Hayrake YE-ZB

Add one more parameter to make it an apples to apples comparison to the flight manual numbers- please set the temperature to 15ºC at SL in the mission editor. Unless listed, flight manuals use standard day temp/press for performance. Some posts have made the mistake of using SL temperature in the mission editor instead of the actual temperature aloft in their calculators. The static air temperature will decrease by 2ºC per 1000 feet of altitude increase. In your example, the OAT at 20000 would be -25C.

A warbird mixed in C130s seems weird. What is the point, to provide a big target for gunnery that you can’t miss? LOL. Looks like you have to “trash the bird”!

Cool!

20C is extremely hot at 24000 ft. Was that the tempature you set in the mission editor at sea level? 20C at the ground should reduce by 2C per 1000 feet above SL. Your OAT at 24K would be around -28C. With your indicated speed of 240, the true would be 350 knots/403mph.

Take it easy there Tex. The real manual (AN 01-45HA-1) has a section on the propellor governor control that shows a limite of 2700rpm. It says that the governor will limit the rpm to 3060 even in a maximum allowable diving speed. So the hack that people are using is obviously wrong and needs to be fixed. Everyone understands that. They’re exploiting it because some pilots can’t seem to obtain proper airspeed, or are confused about altitude vs actual OAT and IAS vs TAS.

I would like to hear what a 10,000 rpm R2800 sounds like (before it explodes).

Gun camera window?

Wouldn’t the prop hub shatter before it hit 4200 rpm, disintegrating the engine along with it?

1.1 Our simulated version has the famous stall strip on the right wing that was added to offset the wing drop. 1.2 The real Corsair also has a large, destabilizing fuselage moment ahead of the CG. 1.3 The simulated F4U seems easy to trim and is stable even when mom is not looking!

I figured that it was my knees shaking causing those needles to vibrate.

Not harsh at all, I’m about problem solving, which is why using accurate language helps to avoid confusion. I mentioned your OAT, because when you set up a mission, the OAT that you choose is for Sea Level, and is reduced by the standard adiabatic lapse rate of 2ºC per 1000 feet of altitude (average value, in practice it varies depending upon moisture content of the air). So your 20C at 10000 feet is in error, and would require a sea level temperature of 40C. For a 20C temp at SL, the temp at 10000 should be more like 0ºC. When I put your indicated airspeed value of 270 knots, I get 314 KTAS. By the way, the indicated temperature felt by the aircraft would show a ram rise of 13C due to air friction, but this is taken into account on most flight computers. Yes, I have tried max power and have posted the results here. At 2700rpm/58” at sea level with the landing gear down, blower neutral, and get 200-210 Kias. Supercharger modes are restricted by altitude, and the performance charts reflected those limitations. I’m getting more MP than the very basic Magnitude3 numbers included in their manual, but about right based on the real world F4U numbers.

The aileron and rudder tabs move opposite to the proper trim input. Elevator is correct. Look for yourself.

What TAS does 270 KIAS work out to, and what was the temp at 10,000 that you tested at? You didn’t initially specify IAS or TAS, you reference Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3 supercharger modes, none of which exist on the Corsair, leaving us to guess what you mean. The supercharger modes of neutral, low and high blower are altitude specific, and you gave three MP values, none of which correlate to values in either the MAG3 handbook or the real F4U POH. I’ve never seen 60” of MP posted anywhere. I’d appreciate you showing me where that is published. I’m not criticizing you, everyone’s doing it for various reasons, but unless you set up the power at a known setting and specific altitude that is published, then it’s not valid to criticize the speeds as being “wrong”. There is definitely a problem somewhere as revealed by the relative speed disparities some are reporting. No question about that.

Me too. I don’t find them fast at all. If it were realistic, it would move in steps, simulating the pilot turning the wheels and knobs in quarter turn increments at the most!

The performance discussion is devolved into a confusing mess because the players are still leaving out some of the critical parameters. We can’t understand the problem when basic altitude and power settings are omitted, and whether you are describing indicator or true airspeeds. It’s not difficult to add Kias or Ktas to your numbers. Then you have players making declarations based on the performance of other modules, or their own intuition, instead of referring to flight manuals for performance. I also haven’t seen anything in the F4U real world flight manual that talks about rpm above 2700 rpm, which would put the prop tips well into supersonic range and decrease efficiency, but I’ll keep looking when I get the chance. This thread started with this statement- “Can't seem to get more than 230-250 kts out of the thing in level flight. Anyone else?“ , and hasn’t gotten much better.