Seafire AH chart is not accurate!

[hitech]

Charts In hangar can not be out of date, on the web page they can be.

I am assuming the charts match right now, I havn't looked, so that meens somthing is amiss in either testing or the setup of the seafire.

we will take look at it.

[Pyro]

Originally posted by MOSQ
According to HTC this is not possible.

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=189254&highlight=Charts

"Sloehand: The charts in the hangar can not be out of date, they are generated on the fly from the current AH model.

HiTech"

He said it was impossible for the in-game charts to be out of date, not that it was impossible to see differing performance from the charts.  The charts are based on a specific test weight.  If the plane is not at that specific weight, you will see different results.  It used to be that the charts had to be manually generated and propagated and that process could get overlooked leaving the charts out of date.  That is no longer the case wrt the in-game charts.

The test weights used to generate charts are usually at a full fuel load and normal armament.  However, that is not always the case.  E.G., the performance in the P-51s is with the aux tank empty.  This is dependent upon the data I'm using and the conditions they tested at.

The Seafire is in a special category of variant because it essentially shares the same airframe and powerplant as the Spit V.  The performance difference between the two primarily comes from the additional weight.  The beefed up structure, tailhook, and C wing with extra ammo load make up the weight difference between the two.  If you compare the performance charts between the Seafire and Spit V, you will notice that they are in fact identical.  The difference between the two is that the Spit V is at the test weight for that chart at 100% fuel while the Seafire is at the correct test weight at about 25% fuel.  The F4U-1C is in a similar situation where it weighs slightly more than the 1D but uses the same performance chart.

That's the majority of the discrepancy.  As I pointed out, the Seafire should be hitting the numbers at around a 25% fuel load but it clearly is not.  In checking into this, the remaining discrepancy is in that the gauge is a bit off.  Maybe we can get rate of climb into the E6B so those types of errors can be quickly spotted.  Generally a discrepancy will be in the gauge but it can also more seriously be that I screwed up the weight schedule and the plane is either underweight or overweight.  That's a lot easier to do than it sounds because of how the test software is setup but I've gotten pretty obsessive compulsive about rechecking that multiple times.

It would be nice to have something in the hangar that would tally up your weight as you changed your fuel and ordnance load and let you compare that against the test weight of the performance charts.  Maybe output a wing loading number on the fly.

[Krusty]

75% of the seafire's internal fuel is ... what?... about 1,000lbs extra weight?

I'd think that with THAT much of a discrepency, this variant needs its own charts. At 25% it can't even touch the spitV with 100% gas. That really doesn't seem right, considering they're almost the same plane.

[gripen]

Originally posted by Pyro

It would be nice to have something in the hangar that would tally up your weight as you changed your fuel and ordnance load and let you compare that against the test weight of the performance charts.  Maybe output a wing loading number on the fly.

Couple basic output values on fly (while testing off-line) would make analysis much easier: Weight, TAS and g load (possibly divided for axis components of the plane). In addition some shooting related outputs would also be nice; exact range to the target, number of hits, hit %.

I have not played AH for a while but some time ago I tried to make some statistics by shooting the drones at long range. I recorded how many shots were needed to down a drone, but my shooting improved while testing so in practice the numbers I got were not particularly representative.

gripen

[MOSQ]

Originally posted by Pyro

It would be nice to have something in the hangar that would tally up your weight as you changed your fuel and ordnance load and let you compare that against the test weight of the performance charts.  Maybe output a wing loading number on the fly.

Excellent Idea!

Also the E6B output would be sweet.

[Squire]

The chart still shows the +16lbs version of the Seafire IIc. The "new" one is +12lbs. Thus the lower climb rate.

When the Spits were redone, we asked why the Seafire IIc was de rated.

Operationally, it used +16lbs by November 1942, when it saw service, along with Spit Vs.

The Spit Vb we have in AH is a version from a year earlier (Feb 41) compared to the Seafire IIc (Nov 42).

Would be nice if they reconsidered and gave it its proper boost.

My previous post:

***********************************************************

Seafire IIc max boost

The Seafire IIC was first issued to the Fleet Air Arm in July of 1942.

The first action they fought in was "Torch" in November 1942 (Supermarine Seafire P.6 John Freeman) with 807, 880, 884 and 885 Sqns.

By that time, the Spitfire V series and the Seafire series had been modified to a combat boost limit of +16 lbs for 5 minutes (summer 1942).

Spit V here: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitv.html

"Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
25 November 1942
Spitfire Mk. VC AA.878
(Merlin 45)
Climb, speed, and cooling tests at combat rating

SUMMARY

The operational limitations of the Merlin 45 have been increased, the use of 3000 R.P.M. and +16 lb/sq.in. boost being now permitted for periods not exceeding 3 minutes during combat. Tests have been made to determine the performance of the aeroplane at this new rating, and also whether the oil and radiator cooling are adequate."

Seafire IIC here, http://www.spitfireperformance.com/seafireIIc.pdf and I will quote the entry:

"The increase in performance obtainable by using combat rating (+16 lb/sq.in ; boost 3000rpm) on a Spitfire Vc is given in the Part of Report No. A& A.E.E/692i and this increase will approximately be equal in the Seafire"

Final source is "Spitfire In Action" page 53 "An engine modification was introduced to give +16 lbs sq.in. manifold pressure at low level." -Refs to both the Seafire IB and Seafire IIC.

And finally...the original Seafire IIC in AH was correct, and had +16 lbs boost, it is not a 1941 Spit Vb.

*If there is a concern of over use, simply limit the Seafire to CVs only in the MA*, but imho it should have +16 lbs.

Thank you.

[Kev367th]

Squire - If its a 1941 Seafire it would have to be one of the few converted RAF Spits.
Doesn't make sense.

All purpose built IIc's had 16lbs boost.

The 1941 Seafires were all converted from RAF Va's. Vb's and IIb's.

So we actually have a Seafire that never existed, as all the converted RAF ones were Seafire Ib's with 'A' frame arrestor hooks.

Guessing it was easier to give it the same FM as the Vb rather than do a new one.

[Squire]

Well, my point is that the VAST majority of any Seafire IIc's would have been +16 lbs boost, even if there were some early ones with +12 lbs.

It should be as it was before, +16lbs.

In any case thats the discrepancy of the climb chart.

[Charge]

Is 160mph its best climbing speed? Did you test it with any other speed?

-C+

[Kev367th]

IF thats the case it makes it the RAREST Seafire ever built, hardly a representative version of the mark.

Considering only 110 Seafire IIcs were built with Merlin 46's (already the rarest version, the rest were built with Merlin 32's) they would have to be among the very first few off the production line.

Perfect time to fix them and give them the common Merlin 32 engine.
All of the original 110 built as Merlin 46 Seafires were retro-fitted with the Merlin 32.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Charge
Is 160mph its best climbing speed? Did you test it with any other speed?

-C+

160 mph IAS is the Seafire's best climb speed. Therefore, any other speed would not have produced a better sustained rate of climb.

My regards,

Widewing

[1K3]

Thank god I discovered that there's HUGE discrepansies betweem the AH seafire  II chart and the actual performance of seafire II in the game.

Imo Seafire IIc should be boosted again to +16.  Add clipped wing Seafire L III.  Seafire IIIs were made up the majority of seafire linenup in RN.