Dogfighting with the P47

[smink1701]

 Haven’t fired up BOM for a while but spent some quality time last night  flying a number of planes, the last being the Thunderbolt.  As good as it looks inside and out it is an absolute dog to fight with.  I think I could do better in a Heinkel.  It’s like the hydraulic fluid was replaced by maple syrup. The developers really need to work on this one. I even tried flying with 20% flaps and it still a dog. Yes I know this topic has been discussed before but I’m discussing it again!

Edited August 28, 2019 by smink1701

[Talon_]

If you fly with 100% flaps you can out-turn anything in the game - it lowers your stall speed to under 40mph.

 

The current FM requires you to completely disregard any semblance of "simulation" to play to the P-47's strengths.

[EpeeNoire]

with due respect, but with just under 5 t of empty mass I don't know if one should expect that plane to be an outstanding dog fighter

Edited August 28, 2019 by EpeeNoire
typo

[Diggun]

43 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

The current FM requires you to

do absolutely nothing at all. You're not even forced to fly the p-47.

45 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

If you fly with 100% flaps you can out-turn anything in the game

but if you're doing that then you are 

40 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

completely disregarding any semblance of "simulation"

and instead choosing to exploit the simulation, as the flaps irl could not be deployed like that.

 

So, the simple answer is to not engage in such unrealistic behaviour yourself, and feel sad for those who do.

 

I very much enjoy the '47. I have some air kills in it, but I'd say it's definitely more useful in a strike role given the way that online server play tends to break down. 

[Cpt_Siddy]

4 hours ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

do absolutely nothing at all. You're not even forced to fly the p-47.

 

 

You are not even forced to breath, yet you must if you plan not to turn blue and look silly when you faint.

 

Ergo, if you fly the big 47, and you want to win your knife fights at low alt, you flappity flap flap 

 

Because we all know that in MP:  you either flaps, or get flappsed! its a cruel world out there 

[Diggun]

38 minutes ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

Ergo, if you fly the big 47, and you want to win your knife fights at low alt,

Then something has gone wrong? Why be in a knife fight at low alt in a p-47 in the first place? 

[DD_Arthur]

12 minutes ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

Then something has gone wrong? 

 

https://youtu.be/mWFwzDJaeKw

 

"What's your secret, champ?"

"It's in the wrist action!"

 

'Tis the secret of all dogfight servers........  

[Jade_Monkey]

How much fuel did you spawn with? At 100% i think it is by far the fighter in the sim with most fuel capacity which means even more weight.

[TheOldCrow]

7 hours ago, smink1701 said:

As good as it looks inside and out it is an absolute dog to fight with

 

Going off more of what Jade_Monkey said high levels of fuel will make you slow and hard to turn.

 

Also what altitude were you at? P-47 does best with boost and it's supercharger which only kicks in fully at about 20,000 ft. I have a good amount of kills on mp diving on bombers and even 109's from high altitude and zooming back up to rinse and repeat. Not much can beat the P-47 at high speed. Just have to fly to it's strengths

Edited August 28, 2019 by TheOldCrow

[56RAF_Roblex]

6 hours ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

and instead choosing to exploit the simulation, as the flaps irl could not be deployed like that.

 

The flaps on the P47 were slotted in order to have minimum drag when partially deployed for extra maneuverability.  You can argue that they work too well but IRL pilots did use them in combat. Same for P51 & P38 when we get them.  

[ShamrockOneFive]

A pilot who has owned a P-47 flew the virtual one and said it was pretty much bang on. So... I'm going to go with that.

 

The P-47 is big, its powerful, and its not perfect in IL-2 but its not a dogfighter in the low altitude flying in small tight circles sense of things.

[JG7_X-Man]

I think the problem lies with the nationalistic (belief that one's own country is better than all others) ideologies we all have heard/hear cloud our judgment of what we know.

• In the US, we have been beat down with the idea that the P-51D won the war in the air and the P-47 on the ground.
• In the UK and Canada, it's the Spitfire
• In Russia it's the IL-2

Germany unfortunately lost the war so no matter what, history belongs to the victor(s). Which is why I fly German exclusively.

@EpeeNoire like you said 5 tonnes! that's over 1/2 tonne more than the Fw 190D-9 so......

 

Fw 190D-9                                                                                                                                                                                         

 

P-47D-30

 

From these generic stats, every minute (LTBE) The Fw 190D-9 will put 120 ft gap (altitude) b/w itself and the P-47D-30. In 5 mins, the Fw 190D-9 will be out of firing range.

With the higher wing loading of the Fw 190D-9, it will pull away even faster than the 12-ft/min. This also means it was turn tighter than the P-47D-30 (flaps or not)

Assuming the Fw 190D-9 is trying to get away, it will be at full power. Thus, they will both be at equal power/mass ratio. 

 

Also 2 x20mm cannons and 2x131mm MGs have more weight of fire than 8x12.7mm MGs. You will hear the argument that the .50 cal was a better round so the US stayed with it. I would counter with the argument the .50 cal was good enough for the job. That said - for a fast moving target without a lot of time on target, you want a weapon that can bring down a aircraft with just a few hits.

 

I  am not saying the P-47D-30 should lose in a match with the Fw 190D-9 on equal terms at all. However, I am saying if I had to choose b/w the two knowing I was going into battle with the other, I would not be flying a P-47D-30. 

Edited August 29, 2019 by JG7_X-Man

[BraveSirRobin]

13 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

Germany unfortunately lost the war so no matter what, history belongs to the victor(s). Which is why I fly German exclusively.

 

 

Wut?

[Jade_Monkey]

8 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

Wut?

LOGIC

[BraveSirRobin]

2 minutes ago, Jade_Monkey said:

LOGIC

 

The "unfortunately" part is also a little troubling...

[PikAss]

11 hours ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

and instead choosing to exploit the simulation, as the flaps irl could not be deployed like that.

 

So, the simple answer is to not engage in such unrealistic behaviour yourself, and feel sad for those who do.

 

I very much enjoy the '47. I have some air kills in it, but I'd say it's definitely more useful in a strike role given the way that online server play tends to break down. 

 

I never check my six, because exploiting the Simulation, as you couldn't check your six like you can in il2 Right now, because you were strapped in the seat belt.

 

So, the simple answer is not check your 6 in such unrealistic behaviour, and feel sad for those who do.

 

I very much enjoy checking my 6. I have done it few times, but I'd say it's definitely more useful not to check your 6 that online Server Play tends to break down.

[Gambit21]

According to Don Bryan of the 352nd, the Jug was a capable fighter and matched the Germans 1 v 1 at 15,000 feet and above. Below that not so much - although 9th Air Force Jugs gave as good as they got down in the weeds.

 

Though that doesn’t mean 1 v 1.

[Talon_]

8 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

With the higher wing loading of the Fw 190D-9, it will pull away even faster than the 12-ft/min.

 

Higher wing loading is a bad thing for climb & turn.

[LuftManu]

If war was won by single aircraft stats I would be afraid to take a walk in the streets

[CIA_Yankee_]

14 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

The "unfortunately" part is also a little troubling...

 

Agreed... the logic is rather dubious.

 

But as to the actual topic, the P-47 is definitely NOT a knife fighter. Fly it like the P-40: climb high, and use that altitude. If you get to the deck, you're in trouble.

 

Unlike the P-40, however, the P-47 can zoom climb much better: those 7 tons of steel and fuel conserve momentum REAL well. So bounce then climb back up, and don't try to turn with the enemy. If they turn, climb back up and come in from a different angle. And don't do that too often: you lose energy every time, so after a couple of tries just reset and regain your altitude.

 

The good news is that, unlike the P-40, the P-47 actually gets better the higher up you are. So climb! Those 109s will be surprised to see you above them, and actually winning an energy fight against them.

 

Personally I've found flying the P-40 to be an eye opener, and great training. I only started seriously using it this month, and I feel it has seriously improved my flying skills, as it's thought me to fight in the vertical and dogfight through energy management instead of just hauling back on the stick like the Yak or Spit teaches you to do. Now I can actually do well in the La-5, for example, and I'm sure it will be very useful in the P-47/51/38.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2019 by 71st_AH_Yankee_

[40plus]

You're bringing an ax to a knife fight. Effective weapon, but not designed for the task.

[-SF-Disarray]

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

 

Agreed... the logic is rather dubious.

 

But as to the actual topic, the P-47 is definitely NOT a knife fighter. Fly it like the P-40: climb high, and use that altitude. If you get to the deck, you're in trouble.

 

Unlike the P-40, however, the P-47 can zoom climb much better: those 7 tons of steel and fuel conserve momentum REAL well. So bounce then climb back up, and don't try to turn with the enemy. If they turn, climb back up and come in from a different angle. And don't do that too often: you lose energy every time, so after a couple of tries just reset and regain your altitude.

 

The good news is that, unlike the P-40, the P-47 actually gets better the higher up you are. So climb! Those 109s will be surprised to see you above them, and actually winning an energy fight against them.

 

Personally I've found flying the P-40 to be an eye opener, and great training. I only started seriously using it this month, and I feel it has seriously improved my flying skills, as it's thought me to fight in the vertical and dogfight through energy management instead of just hauling back on the stick like the Yak or Spit teaches you to do. Now I can actually do well in the La-5, for example, and I'm sure it will be very useful in the P-47/51/38.

 

 

 

In my experience with the plane this is the best answer. I'm no super ace, mind, but this is how I have seen the most success with it. The only word of warning I'd add is, while the P-47 retains energy better than some planes don't become over confident in this ability. You can get caught at inopportune moments if you climb out aggressively; similarly to players in 109's who confuse a better rate of climb for an elevator. Even after the hardest dive and the most gravity assisted climb out you will get beat in a foot race by a bullet and the DM for the 47 isn't what it could be. Plan your attacks, though, and things will go better for you; if you find yourself scrambling and improvising in a P-47 you'd better hope you are better than the other guy or just lucky if you want to make it out alive. One other thing to add is, if you can find one, a wingman in another P-47 can amplify things. Make a 1-2 attack where the first plane dives in and attacks the target while the other hangs out up high and keeps an eye on things. If the first plane in misses or doesn't outright kill the target on their pass, the number two plane rolls in to finish him. This can come in handy if the target plane attempts to counter attack or there is a plane that you missed on initial observation.

[JG7_X-Man]

16 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

Higher wing loading is a bad thing for climb & turn.

 

Faster aircraft generally have higher wing loadings than slower aircraft.

[FTC_DerSheriff]

7 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

Faster aircraft generally have higher wing loadings than slower aircraft.

Are you confusing vertical speed with horizontal speed?

On max power and water and all the jazz the 47 climbs actually better than a D-9. at least above 6km. And 50 cal bullets are laughing hard about 120f/min.

Edited August 30, 2019 by DerSheriff

[blitze]

On 8/29/2019 at 2:41 AM, ShamrockOneFive said:

The P-47 is big, its powerful, and its not perfect in IL-2 but its not a dogfighter in the low altitude flying in small tight circles sense of things.

 

But, but, but - I thought it was only AI that flew low in small tight circles?????

[MeoW.Scharfi]

Sure, P47 Flaps are one thing but what makes me crazy in the P47 is how FAST it gets destroyed in IL2 GB. I am certain that the Fw190D9 or Me262 can take more punishment than the P47D-28. Maybe i will upload a damage model video of it.

 

Because it's reputation was being able to take damage in combat and still make it back to England or France.

 

But how the damage model is modelled right now is just awful!! A LaGG 3 is for example, a fighter plane that can take more punishment than any other fighter in IL2, i mean i would just copy paste the Damage model into the P-47.

 

If you read "Engine 1" is damaged, your engine even after reducing all power and prop pitch/mixture/turbocharger will most of the time shut down before you even reach 50 km. This doesn't happen with Bf 109s or Fw190s so bad. In the P47 it will die in about 9 of 10 cases before you even reach 40km.

 

Usually i would also think that it loses a bit too fast it's wing, but you don't even have to lose your wing, already few small holes into that huge wing making your plane hard to control. It tends to drop so hard to the damaged wing side like no other plane does in our planeset. I had even bigger holes in my lovely Bf109, yet it's still quite controlable even like 10% of the wing was gone(holes). While only like 1% of P47 wingarea damaged, you clearly can't dogfight with that plane anymore.

 

This pic for example is where i had to trim 50% alerion.

 

This was the reason why i had to trim like 50% the alerions to the left, otherwise it would drop hard there on cont. power and maybe 2500 rpm? This is not the torque anymore. And if the wing damage has a little bit more holes or bigger onces in it, you have to trim 100% and rtb without any hope to be able to turn much, unlike Bf109 and Fw190 or Spitfire/Yaks.

 

The damage model for the P47 is sooo horrible that bloody 7.92mm can and will shut your engine down and 20mm just shoot it out of the universe(i speak of 1x hit, not burst hits!!)

 

I like the P47 but i am sooooooo disappointed of the damage model -__- I don't speak about making it indestructable but people who fly it as much as i do, can confirm that is really something broken with the damage model in the P47. The P47D-28 is the weakest fighter in taking damage from all IL-2 fighters we have!

 

guess our victors should have written a better story then, because you take the most known credit away, the survivability.

 

I think i will make a big post about it's damage model someday to show even the last one who is simply refusing to face the reality that this has to be fixed.

Edited August 30, 2019 by MeoW.Scharfi

[InProgress]

@MeoW.Scharfi

Talk about damaged planes getting home

 

 

On the other hand, everything in box seem to lose wings really fast. Hard to get something home with wings fly away like crazy. This is probably one of the biggest problems. I saw a video of some people doing tests, and wings would be cut off with just few 7.9mm shots... but that's from april 2018 and in december 2018 there was some damage improvments in 3.008 version, but i don't know if it still happens or not.

[Talon_]

2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

I like the P47 but i am sooooooo disappointed of the damage model -__- I don't speak about making it indestructable but people who fly it as much as i do, can confirm that is really something broken with the damage model in the P47. The P47D-28 is the weakest fighter in taking damage from all IL-2 fighters we have!

 

This is also true in my experience. The slightest damage means returning home while my 109 shrugs off hits like it's built from adamantium.

[RedKestrel]

16 minutes ago, InProgress said:

@MeoW.Scharfi

Talk about damaged planes getting home

 

 

On the other hand, everything in box seem to lose wings really fast. Hard to get something home with wings fly away like crazy. This is probably one of the biggest problems. I saw a video of some people doing tests, and wings would be cut off with just few 7.9mm shots... but that's from april 2018 and in december 2018 there was some damage improvments in 3.008 version, but i don't know if it still happens or not.

I remember the post 3.008 damage model. Some planes were way too damage resistant, BUT the way the planes went down was much more realistic. Far fewer wing losses, it was almost impossible without the heavy cannons and hitting just right. If that damage model had had more to it in terms of deteriorating lift effects and drag from damage it would have been very good.

The later fix has given us something in the middle between the previous model and 3.008. But wings still come off too easily in general. 

The wing-off behaviour in the P-47 is IMO from the in-game fragile wings combined with the large wing and high wing loading. The game simulates strain on damaged parts increasing the damage. So in the P-47, the wings are very large and carrying a heavy load, while the wing doesn't appear any stronger than  other fighters as far as the damage model is concerned. so a few hits plus the extra strain = wing off. The large wing also makes it easier to hit.

Honestly the issues with the P-47 seem to stem a lot from global issues with the flight, damage and engine models that rear their head with the Jug just because its so different in terms of operation, weight and size from the other fighters. The over-effectiveness of flaps is more noticeable in the P-47 because of its size and reputation as most-definitely-not-a-turnfighter. The restrictive engine modeling appears more egregious in the Jug because, for example, you have 10 minutes of water but only 5 minutes to use it in. The airframe damage model is magnified by the large size of the craft that makes it easier to hit. And the engine is fragile because engine damage is somewhat simplified, and doesn't model, for example, the plane getting home just fine with a few heavily damaged cylinders. An overhaul or some tweaks to flap behaviour, engine operation and limits, and the damage model would benefit the Jug much more than the other fighters.

Of course there are still people who complain that the P-47 is too difficult to shoot down. Plus ca change...

[CIA_Yankee_]

Absolutely agreed about the P47 damage model. There's some glaring flaws there. The thing was an absolute unit, and while that certainly hurt its performance in many ways, it was renowned for its resilience.

 

That resilience is just not there in the sim, and need to be correctly. @MeoW.Scharfi's post is a perfect example of the type of issues the damage modeling faces, and I can certainly attest to the fragility of its engine. 

 

I've been flying the P40 lately, and I can certainly say that it tolerates damage a lot better than the P47. Yes, the fragile Allison is more robust than a radial that was famouse for still turning after missing a cylinder or three! That definitely needs correction.

[Gambit21]

From WWII...

 

”Send a picture home to your girl with you sitting in a Mustang. Come home to her in a Jug”

 

 

 

 

 

[CountZero]

Just now, Gambit21 said:

From WWII...

 

”Send a picture home to your girl with you sitting in a Mustang. Come home to her in a Jug”

 

 

 

 

 

From game...

”Send a picture home to your girl with you sitting in a Jug. Come home to her in a lavochkin-gorbunov-gudkov” ?