Thoughts on the Current Flight Model

[Kev367th]

The only operational use that can be shown is the couple of groups of G1-0 who were using it for "operational testing".

Nothing has yet come to light showing even 1 K-4 used 1.98ata, unless you allow for "we can safely assume" etc.

Look at -
OKL, Lw.-Führüngstab, Nr. 937/45 gKdos.(op) 20.03.45

Go throught the units, see how many got the K-4 out of the proposed ones listed.
Remember this is barely 1/2 - 2 months before the end of the war in Europe.
Then ask yourself how likely was it?
Note the word 'anticipate', which is then skewed into the word 'order'.

Look at the earlier part referencing the D-12, yup that happened then.

They definately intended to use 1.98ata, but nothing that proves they actually did.

If your reasoning is just to get the final version, then theres no reason not to have a  -
21lbs Spit 14 (final version)
25lbs Spit 16 (final version)
Both of which have solid evidence (i.e. sqn logs), showing it was used.

Or the Ponys, 38's and Jugs with their final highest boost version.

Or how about a 25lbs Mossie?

[Benny Moore]

EagleDNY, that Kurfurst site is by Kurfurst, also know as Isegrim.  He is a practiced and accomplished liar.  If you really want, I can make and post a list of threads proving it.

[Knegel]

Hey Benny,

can you please stop that rubbish?? I never saw Kurfi lie, if what he do is to tell a lie, then you be a liar as well!!

When people write "we can assume" or "all know" or "its well known" its a generalation, but not a lie. Many people use this polemical technique including yourself. The Spitperformence testing page use similar polemical tactics.  People who are big fans of a special plane simply have problems to stay objective, all who read should know that.

For now i dont found a hint that the datas on Kurfis page got changed or are wrong, a assumption always include the possibility of a failture, if a reader dont consider this, its not Kurfis fault!!

Widewing,

The P-51B (not D) tested at the 1944 Fighter Conference is rated at 1,510 hp @ 67 in/hg.

The P-38L was not tested, but the P-38J was tested. 1,600 hp @ 60 in/hg.

Anyway, here is the comparison i was refering to:









Greetings,

Knegel

[Benny Moore]

Originally posted by Knegel
Hey Benny,

can you please stop that rubbish?? I never saw Kurfi lie, if what he do is to tell a lie, then you be a liar as well!!

Kurfurst said that Big Kahuna made up numbers and lied to Oleg Maddox to get a P-38 that never existed.  All three points are blatant lies, and he knew it.  He never posted a bit of proof for any of them.  I'll call him a liar if I please, and if you think me a liar also for saying so, then so be it.  It does not matter to me what one thinks who considers Kurfurst anything like an honest man.

I've also seen him admit that the Me-109K was overmodelled in  the IL-2 series, when talking to another 109 lover.  However, when someone else suggested that the climb rate be corrected, Kurfurst claimed that it was fine and he never said it wasn't, which was two bold-faced lies at once.

It seems that I need to do a miniature research paper on Kurfurst's lying habit.  I'll return with a list, compete with links.  Maybe that will convince you.  Unless maybe you also think it's okay to slander folks who have gotten data from books and wartime documents, by stating falsely that they fabricated thedata and lied to the developer.  Kurfurst is a wicked man, and I do not envy him.

[Knegel]

Hm, in what way he lied to Oleg maddox?? You say that, but thats only rumor.

That he thought Big Kahuna made up numbers was what he thought, thats not a lie. That Kurfi is particular badly biased when he start to discuss about 109s i saw, you actually behave in the same way regarding P38´s and US planes in general, but i never saw him lie while that. He assume a lot and he dont accept many good arguments, but i never saw him stating selfmade datas etc.

Oleg Maddox isnt a little child, he know rather good what datas he accept, i realy doubt that Kurfi, who dont realy count as P38 expert, is able to influence Oleg Maddox regarding this plane. There was others with much better odds (Better conection to Maddox or his FM maker) to influence the resulting FM´s.

Btw, my main point is: Noone should talk bad about someone who cant take part of a discussion and specialy not if there is no proof.


Greetings,


Knegel

[Stoney74]

Originally posted by Knegel
Btw, my main point is: Noone should talk bad about someone who cant take part of a discussion and specialy not if there is no proof.

Or better yet, lets get back on topic.  Start a new thread for your boost/aircraft/liar, liar, pants on fire debate.

[Bronk]

Knegel
Twisting info to fit your agenda is dishonest.
Like kev said he would present field testing data of 1.98 ata as "widely used".
That is being dishonest.

Sorry if we disagree on this.  But if a person can not be taken as honest, when they use good info this way.


Bronk

[EagleDNY]

Ok - this is my last go round on the 1.98 ata subject, since I think we are getting off topic here.  

Again, I can't dispute that there isn't any direct documentation where we see some luftwaffe mechanic noting that so and so's 109 has been set to 1.98 ata.  Given the state of the luftwaffe at the end of the war, it isn't surprising to me that a lot of gruppe level documents would be lost / destroyed as the units are being disbanded, destroyed, or retreating, and the type of documents we are talking about are about the last things most historians at the time would give a damn about, even if they avoided destruction as the units retreated.  

The kurfurst site has the one document that shows that the LW high command did issue orders to boost to 1.98ata on March 20, '45 - I did a quick lookup on the JG27 and JG53, which Kurfurst cites as operational 109K units that received this order.  

III. JG53, which had 109Ks, was operational until May 8, '45.
IV.  JG53, also 109Ks, was operational until April 30, '45.
I. and III. JG27, also 109Ks, were operational until May 8, '45.

Given, these units would have been in a sorry state in March - April, '45 but unless they are given to ignoring orders from the high command, they were ordered to boost to 1.98, and they were flying sorties after that order was given.  Did they obey the order?  I don't know.  Did they have C3 fuel to allow the birds to fly at 1.98 even if they wanted to?  I don't know.  

The 109 fans can't produce the volume of USAAF or RAF docs that show that plane type x flew at boost level y (aren't bureaucracies wonderful?), but given that we have an order issued to operational units, I think the inference that some 109s flew at 1.98 is a fair one.  

For the game, all that 1.98 means is that the 109K would be climbing faster and would have better acceleration and a higher top speed.  Frankly, having flown the thing quite a bit, the extra power is probably as dangerous to the pilot as it is to his target.  More engine power in that airframe doesn't fix its flaws, and it is easy to turn the 190K into a lawn dart already.

Can we find other rides in the game where the boost, flight model, ord loadout, etc. could probably be adjusted and improved - sure.  Does this mean that we shouldn't look to improve the 109s, I don't think so, but I'll leave off it here and start a 109 thread to pose my next questions.

EagleDNY
$.02

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Knegel


Widewing,

The P-51B (not D) tested at the 1944 Fighter Conference is rated at 1,510 hp @ 67 in/hg.

The P-38L was not tested, but the P-38J was tested. 1,600 hp @ 60 in/hg.

I'm looking at my copy of the Report of the Joint Fighter Conference, 16-23 Oct 1944 and there is no reference to testing the P-51B or P-38J, both of which were out of production at the time of the conference. At this event, they tested the P-51D and P-38L.

The data you have posted is from Vought, not from the Fighter Conference. I have a copy of the Vought report courtesy of F4UDOA.

My regards,

Widewing

[Charge]

"The 109 fans can't produce the volume of USAAF or RAF docs that show that plane type x flew at boost level"

It seems that there is no document showing how wide spread the boost increase was in USAAF. Benny claims that the conversion was easy- all right, but to what extent were they completed and when?

We at least have that one document from Kurfy which shows which units used the 1,98ATA setting. It would be nice to see such document from USAAF to get a picture how well the conversions were done since the 150 octane and conversion approval were released.

Not that it has anything to do with the fact that US planes could withstand the increased boost and that K4 could use 1,98 ATA given C3 and proper spark plugs and that is enough to me to make them run with those boost levels in game because technically they were up to it.

-C+

Ps. "Like kev said he would present field testing data of 1.98 ata as "widely used". That is being dishonest."

I dont think so. That is just his biased opinion. Doesn't make him a liar.

[Bronk]

Originally posted by Charge


I dont think so. That is just his biased opinion. Doesn't make him a liar.

That's your bias opinion.
My bias opinion he couldn't make an honest argument.

Bronk

[Benny Moore]

Originally posted by Knegel
Hm, in what way he lied to Oleg maddox?? You say that, but thats only rumor.

That he thought Big Kahuna made up numbers was what he thought, thats not a lie.

No, no - Kurfust said that Big Kahana lied to Oleg.  These were his exact words; "Kahuna lied to Oleg about the P-38."  Don't tell me that Kurfurst "thought" that Big Kahuna made up numbers.  Kahuna was very clear about where his numbers came from.  And Kurfurst didn't say, "Kahuna may be making this up."  He said, "Kahuna made these numbers up," and he said "Kahuna lied to Oleg."  And he didn't say, "There's no evidence that the P-38 ran higher than 1600 hp.," he said, "The P-38 never ran higher than 1600 hp."  All three points were previously disproven before ever he made those claims, all three of them are disgusting lies (two of them slanderous and libellious), and not one of them did Kurfurst provide one bit of support for.  The man's a foul liar, and if you think he's honest you are not much better.  I don't care if you think I don't have the right to accuse him; the threads speak for themselves.  There is proof.  I feel no reason to treat that liar with any respect and I certainly won't say nothing to his ugly accusations of a good guy.  Big Kahuna is to the IL-2 community what Widewing is to ours.

"Knegel made up those numbers for the Me-109.  The Me-109 never ran at 1.98 ata.  Knegel lied to hitech."  If I said that, would you still say, "He thought Knegel made up numbers was what he thought, thats not a lie"?  If someone makes bold, nasty accusations like that, then he had better be able to provide some evidence, quick-smart!

Kurfurst's statements were not true, he was given no reason to make them, and he gave no evidence to support them.  He repeatedly made serious unfounded allegations, not once backing them up.  You can't say something nasty and untrue about someone, never back it up one bit, and still call yourself honest.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by EagleDNY
Ok - this is my last go round on the 1.98 ata subject, since I think we are getting off topic here.  

Again, I can't dispute that there isn't any direct documentation where we see some luftwaffe mechanic noting that so and so's 109 has been set to 1.98 ata.  Given the state of the luftwaffe at the end of the war, it isn't surprising to me that a lot of gruppe level documents would be lost / destroyed as the units are being disbanded, destroyed, or retreating, and the type of documents we are talking about are about the last things most historians at the time would give a damn about, even if they avoided destruction as the units retreated.  

The kurfurst site has the one document that shows that the LW high command did issue orders to boost to 1.98ata on March 20, '45 - I did a quick lookup on the JG27 and JG53, which Kurfurst cites as operational 109K units that received this order.  

III. JG53, which had 109Ks, was operational until May 8, '45.
IV.  JG53, also 109Ks, was operational until April 30, '45.
I. and III. JG27, also 109Ks, were operational until May 8, '45.

Given, these units would have been in a sorry state in March - April, '45 but unless they are given to ignoring orders from the high command, they were ordered to boost to 1.98, and they were flying sorties after that order was given.  Did they obey the order?  I don't know.  Did they have C3 fuel to allow the birds to fly at 1.98 even if they wanted to?  I don't know.  

The 109 fans can't produce the volume of USAAF or RAF docs that show that plane type x flew at boost level y (aren't bureaucracies wonderful?), but given that we have an order issued to operational units, I think the inference that some 109s flew at 1.98 is a fair one.  

For the game, all that 1.98 means is that the 109K would be climbing faster and would have better acceleration and a higher top speed.  Frankly, having flown the thing quite a bit, the extra power is probably as dangerous to the pilot as it is to his target.  More engine power in that airframe doesn't fix its flaws, and it is easy to turn the 190K into a lawn dart already.

Can we find other rides in the game where the boost, flight model, ord loadout, etc. could probably be adjusted and improved - sure.  Does this mean that we shouldn't look to improve the 109s, I don't think so, but I'll leave off it here and start a 109 thread to pose my next questions.

EagleDNY
$.02

Is it an order though, or a document of what they would like to do?

Even he states it is proposed changes.

Given that the LW was having to re-assign non essential fuel (including training and testing) to frontline units to come close to keeping sorties close to consistent from Jan 45 onwards, where does the extra C3 needed for 1.98ata come from, considering the 190s had to have it.

Or does it make more sense to leave things as they are, were the K-4's can use B4 or C3.

Should add also - did the ever get the plugs required for 1.98ata?

My main gripe - He said it took the RAF some 2 months from a clearence or order for a mod for it to start happening (look at the Spit I boost thread), yet quite happily asserts that in Germany 2 months from the end of the war some 76 K-4's were converted in those 2 months.
Funny how double standards crop up time and time again.

[Widewing]

Continuing with the original theme of this thread, if we look at the AFDU tests of the Tempest Mk.V (found here), we see that its performance in the game is better than displayed in real world flight testing.

A second document, that sheds additional light on this issue, can be found here. Our Tempest pulls almost 10.5 lbs of boost. However, the test data shown in the above document states that this boost level resulted from using 150 octane avgas, not standard 130 octane. Thus, my question to HTC is: Is the Tempest modeled with 150 octane fuel?

In the AFDU test, the Tempest flown was the third production aircraft that used the longer Hispano Mk.V cannon and the engine never produced full boost. The document shows speeds corrected for the full 9.0 lb boost.

The charts below reflect 8.7 lb boost.





My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

Here's actual climb and boost data taken from the game while recording climb rate at 1,000 foot increments during climb. Also shown is boost at the same altitudes. Data is provided for full load and 25% fuel.



My regards,

Widewing