Sweet, thanks. I wont waste your time further.
1 Like
See above, saying “X main” is not offensive.
Anyway, since you are reacting to my comments means you can see them, are you gonna take up the offer of @GGK_Brian or @RunaDacino and prove the arguments you put forth in this thread are true? I mean, obviously since they are so bad (according to you), it should be non-issue for you to prove your claims.
1 Like
F6F. Slow.
What universe do you live in?
1 Like
What next? Are you gonna call the Do 335 and F-111F fast?
Look its clear that you guys don’t get on so I would recommend if you guys can’t have a conversation just don’t talk to each other!
Of course if you do talk each other please keep in mind what I said above !
1 Like
Obviously, you never said this and it’s all @ULQ_LOVER invention.
If I follow this link I won’t be able to quote you verbatim.
Further, if I go in the game or on statshark and search for ASU-57 and Kv-7 I won’t see 1 kill for each?
Maybe I’m strawman-ing then, if so, what is the definition of “bait”.
Issue is not getting on. statement was made by Pangloin, were just asking for him to prove it true. Thats the basic decency on this forum, is it not?
Asking for facts is the normal/ common basics of conversation ofc they don’t have to reply to your request!
Even after explaining that setting a plane on fire with your mg and then the plane being shot down by som1 else doesn’t add it to your kill count to ULQ, he still denied that I ever got any air kills with em. Honestly, if you still interact with ULQ then you’re doing something wrong.
Oh, and on a side note, severe damage sometimes counts as a kill and sometimes doesn’t. I cant recall if I ever severe’d a plane with my mg.
Making up lies with no proof then telling me to disprove them is not what I would consider decency. Might just be my opinion though.
Source?
Trust me bro!
lul.
To be fair, the F6F-5N is average for 4.3.
But the F6F-5 at 3.3 is one of the fastest easily at sea level you have:
- P51-C10: 606 kph
- F4U-1A : 587 kph
- F6F-5 : 577kph
- P47-D22: 570 kph
- P63A-5 : 567 kph
- He-100D: 560 kph
- 190 A1: 550 kph
- Yak9M: 550 kph
- Typhoon: 557kph
Data from this chart. If you have a different source feel free to show it.
Truly a slow plane right?
oh and btw this is what claim with proof looks like @Pangolin_Fan.
Spoiler
ps: @TheKnightOfZero I’m not sure who should I ask, but is there a way to use a monospaced font? I’d like to align the speed. Thanks!
Might as well list the Do 335’s top speed while you’re at it and claim it’s a fast plane.
No, that’s what a claim with stats that you know aren’t accurate but call em “proof” anyways looks like.
They’re stats taken from in-game through testing. They are reproducibile data, too:
Introduction:
Welcome to this very useful spreadsheet that compares top speeds at sea level for fixed-wing aircraft in War Thunder.
This spreadsheet will give you a good idea for which aircraft can catch you and which aircraft you can outrun at sea level.Methodology:
TAS is used. At sea level, TAS = IAS (except at very high IAS, there may be a tiny difference between the two)
Manual Engine Control (MEC) was used to obtain the top speed without considering engine temperature consequences (fully closed radiators and 100%PP, unless otherwise stated in notes).
Minimum fuel and fuel burn turned off.
Bombers and attackers have no payload. Jet speeds are for clean configuration with CMs (yes, flares/chaff have a small amount of drag on some planes) but in the notes (hover over cell) you can also see speeds with missile/gunpod loadouts.
Takeoff horsepower was simply obtained from the X-Ray mode in the hangar unless otherwise stated in notes. Manifold pressure is from WTRTI (local host)
In the case of a plane being airframe-limited (when an aircraft has enough thrust to accelerate past rip speed) the critical speed is shown (speed above which ripping becomes possible). This doesnt mean the plane can’t pass this speed a little bit, but it may become possible to rip above this speed. If something is incorrect or outdated please let me know in the chatbox on the top right of the page.
Disclaimer: Since some speeds were obtained using MPH, some precision is lost when converting to KMPH. Thus, some speeds in the KMPH
section may be off by 1-2. It’s not any significant difference, however. Note that speeds are also dependent on map. These tests are done on standard atmospheric conditions on the test flight maps, which are all identical. But on colder maps ground speed (TAS) will actually be lower than listed, while IAS will be higher. Vice versa for hotter maps.Main author: dogeness
Coauthor: Adam514
Therein you find defined:
Altitude (Sea level)
Manifold pressure( (60 'Hg, 61 'Hg after gearswitch)
RPM isn’t given, but is defined in the introduction.
Look inside your instrument panel and set the same manifold pressure at altitude and you’ll get the same results.
Do you know about Localhost? It’s an interface to access raw in game data which you can extra and record in real time either using your own software (python maybe) or the pre-made WTRTI.
1 Like
@Pangolin_Fan It’s easy, just link the post where you explained him. you never answered ULQ directly. As usual you deflected and ignored him, and the multiple times it was brought up to you did the same.
Take a single plane from this spreadsheet, show your top speed doesn’t match and show us. It will invalidate it.
Or even better, Link a better source that shows the actual top speed.
As a example, Catwerfer testing from very recently show the exact same top speed for the 335A0, at ~620kph.
If the stats are not accurate, take the most egregious one, launch the game, and show us!
Lol. They are not reproducible. The A-10A goes considerably faster than its listed max speed even at suboptimal altitudes and fully loaded.
Warthunder statcards aren’t accurate, and claiming they are will just get you laughed at.
The literacy rate is seriously dropping. What don’t you understand about “in-game testing”.
The fact that you though for a second that this was from statcards shows that you did not open the spreadsheet at all.
With the A-10. This chart list top speed at 722 with 4 AIM-9L. Meanwhile WT stat card list 676 clean.
2 Likes
We aren’t talking about stat cards.
Please, read what I’d written:
Methodology:
TAS is used. At sea level, TAS = IAS (except at very high IAS, there may be a tiny difference between the two)
Manual Engine Control (MEC) was used to obtain the top speed without considering engine temperature consequences (fully closed radiators and 100%PP, unless otherwise stated in notes).
Minimum fuel and fuel burn turned off.
Bombers and attackers have no payload. Jet speeds are for clean configuration with CMs (yes, flares/chaff have a small amount of drag on some planes) but in the notes (hover over cell) you can also see speeds with missile/gunpod loadouts.
Takeoff horsepower was simply obtained from the X-Ray mode in the hangar unless otherwise stated in notes. Manifold pressure is from WTRTI (local host)
In the case of a plane being airframe-limited (when an aircraft has enough thrust to accelerate past rip speed) the critical speed is shown (speed above which ripping becomes possible). This doesnt mean the plane can’t pass this speed a little bit, but it may become possible to rip above this speed. If something is incorrect or outdated please let me know in the chatbox on the top right of the page.
Disclaimer: Since some speeds were obtained using MPH, some precision is lost when converting to KMPH. Thus, some speeds in the KMPH
section may be off by 1-2. It’s not any significant difference, however. Note that speeds are also dependent on map. These tests are done on standard atmospheric conditions on the test flight maps, which are all identical. But on colder maps ground speed (TAS) will actually be lower than listed, while IAS will be higher. Vice versa for hotter maps.
For the F6F:
Manifold pressure of 60 'HgMM (or 61 with supercharger)
Rads closed.
RPM maximum
At sea level.
On a “neutral temperature” map - on Denmark it’d be a little slower, on Sicily a little faster.
Oh gods.
I think I found why @Pangolin_fan seems to think hellcats are slow.
If you take out a hellcat and use WEP while on Automatic Engine controls, the instructor slams the cooling flaps open. You end up DRAGGIER on WEP with AEC than with MEC.
WIth MEC you’re doing just fine.
Radials with AEC are a bad idea.
2 Likes
It’s true of most plane tho.
If you need top speed, just using MEC and closing RADs can easily give you 5-10kph in a prop. I’d say creating a macro for: MEC → Manual Rads → Closed rads is a nice qol feature that let everyone get the speed increase for no cost.
It feels even worse for radial, I don’t want to test it because it’s boring but cowling flaps seems to be a lot draggier than water radiators.
it’s probably why he thinks 335 are slow too: WT forces you to go full WEP as much as possible, so when you get into a chase, the engine is already ultra hot and AEC will never close flaps to avoid burning your engine.
Meanwhile, If you go 100% throttle THEN you go full WEP, AEC will fully close the rads.
It’s easy to see on corsair and 190s, if you stat a 100% rads are half open, when you go full WEP they fully close for 30s-90s then slowly open.
1 Like