P-47 Power vs Altitude too low.

[Legioneod]

Copy Paste from another post I made in  another section of the forums. Decides to post it here to get a discusion going and see what people think.

 

I've noticed this for a while in the P-47s and I brought it up during the recent beta but power drops too soon above max power critical altitude.

Also, the turbo rpms required to maintain power is too high, we should be able to maintain decent power at around 22k rpms and we shouldn't need to go over, currently we can't maintain proper power even when overspeeding the turbo past 22k rpms.

 

56" Critical altitude should be minimum of 29,000ft, other reports state a critical altitude for 56" at 31,000ft with 22k turbo rpm.

64" critical altitude should be minimum of 24,500ft, in-game it's only around 23,000ft.

 

Currently we can't maintain 56" 2200-2300 hp up to 29,000ft, currently we can only maintain around 52" at 22k turbo rpms. So what we end up getting is about 200+ less horsepower than what we should be seeing at this altitude. We are also seeing a loss in speed compared to what we should be seeing.

 

 

Even overspeeding the turbo past 22k isn't enough to get 56" like we should be able to.

 

Spoiler

P-47 D-22 top speed with 56" at 29,000ft.

 

Report showing 56" water injection critical altitude and power at 31,000ft with 22k turbo rpms. at around 2220HP.

 

Even the 150 fuel test shows 56" critical altitude at around 29,500ft. Only reason 56" power is less at the altitude compared to other reports is because no water injection was used as far as I'm aware, if we follow the water injection curve we can see around 2200HP at 29,500ft.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/P-47D_42-26167_Power.jpg

 

What we should see is pretty much the speed plateauing until reaching higher altitudes. We know from the report above that 2200-2300HP (56") is all that is required to achieve speeds of up to 435-443mph for the D-22/D-28 (with design load).

 

We can see an example of this with the D-30. The D-30 below was running 64" 2600HP, it's high speed at 29,000ft was 443mph. This wasn't it's high power critical altitude but it was still able to maintain the necessary power of around 2200-2300HP to achieve 443mph. (reason for higher speed is likely due to being only 12700lbs, with design load of 13,000lbs it's likely the D-30 would be somewhere around 436 mph.  What we can see is that the speed curve basically plateaus and you really don't see much increase/decrease in speed as between high power critical altitude and 29-31K.

 

 

We can even see in the D-22 report that at 29,000ft with 56" 2200-2300HP we would get a speed similar to that of the D-30 listed above, at around 443mph.

 

Below I've made some examples of the type of curve we should likely see.

 

D28/30 plotted with high speed of 443mph at 29,000ft. (not really accurate due to P-47 being at different loads, I plotted a more accurate chart below)

 

Speed plotted with design load (design load for D-26, D-28, and D-30 are nearly identical at around 13000lbs give or take) Notice the speed barley drops off between 24,500ft and 29,000ft. (speed at critical altitude for 2600HP is 437mph and drops to around 436mph at 29,000ft which is equivalent to around 2200-2300HP.)

 

Plotted another one for the D-22, D-25, and D-27. 24,500ft critical altitude of 2600hp high speed of 445mph and it drops to around 443mph at 29000ft. (D-25 and D-27 design load are similar at around 13,000lbs. D-22 design load is slightly lighter at around 12,800lbs so D-22 may be slightly faster at 24k but probably only be a bit if at all.)

 

We can see similar speed curves below taken from the book Americas Hundred Thousand.

 

 

 

 

 

The current power drop in-game is incorrect. Nothing substantial changed with the turbo/engine when the P-47 was uprated to 64/70" power, it would still be able to produce 2200-2300HP up to and above 29,000ft.

 

Recommendation: Increase power/speed at altitudes to historical figures. 56" 2300HP at least 29000ft (436-443mph depending on weight/aircraft)

64" 24500ft high speed of (437-445 depending on weight/aircraft) (should be done for both 130 and 150 fuel)

 

Tested the D-22 with standard fuel and the numbers are very close to what we see below:

This is fine but the problem is it is used in-game for level flight but irl this data is only relevant to climb. In level flight the MP/HP would have a higher critical altitude. The chart below is mp/hp in climb not level flight, the chart below is pretty close to what we see in-game.

 

I've edited a similar chart below that shows the correct data for 56" WI, it didn't have 64" so I've edited in. The 64" lines aren't exact but they show close to what it should be in-game.

The speed curve I wouldn't pay too much attention to because it's not for the Hamilton and therefore doesn't apply to the D-22. Turbo RPM, Manifold, and HP are all relevant though.

 

level flight performance:

Critical Alt 56" between 29,000 - 31,000ft. (2200-2300HP up to 29,000-31,000ft)

Critical Alt 64" 24,500ft. (2600HP up to 24,500ft)

Shouldn't have to go above 22,000 Turbo rpm to achieve either one of these manifold pressures.

 

Current in-game level flight performance (similar to how it should be in a climb but not in level flight):

56" CA ~ 27,000ft

64" CA ~23,000ft

 

HP seems to drop too soon compared to what it should, even the in-game stats say only around 1900HP available at 29,000ft when we should have around 2200-2300HP at that altitude. Critical Altitude for 64" and 56" is also lower than what it should be, at least from what I've seen.

 

It seems the game is using climb data to get the horsepower and manifold pressures when it should use level flight data, for proper critical altitudes and horsepower. Horsepower and Manifold should drop a bit in climb but not in level flight.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Legioneod

[DSR_A-24]

Have you tried messaging a Developer?

When I asked a very similar question about the P-47D-28's decrease in performance. I was given this figure.

High Speed at Critical Alt. - 245001    *437 MPH
(War Emerg. Rating - Eng. & Turbo)

[Legioneod]

2 hours ago, DSR_A-24 said:

Have you tried messaging a Developer?

When I asked a very similar question about the P-47D-28's decrease in performance. I was given this figure.

High Speed at Critical Alt. - 245001    *437 MPH
(War Emerg. Rating - Eng. & Turbo)

That's the power critical altitude for 64" 2600HP but what's not takin into account that the P-47 can still make 56" up to and above 29000ft, 56" at that altitude will give you anywhere from 430-443mph.

 

This is from a D-26 which is nearly identical to the D-28 main difference is the D-26 is using 56" 2300HP instead of 64" 2600HP.

 

Here is a D-30 using 2600HP. Exactly the same power/engine/turbo as the D-28.

 

Edited October 6, 2021 by Legioneod

[DSR_A-24]

3 hours ago, Legioneod said:

That's the power critical altitude for 64" 2600HP but what's not takin into account that the P-47 can still make 56" up to and above 29000ft, 56" at that altitude will give you anywhere from 430-443mph.

 

This is from a D-26 which is nearly identical to the D-28 main difference is the D-26 is using 56" 2300HP instead of 64" 2600HP.

 

Here is a D-30 using 2600HP. Exactly the same power/engine/turbo as the D-28.

 

I'm just stating what they're basing their P-47 on. I'm assuming what they modeled was P-47D-28 running at 20,000rpm. I also believe the later P-47's were only tested at 20,000rpm. You'll find only that the P-47D-30 is capable of 443mph @ 29,000ft. This mysterious number does not add up to the later P-47 top speed results at all. Everything beyond the summer of 1944 states a high speed @ ~24000ft. Maybe the need for running a turbo at 22,000rpm was unnecessary as the roll of the P-47's was turned into a fighter bomber and on top of that the USAF's strategy being changed to target the Luftwaffe at lower altitudes. Now I'm just guessing, lol.

Take the estimate speed of the D-10 @ 2600hp and the actual highspeed @ 31,000ft. And draw a converging line, you'll find that the lines converge within ballpark of the actual tested high speed and altitude of the P-47D-30. And even the manifold pressure trendline converges with 29,000ft @ 64"(2600hp). It's sloppy, but it works.

I remember reading on avialog's PDFs that the P-47D's turbo being limited for 15mintes at 22,000rpm. Unfortunately, you now have to pay to view their PDFs.

[Legioneod]

9 minutes ago, DSR_A-24 said:

I'm just stating what they're basing their P-47 on. I'm assuming what they modeled was P-47D-28 running at 20,000rpm. I also believe the later P-47's were only tested at 20,000rpm. You'll find only that the P-47D-30 is capable of 443mph @ 29,000ft. This mysterious number does not add up to the later P-47 top speed results at all. Everything beyond the summer of 1944 states a high speed @ ~24000ft. Maybe the need for running a turbo at 22,000rpm was unnecessary as the roll of the P-47's was turned into a fighter bomber and on top of that the USAF's strategy being changed to target the Luftwaffe at lower altitudes. Now I'm just guessing, lol.

Take the estimate speed of the D-10 @ 2600hp and the actual highspeed @ 31,000ft. And draw a converging line, you'll find that the lines converge within ballpark of the actual tested high speed and altitude of the P-47D-30. And even the manifold pressure trendline converges with 29,000ft @ 64"(2600hp). It's sloppy, but it works.

I remember reading on avialog's PDFs that the P-47D's turbo being limited for 15mintes at 22,000rpm. Unfortunately, you now have to pay to view their PDFs.

 

D-22 top speed when running 56" 2300HP Critical Altitude for this setting/speed is 29,000ft.

 

The D-30 I posted above wasn't running 64" 2600HP at 29,000ft. Critical Altitude for 64" 2600HP is ~24,000ft

At 29,000ft that D-30 was achieving the same power as the D-22 above, 56" ~2300HP. Which is why it achieved the same 443mph @ 29000ft.

 

In-game it is impossible to even achieve 56" at 29000ft even with the turbo over boosted past 22k rpm.

64" Critical Altitude is also too low, and at 24000ft you can't achieve 64"

Edited October 7, 2021 by Legioneod

[ICDP]

Do we have in game speed charts for the P47Ds to show if they are slower at alt compared to real life tests?

[Legioneod]

4 hours ago, ICDP said:

Do we have in game speed charts for the P47Ds to show if they are slower at alt compared to real life tests?

The test I've run show that they are slower than what they should be when running the same loadout/weight as the test.  I'll have to find the numbers or test it again but I'll post them here when I get them.

[DSR_A-24]

13 hours ago, Legioneod said:

 

D-22 top speed when running 56" 2300HP Critical Altitude for this setting/speed is 29,000ft.

 

The D-30 I posted above wasn't running 64" 2600HP at 29,000ft. Critical Altitude for 64" 2600HP is ~24,000ft

At 29,000ft that D-30 was achieving the same power as the D-22 above, 56" ~2300HP. Which is why it achieved the same 443mph @ 29000ft.

 

In-game it is impossible to even achieve 56" at 29000ft even with the turbo over boosted past 22k rpm.

64" Critical Altitude is also too low, and at 24000ft you can't achieve 64"

So in late 1944, long after P-47's were cleared for 64". Republic had the idea of comparing an outdated 56" P-47D-30 against its newer P-47N/M? Hmmm

References for data plotted on the charts:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47-differences.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/comp-p47dmn.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/P-47-high-speed-30sept44.jpg

The Greenline is what the ingame P-47 is based off of.

Edited October 7, 2021 by DSR_A-24

[Legioneod]

37 minutes ago, DSR_A-24 said:

So in late 1944, long after P-47's were cleared for 64". Republic had the idea of comparing an outdated 56" P-47D-30 against its newer P-47N/M? Hmmm

 

 

Never said this at all. I said the P-47D30 in that comparison was running 64" 2600HP but it wasn't getting that power at 29,000ft yet it still attained 443mph at 29,000ft.

The C-23 Turbo in the P-47 wasn't able to maintain 64" 2600HP past ~24,500ft, past this altitude the power would drop.

The only possible way that D-30 was hitting 443mph at 29,000ft was if it was still able to maintain 56" at that altitude.

 

37 minutes ago, DSR_A-24 said:

 

 

 

 

References for data plotted on the charts:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47-differences.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/comp-p47dmn.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/P-47-high-speed-30sept44.jpg

The Greenline is what the ingame P-47 is based off of.

I've poured over the charts countless times. Even in the charts you will see that 56" critical altitude is above 29,000ft, and at 29,000ft it has at least 2200HP. Test it in-game and you will not be able to get this.

 

All the info is in the original post that I made. Try to read through it, I thought I explained it clearly enough there.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Legioneod

[DSR_A-24]

26 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Never said this at all. I said the P-47D30 in that comparison was running 64" 2600HP but it wasn't getting that power at 29,000ft yet it still attained 443mph at 29,000ft.

The C-23 Turbo in the P-47 wasn't able to maintain 64" 2600HP past ~24,500ft, past this altitude the power would drop.

The only possible way that D-30 was hitting 443mph at 29,000ft was if it was still able to maintain 56" at that altitude.

 

I've poured over the charts countless times. Even in the charts you will see that 56" critical altitude is above 29,000ft, and at 29,000ft it has at least 2200HP. Test it in-game and you will not be able to get this.

 

All the info is in the original post that I made. Try to read through it, I thought I explained it clearly enough there.

I'm not really saying you said anything Legioneod. I'm just starting a discussion as you asked and I noticed this post was about to submerged without ever being noticed again. Its P-47, its never going to bring the same attention that the Fw-190A3 got in its earlier days in this game.

Don't worry man, I've poured through the charts multiple times 2 years ago. We've actually already mentioned some of this low altitude performance 2 years. Check your DM's.

 

In short, I'm trying to comply my data against the 4 figures that you posted here that I've never seen before.

[Legioneod]

15 minutes ago, DSR_A-24 said:

I'm not really saying you said anything Legioneod. I'm just starting a discussion as you asked and I noticed this post was about to submerged without ever being noticed again. Its P-47, its never going to bring the same attention that the Fw-190A3 got in its earlier days in this game.

Don't worry man, I've poured through the charts multiple times 2 years ago. We've actually already mentioned some of this low altitude performance 2 years. Check your DM's.

 

In short, I'm trying to comply my data against the 4 figures that you posted here that I've never seen before.

Wasn't trying to be hostile or anything. I appreciate the discussions. I have another post with the same data in the beta thread, I figured the devs are more likely to see it there.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

On 10/7/2021 at 5:29 AM, ICDP said:

Do we have in game speed charts for the P47Ds to show if they are slower at alt compared to real life tests?

I have tested the P-47D-22 in the same configuration in this report: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47-26167.html  6 guns, wing racks and full internal fuel.

Though there it's flying with a Curtiss propeller while ours has the Hamilton prop.

@Legioneod I have numbers with both turbo limited at 20000 RPM and letting it overrev, for the chart comparison should I stick to the limit or have the unlimited ones? The report doesn't clarifiy how they ran the turbo so I don't know which one I should use.  Maybe I could have both, hopefully it doesn't get too cluttered.

[Legioneod]

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

I have tested the P-47D-22 in the same configuration in this report: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47-26167.html  6 guns, wing racks and full internal fuel.

Though there it's flying with a Curtiss propeller while ours has the Hamilton prop.

@Legioneod I have numbers with both turbo limited at 20000 RPM and letting it overrev, for the chart comparison should I stick to the limit or have the unlimited ones? The report doesn't clarifiy how they ran the turbo so I don't know which one I should use.  Maybe I could have both, hopefully it doesn't get too cluttered.

I'd say 22,000 is likely what they were running it at since that is what was standard or in use at the time, they wouldn't have gone over this though.

Also 8 guns is what was on this P-47 iirc, not sure how much that would actually effect the test though.

 

Eventually I'm gonna run some test and map out all the different factors to see how they compare with real data. MP, Turbo required, critical altitudes, speed, etc.

Edited October 8, 2021 by Legioneod

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

13 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

I'd say 22,000 is likely what they were running it at since that is what was standard or in use at the time, they wouldn't have gone over this though.

Also 8 guns is what was on this P-47 iirc, not sure how much that would actually effect the test though.

 

Eventually I'm gonna run some test and map out all the different factors to see how they compare with real data. MP, Turbo required, critical altitudes, speed, etc.

The overrev was limited to 22000? I thought there wasn't a speed limit per se but more like no more than 15 minutes above 20k RPM. Might have to re run the tests because I recall it getting into the 23000 and 24000 RPM range when going full boost.

In regards to the guns, it seems to be 6 guns as they describe full internal fuel, and with 6 guns is when the listed take off weights matches close enough, with 8 guns it's too heavy, the photos of the plane also seem to show only 6 barrels protuding, and where the outboard guns would be what looks like a flush filled port.

[Legioneod]

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

The overrev was limited to 22000? I thought there wasn't a speed limit per se but more like no more than 15 minutes above 20k RPM. Might have to re run the tests because I recall it getting into the 23000 and 24000 RPM range when going full boost.

In regards to the guns, it seems to be 6 guns as they describe full internal fuel, and with 6 guns is when the listed take off weights matches close enough, with 8 guns it's too heavy, the photos of the plane also seem to show only 6 barrels protuding, and where the outboard guns would be what looks like a flush filled port.

Yep 22,000 is the maximum allowable turbo rpm, they never cleared it for anything higher than this as far as I know.

It does look like 6 guns but the pic is too poor to really tell. No harm with testing 6 instead of 8 imo. I'll run my test with 8 guns though since that was standard.

Edited October 8, 2021 by Legioneod

[Gambit21]

54 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Yep 22,000 is the maximum allowable turbo rpm, they never cleared it for anything higher than this as far as I know.

It does look like 6 guns but the pic is too poor to really tell. No harm with testing 6 instead of 8 imo. I'll run my test with 8 guns though since that was standard.

 

I just blew it up on photoshop, and while it get's very pixelated, there's a pixel 'blob' on each side where the 4th gun should be.

I'm calling it 8.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

3 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I just blew it up on photoshop, and while it get's very pixelated, there's a pixel 'blob' on each side where the 4th gun should be.

I'm calling it 8.

The thing is the report lists the test plane as weighting 13230 lb, with full internal fuel, water supply and ballast equating 300 rounds per gun of ammunition.

If you configure our P-47D-22 like that and eight guns, it weights 13760 lb, and this with 267 rounds per gun.

Now with 6 guns instead, the weight goes down to 13451 lb.  There is still a discrepancy but it's closer to the report weight.

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

The thing is the report lists the test plane as weighting 13230 lb, with full internal fuel, water supply and ballast equating 300 rounds per gun of ammunition.

If you configure our P-47D-22 like that and eight guns, it weights 13760 lb, and this with 267 rounds per gun.

Now with 6 guns instead, the weight goes down to 13451 lb.  There is still a discrepancy but it's closer to the report weight.

 

P-47D-22 

Empty Weight :10143lbs

Pilot: 200lbs

Fuel: 1830lbs

Oil: 143lbs

Water: 124.5lbs

Ammo: 720lbs

Total: 13160lbs

 

If my numbers are correct you should be very close with full fuel, 8 guns, ammo, etc.

 

 

[Gambit21]

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

The thing is the report lists the test plane as weighting 13230 lb, with full internal fuel, water supply and ballast equating 300 rounds per gun of ammunition.

If you configure our P-47D-22 like that and eight guns, it weights 13760 lb, and this with 267 rounds per gun.

Now with 6 guns instead, the weight goes down to 13451 lb.  There is still a discrepancy but it's closer to the report weight.

 

The pixel blobs could be artifact/coincidence as well. It’s not definite...just if I had to put money on one based on the photo - I’d lean 8.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

39 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

 

P-47D-22 

Empty Weight :10143lbs

Pilot: 200lbs

Fuel: 1830lbs

Oil: 143lbs

Water: 124.5lbs

Ammo: 720lbs

Total: 13160lbs

If my numbers are correct you should be very close with full fuel, 8 guns, ammo, etc.

 

The in game numbers are Standard Weight 13697 lb (full internal fuel, 8 guns, 267 rounds per gun, clean wings and fuselage).

The breakdown available is:

Empty Weight: 10285 lb
Fuel: 1827 lb (305 US Gallons)
Ammo: 664 lb (267 rounds per gun, for 8 guns).

This is a total of 12776, so 921 lb short of the standard weight.  Something doesn't quite add up, empty weight must include either oil or water, and with a different pilot weight than 200lb excluded?

There is also the Minimum weight stat:

Minimum weight (no ammo, 10% fuel, 4 MG removed): 11096 lb

Wing racks are 66lb

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Legioneod]

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

 

The in game numbers are Standard Weight 13697 lb (full internal fuel, 8 guns, 267 rounds per gun, clean wings and fuselage).

The breakdown available is:

Empty Weight: 10285 lb
Fuel: 1827 lb (305 US Gallons)
Ammo: 664 lb (267 rounds per gun, for 8 guns).

This is a total of 12776, so 921 lb short of the standard weight.  Something doesn't quite add up, empty weight must include either oil or water, and with a different pilot weight than 200lb excluded?

There is also the Minimum weight stat:

Minimum weight (no ammo, 10% fuel, 4 MG removed): 11096 lb

Wing racks are 66lb

 

No idea if in-game stats are correct. The numbers I added are what everything adds up to roughly. The weight stated in-game must be wrong.

13160lbs + wing racks comes out to 13,226 so very close to test weight.

 

These are the numbers I used, just change fuel and ammo and it should add up to around the test weight or below it.

I'm wonder if they have the P-47 too heavy for standard loadout?

Edited October 9, 2021 by Legioneod

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

18 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

No idea if in-game stats are correct. The numbers I added are what everything adds up to roughly. The weight stated in-game must be wrong.

13160lbs + wing racks comes out to 13,226 so very close to test weight.

Well, the in game stats are important because those would reflect how it is implemented in the game.

I think I got it in the end:

Your listed empty weight + your oil weight is the same as the in game empty weight, 10285 lb

Adding the pilot, water, ammo and fuel we get to 13100lb, 597 lb short of the listed in game standard weight. The 8 guns are around 573 lb according to in game specs, so that could be most of the difference. 

Looks like in game considers the listed empty weight without guns. Does your empty weight data specify if it is with guns or not?

Edited October 9, 2021 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Legioneod]

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

Well, the in game stats are important because those would reflect how it is implemented in the game.

I think I got it in the end:

Your listed empty weight + your oil weight is the same as the in game empty weight, 10285 lb

Adding the pilot, water, ammo and fuel we get to 13100lb, 597 lb short of the listed in game standard weight. The 8 guns are around 573 lb according to in game specs, so that could be most of the difference. 

Looks like in game considers the listed empty weight without guns. Does your empty weight data specify if it is with guns or not?

Included in the empty weight as far as I’m aware. Gun weight isn’t listed anywhere in the document. They would have listed it if it wasn’t included in empty weight.

 

I assume guns were considered part of the aircraft so I believe the weight is included.

Edited October 9, 2021 by Legioneod

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

10 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Included in the empty weight as far as I’m aware. Gun weight isn’t listed anywhere in the document.

I assume guns were considered part of the aircraft so I believe the weight is included.

Interesting, there could be a possibility that the P-47D-22 is 570 lb too heavy because of having the guns accounted for twice then I guess. Do you have the numbers for the D-28 or say P-51 or P-38 to compare in game?

Edited October 9, 2021 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Legioneod]

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

Interesting, there could be a possibility that the P-47D-22 is 570 lb too heavy because of having the guns accounted for twice then I guess. Do you have the numbers for the D-28 or say P-51 or P-38 to compare in game?

I don’t have them on hand but I’ll look for the D-28 numbers when I get the chance. Iirc it is only a somewhat heavier than the D-22, mostly due to the larger water tank and larger fuel tank.

 

the standard weight you listed might actually be for the D-28. What’s the D-28 stats say? (Not at my pc so I can’t check)

Edited October 9, 2021 by Legioneod

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

25 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

I don’t have them on hand but I’ll look for the D-28 numbers when I get the chance. Iirc it is only a somewhat heavier than the D-22, mostly due to the larger water tank and larger fuel tank.

 

the standard weight you listed might actually be for the D-28. What’s the D-28 stats say? (Not at my pc so I can’t check)

Listed standard weight for the D-28 is 14337 lb, with an empty weight of 10483 lb

1 hour ago, Legioneod said:

Oh just looked at this now,

Looks like in this case the guns aren't taken into account for the 10143 lb empty weight, so the standard weight for the P-47D-22 in game would be accurate.

Using the numbers in that table we end up with 12777 lb for a plane with 6 guns, and 205 gallons of fuel. If we add the remaining weight of the two extra guns and their ammo (143 lb guns + 166lb ammo) and the weight of the extra 100 gallons of fuel (600 lb) then we end up with a total weight of 13686 lb, very close to the listed in game standard weight of 13697 lb.

Edited October 9, 2021 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Listed standard weight for the D-28 is 14337 lb, with an empty weight of 10483 lb

Oh just looked at this now,

Looks like in this case the guns aren't taken into account for the 10143 lb empty weight, so the standard weight for the P-47D-22 in game would be accurate.

Using the numbers in that table we end up with 12777 lb for a plane with 6 guns, and 205 gallons of fuel. If we add the remaining weight of the two extra guns and their ammo (143 lb guns + 166lb ammo) and the weight of the extra 100 gallons of fuel (600 lb) then we end up with a total weight of 13686 lb, very close to the listed in game standard weight of 13697 lb.

Yep looks like I was reading it wrong. That clears things up lol.

So you were right, it is 6 guns. Nice work 

Edited October 9, 2021 by Legioneod

[Knarley-Bob]

[Rache-der-Boote]

On 10/6/2021 at 5:46 PM, DSR_A-24 said:

Have you tried messaging a Developer?

Isn't that the purpose of this section of the forum?

[354thFG_Panda_]

This is quite an interesting thread, was the difference of the horsepower/manifold at altitude ever solved up to this day?

So should the in game 47s be able to maintain 56" up to 29~31 thousand ft?

Edited August 29, 2022 by theRedPanda

[Legioneod]

On 8/29/2022 at 4:24 PM, theRedPanda said:

This is quite an interesting thread, was the difference of the horsepower/manifold at altitude ever solved up to this day?

So should the in game 47s be able to maintain 56" up to 29~31 thousand ft?

As far as I know it's still wrong in-game. I haven't tested or flown the P-47 in a long time though.

We should be able to get 56" at around 31k ft. 

[354thFG_Panda_]

29 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

As far as I know it's still wrong in-game. I haven't tested or flown the P-47 in a long time though.

We should be able to get 56" at around 31k ft. 

Do you have a source for the D22/D25 one? I noticed 56 wasn't achieved in climb past something like 25000ft from the D10 tests. Maybe something to do with ram air?

Edited September 3, 2022 by theRedPanda

[Legioneod]

3 hours ago, theRedPanda said:

Do you have a source for the D22/D25 one? I noticed 56 wasn't achieved in climb past something like 25000ft from the D10 tests. Maybe something to do with ram air?

It couldn't maintain it in a climb but it could in level flight. The problem in-game is that they use climb data for level flight as well (I think).

What we should see in game is power dropping in the climb but regain in level flight, we don't see this though (at least not properly)

[the_emperor]

10 hours ago, Legioneod said:

The problem in-game is that they use climb data for level flight as well (I think).

 

Happened to the Bf 109-G (DB605A), too. They used the engines FTH without ram (5.7km) instead of the FTH with Ram (6.6km). That was corrected recently, but it took about 4 years to fix that