P-47 Maneuverability

[Legioneod]

Another good video by Greg.

 

 

[ATAG_SKUD]

Great video. Thank for posting. I subscribe to Greg's channel but saw it here first.  

 

At 1:04 there is a roll rate chart from NACA Report 868. Has anyone ever made a comparison with BoX roll rates against this chart?

skud

 

[Legioneod]

2 hours ago, ATAG_SKUD said:

Great video. Thank for posting. I subscribe to Greg's channel but saw it here first.  

 

At 1:04 there is a roll rate chart from NACA Report 868. Has anyone ever made a comparison with BoX roll rates against this chart?

skud

 

It's pretty close iirc. Overall I just feel the P-47 in-game is meh. Most of it's performance is close to rl but some things are wrong (DM and Dive being primary concerns) It also feels like the P-47 losses energy extremely quickly, even after a dive.

 

I'd be interested in anyone could calculate zoom climb for various situations, as it stands the P-47 zoom in-game is average at best but nothing to be impressed with. Aircraft like the 190 and 109 seem to me to zoom much better yet real pilot accounts praise the P-47 zoom ability. Persoanlly I don't see it in-game.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Inertia's always been a weak point in this sim.  Zoom is far too close to being universal no matter the aircraft, differences are so slight in performance you can't make any practical tactical use.  Fix it along with the close in spotting visuals and the current fighting style would get an overhaul, most fights now are pure contests of speed and altitude advantage.  Watch the videos and see all attacks no matter the type look exactly the same, that's because they're all performing basically the same. 

[Legioneod]

3 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Inertia's always been a weak point in this sim.  Zoom is far too close to being universal no matter the aircraft, differences are so slight in performance you can't make any practical tactical use.  Fix it along with the close in spotting visuals and the current fighting style would get an overhaul, most fights now are pure contests of speed and altitude advantage.  Watch the videos and see all attacks no matter the type look exactly the same, that's because they're all performing basically the same. 

 

This is what makes the P-47 harder to use in-game imo. It can't keep it's energy that it builds up in a dive even when going in a straight line, it just loses it way too fast. It makes it very hard to zoom climb with the Jug because it loses all it's built up energy quickly and you end up being a sitting duck after a few BnZ passes with very little energy/altitude left.

 

 

[Bremspropeller]

I think it was @JtD who had posted a chart or table of how much the dive-acceleration mattered in terms of distance made in a dive.

The result was relatively small - at least not by any means as decisive as the narrative found in books would suggest.

 

IIRC the test showed that results were surprisingly close to real data.

[Legioneod]

2 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

I think it was @JtD who had posted a chart or table of how much the dive-acceleration mattered in terms of distance made in a dive.

The result was relatively small - at least not by any means as decisive as the narrative found in books would suggest.

 

IIRC the test showed that results were surprisingly close to real data.

Thats not really an issue imo, I never have any real touble staying with people in the dive. The problem with diving is the loss of control surface where there shouldn't be any loss.

Also the Jug losses energy very quickly even in a straight line, this makes diving and zooming attacks (which was the P-47s strongsuit irl) difficult. You can't regain enough altitude with the built up energy because you lose it too quickly and after a few BnZ attacks you start to lose the advantage.

 

One thing I do find odd about the dive is that irl the P-47 was said to quickly reach it's limiting figures yet in-game it seems slow.

 

The DM and losing parts in a dive are the only really problem with the P-47 currently.

I find it loses its energy too quickly as well but I can't prove it at this time but I'm sure someone could figure it out.

Edited January 30, 2020 by Legioneod

[Birdman]

Has anyone tried this test in game?

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/p-47/p-47n-zoom.pdf

 

P47D vs P47N zoom climbs 

Edited January 30, 2020 by Birdman

[Legioneod]

3 hours ago, Birdman said:

Has anyone tried this test in game?

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/p-47/p-47n-zoom.pdf

 

P47D vs P47N zoom climbs 

I'll test it later today and see how the numbers match.

[Legioneod]

Did some quick test and the numbers are pretty close the the rl test. I only tested the WEP zoom climb starting at 320mph, haven't checked the zoom starting at 220 yet.

For the WEP zoom climb my fastest time to 10,000ft was 116 seconds, real life test give around 125-130 seconds to 10k.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Are there comparative tests against a supposedly much weaker plane in zoom climbs?

[Birdman]

34 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Are there comparative tests against a supposedly much weaker plane in zoom climbs?

Don't know what you mean.

 

The test is P-47N vs P-47D.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

8 minutes ago, Birdman said:

Don't know what you mean.

 

The test is P-47N vs P-47D.

 I mean other tests comparing against a Spitfire or captured 109 etc

[Legioneod]

45 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Are there comparative tests against a supposedly much weaker plane in zoom climbs?

Not that I know of, not like the test listed above anyways. There are pilot accounts from both sides and mock combat between different aircraft but other than that I really don't know.

[Birdman]

12 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

 I mean other tests comparing against a Spitfire or captured 109 etc

Ah ok. There's a lot of reports here, I haven't looked at all of them, maybe that sort of info is in there:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/

[[CPT]Crunch]

I do know prepatch you could take an I-16, spawn at 10k, shut the engine off and immediately roll it over into a nose dive and beat a full power on P-47 to the ground by five seconds in the exact same flight profile.  You'll have to set invincible or things fly apart, but that's it.  Even worse, Bostons and Ju-88's could tie or beat a 47 into the dirt.  Never bothered testing since the big patch, with the vis issues don't care, pointless.  Everything dove roughly the same with difference between fastest to slowest an 8 to 10 second differential, Ju-52 physically can't perform the maneuver.  I found that highly suspect.  P-47 was definitely on the slowest end with max power.  Can't say how it is now, but it's easy enough to check yourself.

[Legioneod]

7 minutes ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

I do know prepatch you could take an I-16, spawn at 10k, shut the engine off and immediately roll it over into a nose dive and beat a full power on P-47 to the ground by five seconds in the exact same flight profile.  You'll have to set invincible or things fly apart, but that's it.  Even worse, Bostons and Ju-88's could tie or beat a 47 into the dirt.  Never bothered testing since the big patch, with the vis issues don't care, pointless.  Everything dove roughly the same with difference between fastest to slowest an 8 to 10 second differential, Ju-52 physically can't perform the maneuver.  I found that highly suspect.  P-47 was definitely on the slowest end with max power.  Can't say how it is now, but it's easy enough to check yourself.

There's absolutely no way this should have happened, it most certainly wouldn't happen irl. I'll run some test with my friends and see how it is currently.

Edited January 31, 2020 by Legioneod

[Rei-sen]

Damn, that's my favorite US fighter and it's quite porked in this sim at the moment. I hope the devs will take a close look at it's FM and DM.

[Birdman]

I run the test in the sim and these are my results:

start at 320: time to 10,000ft: 115s in sim, instead of 125s in the RL test

start at 220 time to 8,000ft : 110s in sim instead of 120s in the RL test

 

anybody else ran the test?