DSR_T-800

Nice, we can cross reference that with this document. Unfortunately the document you shared doesn't tell us the highspeed at SL. So, we'll have to compare 'Normal' power settings instead(1675hp/2550rpm). Also there is no mention of wingracks/knuckles. Fighter 12,086lbs vs 12175lbs Normal SL 317 vs 321 Combat ALT 416 vs 409 Certainly gives us a ballpark of the expected speed.

The documents of the F4U-1A and 1D are on https://web.archive.org/web/20250324012447/http://wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ and have been shared on this forum multiple times. F4U-1d is slower than the F4U-1a due to its wing racks/knuckles) by 8mph(SL) and 12mph(Crit. ALT). The real problem is peoples inability to find consistency in their own data. I've read anyway from 250kt - 315kt @ SL. Some don't post wind or tempeturate, others can't get the right manifold pressure, and perhaps some aren't paying attention the turn and slipe indicator.

It helps to use the way back machine. nullI can't remember where I found the F4U roll rate data, but it should be on wwiiairfcraftperformance. The blue and dark-blue lines are the corsairs left and right roll rate up to 42lbs of stick force. The lighter line is purely a visual gestimate.

Do you have any perfomance figures? Considering it took them so long to produce the 1d, I don't think we'd ever see another Corsair unless it was a F4U-4 by another party.

Thanks for the correction. Althought if 300kts is the maximum speed we can achieve on the deck, she is still on the slower side. I found the F4U-1d with and without Pylons. With/out With 8-12mph difference from SL - Critical ALT. It would be nice to have a F4U-1 on more of the figther/inerceptor end of the spectrum, as the one we have in DCS is clearly for a figther - bomber role. The P-47 has the ability to remove pylons, so I don't really see an excuse for them being permenately on. I'd take 18kt+ on the deck any day of the week. null

These figures are on the faster side for the Corsair, but I believe they are well within reason considering we have 3 examples of the her hitting 365mph@SL and 420mph+@criticalALT. 320Kts at SL, overboosting the engine to 75"Hg/>3000rpm, fails to reach the 'Special'(65"Hg) F4U-1 at 327Kts is a tell - tale sign shes just too draggy. Not to forget to mention its somehow slower a F4U w/o water injection. This should certainely help in BFM energy management. The Corsair should be faster, hold energy better(?) and turn tighter than the P-47D. Its earlier access and I don't have the slightless clue on how to make a flight model, so I'm going to refrain from judging, even though its hard to think how you'd get the basics wrong. However, this was same case with the P-47 being released initially w/o water injection, and the Bf-109K4 was either too slow or too fast.

320 knots is on the higher side, but the fastest figure I've seen is 317, which was the Navy's comparison of the P-51B vs F4U, IIRC. However, right now, if people are only capable of reaching 300knots, then that is level speed without water injection. So the wingracks are slowering her down siginificantly, or we've got a drag problem.

How do they compare?

Here is an excerpt from the 56th Fighter Group by Roger A. Freeman. null No specifics of how much performance was lost but it was obviously measurable. Gabreski's P-47 without wing racks and what looks to be a 215-US gallon tank.

Weather: Wind = 0m/s(all altitudes and directions) QNH = 29.92"Hg Temperature = +20°(20F? or C, I'm assuming its Celsius) The point of this test was to see if the drag of the pylons was modeled. The answer is, yes. I ended up including the speed difference for over boosting the engine to 72", which probably equates to 2750 - 2850 hp. If we compare the P-47D-22 with 44-1 fuel/150 Octane) we find that there is a 8mph speed difference between 65" and 70", and this is virtually what we find in game. However, we are going from 64" to 72". I also tried testing the position of the oil cooler and intercooler, and found little to no difference or sometimes an actually increase drag. Specifically with the intercooler in the closed position. The oil cooler - closed, seems to gain a marginal speed boost at the cost of oil temperature going over the defined red line at ~120°C. Note: The pylons do not alter the weight of the aircraft with their removal or addition. Note: All speeds are in knots with the conversion to kph in the parentheses Results: -Pylons/No Pylons, 100% Fuel @ 142333lbs 299(554)/304(563) -Overboost 305(565)/310(574) -No Pylons - Only, 50% Fuel, 50% Guns @ 12760lbs 305(565) -Overboost 311(576) The real high speed of the P-47D-30 at sea level is 345mph comparatively to our DCS's 344mph. However, when loading the DCS P-47D-30 to the weight of real life test, we find a 1knot increase in speed. So, its dead on. I wonder if this was just a ball park estimate for the P-47s pylon drag. I have not been able to find any primary sources on the drag of the P-47s pylons. There are comments here and there with claims of 45mph speed difference on the early razorbacks, and a 15mph difference with the later D blocks. In DCS we are seeing a 7mph speed difference. I don't know which is true, but I think we can agree that speed would slower, and perhaps significantly, because the P-47s wing racks are massive compared to the P-51s. And on the P-51B we see a 8mph speed difference at SL. The P-47 is a much larger aircraft, so proportionally does it approximate to a similar speed lose like we see on the P-51B? Once again, I don't know, and haven't come across a satisfying answer. Here are some approximations I was able to make with the P-47B and P-47D-23 vs P-47D w/wing racks(44-1 Fuel test). We have visual proof of the test plane of the P-47D(44-1 Fuel Test) with wing racks. The P-47B did not have wing racks, and the P-47D-23 from the tactical planning chart specifically states in its remarks that all performance values are shown without the wing racks installed. We also have their speeds at 52"/Military Power at 5000ft. I was initially surprised to see such a large gap of 23mph. Then the P-47D(44-1) reached parity as the altitude increased. I wonder if this something to do with the temperature difference at higher altitudesnull Sources : nullhttp://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47-26167.html http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p-47-tactical-chart.jpg http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/P-47B_41-5942_FS-M-19-1523-A.pdf null

You think you want 150 octane, like I did at one point, but then you'll end up in a shit hole. What we have now isn't perfect, but its only going to get worse if everyone's motivate is making sure their favourite plane has a competitive edge. No one would be arguing for 150 octane if it weren't for the K4 or D9. And believe me, K4 pilots are ready to press that C3 moaning button once the "Allies" get their 150 octane. Go down this path and the next thing you know you're taking the P-38J out for a spin and you're surrounded by +12lbs Tempest Vs flying against C3 Bf-109K4s.

I hope we never lose NineLine for whatever reason.

Lolol I think the lack of MW50 explains your problem.

Did you try to out dive a P-47?

Could you tell us your method for your boom-zoom swing benchmark. Thanks.

Literally no one has compared the DCS P-47 and DCS P-51 yet. Good to see everyone just shat out their 2 cents leaving zero value in actually comparing the two aircraft in DCS. :)

Lol. That's him working his butt off to keep the P-47 in a straight line :P.

Good shooting.

Awesome find, Pikey.

Yeah, worst case scenario lets say the plane was this unstable with the dorsal fin. How in the hell did Gabby, flying the P-47D-25, even shoot anything down that wasn't in level flight? :megalol: Then again, the P-47N had an even larger dorsal fin. I'm excited to see this fixed, but I'm worried there is nothing to fix, lol.

I don't the budget of your stick is the problem :P. The plane is incredible trim heavy, I don't ever recall reading about this. Btw, the top speed with and w/o pylons is the same. Water injection doesn't seem to be modeled, I can't get 64"Hg on the deck nor is there any water pressure.

Yeah, which is great. However, I'm actually struggling to master this beast right now. I find it very difficult to fly.

Holy Sh*t, that is one high quality video.

I'd like to see these figures. The P-51 with and W/O the pylons has a 15mph speed difference at altitude. I can't imagine, given the enormous size of the P-47 pylons, that they wouldn't provide a significant performance boost with their removal. Hey, if you don't get the old gunsight at least you can turn off the gyro aspect. Yeah that is fair, I do think the dorsal fin looks great and I'd lose performance just to look cool, lol.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want a K-14 gunsight. Hopefully our P-47 comes with the Hamilton propeller and without wing pylons like also proposed in earlier screen shots.