« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Climb testing AH2 aircraft  (Read 1038 times)

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #15 on: June 10, 2004, 01:59:10 PM »
You're right it more than probably that.
Logged

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #16 on: June 10, 2004, 05:40:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Batz
Also he started otr and used auto take off...

The results are mostly meaningless.

I dunno why folks dont do the tests with full fuel...


I tested with low fuel because I rarely fly with more than 50% internal load. Why drag along useless weight? Load a drop tank, use it to get where the fight is.

Virtually all of the aircraft tested are used as interceptors, with the exception of the P-47 (and that may change once people are aware of its performance when light). Climbing ability from wheels stopped IS useful data if you intend to get up and defend.

My regards,

Widewing
Logged
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #17 on: June 10, 2004, 06:14:35 PM »
I think I heard AH2 will likely not allow you to takes less that 100% internal fuel and drop tank.

Also AH increases fel consumption multiplier a lot so 50% or 25% fuel wont last very long.
Logged

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #18 on: June 10, 2004, 09:44:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I think I heard AH2 will likely not allow you to takes less that 100% internal fuel and drop tank.

Also AH increases fel consumption multiplier a lot so 50% or 25% fuel wont last very long.


Unless they plan to change it after beta 41, this isn't the case. Besides, it was commonplace for fighters to be loaded with less than full tanks AND external tanks for exactly the same reason I do it.

I've been flying with less than full tanks in the beta for weeks. Fuel burn is 2.0, so it requires fuel management (IE reduced power settings) to transit to targets areas. The fuel models reward this with greatly increased range and/or endurance.

My regards,

Widewing
Logged
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline xHaMmeRx

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 402
      • http://www.netaces.org
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2004, 09:22:57 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
widewing change your test procedure to the following. after reaching 800 agl, engage auto speed. Other wise you will be getting strage climb changes do to the auto take off controller trying to slowy get you to auto speed.


HiTech


HiTech,

Has this changed? I have done some comparisons on various aircraft using the method you mention above and leaving it on auto-takeoff all the way up. The results to 5k for both methods have been within 1 second of each other for the A6M2 (low powered plane), the Fw 190A-5 (mid powered plane) and the La-7 (hi powered plane).

In all cases, when auto-takeoff is left to itself, the plane climbs steadily and slowly reaches its climb speed. When I hit the auto speed at 800 agl, the plane dips to reach climb speed then resumes climbing. Like I said, each method got its plane to 5k within 1 second of the other method.

Did I just pick the wrong planes to check or did you change something? I'm getting ready to test all the planes and just want to be as accurate as possible.

Thanks!
Logged

Offline Schutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1138
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #20 on: October 21, 2004, 09:35:21 AM »
What are the numbers for 10k?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »