Feel slow in the P-47

[Badders46]

Sorry if this has been asked before... I remember having read about how to fly the P-47 before but wasn't sure if this was covered.

 

Apart from feeling extremely fragile in the P-47 due to it seemingly not being able to take any damage at all, I also find myself feeling extremely slow, even in comparison to the relatively slow Spit IX. .

This is mainly down low as that is where the majority of multiplayer fights take place and after bombing, I am a sitting duck. 

 

I have oil and intercooler flaps at neutral and cowl at 10% or less and I am lucky to maintain 250mph when straight and level... Is this correct? 

 

The only reason why I ask is because I have recently watched an interesting program about Y-29 and the BoBP and it focussed on a couple of US airmen, one of which was a P-47 pilot who kept up with a 190 and managed to evade a 109... Both on the deck! In sim, I have no chance to do this currently as my 47 is incredibly slow!!

 

I should also mention that although not interlinked in sin, my throttle and turbo are linked on the HOTAS. I normally fly at 2550rpm and around 50" MP. I also normally take around 50-60% fuel.

 

I appreciate that the Jug is a rather large beast and is best suited to higher altitude fights but I try not to turn fight and after diving and getting a shot in, I am left a sitting duck and 95% of the time, my foe easily hunts me down and the game is over very quickly! 

 

Any help would be appreciated! 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Badders46_VR

[JonRedcorn]

Well in the actual war the pilots would have had the throttle pinned and using the full water injection till it ran out instead of babying the motor around like you have to in the sim. That's 95% of the problem.

[Badders46]

Ah OK, so it is potentially a limitation in game restricting the P-47?

 

The damage model does frustrate me too as I am sure I have read stories of 47's coming home with massive damage and I've heard of radials still running with cylinders missing but the other day, I received one shot to the engine from a 110 gunner and it was curtains! Engine stopped fully a couple of seconds later ☹️

[6FG_Big_Al]

51 minutes ago, Badders46_VR said:

Ah OK, so it is potentially a limitation in game restricting the P-47?

 

The damage model does frustrate me too as I am sure I have read stories of 47's coming home with massive damage and I've heard of radials still running with cylinders missing but the other day, I received one shot to the engine from a 110 gunner and it was curtains! Engine stopped fully a couple of seconds later ☹️

I normally link the Throttle quadrant with all three levers together with 85-89%. and use 50% intercooler/oil radiator and normally 0% outlet (unless the oil overheats)

I don't know how much speed i gain with setting.  Luzitano made also a nice quick video about it, i hope this helps:

 

Regarding to the damage model, i can only agree with this. The Jug can't really take damage without falling apart or an engine failure. But the Devs said that they rework the damage calculation for all in the next update, so let's hope that our big lady get's a little bit tougher with that.

[Blackhawk_FR]

It's always complicated to factually evaluate DMs. But yes, it must be something wrong... when I take MG hits in my P47, I (very) often loose my engine. While I can take a huuuuuUUUUUUUUUGEEEeeeee amount of 20mm hits in Spitfire, P51, Yaks, La5, LaGG3, before being completely shot down.

 

It's getting really obvious something is wrong with P47's DM.

 

For the speed, the only way to get a decent top speed: 

Full throttle, full turbosupercharger, full rich (you get few kmh more than with auto rich), 2600-2550 rpm. 

Intercooler 50%, cowl flaps closed, oil rad at about 20%. 

Edited February 14, 2020 by JG300_Faucon

[Rei-sen]

Dude, I was about to start a similar topic myself. I've started a Bodenplatte Career, flew 2 missions - the P-47 in this sim is a joke! It's a pig made of glass. What's even more funny - I ran a Quick Mission on 10000m in P-47 against a Bf-109 G14. So at that altitude the Jug has to run circles around the 109, right? Wrong! The 109 could outclimb and outturn me. This is ridiculous! Even down low it's too porked. I'm going to run some experiments tomorrow, fly quick mission battles in Il-2 and A20 against 109s and compare it to the Jug. But I already imagine the results.

IMHO, the Jug is incomplete and needs serious rework in both it's FM and DM.

I ran the similar quick mission in 1946 in P-47 D27 against Bf-109 G14 at 10000 meters. I ran circles around it. Even though the AI in 1946 is even better than in BOX. I think it pretty much sums it up.

[Badders46]

Thanks for your inputs all... At least it isn't just me feeling like I'm not getting anywhere with the Jug. Hopefully the Devs can resolve this as it is probably my favourite from WW2 and deserves to be flown more but I shy away from it because of the above issues ☹️

[Lusekofte]

I agree to everything. P 47 suppose to be my favorite. Without exaggerating I literary get depressed flying it. 
It suppose to bring fear to its opponents in altitude. It should be frustrating for axis planes to bring down. And it should be able to take structural damage down low by aa and get home. I really hope they get it right before the razorback comes along. 

[Bremspropeller]

Another thing missing to be competitive with the late war fighters is the 150 octane fuel.

[56RAF_Cina]

Since the devs are working on BON and P-47 Razorback is in the planeset I think the DM and FM for D-28 will undertake a huge overhaul.

I know they will. So patience. P-47 will shine soon - right devs??

[BlitzPig_EL]

The P47 is the worst Allied plane in the entire sim.  There is absolutely no reason to fly the the thing, not one.  Frankly I'd rather take a P40 than the TBolt, even in a late war scenario.  It's the same sort of portrayal that it got in the original IL2.  Ponderous, slow, brittle...  Makes no sense, but that's how it's always been seen by developers from Russia.

I don't understand how they got this idea about the 47.  They certainly understand the Mustang, Spitfire, and, 109 well.

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

its got a decent bomb load and ok at ground pounding. 

 

[CountZero]

Dont expect anything to change while we have fantasy engine limitations. Its great airplane for up to 5min DF on Berloga for anything els its pointles to take when you have flying P-51 that is good for DF on any alt, have 150 oct fuel and is great for GA as its not build from glass like 47 or 38. Only good thing that happend to this airplane in this game is that it come few months before P-51 so players were forced to play with it for that time ?

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

Stop focusing on the wrong role for the plane and its fine.

Its a ww2 flying sim so that means its a bombing/ground war attack sim.
Load P47 with bombs, 
Remove 4 x guns and the ammo. 
Remove all other weight (forgot mods) 
Take 45% fuel 

Good for most ground pounding missions on most Normal servers.

Climbs better than pe2.
Heavier Bomb Load. 
Has better front guns.
But no gunner so must check 6. 

[ShamrockOneFive]

6 hours ago, Badders46_VR said:

Apart from feeling extremely fragile in the P-47 due to it seemingly not being able to take any damage at all, I also find myself feeling extremely slow, even in comparison to the relatively slow Spit IX. .

This is mainly down low as that is where the majority of multiplayer fights take place and after bombing, I am a sitting duck. 

 

I have oil and intercooler flaps at neutral and cowl at 10% or less and I am lucky to maintain 250mph when straight and level... Is this correct?

 

Damage model for the P-47 is something else to talk about. Most of us feel like it needs another pass and I think especially so when it comes to the engine. A recent dev diary mentioned damage model updates coming soon so until we get there I think it's best to move on from damage model.

 

250mph indicated at what altitude? The P-47 is much faster at altitude than down low keeping in mind the difference between IAS and TAS.

 

The other thing I want to mention is the "slowness" of the Spitfire IX which is really not true. It all depends on altitude. At lower altitudes, especially with the 25lbs boost, the Spitfire IX is really quite fast. Infact the 25lbs boost mode should make the Spitfire IX a bit faster than the more powerful Spitfire XIV. Even at high altitude the Spitfire IX is not a slow aircraft and thanks to smaller size and weight, the Spitfire accelerates and turns much more quickly than the P-47.

 

I can recommend two links to make sure you're getting the most out the P-47:

 

 

 

Remember to fly the P-47 as the big heavy fighter that it is. It has lots of power but I'm not convinced that everyone flying it is getting the most out of the engine, even with the timers that are used to restrict engine power in the sim. After following the above guides I was able to get much more out of the P-47 and when you engage boost you can really accelerate quite quickly and use that speed to bounce enemy pilots.

 

We just need the engine and maybe the wings to take a few more hits.

[CountZero]

It is slowest, and its because you can fly spit9 on combat for all the time you have fuel in airplane, and p-47 you have to fly on continuous because of how engine limitations work in this game, you spend combat and you cant even recharge it for 45min, and on top of that you dont even get working message in techchat so you cant risk flying on anything els or your engine explods as game dosent inform you when their fantasy timers run out like it should as real pilots didnt risk blowing their engine if they used more then 5min of max power so its important if game is forcing this on player to inform him about it properly.

 

This is speed of spit9 m66 at combat (left blue line), and P-47 on continuous (left red line) :

Spoiler

This is speed of spit9 m70 at combat (left blue line), and P-47 on continuous (left red line) :

Spoiler

 

[Knarley-Bob]

I was beginning to wonder what was going on. Seems like the "American" aircraft are an after thought, perhaps to boost sales in the States. The P-51 is a booger to fly, the P-47 is like trying to fly a truck, and the P-38, I don't know what's with that. But as a wise man once said.."It is, what it is".....

[=621=Samikatz]

The P-47 is a very large and very heavy airplane for reasons that sadly don't give it any reasonable advantage in this sim. Sure, up high it's very fast, but few other players are going to roam up there for you to shoot down anyway. The simple fact is players will generally gravitate towards the most action, and most bomber and attack pilots online like making low passes to hit targets precisely, so most fights will end up where the P-47 doesn't really have any advantage. It would be nice to get an M some day that could be a lot more aggressive

Just now, Knarley-Bob said:

The P-51 is a booger to fly

 

You have to dance on your rudders a lot to get the most out of it but I'd rate it as the best allied plane in the sim (probably joint with the Tempest, really), right now, if you have the 75"hg mod available

[BlitzPig_EL]

I agree, the Mustang and Tempest are the best overall Allied aircraft.  The Mustang is very smooth, very fast, and played to it's strengths is a formidable weapon.  At the altitudes mostly flown, online and off, in the sim the Tempest is an amazingly good mount.

Just be careful with the elevators, as it has outstanding elevator authority and will black you out very quickly indeed, and when those four Hispanos hit in convergence, it brings the pain to the enemy in a very decisive fashion.

[Lusekofte]

Yes I like the Tempest. But I have a very forgiving nature, and that does not help when it comes to P 47. It should and must be a major player in late war Europe. 
Never really liked Bias talk, but I cant help thinking it

[kendo]

I suspect (and hope) that it will be like the Fw190 - many complaints about it for a long time after initial release. I think they made two different attempts at revising the flight model before people thought they had got it right.

 

I'm hopeful the upcoming DM revision will make the P47 more rugged. But generally there seems to be an issue with most aircraft losing wings and breaking up too easily.

 

The other side of that equation though - as soon as planes become harder to kill, there will be immediate complaints about one side or the other's weaponry being 'nerfed'.  

 

 

[cellinsky]

I have some 40+ Missions in my P47 carrere as a fighterbomber. Ditched a view times but always made it home. It was called the "Thunderbomber" by its crews in the MTO. Using it in that role is not so bad at all me thinks. Actually quite close to RL from what I read. It wasnt a Uberplane but I agree, the DM needs a revisit. Still my favorite allied plane. It is just that "something" to it, that let me fly it again and again...?

[Lusekofte]

5 minutes ago, cellinsky said:

is just that "something" to it, that let me fly it again and again...?

I know that feeling. But with this plane I simply can not over look its fails where the strength should have been. 
A mg 32 seize its engine in a second. I have never brought home  a P 47 from ground pounding myself

[BlitzPig_EL]

28 minutes ago, LuseKofte said:

Never really liked Bias talk, but I cant help thinking it

 

Please understand, I am not saying anything about bias.  I'm not saying, nor do I think that the devs are playing the bias card with the P47, or any other plane.

 

[Dagwoodyt]

The 4 Aces: I realize this topic addresses MP but in SP the P47 is also unexciting as AI. Once I set up a QMB flying a D9 against 4 Ace P47 AI at 10,000m start altitude. The 4 aces milled around aimlessly below me unable to cover one another until I shot them all down. The only thing the P47 has going for it is that it is very forgiving on landings.

[Lusekofte]

10 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Please understand, I am not saying anything about bias.  I'm not saying, nor do I think that the devs are playing the bias card with the P47, or any other plane.

 

I did not say you did. I say I myself have start to think it, but do not like to say it

[LuftManu]

Now that a new P-47 is coming, I believe that they will revisit the P-47 already in the sim as it happened with the Fw 190! Have faith!

[Diggun]

7 minutes ago, Dagwoodyt said:

only thing the P47 has going for it

Looks pretty bleedin' cool too.

 

Plus I do find it a pretty effective mud mover, in an environment where a2a supremacy exists, which was the case in 44/5.

 

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by Diggun

[RedKestrel]

6 minutes ago, Diggun said:

Looks pretty bleedin' cool too.

 

Plus I do find it a pretty effective mud mover, in an environment where a2a supremacy exists, which was the case in 44/5.

 

 

The P-47 has a lot going for it!
-good armament with lots of ammo
-good roll rate
-good high alt performance
-good bomb load
-good dive speed and stable at high speeds
-the pinnacle of elegance and grace

It's just not the best at anything. P-38 has a better bombload, and P-51, Tempest and Spitfire are better dogfighters. Since the fight rarely gets up to the high altitudes where the turbo really matters, it can't shine as it did. And the fragile DM makes it's low-alt performance seem worse than it is.

With the upcoming updates mentioned in Dev Diary 239 in regards to airframe damage, we might see some of the issues addressed in terms of how much damage the Jug can soak up. If this happens I expect the Jug to be much more of a joy to fly.


 

[Stoopy]

I'm not sure this is the right place to introduce it but what the heck...

 

Being equally disappointed with curious about the P-47 DM and wondering how it really compared to other A/C, I created a mission using the Mission Editor that establishes an "obstacle course" of light AA ground fire (Mg's only) of various types - MG34, M2, etc. plus some parked aircraft with trigger-happy tailgunners on the ground.  Then, 8 different AI aircraft are triggered to fly at very low level through the converged fields of fire along this obstacle course,  one at a time, and at the exit point of the obstacle course they continue to fly an additional 25km to evaluate their survivability while being damaged.  Any aircraft that reaches the finish line is deemed to have survived, otherwise the number of PK's, crashed and/or critically damaged aircraft are counted.   The results are displayed on a scorecard that I put on the GUI Map. Each aircraft goes through the course 8 times, for a total of 64 passes for all aircraft, making one data measurement set.  More than one full set should be run in order to get as much data as possible.  The idea being that you kick off the mission, sit back and watch the results accumulate, and at the end you have a fairly representative evaluation of the relative survivability of each aircraft.   It takes about an hour to go through the whole set.

 

The current aircraft set in the mission includes the P-47, P-51, P-38, P-40 (a nice rugged baseline), Fw190A-8, Bf109K-4, Tempest and Me262 (just for kicks). 

 

For the P-47, well, the results are pretty much what you'd expect.  It scores the absolute lowest among the above aircraft in terms of survivability, and not largely due to any immediate catastrophic failure over the obstacle course, but inevitably in the 25km "survival course" segment where all it has to do is just stay in the air until the finish line.  Once a P-47 starts streaming smoke over the obstacle course, it almost always crashes somewhere along the nice, peaceful, no-fire-zone 25km segment to the finish line.  By contrast,  a P51 or P-38 with multiple streams of smoke, fuel and/or coolant typically makes it to the finish line just fine.  Indicating that if you want to make it home, stay out of a T-bolt!

 

I haven't posted the mission for download only because there are two aircraft (Tempest to a degree, but more so the Me262) that I haven't been able to make fly through the obstacle course at the exact same speed as all other aircraft.  The 262 just cruises through unscathed most of the time since it spawns at a much higher airspeed.  So it's not a fair assessment of survivability in a strict regard, although one could argue that the 262's higher airspeed is a basis for survivability.  I would just expect folks 'round here to argue the point both ways (knowing how you people get  ). 

 

But it sounds like it might be time to dust it off and post it if there's interest in seeing how current, and any potential upcoming, DM's measure up in a "Damage Comparator" tool like this. 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by =[TIA]=Stoopy

[Diggun]

2 minutes ago, =[TIA]=Stoopy said:

I'm not sure this is the right place to introduce it but what the heck...

I v much approve of this Actual Science happening!

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Whenever I see People complain about the American Planes currently I can guarantee that they are taking too much Fuel and don't know how to fly their Aircraft.

When I see people complain about the Damage Model, I see Fw190s with up to two 30mm and two 20mm and two 13mm Guns, 109s with one 30mm and two 20mm Guns and two 13mm and Me-262s with four 30mm Guns.

Once you try it with a G-2 or G-4 you will find that the P-47 will drain your Ammo quite a bit and it's a Game of Chance even with a lot of good hits to bring it down.

 

The P-51 needs about 400l/h, and loaded with 400l she is without a Doubt the best flying Allied Fighter in Game. The only Problem is that the 6x.50cals don't work for me.

The P-47s biggest Issue at the Moment is Lack of Power. The current Power available isn't higher than what was available in 1943. Against German Fighters without MW50 and MK108 the P-47 is a strong Opponent, but with 64" MAP it simply has no Upsides aside from having a G-Suit.

 

So I hope the Devs will, against historical Judgement,  introduce 150 Octane and Field Mod for 70+".

 

At the Moment you will never have to Push the Turbo past 90% to 92% to reach 64", 100% Turbo only eats Power as it forces the MAP Regulator to Throttle the Engine down again, so for about every 1000ft Alt. gained Turbo requirement is 1% less for Max Boost.

The Speed Difference is significant, so don't Over-Turbo the Supercharger.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Another thing missing to be competitive with the late war fighters is the 150 octane fuel.

 

150 octane fuel was not used by the US 9th AF on the Continent. 

[Stoopy]

44 minutes ago, Diggun said:

I v much approve of this Actual Science happening!

 

Good 'nuff. I'll post it in the Single Missions section of the forum tomorrow.  Being as this is Valentine's day and I hope we all have better things to focus on tonight. 

 

...Then you and anyone else can run it and we can build a collection of non-subjective results to argue about.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by =[TIA]=Stoopy

[Rei-sen]

It's bad even at high altitude in this sim.

[Bremspropeller]

1 minute ago, LukeFF said:

150 octane fuel was not used by the US 9th AF on the Continent. 

 

Yes, I know. But it was used by the 8th / 56th FG and ze Germans have a K-4 with 1.98 ata in game.

 

It's not like DF-servers are overly historical anyway.

 

[357th_KW]

The 353rd, 356th and 78th all converted from P-47s to P-51s in Oct, Nov and Dec of 1944 respectively and would have been using 150 octane as well.  All four of the remaining 8th AF P-47 groups were heavily involved in Market-Garden in September of 44.  So there’s a pretty solid argument for providing the option, particularly with Normandy on the way.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

19 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

150 octane fuel was not used by the US 9th AF on the Continent. 

Well trained Pilots were not used by the Luftwaffe around Bodenplatte.

[Knarley-Bob]

1 hour ago, RedKestrel said:

The P-47 has a lot going for it!
-good armament with lots of ammo
-good roll rate
-good high alt performance
-good bomb load
-good dive speed and stable at high speeds
-the pinnacle of elegance and grace

It's just not the best at anything. P-38 has a better bombload, and P-51, Tempest and Spitfire are better dogfighters. Since the fight rarely gets up to the high altitudes where the turbo really matters, it can't shine as it did. And the fragile DM makes it's low-alt performance seem worse than it is.

With the upcoming updates mentioned in Dev Diary 239 in regards to airframe damage, we might see some of the issues addressed in terms of how much damage the Jug can soak up. If this happens I expect the Jug to be much more of a joy to fly.


 

Just a foot note:

U.S. Fighters, Lloyd S. Jones, published 1975, Page 117

  The durability and strength of the P-47 led to the nickname "Juggernaut" by it's pilots, or more affectionately, just "Jug". Many times, the big planes returned from missions with great quantities of daylight showing through the airframe; and even with portions of the engine blown away, the venerable, durable "Jug" brought its pilot home safely.

 

KB

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Well trained Pilots were not used by the Luftwaffe around Bodenplatte.

 

Fair enough.