fufubear

Way of the Samurai
  • Content count

    6,481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3
medal medal medal

fufubear last won the day on February 12

fufubear had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

5,654 Outstanding

1 Follower

About fufubear

  • Rank
    Marshal of the Air Force
  • Birthday 02/03/1995

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Northwest Indiana, US

Recent Profile Visitors

6,730 profile views
  1. Just stop Sakuzhi.
  2. 2 year necro but this wouldn't have changed anything for the stuka. The airframe was outdated and it would still be slow.
  3. I can't even read the speedometer on that plane.
  4. That dcs video does not say you are supposed to end at the same speed. It says same altitude and heading.
  5. I don't have the p51 issue.
  6. It's fully in Japanese so I can't read everything but Bunrinin do is usually right on the mark even with US aircraft.
  7. Bunrinin do famous aircraft of the world issue 65. I'm not comparing with drop tanks because the Japanese and US seem to have used different sizes. What I always see (where mentioned) for the Japanese is 200L while the Mustang is using 75 gallons. The mustang external tanks hold much more.
  8. Saying fact does not make something a fact...
  9. So I'll take it as you not having proof. If it is not normal then how is that proof that the physics are wrong? Sounds like a bug in the physics engine if even true. And cannon ap rounds do the same. This is not a 50cal issue. You would have to pull the same g force then and I'm not really sure all planes can do this irl.
  10. Such as? Yes I am. You made a claim so I can demand you prove it. Just stalled the f4f3 and it drops it's right wing like a normal plane would. Nothing out of the ordinary here (besides the ridiculous low speed I got to before the wing dipped). When your round depends on kinetic energy you kind of have to follow how it works irl. I've been wrong before so someone can correct me if im wrong but this makes no sense. How will you start and end at the same speed in a barrel roll? You would have to pull the same G force throughout which defeats the purpose of doing a barrel roll. I think you are mixing this with a virage.
  11. I don't have to prove anything because I'm not making the claim. You claim it's different in other games so go prove it's actually different. First, what aircraft is stalling tail first? Second, that would be an issue with the way the plane is designed (perhaps the cog is too far back?). And yes if I get within realistic shooting ranges and put a good burst the plane will most likely go down. What aircraft can't do a barrel roll? Just did an rb test flight with the p47D and had no issues doing a barrel roll.
  12. So no proof... You made the claim so you go prove it. I know a bunch of people that agree with me in regards to 50cals. Actually id even go as far to say that WT 50 cals are better than dcs 50cals.
  13. Beleive it or not a6ms aren't my favorite plane so I don't have much on them. I have info on the ki 43 which did not out range the a6m. The ki 43-II had a max range of 2200 km with 20 minutes of combat with what looks like full internal fuel since no measurement is given for drop tanks. Iirc that should be further than the range of the mustang with internal fuel. As for the n1k I get 2392 km with internal fuel. @xBromanx I have played dcs, il2 1946, and il2 bos and I am saying that 50 cals are fine. A good burst at normal shooting range downs planes. Prove that the physics engine is wrong. Incorrectly stalling isn't proof because for the longest time the Fw 190 in bos was stalling way too high along with La 5s and Lagg3s out rolling 190s.
  14. No prototype or even paper plane from ww2 can compete with the f86F or mig 17. This is stuff 10 years younger.
  15. I think you are looking at kilometers for the mustang broman. The a6m2 had the longest range of any ww2 fighter and escorted level bombers with it. Also there are other Japanese planes that out range the mustang but not the a6m like the n1k.
  16. They were all used to escort bombers (aside from the interceptors). The second half is just the way the planes were designed.
  17. A lot of Japanese planes are handicapped the same way yet they seem to do fine.
  18. More likely a 190G
  19. The planes are as good as everyone else's planes. There is no reason they should cost more than others.
  20. Not the variants in game though.
  21. I did read what you wrote. You are not reading what I am writing. No one is saying the translated documents you posted were estimations. They were speaking about the taic charts like the one I linked above since that's what the majority refer to when they mention taic. Also i originally acknowledged that what you posted may prove the game wrong. I don't know how you can say that I didn't realize it. No one attacked this image you posted. What they attacked was you saying the American test data wasn't an estimation. The test data they were refering too are the taic report like the one I linked above. Those are estimates. Well they aren't both specified at 340 knots. The VNE is in a category called flight limitations and is in indicated air speed. The max speed would be in a different category and in true air speed. You made a simple mistake and there's nothing wrong with that but you seem to be taking us pointing out the error as if we are attacking you. I'm not sure about the takeoff speed being 100% accurate tbh. That speed is pretty low. Is that clean or with flaps? That's not possible clean since that gives a Clmax of ~1.77 (assuming it's stall would be in the same ballpark). With flaps that may be possible but probably only with full flaps and no one takes off with full flaps. The game gives a takeoff and stall of 100 mph which give the j2m a Clmax of ~1.39. This is much more reasonable. It possible the game may be wrong but I don't see it being all that much tbh.
  22. Yak 3 and Yak 3p use the same engine outputting the same power.
  23. Everyone is talking about the taic performance charts like this http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/Ki-61-154B.pdf These are the estimates everyone is talking about. These are based off of fragmentary documents. Some are pretty close like the ki 44 which was based on the manual (only issue was they didn't know japan used rated power for performance tests). The one linked above is way off from the truth. Things like translated manuals and flight tests are not what people are discrediting. Now with that said. No one is harassing you. You made a claim and we asked for a source. You misinterpreted your source so we corrected you. This is an over reaction on your part. I'm sure it does use the Japanese manual but based on what you posted it proves nothing in regards to errors. The 340 knots at 6k. Would have to be a vne because I highly doubt that Japan would have discontinued a plane that can achieve 830 kph in level flight and pilots would have mentioned that the plane was faster than anything American. You need to remeber that the landing and stall speeds given in manuals do not account for pec and I don't think a pec chart exists for really any Japanese aircraft (besides the ki 84 iirc Hiromachi has access to a recreation) so I wouldn't flat out say they are made up (although they may just be made up).
  24. It's just a yak 3 with the gun from the yak 9t.
  25. Yak 3t would be interesting.
  26. Wait 340 knots indicated? I didn't pick up on that. No way that's possible. It would be doing nearly 700 kph true. If it was truly this fast then it wouldn't have been in the process of being replaced by the n1k. Actually if the converter I used is right that puts it over 800 kph. I'm sure Rapitor is right and that is referring to the vne.
  27. That's in regards to the charts
  28. This data is still going against the majority of things I've read on the j2m series of aircraft like the excerpt from Horikoshi's book above.
  29. Well you would need to post that because the lead engineer of the plane confirms the speed in game.
  30. 1.9 isn't experimental. You just needed c3 fuel to use it. The fact that flight test reports state that they didn't run performance tests. Lots of charts show the speeds line up with what they are in game. This is interesting. If you have more sources that line up with that you could make a bug report. Although this wouldn't line up with what pilots have said and what lots of other charts have said. Taic reports are all estimates. Iirc it mentions this in the big book of taic reports. As for Japanese data we have access to Jiro Horikoshi's book. It shows a max of 322 knots which is 596 kph.
  31. First off, I would recommend not flying yaks against Japan. I know you can't really make a choice but just join the Lavochkin master race and you can do well. Yaks are outclassed compared to a lot of Japanese planes because they aren't as fast and are inferior in a dogfight (besides probably the yak 3 but thats still an uphill battle imo). With Lavochkins you are faster than contemporary Japanese planes in the sea level to 3k altitude band. Recommended method of attack would be to use high speed hit and run attacks prioritizing the faster opponents first. Speed is life so don't drop too much speed trying to line up a shot. You need to recognize early on if a shot will line up (this will become easier with time) or not and adjust accordingly. At low altitudes you can outclimb some Japanese planes but I would recommend against climbing tactics unless in excess energy since a drop in speed will shift any advantage you have to the Japanese plane (I'm generalizing here, some Japanese planes like the j7w or ki 83 aren't good at low speed and it would actually be in your favor). Overall fly like you would if you were in a US plane going against Japan.
  32. The US never did a performance test. They flew a handling test to see how the plane flew to exploit it's weaknesses in a dogfight (this is what they did with most Japanese planes btw).
  33. Only to a certain point though which is what I am saying. The H mustang might be the lightest possible weight a mustang could be but it's still heavier than a ki 43 from 1941. The p51 comes with more features by default that were available on the ki 43. It's these features that are adding to the weight A yak 3 and a mustang come from the same time. The Yak is significantly lighter than the mustang. The Yak is a light fighter. The f86 and mig 15 come from the same time. The f86 is a good amount heavier than the mig 15. The mig 15 is a light fighter. The Yak and mig are both light fighters despite the mig being much heavier because compared to their contemporaries they are light. The Yak is light by 1944 standards but is super heavy compared to 1930 standards. The mig is light by 1950 standards but is super heavy by 1940 standards.
  34. That's more of a special case since the H mustang was designed to be lighter.
  35. aircraft/loadouts

    Oh yes
  36. Yay \o/
  37. Hello I am here to suggest a complete rework of wep mechanics for aircraft. To keep it simple, wep in Warthunder has one big issue. Wep works as an all or nothing switch for engine power despite being variable for the majority (if not all) aircraft in game. First issue Water injection for aircraft equipped with it is automatically used when you activate the wep setting. For a lot of aircraft this isn't how it works. Many aircraft with water injection could use a "dry wep" (a lower overboost setting without the use of water injection) as an option to preserve their water injection or for an emergency situation in which you have no water injection. Remedy Simply add a button that activates water injection. Looking at il2 1946, there is a button to activate water injection. You can still run an emergency setting without the injection but adding the injection will increase the manifold pressure. Warthunder would work with a similar system. Take the P51H as an example. With its water injection it's highest setting I've ever seen was 90" HG. This would make it near unchallenged as a fighter aircraft in this game. The downside is the water tank only lasted for 7 minutes so it makes balancing the plane somewhat tricky since many people will blow the water in the initial stage of a match. If we have a way to differentiate between wet wep and dry wep the p51H can now run 75" as a dry setting and that makes it much more easier to balance. (Some planes would automatically apply the water injection once the manifold pressure past a certain point but I recommend leaving that out until a more comprehensive list of effected planes are created (I only know about very few)) Second Issue For certain planes, there is no way to use intermediate overboost settings. For example the 109K runs 1.42 as military but when it uses wep it goes all the way up to 1.98 despite the fact it is capable of running all those intermediate settings. Remedy Changing how the throttle is displayed and it's limit is what I would recommend. Once the throttle passes 100% it will display red like it would if it was doing wep but instead of displaying wep it could display the equivalent percent or even (what I would prefer in general for the throttle) the manifold pressure. So if I am pushing 1.5 in a k4 it will display the 110% (or whatever the actual equivalent percent is) or 1.5 ata in red text to inform me that I am running an overboost setting. Side suggestions still related to wep mechanics. 1. Including a timer for how much water injection is left (rb only). Since many planes use water injection it only makes sense that there should be a way of informing people how much water is left in their tank for the realistic battles mode (sb should have the least amount of HUD and AB does not use water injection) 2. An option to change the throttle display. Instead of displaying the percentage I would like an option to change this to display the manifold pressure. So for example looking at the Bf 109 K4 again. It's 100% setting is 1.42 so instead it would just display 1.42 for the throttle setting and would do so for all throttle settings. Thank you all for reading this. I will read any feedback and adjust the op accordingly. A poll can be added on request.
  38. But isn't the weight just a side effect of the needed requirements to fit better equipment? It's not like designers purposely increased weight but it was more of all the features of the aircraft added together. Best example I have of this is japan. They tended to build light fighters but looking at their development they steadily increased in weight. Things like more powerful engines, armament, and protection that weren't on earlier planes or were improved in later versions are just added weight that can't be compensated for anywhere else.
  39. A excerpt from the test referenced earlier. "In following the P-38 on the way down, the OSCAR could stay in easy gun range on all maneuvers except fast climbs or dives over 300 mph. " Keep in mind that this was in 1944. The ki 43 used was a ki 43-I from 1941 compared to a modern p38. As seen with the a6m3 mod 32 and spitfire, clipping wings delays the stiffening of the ailerons so later versions of the ki 43 should be control able longer than this one. There is also the ki 44 that maintained good aileron controls to 300 mph despite being a very light machine.
  40. Lol I have no idea why I didn't just ask blakeob
  41. Gaijin needs to implement a way to use dry wep and wet wep. Like in il2 1946 where a click of a button activates water injection and the engine instantly runs on a higher manifold pressure. Can that be a suggestion? @Rapitor
  42. Perhaps but iirc the benefit of that is only seen at higher speeds.
  43. Speaking of a6ms did gaijin give the a6m5 the same roll rate as the a6m3 mod 32? The patch notes imply they didn't when they should both be the same in regards to roll. The purpose of shortening the wings on the a6m5 was to gain the roll increase of the mod 32.
  44. I'd have to fly it first.
  45. The speed is accurate. Its old speed did seem odd to me based on what some japanese pilots said. One quote that stood out was that they could not out run the hellcat but could escape vertically. With its old speed it gave the hellcat a run for its money while now it seems to line up more with what the pilot said.
  46. Not only that. Based purely on anecdotes the mig 3s engine was also pretty unreliable.
  47. J2ms got a speed fix
  48. The I 120 was another mig prototype iirc and the 105 was a special Lagg prototype.
  49. Not true. The ki 43 kept it's roll rate to at least 300 mph with its initial version as seen in a US test and things like that are not reliant on the weight of the aircraft but the factors I listed. Second part is also false look at the spitfire for example. It had a very light elevator for all speed ranges. I need sources for the last paragraph.
  50. There actually was a story about a Russian pilot who got what I would call a no scope. So the standard for this particular unit was to fire a shot above the aircraft they would target. So this pilot fired a round from his yak 9t and shot down a Bf 109 iirc.
  51. aircraft/loadouts

    Hello everyone, I am here to suggest the Mansyu Ki-98. It is a twin boom pusher aricraft. History The roots of this plane can be traced all the way back to 1942. The Koku Hombu (Japanese High command) was in need of a variety of fighters. Mansyu attempted to address this need with their design. By 1943 the design was finalized and it was submitted to the Koku Hombu. To their surprise, the design was accepted to serve as a high altitude fighter after a couple modifications were done. One of the changes included an engine change and another added a safer way for a pilot to bail. After the design was finalized for good, a prototype began construction. Due to the Soviets entering the war and their fast advancement the prototype never reached completion as it was destroyed by its engineers to prevent capture. Specifications Wing Span - 11.26 meters Length - 11.4 meters Boom Length - 8.36 meters Height - 4.3 meters Wing Area - 23.99 Empty Weight - 3500 Kg Loaded Weight - 4500 Kg Power plant The Ha-211 ru is the exact same engine that is used on the Mitsubishi Ki-83 so these figures come from the datasheet. Takeoff power 2200 hp Rated power 2000 hp - 0 meters 1930 hp - 5000 meters 1720 hp - 9500 meters Performance Based on my feeling, I do think these estimations are for rated power and not Takeoff power. The few Japanese engine charts and graphs I've seen do not give info on takeoff power above sea level so I can only assume they were never tested. Max speed - 731 kph at 10000 meters climb - 5:30 to 5000 meters Armament Ho-204 37mm cannon x1 Ho-5 20mm cannon x2 Both of these are in the nose. In Game I think this would work as either a premium tier 4 fighter because it was only partially completed and would not add much to the regular tree since the J7w1 is already there. No real pictures exist so I can only give models and drawings. Sources Japanese Secret Projects - Edwin M Dyer The X planes of the Japanese Army and Navy (no author listed)