New engine cooling scheme

[moot]

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

And also ambient temperature (it's cold up there), and air speed.

[Hazard69]

Agreed 100%.

I dislike this unlimited WEP supply. I'm no history buff, but I am an engineer. I'm fairly certain fighters would have had a limited supply of additives (methanol or water injection for e.g.) for WEP. WEP should be available for that time limit only and no more.

Plus I also don't like this auto WEP off business. I say let it run till it cooks your engine, like it used to in the old AH1.

Would add another element to a fight and make people actually look at their instruments once in a while.

[Tilt]

I think if work was ever done to bring benefits to those ready to manage their engines then this would be one of them.

Press button for more power is somewhat simplistic. Unfortunately it would mean creating different WEP mechanisms for differing ac.

There were a myriad of them from enriched fuel injection thru water addition to basic over rev. Even basic over rev can be more complex than first seen. e.g Full Lavochkin WEP was the Combination of over rev (2500rpm) and the reduction of drag enjoyed by closing off the engine cooling vanes/louvres.

Did wing mounted radiators on 109's and Spits have similar dampers/ louvres that would change drag coefficients?

[4deck]

Agreed 100%.

I dislike this unlimited WEP supply. I'm no history buff, but I am an engineer. I'm fairly certain fighters would have had a limited supply of additives (methanol or water injection for e.g.) for WEP. WEP should be available for that time limit only and no more.

Plus I also don't like this auto WEP off business. I say let it run till it cooks your engine, like it used to in the old AH1.

Would add another element to a fight and make people actually look at their instruments once in a while.

I agree 100% with that statement, especially the part of "Cooking the engine" I look at my gauges all the time, even in combat. Probable why I only fly a handful of fighters. Eitherway, you should know where your instruments are at.

[Denholm]

I definitely agree that with the idea from Widewing as well with the idea from Moot regarding ambient temperatures.

[Anaxogoras]

You guys don't remember what happened the last time I asked for more detailed engine management?

[moot]

It's not management.

[Anaxogoras]

Reducing power to cool the engine down is not engine management?  You're fooling yourself.

[Karnak]

Agreed 100%.

I dislike this unlimited WEP supply. I'm no history buff, but I am an engineer. I'm fairly certain fighters would have had a limited supply of additives (methanol or water injection for e.g.) for WEP. WEP should be available for that time limit only and no more.

Plus I also don't like this auto WEP off business. I say let it run till it cooks your engine, like it used to in the old AH1.

Would add another element to a fight and make people actually look at their instruments once in a while.

WEP in AH has always been just as it is now.  There was never a time when you could run it to destruction, at least not since before v1.00.

Also, not all aircraft used additives for WEP.  Spitfires and Mustangs for example.

[moot]

Reducing power to cool the engine down is not engine management?  You're fooling yourself.

Let me put it this way.  It's not management because flying only on MIL or WEP as we do now would make no changes in the cooling times.  It's just making the physics higher fidelity.  The same way increasing the lift points calculated wouldn't be management.

[Anaxogoras]

I don't like the analogy to lift points.  What widewing proposes asks me to do something.  To use hitech's terminology, I would push a button or move something, in addition to what I do now, in order to get the benefit of greater fidelity.

[moot]

It doesn't ask you to do anything.  Keep flying just like you do and there won't be any difference. 

[Anaxogoras]

You know, that's the exact same argument we gave to hitech when asking for true engine controls like mixture, cowl/radiator flaps, etc.  We said something like "make it so those who don't want to bother won't suffer anything," and the idea was still anathema to him.

[BnZs]

Anax:
Good lord man, you have to admit that "reduced throttle"="quicker cool down time" is a simple, intuitive, no-brainer relationship that anyone can easily get. It is nothing like having to fool with mixture, supercharger settings, cowl-flaps, etc.

But let me tell you guys something about absolute fidelity in engine modeling. It would have unrealistic results. With absolute realistic engine controls and failure modeling I could and would run an R-2800 for example as high as it would go for most of typical 30 minute sortie, land the engine I just wore slap out, and get to take off with a "new" airplane with a "new" engine to do it again next sortie.

[moot]

I'm just saying we ought to have engine temperature that obeys the laws of physics. The same way flaps do, or the same way losing parts like control surfaces does. It's not about adding management.