it would get me really dizzy...

 

Edited by jcomm-il2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wanted this to happen. 

Did he say anything about the sound?  I always imagined it to be more brutal than the game offer. 

I have suspected radial engines are way to fragile in this game and wings get off too easy. 

It is so rear one can get pilots to test out sims. 

I reslly would have loved him to try P 51 in DCS. 

I got one such reference, always good to have more

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really looking fwd for the P-51D in IL-2. Somehow there were always some aspects I seriously doubt about in the way it was modeled in DCS.

 

And then, I will be looking fwd for the day Devs announce the introduction of fuel management, and resulting asymmetric fuel loads in aircraft that have that problem, losing fuel from one tank, etc... 🙂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damage model and engine damage could maybe do with some tweaking.. But the end result will more likely be the same. 

The wing would not fall off but the damage would put you out of the fight and same goes with radial engines, (I have blown/shut down  enough to see the difference between "myth and reality") 

 

At the end of the day these issues (generally) don't change outcomes, (in combat which is what the 'game' is about) except for getting home with "two cylinders blown off, 1% scenarios. 

 

Of course improvements/granularity/detail are always welcome

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dakpilot said:

 

At the end of the day these issues (generally) don't change outcomes

I agree. But seeing the wing blow off in a IL 2 and P 47 is off character compared to the quality in rest of the game. 

In my opinion people confuse how radials work. 

It can operate with severe damage given right conditions. 

Parameters too complex to be expected modeled here. But radials should be modeled a bit more robust so it give the pilot a glimpse of hope to return before he blow out of the skies

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, =EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand said:

 

Right lol, because he probably gets shot at with 30mm everything he takes the real P47 for a spin.

Honestly though, in terms of FM I am sure he knows his stuff 110% but how is he supposed to have any experience regarding the DM?

Knowing OPs opinion on the DM, there might have been some bias in his opinion.

He just read first hand accounts stories about the durability of the P47, also the radial engine, like all of us.

He might know a bit more that the regular WWII buff though.

By hanging out and talking to those veterans, his flight instructor was a WWII fighter pilot, he met Adolf Galland and Eric Hartman, along some other WWII fighter pilots, and flew many of those fighters himself, did lots of dogfighting for fun, and also  by being in combat himself, BTW he loved the A26 and confessed he had lots of fun as a ground attacker plane blowing things up with all those guns on the nose, very fast plane.

 

Reno races in the 60s ,70s , and 80s  were flown many former WWII era pilots, and according to him you could tell right away when you saw them flying, who was a civilian and who was a former fighter pilot, the vets were so much better.

Did not commented on the sounds, I use VR and use a pretty good headset instead of the VR sound, high volume plus the Buttkicker is very convincing, the sounds of the P47 is the best in game IMHO.

Regarding trim for landing, he did not find it strange, his landings were not smooth or perfect though, this is why he said they were very forgiving in game, but he never broke the plane. (is a matter of getting used to stick forces in game, which are way more sensitive than real ones)

Flaps were used on final for landing,  he did not do any stalls or slow flight, so didnt experienced the big advantage flaps gives the P47 in game.

He commented radials are very though.

I explained that the P47 might not be finished , since the official release of BOBP is in a few months and might get tweaked.

Edited by II./JG77_motoadve
spelling
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FlyingNutcase said:

 

Is this the "exaggerated elevator authority" (apparent) issue?

 

Im not sure if it's the same issue. People deploy flaps and get to turn tighter than any other plane with almost no drag. All of a sudden the P47 becomes the king of turnfighting low with no energy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I do not know if any can confirm this price list

HE PRICE OF  VICTORY (cost of an aircraft in WWII dollars)
B-17        $204,370.     P-40        $44,892.
B-24        $215,516.     P-47        $85,578.
B-25        $142,194.     P-51        $51,572.
B-26        $192,426.     C-47        $88,574.
B-29        $605,360.     PT-17      $15,052.
P-38          $97,147.     AT-6        $22,952.

 

It is interesting. 

My point in this is, there are no doubts P 47 and IL  2 had losses. But when you loose one of the two. Blowing the wing off every 2 time is not believable.  

Here is the website for incredible statistcs

 

Edited by LuseKofte
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

LOL my wife says that all the time!😀

 

Looks fine to me, at least you can see some of it . . . . which is more than I can say for mine lol

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/4/2019 at 3:29 AM, Dakpilot said:

Damage model and engine damage could maybe do with some tweaking.. But the end result will more likely be the same. 

 

I don't know about the engine. The P-47 has easily the most fragile engine on the allied sides. I've _rarely_ managed to nurse one back home after it's been damaged, which is the complete opposite of the P-47's reputation.

 

It defies logic, since by most accounts radial engines tend to be more durable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

 

I don't know about the engine. The P-47 has easily the most fragile engine on the allied sides. I've _rarely_ managed to nurse one back home after it's been damaged, which is the complete opposite of the P-47's reputation.

 

It defies logic, since by most accounts radial engines tend to be more durable.

 

I've found it to be quite hardy, not just the engine but the overall structure on combat box server vs AA. It seems to take a surprising amount of punishment and still mostly get you home, which is in complete contrast to damage taken from enemy AC, where it seems to be extremely fragile

 

Edit: To be fair though I suppose a few 30 mm rounds are more than capable of ruining your day, regardless of what you are flying

Edited by ACG_Herne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, von_Michelstamm said:

Which one did you put on the stick extension? The the long orange one with a ball on one side and screw on the other?

I attached it to the base.

No photo description available.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...