S3 Series
http://squadselectseries.com/s3forum/

DoD Frame 3 - plane comparison
http://squadselectseries.com/s3forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2669
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Robert [ Fri Nov 24, 2017 5:38 pm ]
Post subject:  DoD Frame 3 - plane comparison

<S> all and happy thanksgiving! Here is the fighter comparison for the Pearl Harbor event.

U.S. fighters
The P-36C will have a completely new flightmodel released in the coming update next week. The new model will both turn faster and retain it's energy better than the old model. The P-40B had it's new FM released in the update FL2050.

The P-36C was the predecessor to the P-40's and it's a fairly lightweight fighter with a P&W radial engine tooled for best performance up to 10000 ft. Below this altitude it can turn with an A6M-21 Zero and even outrun it. At higher alts the Zero's better power/weight retainment starts to play a role though, and the P-36C has a quickly decreasing performance with scaling altitude. Be aware that like the Zeros, the P-36C has no pilot armor. The P-40B is a much heavier version with an Allison inline engine. This bird is faster than the P-36C and has it's full throttle height (FTH) at 15000 ft. It also has better armament than it's predecessor, while it's added weight means it isn't as agile and will rely more on boom n zoom tactics vs Japanese fighters. All in all the P-36C is probably the plane to go if expecting a fight down low, while the P-40B is better for higher altitude interception. Both U.S. fighters can outdive the Zeros, especially the P-40B.

IJN fighters
All the A6M's recieved new flightmodels in update FL2050.

The A6M-32 is an upgrade to the A6M-21 and has a two stage supercharger resulting in a better high altitude performance than the -21. The A6M-32 has clipped wings which gives it a better roll rate, with the drawback of a slightly worse stall speed and energy retainment. The A6M-32 is generally faster than the -21, climbs somewhat better and holds more cannon ammo, while the A6M-21 is the better turn fighter. A P-36C can turn inside the -32 at low altitude, while the -21 has a slightly narrower turning radius than the American lightweight fighter. Both Japanese fighters can confidently go into a turn fight vs the P-40B.


Test results for the fighters in frame 3 - December of Doom


Speed and climb rate

Image Image


Turn performance

Image


Stall speed and critical dive speed

Image



<S> :D
/Robert

Author:  -Oskar [ Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DoD Frame 3 - plane comparison

Excellent... Many thanks Robert for the detailed plane comparisons. Looks to be pretty good match ups for the next frame, excluding the A6M's stellar high alt & climb performance. Oh, and those wicked 20 mils :)

Glad to be able to park the lumbering Brewster

<S>

Oskar

Author:  Beaver [ Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DoD Frame 3 - plane comparison

Thanks Robert.

Author:  Robert [ Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DoD Frame 3, 4 & 5 - plane comparisons

I'm happy it's of help :).

And here are the test results for the remaining two frames:


Image Image


Image


Image

Author:  fencer7 [ Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: DoD Frame 3 - plane comparison

Hi Robert: This is a little off subject but I am not able to log in to the Warbirds forum.
According to the information I have(William Green: "Famous Bombers of World War II)
the He111, Ju88 and Do17 were all originally designed as civilian transport airplanes.
This was because the Nazis could get around the Treaty of Versailles restrictions on
combat aircraft. This would explain the multiple side windows in these aircraft. Hope
this info is some help. And another piece of info: William Green's series on Famous
Aircraft of World War II is an excellent source of data on many aircraft. He was able
to interview many of the people who designed, built and flew the aircraft.

Fencer

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/