The A2A Simulations Community

In what ways could it be better than the FS9 version?

I'm just curious of what 'under the hood' improvements of FSX could be used to make the Thunderbolt more realistic. This question is merely to feed my daydreaming but also to help me understand if FSX could make fuel consumption more realistic, give complete turbo control (and/or model turbo overspeeding and collapse), simulate the siphoning of fuel out of the main tank overflow vent, that kind of thing. Can FSX allow for control of the intercooler and oil cooler doors? Can it now properly simulate Auto Lean/Auto Rich mixture controls?

I don't really know much about aviation or piloting. Somewhere along the way I became very fond of the Thunderbolt and I've tried to learn how to fly it 'by the book' as Shockwave suggests. The more I'm able to digest the historic operating notes, training guides and Pilot Information File, the more I also understand the limitations of the Wings of Power model. I'm just curious if improvements in FSX and Shockwave's years of experience could (theoretically) better fill the gap between simulation and reality if there was ever a P-47D 'Redux.'

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

I've been thinking more about this, and I think that if a FSX remake was ever considered the P-47N-25 is the best candidate for a painstakingly accurate model.

Here's why:
"The N-25 is equipped with Automatic Engine Control, which automatically maintins correct boost and throttle relationship. AEC is set in operation by an ON-OFF switch on the main switch panel. When the switch is off, you get no boost." (Pilot's Training Manual for the Thunderbolt P-47N, 1945)

Looking at the photographs in the manual, it appears that the boost lever was removed from the quadrant for that variant.

(And we'd get arm rests. )

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

The excellent Stratocruiser + the Accusim videos highlighting the very features I originally asked about (exhaust-driven turbo control, oil and intercooler controls, water injection, etc.) bring me back to this thread. The P-47 series did, after all, use Pratt and Whitneys so it seems like a logical 'next step' to apply your Accusim technology advances to the Thunderbolt (and to the B-17G as well).

So, is there a chance of geting a true FSX Thunderbolt in the future?

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

Yes, Skycat, you are not alone. We've wanted the these kinds of features for years as well, but it just took this big push on our end to make this possible. We were not going to accept sub standard stuff - this all had to be created by the book. The 377 and Accu-Sim is very much by the book.

For example, if you take the 377 up and dial in a certain manifold pressure and RPM, the engine will produce realistic torque values based upon not just these values but turbo pressure, general engine condition, air temperature, and even ram air pressure (if you have opened the ram air doors). We even have the turbos realistically spool up. And yes, if you are negligent, you can overdrive the turbos and their associated bearing temperatures to the point of ultimate failure. Losing a turbo at 30,000 feet is quite a dramatic event. BTW, we even have true asymmetrical drag with the cowl, oil, and intercooler flaps. We even have included drag when you lower your landing lights.

Accu-Sim has a solid technology base, and once the stratocruiser is out, we can then create Accu-Sim expansion packs for aircraft like the Thunderbolt. We are currently upgrading the P47 now for FSX, and being the big high altitude radial makes for a nice Accu-Sim project.

Scott.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.

This is good news even if you can't promise anything definate right now. At least there is something to look forward to.

I know A2A doesn't want to get bogged down in building new P-47 models from scratch. If, however, the cockpit controls are ever revisited there are a few items that don't seem to jive with vintage manuals and historic photos, at least not for all variants of the series. Several items like the throttle lever, landing gear indicator lights and the bomb release T-handles under the instrument panel seem to be modeled after (I'm assuming, given your company's formal address) "54 Norma" at the New England Air Museum, actually a P-47D-40 formerly in foreign service that is currently displayed as a P-47D-30.

For example, the Razorback variant throttle lever should be something like this:



Most 'bubble top' Thunderbolts (through P-47D-30) would have had this throttle lever:


The throttle quadrant in all of the Wings of Power Thunderbolt models is, to my understanding, the style used with the K-14 gunsight. The pilot could adjust the gunsight reticle's dimension by twisting the throttle grip. Seeing this style in New England Air Museum's "54 Norma" makes perfect sense because that aircraft is actually a P-47D-40 and would have been factory-fitted with the K-14; as a display model retrofitted to be a P-47D-30 it seems to have been given a Mk. VIII reflector gunsight standard in nearly all of the 'D' models up until the D-40.

Another detail is the bomb and tank release levers:



I certainly didn't know the difference before the P-47 Mega Pack was released; it wasn't until I got my own copies of vintage manuals that I became aware of these 'errors.' Obviously, one could argue that the WoP Thunderbolts are operating in the modern FS world and therefore have to be excused as modern restorations instead of vintage 'factory-fresh' models. I enjoy flying them either way.

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

Skycat,

Thanks for taking the time to post this information here. We will take a close look at the controls while we have the source cracked opened.

Scott.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.

I just read the Accu-sim manual for the B-377 and I'm really excited for the future. I don't really get excited for two seater, multi-engined types but I'm practically delirious now thinking of how Accu-sim can be applied to the single-engined fighters I love.

I hope I haven't offended anybody with my above suggestions on cockpit changes. I'll admit that while my best sources are pilot's operating notes issued during the war, they can't cover all of the aircraft produced. Sometimes I get the feeling that, like snowflakes, no two Thunderbolts left Republic's plants configured exactly the same. I'm sure that changes incorporated at the factory weren't always as direct as textbooks would have us believe; maybe older parts had to be used up first or new parts were gradually introduced as they became available. Field modifications and upgrades would further blur the line of what a 'definitive' Thunderbolt of any given production block would look like. And then of course many Thunderbolts served into the 1950s and were continuously upgraded by the units that operated them to keep them combat-ready.

As for the Razorback's throttle design, I admit I am confused by an aircraft on display at the USAF Museum in Ohio:
Razorback cockpit photo
I understand this aircraft is currently painted to represent Col. Neel Kearby's P-47D-4-RA "Fiery Ginger IV." In actuality the airframe is a Curtiss-built P-47G; did Curtiss install a differently styled throttle lever? Is this a replacement quadrant taken from a late model Thunderbolt? Either way, this example seems to be an anomolie when compared to vintage photographs of early P-47D cockpits:
Wartime photo of P-47D-5 throttle quadrant.

I would also refer you to the wartime pilot familiarization films, circa 1943. I noticed P-47D-5RE stenciled on the bulkhead in part II of this film series. Skip to about 14 minutes on the first film to where the instructor starts pointing out various cockpit controls. Note that:

1. The throttle handle is the square kind.
2. The turbo overspeed light is explained.
3. The landing gear light is a single light positioned above the instrument panel.

Again, I'm not trying to be overly critical. I think I want what you are also trying to achieve: an aircraft that closely matches all the real world tech manuals, operating notes and performance data available for it. See it in the vintage manual, do it in Flight Simulator. Overall, though, I'd rather have the Accu-sim technology added than worry about cosmetics that have no affect on the plane's actual performance.

In conclusion, I'm looking forward to using that window defroster control.

_________________
I like Thunderbolts! (Link to MySpace tribute page)


120th Fighter Wing, Montana Air National Guard

Skycat,

Yes, this is what Accu-Sim is all about. It has bothered me since day 1 not to have real engine management in our flight simulators. Accu-Sim was developed simply as a need to do things right and we're very happy where we are now.

Accu-Sim is built on a considerable chunk of code that gives us a real aircraft engine to run, with real systems. We plan to integrate Accu-Sim into the P47 next.



Scott.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.

As we are going through this P47 FSX update, it's exciting to see the carb air temp and even a turbo RPM gauge. Turbo RPM was another feature that doesn't exist in FSX, so we created this for the Stratocruiser. This P47 will be similar to managing a 1 engined Strat, having to manage carb heat, CHT, intercoolers, etc. Accusim already has all features for the P47 in place.

_________________
A2A Simulations Inc.