Why can't I achieve more than 258 kts airspeed?

[felixx75]

3 hours ago, fargo007 said:

Instead of arguing the particulars of one specific plane at a time, address why the corsiar comes in second from the last.

If you're claiming that it should in fact come in second to last in this kind of comparative testing against all of these other aircraft, then okay. 

The issue here is the claim that the corsair isn't showing as much speed as it ought to. This video more or less bears that out, and there's also a second one where they test it with the 4200rpm secret extra power technique (where it wins unrealistically and dramatically) as well as an included control, which produces the same result as the first video. 

 

 

I would like to ask again, what data prove that an FW190 D9 must be slower at sea level than an F4U-1D?

These two videos don't prove anything, except that there is a bug.

[fargo007]

1 hour ago, felixx75 said:

I would like to ask again, what data prove that an FW190 D9 must be slower at sea level than an F4U-1D?

These two videos don't prove anything, except that there is a bug.

None. Can you move on now? This thread isn't here for this.

[Jenrick]

I tried a similar run to the one I did earlier to see if there was a difference at 5000 ft.  Took off from Batumi, 50% fuel, default weather.  Climbed at mil power to 5000 ft and then full WEP, per the knee board 2700 rpm and 56.5 inHG MP at low blower.  Topped out around 278 knots IAS, with oil cooler closed, intercooler open 50% roughly (enough to keep the over temp light off), and the cowl flaps open about 20%.  If I buttoned it up and ignored the lights I'm guessing I'd get a few more knots IAS. 

At 5000' MSL on a STP day, 307 knots TAS is 286 knots IAS, I wonder if the kneeboard has the wrong speed (ie should be TAS rather than CAS). I think 286 IAS would be achievable if you're willing to redline things.

[captain_dalan]

On 7/2/2025 at 5:10 AM, fargo007 said:

Look into the p47 please.

I will when I get the time. I don't own the module, nor have I flown it in other sims, so it was never high on my research priorities.

22 hours ago, fargo007 said:

It is. I meant to say the FW-190. I just confused them.

And in this video it comes in second to last which doesn't seem correct to me.

 

 

I'm sorry, but videos like this one are almost completely irrelevant to the issue. A "five" mile drag race in which a guy firewalls the throttle and finishes at n spot is not a good bug report. If you want to prove a module is over or under performing, you need to fly the numbers and document the differences from published material. We are talking time to climb, speed at altitude, excess power/acceleration and the like. 

Finally, personal feelings are even less relevant. Unless you are a WW 2 aviator that flew with the thing, in which case, you should offer your services as a certified SME. 

[captain_dalan]

23 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

The K4 has a higher top speed true. So at 30k feet the K4 is much faster. Same is not true at 14k, 8k or sea level. 

Can you share (if allowed and available) the data charts? I don't have enough data for full level flight evaluation at all altitudes.