Etask Posted 16 hours ago Posted 16 hours ago 11 ore fa, cw4ogden ha scritto: No where does he mention 23,000 feet for the 261 knot reference. "2,500ft all they way up through 15,000 ft" If you are willing to look past at least 8,000 feet pressure altitude discrepancy, then yes everything is ok. I tested at 23,000 with 50% fuel, full blower, 2700 rpm all cooling flaps closed, mixture rich, and maxed out at 243kias which translates to about 402mph true. Not bad, but not correct either. Those results were achieved with a dive from 24k to 23k, then waiting until the speed stops decaying. It's even worse with a level acceleration coming in at around 236kias. At sea level with a dive I can get about 289kias which is about 332mph true. With about 275kias achievable in level acceleration. Aside from the OPs hyperbolic post, no one is saying it's off by a huge amount. But it's missing 5-10% of top speed as a rough estimate. Well, I am not looking past 8000ft PA discrepancy, nor I am saying the flight model is correct. I did actually say it does need work. My point was, if people complain about the speed while not realising we are talking about different speeds (indicated vs true) and different units (knots vs mph), it just creates a lot of confusion. First message in this thread: ”this thing barley does over 200 mph, even stripped down with no fuel..” it is simply not true. This thing actually does well over 200mph even at full load. If we wanna talk about that 5-10% difference and other oddities in this module I am open to it, it definitely needs work and tuning; however let’s not spread wrong and misleading info.
cw4ogden Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago 10 hours ago, Etask said: Well, I am not looking past 8000ft PA discrepancy, nor I am saying the flight model is correct. I did actually say it does need work. My point was, if people complain about the speed while not realising we are talking about different speeds (indicated vs true) and different units (knots vs mph), it just creates a lot of confusion. First message in this thread: ”this thing barley does over 200 mph, even stripped down with no fuel..” it is simply not true. This thing actually does well over 200mph even at full load. If we wanna talk about that 5-10% difference and other oddities in this module I am open to it, it definitely needs work and tuning; however let’s not spread wrong and misleading info. I get your point, and I'm not trying to be rude or inflammatory. I want it fixed. I want the product I purchased to live up to the fidelity level we've come to expect from DCS. Currently it doesn't. I'm willing to help that process, but it's maddening to put hours of effort into testing, only to have someone else chime in half-cocked that everything is hunky-dory. Your comment summarized is "Did you consider the nuances of aviation airspeed?". And the answer here and in other similar threads is yes. The nuances of of true versus indicated and knot versus miles per hour were calculated, and it's still coming in slow. My grievance isn't with you individually, it's DCS forums thing. No matter how much data you provide, there's always contingency who argue in the contrary. Almost like disagreeing for the disagreeing's sake. And it results in the inability to even substantiate something is a bug, like where we are with the F4u. This hasn't even been acknowledged as a bug yet.
Etask Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago (edited) 3 ore fa, cw4ogden ha scritto: I get your point, and I'm not trying to be rude or inflammatory. I want it fixed. I want the product I purchased to live up to the fidelity level we've come to expect from DCS. Currently it doesn't. I'm willing to help that process, but it's maddening to put hours of effort into testing, only to have someone else chime in half-cocked that everything is hunky-dory. Your comment summarized is "Did you consider the nuances of aviation airspeed?". And the answer here and in other similar threads is yes. The nuances of of true versus indicated and knot versus miles per hour were calculated, and it's still coming in slow. My grievance isn't with you individually, it's DCS forums thing. No matter how much data you provide, there's always contingency who argue in the contrary. Almost like disagreeing for the disagreeing's sake. And it results in the inability to even substantiate something is a bug, like where we are with the F4u. This hasn't even been acknowledged as a bug yet. Well, I agree with you, didn’t wanna “argue in the contrary”, we’re here for the same goal. It’s just that sometimes people consider bugs things that are not bugs (not just in the Corsair, in all modules). Opening (yet another) thread saying this thing flies 200mph at max power and is severely underpowered is not gonna help anyone, devs are just gonna disregard it. It is frustrating because I would also love this module to shine, not just because I’ve paid for it…but because I truly love this aircraft. And to be clear, I also think it flies slower than it should. Edited 1 hour ago by Etask
Recommended Posts