Robert...take a look in the c47s

What should I check, sir?

_________________
I swear it wasn't my mistake...

Perhaps for starters the hardness? It seems like it can absorb a bit too much punishment for its non armor plated skin.

_________________
2020 Retina 5k iMac 27"
3.8GHz Intel 8 Core i7
16 GB 2667 MHz DDR4
AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT 16 GB
OSX 11.5.2

<S>
Here are my thoughts on the C-47.
When it comes to the C-47 I have looked extensively at C-47 design blueprints etc. It pretty much has the same fuselage- and wing structure as bombers. Also bombers never had armored plated skin. That would have weighed so much the bomber would not even have made it off the ground. Heck, it would probably even have collapsed under the weight while standing on the ground. Bombers had small internal armor plates at critical parts where crewmembers were sitting. I.e. an armor plate behind the pilot seat, an armor plate infront of the tail gunner etc. As the war progressed the bombers started to get fitted with armor plates on the engines and selected areas, but they never had an armor plated skin, just normal skin just like the C-47, usually made from an aluminium alloy. Fact is that the C-47 actually has had it's fuselage hitpoints reduced to 50% of normal hitpoints for it's size. This in order to make up for it not having internal armor plates and gameplay reasons, so it's fuselage is already at half the strength than a same sized bomber like the He 111 etc. When it comes to the wings and elevators etc, the C-47 should follow the same laws of physics as other planes, as it used the same structure and materials. They were not made out of paper and glass.

My best advice is to go for the engines like pilots did IRL. The engines have around 1/6 the hitpoints of the fuselage, so aim at them specifically, don't just blindly throw lead into the huge body of the C-47, that's a waste of ammunition. (This goes for attacking all kinds of bombers). Also going HO, aiming for the pilot is a good way to kill it whenever possible.


<S> and all feedback is welcome.
/Robert

Been reading lenghty discussions about the stall speed and turning ability of a Spitfire vs the Bf 109. Going through windtunnel reports etc of clmax of the Spitfire wing vs the Bf 109 wing with leading edge slats open etc etc. My conclusion is that the Bf 109 we have in Warbirds is probably quite where it should be compared to the Spitfire. The Spitfire series, depending on time period, currently has an around 15% better sustained turn rate than the Bf 109 series in Warbirds, which should be realistic after looking at all the numbers, windtunnel tests, and pilot reports.

The Bf 110 was modeled to have the same effects of slats as the Bf 109, but doing more detailed measurments the effects should probably be reduced to around 80% of what is currently modeled. I have now done some tweaking and lowered the Bf 110 slats effect to more realistic numbers and done new stall and turning tests. The turn rate of the Bf 110C-4 and G-2 were, as expected, negatively affected as seen below. This change is not dramatic but will decrease the Bf 110 series current agility, especially coupled with the significant roll rate nerf they'll also have with the coming update.

Stall speed: Increased by 2-3 mph (3-5 kmh) for both Bf 110's.








<S>
/Robert

Robert, it's nice that things are getting done, but which version are we supposed to be using or expecting the updates for? Right now we have 2018, 2020, and 2021 versions all useable. However, the 2020 version says an update is available and will not download it. The 2021 version says an update is available, tries to download it, and says files are up to date even though it doesn't update.

You should be happy with the obvious advantages you have over everyone else and not complain about people doing what they have to do to avoid being one of your thirty + kills per flight.

Mine just blows up, so there must be some other secrets in it as well. Sometimes they explode even when landing to a runway w/ too high speed.

_________________
I swear it wasn't my mistake...

Robert more than likely has no idea about which one is which to update. He's on the FM team and not the program team. Stay with 2018 and all should be good. Shame they don't just put 2018 D/L up and just rename it 2020/2021 for now.

<S>