Thoughts on the Current Flight Model

[1K3]

If we get "perk performance" along with proposed "perk ordinance" players will see... (and if you have enough points you can select...)


+25 boost Spit XVI

+21 Spit XIV

150 grade fuel on P-51B and D

Higher boost P-38L

1.98ata 109K

Fw 190A-8 and F-8 with MW-50 for WEP

100/130 octane fuel for Ki-84, J2M3

P-47D-25 with 150 grade fuel (basically a P-47M)

[Widewing]

Originally posted by 1K3
If we get "perk performance" along with proposed "perk ordinance" players will see... (and if you have enough points you can select...)


+25 boost Spit XVI

+21 Spit XIV

150 grade fuel on P-51B and D

Higher boost P-38L

1.98ata 109K

Fw 190A-8 and F-8 with MW-50 for WEP

100/130 octane fuel for Ki-84, J2M3

P-47D-25 with 150 grade fuel (basically a P-47M)

It should only be a perk option if it existed and was in service. Not almost in service or not available at all (such as 100/130 avgas in Japanese fighters).

My regards,

Widewing

[Benny Moore]

Originally posted by 1K3
If we get "perk performance" along with proposed "perk ordinance" players will see... (and if you have enough points you can select...)

1.98ata 109K

We appear to already have a 1.98 ata Me-109K.  If this is so, does that mean you support it being perked?

[Widewing]

Originally posted by nuchpatrick
Widewing & All..

You guys are wrong, you need to look at this data again. Your Compairing a P-47C-1-RE against a P-47D-11-RE. Tho they are simular in design your not taking in account the motors of the planes.

The P-47C-1 w/2800-21 - 2000hp and no water injection vs P-47D-11 with 2800-63 - 2300 hp which also had water injection.

It would be like comparing a A-36 Allison V-1710-81 to a P-51B Packard V-1650-3(Merlin made 68)

If were going to base this on facts lets have them right.

I guess you're stumbling over the relationships the test displays.

That P-47C was tested against a P-51A. Thus, the 300 lb lighter (than the P-51B) also has 390 less horsepower, and therefore a poor power loading compared to the P-47C. Nonetheless, the P-51A out-turns the Jug.

Moreover, I'm not comparing the P-47C to the P-51B at all...

Go back to the beginning and see if you can find where you lost the trail of my reasoning.

My regards,

Widewing

[straffo]

Point 12 Stepanets and Roger Sauvage pretend the Yak 9T was able to dive at 850km.h-1 without any trouble.

It has been discussed in the past here and there was not any proof posted prooving the modelling wrong.

If I can get a hand on my caving helmet I'll try to post some scan.

[Stoney74]

Originally posted by Charge
Actually this seems to be concerning more flaws in individual models -not the flaws (or what ever) in current flight model .

Semantics, sry...

I think we were originally using individual plane performance in the game and comparing it to real world examples in an attempt to discover where the flight model may need some tweaking.  Widewing's original post shows that the last tweak to the model certainly changed the turn performance of the P-51 for the worse, much like the one previously developed the "last notch of flaps drag anchor" in the P-38.  We're not looking at higher manifold pressures from higher octane fuel, or correct modelling of armament, merely the aerodynamic qualities of the aircraft in the game as opposed to their actual qualities in real life.  Through this, we hope to determine if there are opportunities to better tweak the model to more closely approach the real life flight characteristics of the individual aircraft.

[Widewing]

Here's another one to the list...



Our Ki-61 is a bit heavier then that tested, but not much. In the game, the Ki-61 doesn't even come close to turning with an FM-2. They are nearly 80 feet apart in turn radius.

Also, this is one of those fighters that suffered badly after the last drag model update. Flaps add massive drag, but little improvement in turn radius, while turn rate suffers badly.

You can find a complete copy of this Navy test on this website.

My regards,

Widewing

[Knegel]

Originally posted by Widewing
Also, this is one of those fighters that suffered badly after the last drag model update. Flaps add massive drag, but little improvement in turn radius, while turn rate suffers badly.

My regards,

Widewing

Hi,

maybe they did start in the Ki61 to model the flaps in a more realistic way??

I hope they take the K61 flaps as base for comming updates.

Greetings,

Knegel

[1K3]

our AH ki61 has no problems staying with spits @ turns.

[Kev367th]

Spit WEP -

The 5 mins was only a guideline laid down bt the Air Ministry.
They go on to say that if the 5 mins is exceeded it should be reported to ensure extra engine checks are carried out.

Max use of WEP in a Spit I am aware of was a Spit IX running home from 3 x 109s - he ran WEP for 35 mins.

The 5 min limit in AH2 is an 'artificial' block.

[EagleDNY]

Originally posted by Benny Moore
We appear to already have a 1.98 ata Me-109K.  If this is so, does that mean you support it being perked?

We do?  That's funny because the boost guage in mine only goes up to 1.80

As far as being perked goes, how do you perk a plane with an ENY of 20?
There are plenty of rides that are just as fast as a 109K, and plenty more maneuverable too.  Perking, IMHO, is to keep large quantities of uber-planes from unbalancing the arenas.  

Having a load of 109Ks coming into your base isn't exactly the same as having a bunch of Tempests (or La-7s for that matter) show up overhead.  65 x 30mm rounds, a couple of MGs and no ordinance isn't exactly earth shattering.

As fas as 1.98 ata goes, there's plenty of data out there to support the 2,000hp / 1.98ata 109K4 variants, and plenty of it has been posted here.  

EagleDNY
$.02

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by EagleDNY
As fas as 1.98 ata goes, there's plenty of data out there to support the 2,000hp / 1.98ata 109K4 variants, and plenty of it has been posted here.  

EagleDNY
$.02

Theres plenty of graphs, the often cited intention to swap K-4 units to 1.98ata (end Mar 1945), but nothing ever showing even one was used operationally at 1.98ata.

Equivalent would be the intention to boost some Spits to 30lbs,
Intention -  yup,
Was it tested (there are graphs) - yup
Ever used operationally - no.

[Benny Moore]

Wow.  As I said, you Luftwhiners just love to have your cake and eat it as well.  You say of the Me-109, "There are plenty of rides that are just as fast as a 109K, and plenty more maneuverable too. Perking, IMHO, is to keep large quantities of uber-planes from unbalancing the arenas."  And yet you would want a 66" P-38 perked, although the same statement would apply.  There are plenty of rides that are just as fast as a 66" P-38, and plenty more maneuverable, too.

You think that there's nothing wrong with having a 1.98 ata Me-109, yet do not want to see a 75" P-38 (or even a 66" P-38).  That's called a double standard if I ever heard one.  1.98 ata was used less on the Me-109 than the 70 and 75 inch ratings on the P-38L, but you have no problem with this little-used rating being in the game but you balk at the thought of the common, officially approved 66" rating on the P-38.  That's hypocrisy.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Benny Moore
Wow.  As I said, you Luftwhiners just love to have your cake and eat it as well.  You say of the Me-109, "There are plenty of rides that are just as fast as a 109K, and plenty more maneuverable too. Perking, IMHO, is to keep large quantities of uber-planes from unbalancing the arenas."  And yet you would want a 66" P-38 perked, although the same statement would apply.  There are plenty of rides that are just as fast as a 66" P-38, and plenty more maneuverable, too.

You think that there's nothing wrong with having a 1.98 ata Me-109, yet do not want to see a 75" P-38 (or even a 66" P-38).  That's called a double standard if I ever heard one.  1.98 ata was used less on the Me-109 than the 70 and 75 inch ratings on the P-38L, but you have no problem with this little-used rating being in the game but you balk at the thought of the common, officially approved 66" rating on the P-38.  That's hypocrisy.

Usually the same guys who say if there was a 4 cannon 1943 Spit Vc it should be perked .
Probably would ask for a mid 43 spit XII to be perked also.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Kev367th
Usually the same guys who say if there was a 4 cannon 1943 Spit Vc it should be perked .
Probably would ask for a mid 43 spit XII to be perked also.

Well that 5 min of wep is SOOOOOOOOOOOOO unbalancing.


Bronk