P-47 is poorly represented

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

If you take one hit to a wing the plane wants to spin continuously. This is ridiculous considering german planes suffer very little performance when hit, then they tag you with one shot out of 30 and then there's nothing you can do. Its all you can do to keep the plane in the air after taking a single hit most times and even if you do you're going so slow you're just waiting to die. 2/3's of the time it simply explodes. Meanwhile I've flow 190's missing half their tail and both wings shot up badly with hardly any trouble keeping it in the air. 109 is not much different. This really kills the game for fans of the jug which was a very effective fighter in Europe.

Edited September 30, 2021 by -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138

[AEthelraedUnraed]

3 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

This really kills the game for fans of the jug which was a very effective fighter in Europe.

I'm a fan of the Jug and my game isn't killed.

 

With the Jug, it's imperative that you keep your speed up (above ~200mph). Below that and it turns very sluggish, which is especially true when you're damaged. Sacrifice any altitude you have, if necessary, to get above 200mph. You'll find that the higher speed allows you to fly at a shallower Angle of Attack, reducing drag so that you can then accelerate further. If you try to keep altitude at all costs, you might end up in a vicious circle where your slower speed requires a larger AoA, increasing drag, reducing speed and so forth while at the same time reducing your control authority.

 

Regarding the amount of lift that's lost when damaged, I won't make any statements since I've never flown a damaged plane.

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

As I said, the plane is very unstable after one hit to the wing by a 20mm while in the 190 A-8 and A-5 I've more than once eaten several hispanos and even had both wings shot to the highest damage representation while also missing an elevator and was still able to fly home while escaping the fight. If the 190 can fly as stable as it does with heavy damage the jug should be able to as well. Keeping speed high is also an issue specifically for the D28. It has trouble holding speed when you level after a hard dive it slows down rapidly. I believe Greg's Airplanes and Auto's also found it not making the power it should be.

 

Edited September 30, 2021 by -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

OP you are exaggerating but I think loosing lift after hit with 20 mm HP on allied planes is to severe,  you start constantly rolling and defending in that condition is very hard,  I would like to have penalty but that is to much imho, because it's like wing has hole in top and bottom of the wing. You should have more drag but the rolling is to severe. 

 

When you get hit in another wing , when both are damaged plane straight it self, and you can do defending maneuvers much better.  This luck can save the day. 

[CountZero]

7 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

If you take one hit to a wing the plane wants to spin continuously. This is ridiculous considering german planes suffer very little performance when hit, then they tag you with one shot out of 30 and then there's nothing you can do. Its all you can do to keep the plane in the air after taking a single hit most times and even if you do you're going so slow you're just waiting to die. 2/3's of the time it simply explodes. Meanwhile I've flow 190's missing half their tail and both wings shot up badly with hardly any trouble keeping it in the air. 109 is not much different. This really kills the game for fans of the jug which was a very effective fighter in Europe.

Why are you playing with american airplanes in this game ? game is not made for them, they are here just nice things to look at in hangar or making skins for. Play with LW or RAF insted like others. Leve american crap in hangar where they belong. 

Your part of problem, if they see in data that players dont play with american airplanes, they wont make more of them, just imagine if insted P-47D22 and P-51B5 we got more airplanes that work in this game, like Spitfire 9c or Beaufighter, great engine timers and guns that work, who will use P-47 or P51 from BoN lol

Edited September 30, 2021 by CountZero

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 minute ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

If the 190 can fly as stable as it does with heavy damage the jug should be able to as well.

The 190 and the Jug are two different airplanes with different aerodynamics and specs. The fact that one of them can do something means exactly zero about whether or not the other can do the same thing.

 

I'm not claiming the P-47 responds correctly to damage, as I do not know how it should respond to damage. I do claim however that even with both wings heavily damaged and missing an elevator, it is certainly possible to fly the Jug home, as long as you keep your speed up.

 

[=RS=EnvyC]

I'll take "ive never flown a P47 with damage before" for $200.

[Knarley-Bob]

2 hours ago, CountZero said:

Why are you playing with american airplanes in this game ? game is not made for them, they are here just nice things to look at in hangar or making skins for. Play with LW or RAF insted like others. Leve american crap in hangar where they belong. 

Your part of problem, if they see in data that players dont play with american airplanes, they wont make more of them, just imagine if insted P-47D22 and P-51B5 we got more airplanes that work in this game, like Spitfire 9c or Beaufighter, great engine timers and guns that work, who will use P-47 or P51 from BoN lol

I would agree that the American planes in this game are terribly represented. Heck, in BOBP one CAN'T fly a P-51, and if you fly a P-47, you the pilot, might as well be hung on a meat hook before you take off...?

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

5 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

 

I'm not claiming the P-47 responds correctly to damage, as I do not know how it should respond to damage. I do claim however that even with both wings heavily damaged and missing an elevator, it is certainly possible to fly the Jug home, as long as you keep your speed up.

 

It seems you're assuming that I am trying to fly the Jug like a Spitfire pulling lots of aoa at low speeds however I don't. I fly a lot of lag pursuit, and use roll to change direction, only pulling pitch to lead a shot. I almost never use flaps in the Jug and use the vertical against tight turns. Also 200mph is rather slow. The jug isn't happy at any speed below 250 and if you take a hit, you're fighting so much roll and drag that you can't keep your speed up. I also cannot recall a time that I lost an elevator in the jug without losing the whole tail or just exploding.

[Knarley-Bob]

IMHO the P-47 is depicted as a pick up with a full load of dirt and 1/2 way inflated tires. Now, let's put it on a drag strip against a muscle car.

If you see an enemy, you are toast, especially if he puts one bullet into you ship.

Sorry Gents, but that's my take on it. Just too bad it's that way..........

Like it was said before, "This game is not made for American aircraft".

Edited September 30, 2021 by Knarley-Bob

[AEthelraedUnraed]

16 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

It seems you're assuming that I am trying to fly the Jug like a Spitfire pulling lots of aoa at low speeds however I don't. I fly a lot of lag pursuit, and use roll to change direction, only pulling pitch to lead a shot. I almost never use flaps in the Jug and use the vertical against tight turns. Also 200mph is rather slow. The jug isn't happy at any speed below 250 and if you take a hit, you're fighting so much roll and drag that you can't keep your speed up.

Did you read anything I wrote at all? Nowhere am I suggesting that you fly the Jug like a Spitfire. I'm only saying that it definitely is possible to fly home when you're heavily damaged - I know from plenty of experience. If you're not able to, you must do something wrong and I've given a couple of hints of where to look. If the fact that I am able to fly home when heavily damaged while you're not upsets you, then you really need to toughen up.

 

On 9/30/2021 at 10:06 AM, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

even had both wings shot to the highest damage representation while also missing an elevator

16 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

I also cannot recall a time that I lost an elevator in the jug without losing the whole tail or just exploding.

Please stick to one story if you're trying to make a point.

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

My guy, if you're going to quote me then quote the whole idea. When I claimed to have both wings shot up and one elevator I was in the FOCKE WULF 190. Whatever, it seems you wont be happy until I change my mind and acknowledge that you are right and the game is great but that's not going to happen so just accept that you have an entirely different experience with the jug (one which I believe is not based in the reality of IL-2) and my experience is shared by others who actually fly the P-47 in IL-2. It's slow, it wings stalls with any hard maneuvering at any speed and it takes way to much damage or just explodes when hit. Meanwhile the 190 and 109 turn on rails and can instantly recover from a spin if you can even manage to induce a spin or stall. So kindly stop taking up a crusade against my position if you disagree with it. The analogy of a truck loaded with dirt I think explains it well. The plane feels like its maybe too heavy or there is some data point in the sim that is not working correctly. Whatever the case, The Jug is poorly represented in this game.

[Dakpilot]

It is like a dump truck... 

 

It weighs about 3 tons more than a 109K and a 190

 

 

?

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[von_Tom]

 

Hard manoeuvering causes massive energy bleed so stalling isn't that surprising.

 

I like the truck loaded with dirt analogy, but then you're up against 109s and 190s which although they may not have the same power they are much, much lighter and smaller.

 

Get the P47 up high flying and it's a beast.

 

I cannot really comment on the damage it can take, but I'd take anything over the instant pk I get whenever I'm in a 190.

 

von Tom

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

It feels like its underpowered. without 150 it has trouble holding good speed in level flight. With 150 it seems to reach speeds it should but without 150 oct fuel it feels very sluggish.

[Dakpilot]

33 minutes ago, von_Tom said:

I like the truck loaded with dirt analogy, but then you're up against 109s and 190s which although they may not have the same power they are much, much lighter and smaller.

 

You could literally strap a Hi-cap Landrover 110 pick up full of dirt to the heaviest 109 and it would still weigh less than a P-47 (both at standard weights) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[BraveSirRobin]

I’ve talked to another warbird pilot who flies the P-47.  He hasn’t flown the BoX P-47, but he has flown several other WW2 warbirds, including the P-51, P-40, and Corsair.  He hates the P-47.  Says that it’s a sluggish pig.  Fortunately, he wasn’t able to offer any insight on the damage model.

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

It feels like its underpowered. without 150 it has trouble holding good speed in level flight (325mph). With 150 it seems to reach speeds it should but without 150 oct fuel it feels very sluggish. Taking a hit during defensive maneuvers often throws it into a spin or wing stall and several times I've been thrown into a terminal flat spin. Flat spins NEVER happen to 109's or 190's as they should especially considering the things people do in them while at low speeds. PK's are a thing but not as bad as the all but certain guarantee of losing a fight that comes with any damage to the 47. I know there's the idea that 20mm and 13mm he are over performing (which I would agree with) which would explain a lot of this I think. I've even had my plane tossed out of it's flight path from a hit (a dump truck shifted out of its inertia by a relatively small shell) which was baffling to me. (I saw this in replay)

[Knarley-Bob]

And I quotef rom "U.S. Fighters" 1975 Pg.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 it's pilot home safely."

 

But in this sim, a couple June bugs will cripple the craft. The sim just doesn't do justice to the plane. And that my friends is too bad.....If they would correct this, great, if not, well what can one say? Shooting down a P-47 shouldn't count on one's kill tally?

[354thFG_Panda_]

Since this is pretty much a Damage Modelling complaint, guys please be patient for whatever changes they intend to do in future. There is already a thread for flight modelling of p47 so things of that aspect can go there.

Edited October 1, 2021 by LR.TheRedPanda

[Knarley-Bob]

21 minutes ago, LR.TheRedPanda said:

Since this is pretty much a Damage Modelling complaint, guys please be patient for whatever changes they intend to do in future. There is already a thread for flight modelling of p47 so things of that aspect can go there.

I am really glad to hear that, my Dad flew P-47's, was beginning to wonder how I was ever born..........?

Where is this thread? Just curious..........

Edited October 1, 2021 by Knarley-Bob

[AEthelraedUnraed]

10 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

My guy, if you're going to quote me then quote the whole idea. When I claimed to have both wings shot up and one elevator I was in the FOCKE WULF 190. Whatever, it seems you wont be happy until I change my mind and acknowledge that you are right and the game is great but that's not going to happen so just accept that you have an entirely different experience with the jug (one which I believe is not based in the reality of IL-2) and my experience is shared by others who actually fly the P-47 in IL-2. It's slow, it wings stalls with any hard maneuvering at any speed and it takes way to much damage or just explodes when hit. Meanwhile the 190 and 109 turn on rails and can instantly recover from a spin if you can even manage to induce a spin or stall. So kindly stop taking up a crusade against my position if you disagree with it. The analogy of a truck loaded with dirt I think explains it well. The plane feels like its maybe too heavy or there is some data point in the sim that is not working correctly. Whatever the case, The Jug is poorly represented in this game.

Listen - I'm not here on any kind of "crusade" against you or anything here. You posted a statement (that even "after taking a single hit most times" the P-47 ends up basically uncontrollable) which doesn't agree with my own observations. And yes, conversely to what you're suggesting, I "actually fly" the Jug; in fact it's the plane I've flown most for the past 2 months or so. During that time, I've been damaged many times, and I've been able to keep control of the aircraft for all except the very worst cases. This is an obvious discrepancy between our experiences. Now this discrepancy can be caused by basically four things:
- Our Jugs have different flight/damage models. Very unlikely.
- Our Jugs were damaged in a different manner. Since we both claim to have flown damaged Jugs many times, this is also unlikely by way of statistics.

- We have different standards of what constitutes "controllable". IMO it's a pretty black-and-white term, either you can control an airplane and fly it, or you can't and crash. More likely than the two options above though.
- You and I deal with the damage differently. IMO the most likely explanation.

 

I then posted a couple of hints on how you might be able to better deal with damage and improve your chances of returning home. This apparently upset you for some reason.

 

10 hours ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

kindly stop taking up a crusade against my position if you disagree with it.

Well, nobody's forced you to start a thread to complain about P-47 damage. What do you want? For everyone to either say yes and amen to your every claim or shut up? You are entitled to have your opinion about the Jug, and to share it on the Forums. But other people like me are equally entitled to disagree with that opinion and reply to your thread about it. If you only want people to post if they agree with your claims, I suggest you start some Discord server or whatever with a select group of people of which you know they agree with you, and you can sling mud at IL2 all day as you please. But if you post on a public forum, you simply cannot demand people to either agree with you or stop replying.

Edited October 2, 2021 by AEthelraedUnraed

[354thFG_Panda_]

15 hours ago, Knarley-Bob said:

I am really glad to hear that, my Dad flew P-47's, was beginning to wonder how I was ever born..........?

Where is this thread? Just curious..........

 

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

Thanks a lot for the thread link Panda S! This explains a lot of what I feel when using the 47 in this game.

 

Edited October 2, 2021 by -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138

[QB.Beno]

On 10/2/2021 at 5:34 AM, Knarley-Bob said:

And I quotef rom "U.S. Fighters" 1975 Pg.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 it's pilot home safely."

 

But in this sim, a couple June bugs will cripple the craft. The sim just doesn't do justice to the plane. And that my friends is too bad.....If they would correct this, great, if not, well what can one say? Shooting down a P-47 shouldn't count on one's kill tally?

Perhaps this is proof of the jugs poor combat performance with how often it was shot to pieces ?

[Legioneod]

49 minutes ago, QB.Beno said:

Perhaps this is proof of the jugs poor combat performance with how often it was shot to pieces ?

Considering that it had one of the most dangerous missions a fighter could have (ground attack) I’m not surprised that many got shot up, but relatively few were ever shot down.

 

P-47s flew over twice as many sorties as the P-51 and lost fewer aircraft. It lost fewer aircraft per sortie than any other American fighter iirc.

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

Highest scoring fighter unit in the ETO was the 56th. They flew P-47's and they killed a lot of all types.

 

[Legioneod]

26 minutes ago, -332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138 said:

Highest scoring fighter unit in the ETO was the 56th. They flew P-47's and they killed a lot of all types.

 

Yep. One of the top scoring, was tied with one or two others iirc.

 

Over 600 kills in air to air with a loss of only around 40 P-47s to enemy aircraft. Another 80 or so were lost to ground fire iirc.

Edited October 3, 2021 by Legioneod

[GodTickles]

I love this guy. Did you even read what I wrote? Lol. While he is accusing the op he is clearly not reading what the op said. 

 

"Stick to one story" then proceeds to repost 2 comments about 2 separate planes to try to show the op's inconsistency.  Perhaps someone should learn to read and it's not the OP. 

Edited October 3, 2021 by GodTickles
Typo

[Denum]

Looks at the P47 dash 

 

THE PROPHECY! 

 

 

[Gambit21]

21 hours ago, QB.Beno said:

Perhaps this is proof of the jugs poor combat performance with how often it was shot to pieces ?

 

Read a book.

 

 

[Mtnbiker1998]

21 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Considering that it had one of the most dangerous missions a fighter could have (ground attack) I’m not surprised that many got shot up, but relatively few were ever shot down.

 

P-47s flew over twice as many sorties as the P-51 and lost fewer aircraft. It lost fewer aircraft per sortie than any other American fighter iirc.

Never liked how the P-47s durability was dismissed as "just some anecdotal stories" when real, solid numbers like this exist. 

 

Heck, look at the numbers and the IL-2 starts to look a lot less like a flying tank and more like a flying coffin...

 

And yet their respective digital versions seem to tell a much different story...

[oc2209]

Osprey book data for anyone interested (ETO):

 

P-47: 423,435 sorties, 3082 air victories, 3202 ground vics, 3,077 losses.

P-38: 129,849----------1771--------------749----------------1758--------

P-51:  213,873----------4950-------------4131---------------2520--------

 

I'm not getting involved in the discussion beyond that, either pro or con. Just thought I'd post the numbers for ease of reference.

[Legioneod]

8 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Osprey book data for anyone interested (ETO):

 

P-47: 423,435 sorties, 3082 air victories, 3202 ground vics, 3,077 losses.

P-38: 129,849----------1771--------------749----------------1758--------

P-51:  213,873----------4950-------------4131---------------2520--------

 

I'm not getting involved in the discussion beyond that, either pro or con. Just thought I'd post the numbers for ease of reference.

Nice. So I was wrong about the P-47 losing less, but still with nearly twice as many sorties only losing 500 or so more is still an incredible feat imo.

[Dakpilot]

I think those figures rather show what an incredible feat the (comparatively delicate) Mustang achieved 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[oc2209]

2 hours ago, Legioneod said:

Nice. So I was wrong about the P-47 losing less, but still with nearly twice as many sorties only losing 500 or so more is still an incredible feat imo.

 

Yup, it is pretty impressive. Especially considering that a decent chunk of the 47's losses would have been in '43, before the P-51 arrived on the scene in useful numbers, and before the Luftwaffe was well and truly crippled.

 

A lot of '43 was taken up by learning how to fix Allied weaknesses and exploit German flaws. Inclusive of the Allied weaknesses would be the low level performance of the '47 prior to the improved prop, and the trial and error of perfecting the best combat tactics.

 

In other words, the '47 was present for the entirety of, and took the brunt of, the worst growing pains of the Allied air offensive.

 

Unlike the P-51, which by early '44 was in a perfect position to fully benefit from everything that had been learned throughout the toughest months of much of '43.

 

So yeah, I am a little biased in favor of the '47 over its sexy supermodel cousin, the '51.

[HR_Zunzun]

I think that the majority of those losses were on the AG role. There was a vas difference between the AA to AG role in terms of damage received.

In the book "USAAF Jabos in the MTO and ETO" by William Wolf the vulnerability of the main types (-47, -51-, -38....) was treated. It was determined that the -47 was the more durable of the USAAF types, followed by the -51 and then the -38.

The data was taken from a study in the 50´s that used data from USAAF and US Navy sources. They took into account the type of damage taken, the source (AA vs AC) and other parameters and calculate ratios, for example, of AC loss per AC hit to estimate the relative ruggeness. Despite all the caveats that such a study will have, it was found that the -47 was above both the other types in the USAAF. The F6F and (a surprise to me) the F4F were also considered very safe planes in term of durability to enemy damage.

[6./ZG26_Custard]

Air superiority can cloud so many things.

[Bremspropeller]

Will we see the day, when the P-47 can be looked at objectively? It's just another airplane with strengths and weaknesses.

 

The P-47 supposedly broke the neck of the Luftwaffe, so the P-51 could go on turkeyshooting.

What's amusing me in those discussions about the relative merits of the three US fighter-types, people usually are ignoring that there was something called the "Royal Air Force", royally hacking away at the Luftwaffe. Since 1940. And yes, even though the initial "leaning into France" and Dieppe '42 was more of a blunderfest, it layed the foundation of allied airpower. The same is true for the MTO. It was the RAF that took a big swing and kicked the Luftwaffe in the plums first.

 

If you look at a german unit history (JGs 2 and 26), you can see that 1942 already had an accelerated rate of attrition. It was mostly the RAF that inflicted those losses, while the USAAF gradually grew from a sideshow to a major player.

 

The RAF was a great melting pot of people from all corners of the world back in those days. I think this also needs a bit more acknowledgement by modern popular (and scientific) history.

Edited October 4, 2021 by Bremspropeller

[-332FG-SGTSAUSAGE138]

3 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

Will we see the day, when the P-47 can be looked at objectively? It's just another airplane with strengths and weaknesses.

 

I just want to see it's strengths represented as much as its 'weakness' is in IL-2.