More Ponies !

[MiloMorai]

An example, the RAF used Meteor Mk Is, Tempest Mk Vs, Mosquito Mk VIs, Mustang Mk IIIs (D Ponies), Spitfire LF.Mk IXs and Spitfire F.Mk XIVs to intercept V-1s.  Only three of those could do so without diving to get overtake speed, the Meteor Mk I, Tempest Mk V and Spitfire F.Mk XIV.  All of the piston fighters on that list were running on 150 octane for that role.  This information comes from an RAF Mustang pilot who said he didn't know how fast the +21lbs boost Mk XIV was, just that it was faster than his Mustang.

Correction Karnak, the Mustang III was a P-51B/C. The Mustang IV was the P-51D/K.

[Die Hard]

With +25 lbs boost on 150 octane fuel the Mustang III's were more than fast enough to catch the doodlebugs which flew at 2,000 - 4,000 feet at less than 400 mph. The Mustang IV on the other hand was not fast enough, or just barely so.

[eddiek]

I think he means the line-up. Adding an early A model, a higher boost A5, and an A9 ought to do it.. An option to have only wingroot guns on the A5 (was a factory option IIRC) would be nice and even better if available with the higher boost option.

Higher boost A-5?  It's running at 1.42ata per specs as it is now.  Sea level speed is a mystery, 10-12mph short of speeds from test documents, but I'm sure somewhere back down the road someone already questioned it or brought it to HTC's attention.  Figure out where the sea level speed losses are coming from and the A-5 should be good to go.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190a5.html

"Following completion of Fw 190 A-5 serial production, brief trials were carried out from 30.8.43 – 1.9.43 of a Fw 190 A5 equipped with a BMW 801D engine operating at 1.58/1.65 ata erhöhte Notleistung. Charts prepared by BMW dated 26.11.43 presenting the results of these trials show maximum speeds obtained were 578 km/h (359 mph) at sea level and 680 km/h (423 mph) at 5.2 km (17,000 feet). However, the Fw 190 A-5/A-6 aircraft handbook issued in December 1943 notes the engine limitations for Start und Notleistung (3 minutes) as 1,42 ata with maximum speeds being 560 km/h (348 mph) at sea level and 660 km/h (410 mph) at 6300 meters (20,669 feet). It should be noted, however, that Part 7 of the handbook (Triebwerksbedien- und Versorgungsanlage) contains the possibility of the C3 injection with the higher boost pressure. By using the ÄAnw 104 the C3 injection could used for 10-15 minutes up to the height of 1 km with the A-5. It is also apparent from the Fw 190 A-5 Flugzeug-Entwicklungs-Blatt dated 1 November 1944 that 1.58/1.65 ata was not cleared for service use for this varient up to the date of this publication"

From what I got from reading this (and many thanks to Mike Williams for taking the time to gather and organize these documents), it was tested, but never cleared for use.

[Widewing]

As a side note to this discussion...

I would like to see water injection/ADI/All additional boost enhancements reflect reality. In other words, when the fluid or gas agent is consumed, that's it. No more. No recharging while in flight.

This would be separate from WEP time limits. If water injection fluid carried is enough for 15 minutes, you get three periods of 5 minutes.

Also, there was no override for WEP. You could keep engines in WEP until they blew up. If after 5 minutes, a reliability factor variable was introduced, pilots could use WEP for as long as they needed it. However, with the ever increasing risk of failure.

Is this feasible to code into the game? I can't say. It would not be simple though.

What about cooling down times? This is currently outside of pilot control. Yet, if we had control of cowl flaps, radiator flaps and oil cooler doors we could control cool-down time to some degree, with a corresponding increase in drag. As it stands now, some aircraft cool down faster than others.... For no obvious reason (at least to me).

P-51 radiator and cooler doors were thermostatically controlled (automatic), but could be overridden by the pilot. Yet, the P-51s have the same cool-down time requirement as the R-2800 in the P-47, F4U and F6F, which were only manually controlled. I can see why it is simplified, but it is extremely artificial.


My regards,

Widewing

[BnZs]

I think there is a very good reason why one is not able to over-ride WEP time limits in the game.

Some of these engines could probably be run at their WEP settings for *hours* without blowing up. Modeling an R-2800 to fail after 30 minutes on WEP for instance, would likely be highly unrealistic. A bigger concern was engine life and reliability over the course of many missions. Obviously this would *not* be a concern in AHII, since we get a "new" plane every time we up and someone else is buying the engines. So if both engine control and engine durability were modeled with full realism, it would likely be equivalent to just giving most aircraft unlimited WEP.

[Widewing]

Here's something else that I find over-simplified..

P-51D has 5 minutes of WEP before max temperature is reached.

Cool-down time to normal operating temp is 10 minutes. This is a 15 minute cycle.

What I find bothersome is that reducing power does not reduce cool-down time. It should as the engine is making much less heat.

After 5 minutes at WEP, it still takes 10 minutes to cool down to normal temp even with power reduced to 35 in/hg @ 2,200 RPM. Even if you shut off the motor and restart it two minutes later, the temperature jumps up to where it would be if I had left the engine cooling down at MIL power. This doesn't encourage anyone limit power unless fuel is an issue.

I'd like to see cool-down times based upon power settings, for all aircraft.


My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

An example, the RAF used Meteor Mk Is, Tempest Mk Vs, Mosquito Mk VIs, Mustang Mk IIIs (D Ponies), Spitfire LF.Mk IXs and Spitfire F.Mk XIVs to intercept V-1s.  Only three of those could do so without diving to get overtake speed, the Meteor Mk I, Tempest Mk V and Spitfire F.Mk XIV.  All of the piston fighters on that list were running on 150 octane for that role.  This information comes from an RAF Mustang pilot who said he didn't know how fast the +21lbs boost Mk XIV was, just that it was faster than his Mustang.

According to this test data... A P-51B/Mustang III running 25lb boost is significantly faster than the Spit MK.XIV running 21lb boost from sea level up beyond 10,000 feet.



This next chart shows the Mustang III still faster than the Spit Mk.XIV below 4,000 feet when both are running 25lb boost.




My regards,

Widewing

[Anaxogoras]

The last time I asked for more realistic engine management HT nearly blew a gasket.

[morfiend]

Here's something else that I find over-simplified..

P-51D has 5 minutes of WEP before max temperature is reached.

Cool-down time to normal operating temp is 10 minutes. This is a 15 minute cycle.

What I find bothersome is that reducing power does not reduce cool-down time. It should as the engine is making much less heat.

After 5 minutes at WEP, it still takes 10 minutes to cool down to normal temp even with power reduced to 35 in/hg @ 2,200 RPM. Even if you shut off the motor and restart it two minutes later, the temperature jumps up to where it would be if I had left the engine cooling down at MIL power. This doesn't encourage anyone limit power unless fuel is an issue.

I'd like to see cool-down times based upon power settings, for all aircraft.


My regards,

Widewing

 I couldnt agree more,and to add to this thedifference between manual and automatic controls might lead to players using planes with the auto controls.The FW's come to mind, having to control mixture,prop and cowl flaps could influence game play greatly.

 Of course I think making this a user option like stall limiter would be the way to go.The benefit of manual control could be as WW said,improved cool down times and thus would be a worthy task to master.

[Karnak]

It was a pilot comment I had read, and I very likely remembered the incorrect mark of Mustang, which I understood to be the RAF's name for the "D".  That said, the pilot in question also could have been in error as well.