I think it can be considered as a CCIP, the only issue is if it ask players to use 4s to wait the system works.
1 Like
as far as i can tell if the mig 15 bis ish gets ccip, the the F4U-5 can be modeled with CCIP. Because the system in the bis ish was directly copied off of the americans. Im trying to find evidence to get this modeled on the AU-1 and F4U-7
I wonder if such an aim system appears on A1H or AD4? If so, it must be a great buff for the US WWII BR
Not really, as the only ordinance the system mentions is hvars. so unless you are doing dedicated anti spaa work, its not going to be very useful
Added link for the flight manual, if anyone is interested!
France has the F4U-5 right? Weird that they have it and the us doesn’t get one
France has the F4U-7, its not the same airplane.
F4U-7 is developed from AU-1 that was developed from the F4U-5.
F4U-5 is lighter and has a better engine.
1 Like
Ah okay must have gotten them confused, just remembered that France had one that the US doesn’t have yet
whats the main difference between f4u4b and f4u5? for example when i check the wiki it says the 4b has a bad rudder which it doesn’t have so I believe gaijin mustve changed that at one point? from what I learnt about the -5 one of the upgrades was adding a rudder tab to improve control compression but the 4b also has that. there also doesnt seem to be much difference in the engine performance compared to the 4b can someone help explain? Does the -5 trade the high speed power at sea level of the 4b to have a slightly better power curve at high alt? thats the only difference im seeing
F4U-5 has hydraulic boosted control surfaces making it easier to control at high speed (shouldn’t lock up more at high speeds nearly as much as 4B), better engine with higher top speed, better climb rate, acceleration and carrying capacity.
is the 2760hp listed at sea level only obtainable at high ram air (high ias) or is it the default? it looks to work similar to the f8f and 4b we have ingame. Comparing the power chart listed, as I said there only seems to be a sub 50hp difference and is mainly noticeable up high (2450hp at 6100m while the 4b drops to that earlier), while at sl the 4b and f8f1 have much higher hp. im not sure what hydraulic control surfaces do as the 4b’s rudder is already quite responsive, the roll stays really good at high speed, and the elevators are limited to 7.5g from the wing shape
F4U-4B is probably overperforming at SL at high ram in game by some 150hp or something
F4U-5 has a better high alt engine that is the main difference yes, it does not have 2760hp. The old forum post is very vague, check my performance section in this post. Vought F4U-5 Corsair : The Corsair who missed the golden age
You can compare current F4U-4B with WTAPC https://wtapc.org/ and my data from actual test flight in performance:
On the matter of hydraulic boosted… Well AU-1 and F4U-7 also should have them and they do not have better controls than 4B in game…
1 Like
New Premium That’s awesome!
whoa thanks didnt know about that website, i can see the high alt difference much clearer now massive W. separate topic but kinda related do you also happen to know whats constraining planes from having larger water tanks to increase water injection time (maybe size?)? having more wep helps a lot with high alt dogfights
Well, size and weight is definitely a problem. You have only so much engine compartment area and you dont want it to change CG much when empty vs full.
But also in real life it was probably more than enough, actual confrotations lasted a matter of seconds and in game we are also very optimistic of how much water lasts, irl consumption was higher at the powers we use in-game.
In Reno unlimited class they use water for much longer bc they have to use full power all the time almost, so they install larger water tanks :)
They also directly spray water into the radiators for better heat transfer.
1 Like
./. 100 for the plane
+1 for the high quality of the suggestion
Why?
and
are actually the main points of why this is just another US postwar plane nobody needs - simply because it is an immersion killer for all other pilots trying to have a somehow realistic WW 2 feeling.
The actual reasons why US fanboys are voting for this aircraft:
-
The BR setting policy of gaijin denies fights vs Luftwaffe and RAF jets (maybe in full or 0.7 uptiers) despite those aircraft were in service in 1944. That’s how this game works and there is technically seen nothing wrong with this.
-
The critical aspect is the poor US pilot performance on average - this simply guarantees a BR setting (all mentioned BRs for Air RB) well below actual WW 2 props like the Spitfire Mk 22 at 6.7 (just look at the P-51 H-5 at 6.3) and allows them to bully actual WW 2 props like the Ki-84 hei at 6.3, the G 56 prototype (from 1944) at 6.3 or the Ta 154 H-1 at 6.0 / the C-3 at 6.3. Their main advantage is based on high octane fuel (which allows higher manifold pressure) and not any interesting engine features. Full stop.
-
The CAS loadout which helps tankers to get cheap kills vs more or less helpless ground units just based on the way gaijin implemented planes and tanks and how the game play is designed in Ground RB.
I mean if you look on the topic open minded:
-
The prop was dead in 1945. The sole reason for building props for the USN/RN after WW 2 was the fact that jet engines delivered not enough thrust for a short take-off from a carrier and had severe disadvantages regarding range and payloads. The RN equivalent to a post WW 2 carrier based fighter, the 1948 service Seafire F Mk 47, sits at a 5.7 BR…
-
In other words the sole purpose of so called US superprops is to bully actual WW 2 props or tanks based on their too low BRs in constant downtier loops. Not every bodies cup of tea…
Besides that - the plane is a real beauty compared to other USN fighters.
ngl, this is too complicated for me but thx for the answer anyway, ill try to read those resources in my freetime. I just saw greg’s airplanes video on the f4u5 and he said the corsair uses 2 gallons/min from 24 so im not really sure, i hope gaijin adds the whistling death sound of the corsair though that would be really cool
dude please, im so sick and tired abt ppl complaining abt “undertiered american planes” and i feel like im gonna lose my shit, not to even mention this is the wrong place to talk about that topic anyway, but now im going to rant.
bnzing, as compared to turn fighting, is the harder playstyle of the two PERIOD. the current structure of airrb encourages dogfights that transition into a massive furball in the middle of the map where both teams meet and its the most intuitive fighting style that comes into ppls minds.
The BR setting policy of gaijin denies fights vs Luftwaffe and RAF jets (maybe in full or 0.7 uptiers) despite those aircraft were in service in 1944. That’s how this game works and there is technically seen nothing wrong with this
no idea what you mean by this
The critical aspect is the poor US pilot performance on average - this simply guarantees a BR setting (all mentioned BRs for Air RB) well below actual WW 2 props like the Spitfire Mk 22 at 6.7 (just look at the P-51 H-5 at 6.3) and allows them to bully actual WW 2 props like the Ki-84 hei at 6.3, the G 56 prototype (from 1944) at 6.3 or the Ta 154 H-1 at 6.0 / the C-3 at 6.3. Their main advantage is based on high octane fuel (which allows higher manifold pressure) and not any interesting engine features. Full stop.
im gonna compare the p51h to the aircraft you mentioned and add my opinion
P51h vs:
- spitfire mk22
why did you cherrypick the mk22 and not mention the mk24? one fits the current meta fighting style, the other does not - ki84 hei
again why cherrypick the literal worst br variant of the exact same airframe, that already has more than good enough guns at 5.3 and 5.7? i thought it should be well known to the community that gaijin loves to uptier planes with “even better guns” (that are already unnecessary in this case) much higher than they should be? - g56
I havent grinded the italian tt so I cant give an accurate opinion of the plane’s performance, but from the wt wiki (many times unreliable), im getting the gist that it has competitive climbrate (with unlimited wep unlike the p51h), high critical engine alt, turns better than the p51h, better MER and guns, and having worse roll and radiator drag. having flown against g56s before I also get the impression its not an overtiered aircraft, so idk where ur going with this. - ta152h is completely fine at its br, 152c3 could be 6.0 or 5.7 if u really want to push it, idk why its at that br, maybe grb? but still, ur again comparing the p51h against other overtiered aircraft and not the best other nations have, and that makes ZERO sense.
Their main advantage is based on high octane fuel (which allows higher manifold pressure) and not any interesting engine features. Full stop.
im absolutely not an expert on engine design so cant comment
The RN equivalent to a post WW 2 carrier based fighter, the 1948 service Seafire F Mk 47, sits at a 5.7 BR…
where are you going with this? maybe its overtiered and could go to 5.3, but the f4u4b nor the f4u5 being suggested have amazing performance anywhere close enough to rival the bad boys of the br like the lfmk9, yak3u, vk107
In other words the sole purpose of so called US superprops is to bully actual WW 2 props or tanks based on their too low BRs in constant downtier loops. Not every bodies cup of tea…
cas in grb is its own separate issue, other nations literally also get sufficient cas (pe8 and lancaster, us has NOTHING similar) but saying bnz is superior and easier to do than turn fighting… i dont understand, p51h has 8:30 of wep and half is spent on climbing.
if you had checked gaijins followup devblog about why they continued with the decision to lower the bearcat to 4.7, they literally said it is the WORST PEFORMING 5.0 AIRCRAFT. In planes that are either “overpowered” or complete dogshit, there would usually be a few select tryhards who sweat their balls off trying to get the highest kd in them, so when gaijin said that, im very much inclined to think NO ONE WANTS TO PLAY IT. they dont publicly release the player stats of each vehicle, but when they say something is the ABSOLUTE WORST, im going to take their word for it than believe some conspiracy theorist. I would love to see video proof of absolute textbook tactics from a squad in bearcats taking down competent enemy players that don’t make massive mistakes as proof of them being overpowered at 4.7 now.
with the current br system, many planes are either a bit too good or bad at their br, vice versa when lowering or increasing, this should be well understood from the get go