Giving an engine a little more power?

[dasuto247]

I have always found the stock F4F-4in CFS 2 to be a bit underpowered.I know the F4F was no speed demon but reading multiple accounts it could move better than does in game,I tried another version on here, did look like F4F, had far too much power plus water injection.Stock and PH model look like an F4F-4 and mostly fly like one from what have read, other than slightly underpowered.I figured if knew how, could tune the stock/OH F4F a bit to get the performance.Am I wrong? I love the F4F-4 actually, can take a beating usually and with right tactics can take out the Zeros, just find it wanting at times where it shouldnt be, such as in a dive, which was it's major advantage over the Zero.

Great Example. I flew an escort of SBD's to hit seaplane base at Rekata Bay in November 1942. While heading home, spotted an incoming raid(15 Vals 21 Zekes) over the Slot heading for Henderson, bombers went on, I lead my division to attack, diving from above.Nailed a Val on first pass, pulled up behind a Zero, nailed it.Then now alerted Zeros scattered, two of my division were shot down.My wingman nailed one, but another got on my tail, I hid in a cloud, came in slightly above, shot him down.Then his wingman jumped on me and I went into a dive, already at 200 knots, was at 375 knots in a dive, had to go from 150000 feet to the deck, he was behind , lagging then suddenly he gained.I had no damage, engine was fine, just did not have the power feel should have.Zero caught up, flamed me, I bailed out and survived.

I wonder given most times I survive in F4F but its more of a gamble than in a F4U or F6F which.Just seems to me F4F should have more power, a little more.Again am I wrong?

[TheBookie]

I don't use the stock/OH F4F but the FDG donationware ones.They are free now.You get both the F4F-3 and the F4F-4 and there are alot textures for them.Also someone also redid the airfiles and cfg files to bring them up tp specs.

If you want to fixup the stock one get AirEd at simviation.This way you can do the air file.You may also have to change some thing sin th cfg file which you can open with notepad or wordpad.

TheBookie

[dasuto247]

I don't use the stock/OH F4F but the FDG donationware ones.They are free now.You get both the F4F-3 and the F4F-4 and there are alot textures for them.Also someone also redid the airfiles and cfg files to bring them up tp specs.

If you want to fixup the stock one get AirEd at simviation.This way you can do the air file.You may also have to change some thing sin th cfg file which you can open with notepad or wordpad.

TheBookie

Ah thanks.Maybe ill give the FDG a second chance, it was way overpowered and did not look like the -3 and -4 to me, plus doesnt show damage. Great models but prefer OH, just needs a little more power.

[kelticheart]

Ah thanks.Maybe ill give the FDG a second chance, it was way overpowered and did not look like the -3 and -4 to me, plus doesnt show damage. Great models but prefer OH, just needs a little more power.

Hi dasuto247,

I just answered you in your missing fuel tank switch thread. AirEd is the answer and I believe record #505 contains all of the piston engine parameters.

You can also increase the following aircraft.cfg entries:

[piston_engine]
power_scalar = 1.0

[propeller]
thrust_scalar = 1.0

I suggest doing it in 0.1 increments and then test fly the aircraft. Remember this way is a sort of cut-corner solution, it may have unexpected consequences on the aircraft behaviour, like exaggerated engine torque and such.

On the other hand, you may increase engine displacement, compression rate, max rpm and boost gain in the airfile without altering too much the aircraft behavior.
SOH's member Bearcat246, a true engine soup-up guru around here, suggest also to reduce the fuel weight from a standard 6.00 to 5.5 lbs per gallon.

Cheers!
KH :ernaehrung004:

[Rami]

Ah thanks.Maybe ill give the FDG a second chance, it was way overpowered and did not look like the -3 and -4 to me, plus doesn't show damage. Great models but prefer OH, just needs a little more power.

Hey guys,

I am the one who did the historical performance specs for the FDG models. You can get the altered files here: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=17&id=6469

Also, I find that engine spec data and aircraft weight go a long way to correcting aircraft performance. The weight of the aircraft is listed in the airfile under 1101, "Primary Aerodynamics."

[bearcat241]

dasuto247,

You're playing inside of a retail combat sim that is skewed to give the AI opponents the performance advantage, although it leaves much to be desired in AI combat decision-making. They have no fuel weight, no additional payload weight (ammo and pilot), no stall limitations, insanely low drag factors, plus unlimited ammo. Conversely, the player is bound by all of these. Throw out the historical accounts about the strengths and weaknesses of allied and axis warbirds and how it all factored into the battles. The sim's AI physics and the player flight dynamics wasn't programmed to play by such constraints 100 percent. Just take some QC time and learn how the sim's AI engine actually "thinks" in combat -- it has some serious decision-making flaws that really stand out in the heat.

Using your example above, your move to dive for life was a good one, but instead of running on the deck, you should have popped a tight loop or a chandelle on the Zero. These moves are directly counter to actual accounts from former Wildcat pilots and their training. They were told to never loop a Zero or an Oscar and avoid climbing turns -- just dive and run in tight spots where they had altitude (the Zero can loop so tight that 2 complete loops, with the Zero starting in the disadvantage position, will put the Zero squarely behind a Wildcat). In this sim, the stock Zero is just as fast as the stock 'baby Cat' in a downhill drag race, so running won't help. You have to get to know the enemy "pilot" better and he flies every model the same. And here's one of his greatest weaknesses: he absolutely hates loops when giving chase to the player. Regardless of what he's flying, he'll pass right under you almost every time for an easy setup on his six. And in the rare cases when he does climb with you, he won't fire his guns after you pass the pure vertical aspect and begin to actually turn over the top, so its always a good move to escape gunfire when you're getting hammered in a careless moment. If you continue over the top, he'll covert his climb to a chandelle maneuver and disengage. This also is an easy setup as you re-engage from above and behind.

Bottom line, forget replicating the stories. They're great for mission setups, but that's where it all ends. If you want more wins vs loses, get to know the habits and traits of your enemy, not just his weapons.

[Cody Coyote]

Great advice bearcat and a good reality check.

[Worthless]

Hey guys,

I am the one who did the historical performance specs for the FDG models. You can get the altered files here: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/local_links.php?action=jump&catid=17&id=6469

Also, I find that engine spec data and aircraft weight go a long way to correcting aircraft performance. The weight of the aircraft is listed in the airfile under 1101, "Primary Aerodynamics."

Many thanks for this Rami. Boy was it an eye opener for me. I had no idea how far off the empty weight in the airfile is until now.

[Rami]

Worthless,

The other bugaboo is section 505 in the airfile. I can't tell how many times I have seen incorrect engine data, especially with regard to cylinder displacement, number of cylinders, and compression ratio. All are of critical importance when adjusting the performance of an aircraft.

[peperez]

You need AirEd. First of all, copy the airfile and save it as back up. The engine is in the 505 entry and all data are real. Nothing to do there. You can try to enhance the propeller values (entries 510 to 512). The best way is to look for best behaviour aircraft to copy and paste each value. The weight is regulated by the aircraft.cfg. The 1101 entry just serves to control the AI behaviour. The weight is 100lb lighter at CFS2 than the real plane. The incidence at 1204 entry is 1 (I suggest you to put it to zero) and to reduce the induced drag constant a little (around 200 points). I'll give a look at it.

Cheers

Pepe

[Rami]

Pedro,

That is not directed at your aircraft. I have seen some engine data that is WAY off in other aircraft. Fuel loads as well.

[dasuto247]

dasuto247,

You're playing inside of a retail combat sim that is skewed to give the AI opponents the performance advantage, although it leaves much to be desired in AI combat decision-making. They have no fuel weight, no additional payload weight (ammo and pilot), no stall limitations, insanely low drag factors, plus unlimited ammo. Conversely, the player is bound by all of these. Throw out the historical accounts about the strengths and weaknesses of allied and axis warbirds and how it all factored into the battles. The sim's AI physics and the player flight dynamics wasn't programmed to play by such constraints 100 percent. Just take some QC time and learn how the sim's AI engine actually "thinks" in combat -- it has some serious decision-making flaws that really stand out in the heat.

Using your example above, your move to dive for life was a good one, but instead of running on the deck, you should have popped a tight loop or a chandelle on the Zero. These moves are directly counter to actual accounts from former Wildcat pilots and their training. They were told to never loop a Zero or an Oscar and avoid climbing turns -- just dive and run in tight spots where they had altitude (the Zero can loop so tight that 2 complete loops, with the Zero starting in the disadvantage position, will put the Zero squarely behind a Wildcat). In this sim, the stock Zero is just as fast as the stock 'baby Cat' in a downhill drag race, so running won't help. You have to get to know the enemy "pilot" better and he flies every model the same. And here's one of his greatest weaknesses: he absolutely hates loops when giving chase to the player. Regardless of what he's flying, he'll pass right under you almost every time for an easy setup on his six. And in the rare cases when he does climb with you, he won't fire his guns after you pass the pure vertical aspect and begin to actually turn over the top, so its always a good move to escape gunfire when you're getting hammered in a careless moment. If you continue over the top, he'll covert his climb to a chandelle maneuver and disengage. This also is an easy setup as you re-engage from above and behind.

Bottom line, forget replicating the stories. They're great for mission setups, but that's where it all ends. If you want more wins vs loses, get to know the habits and traits of your enemy, not just his weapons.


Interesting point. I have flown enough to know they don't always perform historically accurate manner, but find most are somewhat in line. Example, usually the dive in a F4F can get me away from a Zero(stock or OH) but later variants such as the A63M3 Hamp seem to dive better(as did in RL from what have read) but can still when pushed, get away. I am an above average pilot but am curious if you pulled such moves with realism set to 100? One way I usually survive in the situation above is to turn head on into them(as in RL and as suggested in the CFS 2 manual) playing chicken and fire but that is not always an option when can't get them off your tail, suppose will try what you suggested.Considering many of even the best F4F pilots were usually shot down once or twice during the Guadalcanal campaign(Foss, Carl, etc) and that usually I make it home, should just write it off.Like I said, just want to give the -4 a little more power but in meantime, will just make sure do not get caught in same situation again.

[bearcat241]

... I am an above average pilot but am curious if you pulled such moves with realism set to 100?...

Given my comments above about the retail quality of this sim, i'm not sure how you define 100% realism or "somewhat in line" with the many weird "out-of-line" things i've seen AI opponents and wingmen alike do over my years in CFS2. If you mean hard flight model settings, then i have to admit that i avoid it. Its trash in my opinion when applied to stock flight modeling. It just there for the entertainment value of a greater challenge for those who are interested -- i've always been curious about the base parameters used in constructing this mode anyway. I've settled on medium settings long ago and that's been good enough for my entertainment. As for the head-on tactic, its your basic ACM opener, kinda like the critical opening move on a chessboard. Its always a great way to start a fight and also to defend yourself when you can get it. "Swede" Vejtasa used it as a Dauntless bomber pilot to keep 3 Zeroes off his tail and on his nose, shooting down 2 and taking out the third with a head-on wing strike.

But just keep in mind that the more power you add, the more braking strength you, and your AI wingmen in particular, will need on landing. The stock flight models were all mistakenly designed with two-bladed prop configurations, Adjusting this is a good start. Then go to thrust before touching the power scale. This will keep your power closer to historical numbers while boosting performance overall. It also helps the AI in stopping when landing because they aren't affected by big power gains.

[Blood_Hawk23]

If you have excel and want to realy customize your air and cfg files then try this...


http://mudpond.org/FlightDynamicsWorkbook.zip
http://mudpond.org/AirUpdatePage.html

There is more info here...

http://mudpond.org/

Be warned. This will give you a headache if your not ready for it.

If you want some help with it just send me a PM. If you don't have excel you can use openoffice. But with openoffice some of the macros don't work.

[peperez]

I check the plane speed and I found it has too much drag, very simple to fix it! It has 22 MPH less speed than the real thing. I'll give attention to it tomorrow.

Cheers

Pepe

[peperez]

Pedro,

That is not directed at your aircraft. I have seen some engine data that is WAY off in other aircraft. Fuel loads as well.

I'm talking about the stock F4F4 Wildcat. The figures are right for the engine used by it. Remember that Wildcats used a lot of versions of Cyclone and Wasp engines. The weapon, weight and fuel load varied along the versions.

Cheers

Pepe

[Worthless]

The stock flight models were all mistakenly designed with two-bladed prop configurations, Adjusting this is a good start. Then go to thrust before touching the power scale. This will keep your power closer to historical numbers while boosting performance overall. It also helps the AI in stopping when landing because they aren't affected by big power gains.

Just curious, BC. Some AC reference the number of blades in the aircraft.cfg under [propeller],some have no mention, whatsoever. Is it just as simple as copying the line from one *.cfg to another? Or, does it require a tool like AirWrench?

[Allen]

Just curious, BC. Some AC reference the number of blades in the aircraft.cfg under [propeller],some have no mention, whatsoever. Is it just as simple as copying the line from one *.cfg to another? Or, does it require a tool like AirWrench?

Dosen't work in CFS2. The only things that work in [propeller] in CFS2 are thrust_scalar= and rotation=

[Blood_Hawk23]

You don't need airwrench. Its a great tool but its not needed. You can add everything to the cfg with notepad.

If you have FSEdit you can load up any CFS2 aircraft and it will create a CFG. Note that not everything is needed.

In the case of the Propeller, paste this into the F4F4 wildcat's cfg.

[propeller]
thrust_scalar = 1.0
propeller_type= 0
propeller_diameter= 10.833
propeller_blades= 3
propeller_moi= 33.370
beta_max= 53.500
beta_min= 18.500
min_gov_rpm= 1800.000
prop_tc= 0.010
gear_reduction_ratio= 1.778
fixed_pitch_beta= 0.000
low_speed_theory_limit= 80.000
prop_sync_available= 0
prop_deice_available= 0
prop_feathering_available= 0
prop_auto_feathering_available= 0
min_rpm_for_feather= 0.000
beta_feather= 0.000
power_absorbed_cf= 0.000
defeathering_accumulators_available= 0
prop_reverse_available= 0
minimum_on_ground_beta= 0.000
minimum_reverse_beta= 0.000

Ignore the green. This AC doesn't need it. The blue will be the same for all modern ACs and doesn't need to be changed. The red can be edited based on historical data.

If you have an Aircraft with no info in the cfg then CFS2 will use the airfile (note that there is some basic info needed). Now if you add this to the cfg, CFS2 will use this info for the Player's aircraft. It will still use the airfile info for the AI.

You can create a balanced Player and AI aircraft in this manor. Though sometimes a dedicated airfile is needed for better AI behavior.

[Worthless]

Ah! Very enlightening , BH and Allen. Thanks for the info.

[dasuto247]

I check the plane speed and I found it has too much drag, very simple to fix it! It has 22 MPH less speed than the real thing. I'll give attention to it tomorrow.

Cheers

Pepe


:applause:

[Rami]

BH,

I tend to shy away from AirWrench for modifying air files, though I DO use it to see how my tweaks modify performance without actually saving my work, that way I can try to match my target numbers as closely as possible.

When you save a CFS2 file in AirWrench, two things happen.

1) A lot of "junk" end up being copies over into the aircraft.cfg file. A "true" CFS2 aircraft.cfg should be between 3 and 5KB. When it's up into the 10KB-plus category, that means a lot of additional information that should not be there has been added. This causes problems for modifications, including having to enter the new data into the airfile AND the .cfg file, and making sure they match precisely, because if they don't, the .cfg file overrides the info in the .air file.

2) There is a thrust characteristic that becomes prevalent when AirWrench is used. Acceleration of the aircraft changes from being steady to consisting of "surges." While I love Captain Kurt's Bf-109 mods, they have this characteristic, along with the Team Daedalus Fw-190s.

[Blood_Hawk23]

I don't have the full version so I only use it to see the results of my changes.

I will say that the spreadsheet works. You still need to know your way around the airfile and cfg. Its not for the faint of heart. Trust me.

I used it on the Albatros DV's prop settings in the airfile. I don't have excel so I had to do things the hard way. It is very promising. According to AER_DaddyO the engine rpms are spot on to a video of the Albatros. Though the idle is higher on mine. that could have been my mistake.

[bearcat241]

There is a thrust characteristic that becomes prevalent when AirWrench is used. Acceleration of the aircraft changes from being steady to consisting of "surges." While I love Captain Kurt's Bf-109 mods, they have this characteristic, along with the Team Daedalus Fw-190s.

Not having flown any of these specific types in real life, i still believe that in some warbird fighter models this acceleration surge would be appropriate, especially the turbocharged types. When i read accounts from former WW2 fighter pilots who actually flew them, there have been some accounts where the pilot remarked about how pushing balls to the wall was like a sudden kick. In today's jet age, its easy to experience or imagine such a thing, but back in the golden age of flight, they actually had new prop engine designs which did this as well.

I agree with you Rami regarding the over-reliance on Airwrench mods. It can add a lot of unnecessary fluff to a CFS2 flight model.

[peperez]

I got the following speeds at the following altitudes:

5,000 ft = 254 kts per hour
10,000 ft = 270 kts per hour
15,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
20,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
25,000 ft = 268 kts per hour
30,000 ft = 242 kts per hour
34,000 ft = 204 kts per hour

22485

[peperez]

May be all of them has too much drag!

Cheers

Pepe

[Ivan]

Hello Dasuto et al.

I don't actually fly CFS2 much any more but did at one point, so some of this discussion will be based on CFS1.

The scenario that you described about not being able to out dive and out run a Zero in a F4F-4 Wildcat is actually how I would expect things to happen IRL.
The Wildcat had a higher maximum diving speed but probably a LOT less initial acceleration in the dive.
Its advantage over the Zero wasn't as great as later Allied Fighters. Against the A6M5, the advantage was nil.
The dive speed limitation on the Zero also wasn't because it could not go faster. It was more because the structure was too light to take the aerodynamic forces.

The F4F in either version had no hope of fighting the Zero on even terms. That is why the Thach Weave was invented (and first used at Midway).
With larger numbers in the air, the historical (though not well documented) tactic was to ignore the fellow on your own tail. Concentrate on shooting Zeros off your squadron mates' tails instead.
This works on the premise that the Zero had only enough cannon ammunition (60 rounds per gun) for about 3 good squirts. Once the cannons were done, the Wildcat was pretty resistant to 7.7 mm MG fire especially from the rear.

Bearcat also gave some very good advice on how to actually beat the AI. They do NOT like to use any kind of vertical maneuvers. They only really know how to fly turning fights.

I don't agree with using only the Medium Flight Model though because it takes out way too much of the aerodynamic simulation. If the flight model isn't realistic on Hard, then it should be tuned to work there.

Hope This Helps.
- Ivan.

[peperez]

Hello Dasuto et al.

I don't actually fly CFS2 much any more but did at one point, so some of this discussion will be based on CFS1.

The scenario that you described about not being able to out dive and out run a Zero in a F4F-4 Wildcat is actually how I would expect things to happen IRL.
The Wildcat had a higher maximum diving speed but probably a LOT less initial acceleration in the dive.
Its advantage over the Zero wasn't as great as later Allied Fighters. Against the A6M5, the advantage was nil.
The dive speed limitation on the Zero also wasn't because it could not go faster. It was more because the structure was too light to take the aerodynamic forces.

The F4F in either version had no hope of fighting the Zero on even terms. That is why the Thach Weave was invented (and first used at Midway).
With larger numbers in the air, the historical (though not well documented) tactic was to ignore the fellow on your own tail. Concentrate on shooting Zeros off your squadron mates' tails instead.
This works on the premise that the Zero had only enough cannon ammunition (60 rounds per gun) for about 3 good squirts. Once the cannons were done, the Wildcat was pretty resistant to 7.7 mm MG fire especially from the rear.

Bearcat also gave some very good advice on how to actually beat the AI. They do NOT like to use any kind of vertical maneuvers. They only really know how to fly turning fights.

I don't agree with using only the Medium Flight Model though because it takes out way too much of the aerodynamic simulation. If the flight model isn't realistic on Hard, then it should be tuned to work there.

Hope This Helps.
- Ivan.

Okay Ivan, but the original CFS2 F4F4 has a speed 20 miles bellow than the real thing. Dasuto was right in his complain. I tested it in all altitudes and I proved it. My airfile attached put the speed in it's real parameters.

Cheers

Pepe

[dasuto247]

I got the following speeds at the following altitudes:

5,000 ft = 254 kts per hour
10,000 ft = 270 kts per hour
15,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
20,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
25,000 ft = 268 kts per hour
30,000 ft = 242 kts per hour
34,000 ft = 204 kts per hour

22485

Flew an intercept in November 1942.Betty's at 20,000 feet with Zeros. The new airfile is perfect.Performance is as expected and seems to match.Not a hotrod like F6F or F4U but not so sluggish as the original.I took some hits from bomber gunners and a pesky Zero but managed to dive away then turn into him and he flamed on second pass, sky was empty, had made all way north of Tulagi in the running fight, headed home.Landed safely with 2 kills(one Betty one Zero) and one Betty damaged .Thanks again.

[peperez]

Flew an intercept in November 1942.Betty's at 20,000 feet with Zeros. The new airfile is perfect.Performance is as expected and seems to match.Not a hotrod like F6F or F4U but not so sluggish as the original.I took some hits from bomber gunners and a pesky Zero but managed to dive away then turn into him and he flamed on second pass, sky was empty, had made all way north of Tulagi in the running fight, headed home.Landed safely with 2 kills(one Betty one Zero) and one Betty damaged .Thanks again.

Thank you, Dasuto! I'll test all standard planes to check they have the correct speed to upload a big fix. I pretend to limit my effort at the drag parameters.

Cheers

Pepe

PS: After that, may be you can not stay alive after fighting Zeroes, Dasuto...

[peperez]

You don't need airwrench. Its a great tool but its not needed. You can add everything to the cfg with notepad.

If you have FSEdit you can load up any CFS2 aircraft and it will create a CFG. Note that not everything is needed.

In the case of the Propeller, paste this into the F4F4 wildcat's cfg.

[propeller]
thrust_scalar = 1.0
propeller_type= 0
propeller_diameter= 10.833
propeller_blades= 3
propeller_moi= 33.370
beta_max= 53.500
beta_min= 18.500
min_gov_rpm= 1800.000
prop_tc= 0.010
gear_reduction_ratio= 1.778
fixed_pitch_beta= 0.000
low_speed_theory_limit= 80.000
prop_sync_available= 0
prop_deice_available= 0
prop_feathering_available= 0
prop_auto_feathering_available= 0
min_rpm_for_feather= 0.000
beta_feather= 0.000
power_absorbed_cf= 0.000
defeathering_accumulators_available= 0
prop_reverse_available= 0
minimum_on_ground_beta= 0.000
minimum_reverse_beta= 0.000

Ignore the green. This AC doesn't need it. The blue will be the same for all modern ACs and doesn't need to be changed. The red can be edited based on historical data.

If you have an Aircraft with no info in the cfg then CFS2 will use the airfile (note that there is some basic info needed). Now if you add this to the cfg, CFS2 will use this info for the Player's aircraft. It will still use the airfile info for the AI.

You can create a balanced Player and AI aircraft in this manor. Though sometimes a dedicated airfile is needed for better AI behavior.



These are FS2002 and FS2004 commands, they didn't work at CFS2.

Cheers

Pepe

[bearcat241]

Well, i dunno about you guys, but this data has always worked in my tweaks...:triumphant:

[peperez]

Airwrench write a lot of FS2002 and FS2009 info at the airfile and aircraft.cfg. I always clean all of them using AirEd. I already try airfiles with the additional info and I didn't found any substantial improvement in the aircraft before suppressing them. I'll give another try, but the true is that standard F4F4 have more drag than the real thing.

Cheers

Pepe

[dasuto247]

Thank you, Dasuto! I'll test all standard planes to check they have the correct speed to upload a big fix. I pretend to limit my effort at the drag parameters.

Cheers

Pepe

PS: After that, may be you can not stay alive after fighting Zeroes, Dasuto...


No problem, really enjoyed the improvement in F4F.Still have to use proper tactics to survive but less drag helps.

[Roxane-21]

I got the following speeds at the following altitudes:

5,000 ft = 254 kts per hour
10,000 ft = 270 kts per hour
15,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
20,000 ft = 282 kts per hour
25,000 ft = 268 kts per hour
30,000 ft = 242 kts per hour
34,000 ft = 204 kts per hour

22485
May we use the same airfile for the F4F-3 as well ?
I don't know if the only difference between the -3 and -4 versions was the 2 additional .50 guns on the -4...

[Blood_Hawk23]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F4F_Wildcat

Ther e were a few other minor differances.

Specifications (F4F-3)
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 28 ft 9 in (8.76 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft (11.58 m)
Height: 11 ft 10 in (3.60 m)
Loaded weight: 7,000 lb (3,200 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Pratt & Whitney R-1830-76 double-row radial engine, 1,200 hp (900 kW)
Performance
Maximum speed: 331 mph (531 km/h)
Range: 845 mi (1,360 km)
Service ceiling: 39,500 ft (12,000 m)
Rate of climb: 2,303 ft/min (11.7 m/s)
Armament

Guns: 4 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) AN/M2 Browning machine guns with 450 rounds per gun
Bombs: 2 × 100 lb (45 kg) bombs and/or 2 × 58 gal (220 L) drop tanks
Specifications (F4F-4)
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 28 ft 9 in (8.8 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft 0 in (11.6 m)
Height: 9 ft 2.5 in (2.8 m)
Wing area: 260 ft² (24.2 m²)
Empty weight: 5,895 lb (2,674 kg)
Loaded weight: 7,975 lb (3,617 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 8,762 lb (3,974 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Pratt & Whitney R-1830-86 double-row radial engine, 1,200 hp (900 kW)
Performance
Maximum speed: 320 mph (290 kn, 515 km/h)
Range: 830 mi (721 nmi, 1,337 km)
Service ceiling: 34,000 ft (10,363 m)
Rate of climb: 2,200 ft/min @ normal power (11.17 m/s)
Wing loading: 30.7 lb/ft² (149.77 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 249 w/kg (0.15 hp/lb)
Armament

Guns: 6 × 0.50 in (12.7 mm) AN/M2 Browning machine guns,

[peperez]

The F4F-3 had better performance than the F4F-4. It was lighter!

Cheers

Pepe

[dasuto247]

The F4F-3 had better performance than the F4F-4. It was lighter!

Cheers

Pepe

Any chance of a -3 airfile? B24 guy's F4F3