What Does this mean?

[Raptor]

In the New Version:

The static and low speed thrust (<100mph) of the P-38L was lower than it was supposed to be.  It's now the same as the P-38J.

Fixed some prop efficiency errors on numerous planes that gave too much thrust below best climb speed at high altitudes.

What does this mean for the engineering illiterate?

[Soulyss]

Not much flying under 100mph... maybe it just means the 38L's take off run was longer than it should have been.

[Serenity]

Not much flying under 100mph... maybe it just means the 38L's take off run was longer than it should have been.

Um... how would that coding error happen? Isn't there a formula they're using? lol.

[Chalenge]

I think there were a few planes that could literally hang on the prop when they shouldnt (vis-a-vis prop efficiency).

[Ack-Ack]

I think there were a few planes that could literally hang on the prop when they shouldnt (vis-a-vis prop efficiency).

Fortunately for us Lightning drivers, the P-38 isn't one of those planes that shouldn't be able to hang on its prop.


ack-ack

[thorsim]

Fortunately for us Lightning drivers, the P-38 isn't one of those planes that shouldn't be able to hang on its prop.


ack-ack

ummm define hang ...

[OOZ662]

ummm define hang ...

When held perfectly vertical, it will virtually stop in midair and stay there much longer than other fighters. It also has the ability to take an equal amount of starting energy and, when pulled straight up, climb higher than most (if not all) other fighters.

[Soulyss]

D'oh forgot about prop hanging.

[thorsim]

When held perfectly vertical, it will virtually stop in midair and stay there much longer than other fighters. It also has the ability to take an equal amount of starting energy and, when pulled straight up, climb higher than most (if not all) other fighters.

you mean in the game?

[StokesAk]

you mean in the game?

No were talking about the 38's preformance on Mars.

[OOZ662]

[Spikes]

No were talking about the 38's preformance on Mars.

I gotta admit I've been sitting here trying to think of something smartass to say, but this was good!

[thorsim]

No were talking about the 38's preformance on Mars.

Fortunately for us Lightning drivers, the P-38 isn't one of those planes that shouldn't be able to hang on its prop.


ack-ack

well you guys are confusing

[Stoney]

In the New Version:
What does this mean for the engineering illiterate?

Basically, propeller efficiency peaks out around 80% for most aircraft, at some point of its performance envelope--most of the time this is at high-speed cruise or close to maximum speed for the aircraft (more or less).  This is because no propeller is 100% efficient--i.e. it can't turn all of the engine power into thrust.  The propeller chosen for a certain powerplant is always selected based on a desired performance range.  Inside that range, the prop will stay in the upper parts of its efficiency curve--say between 60-80% efficiency.

At slow speeds, or with no speed on the plane though, the prop is not very efficient.  It appears that HTC made some corrections to the way they model this "static" and low-speed thrust by lowering the propeller efficiency curves for some aircraft.

I could throw the thrust and prop efficiency equations up if desired...

[StokesAk]

It means people will have an excuse to explain how my the 38L owns....