Something more realistic, less arcade.

[nrshida]

Spitfires should be very bad at it...

Why Spitfires especially may I ask?

[gyrene81]

FIGHTERS - with inverted restrictions ?  These are not Dodge Pickups - DRY SUMP, positive feed, oil tanks became standard military design in the 1920s. CESSNA 150s may have such limitations.    One of my old instructors had a Meyers OTW trainer (bi-plane primary trainer) that we did 60MPH inverted passes at 50 ft - straight down the runway with at airshows ... including approach and point rolling exit, we'd be inverted 2 -3 minutes at a time.

depends on the motor. if that meyers trainer had the old 5 cylinder rotary engine on it, the lubrication system is way different than the v and radial engines used in wwii combat aircraft.

[colmbo]

depends on the motor. if that meyers trainer had the old 5 cylinder rotary engine on it, the lubrication system is way different than the v and radial engines used in wwii combat aircraft.

The OTW did not use a rotary engine.  The production airplane had a Kinner R-5 radial.

[nrshida]

I did trawl up some information while researching the Spitfire Mark I fuelling issue recently that the Merlin engine couldn't survive prolonged inverted flight because of the oil system.

[MachFly]

Machfly: I agree it's the best but there are many areas it could be improved.

True.

I wonder if the OP is talking about the inverted push-up planes do for extended periods of time to stick stir their way out of a sure death? In THAT case it's been proven most engines cannot operate for more than a few seconds (15 seconds in some cases) inverted due to the oil starvation or some such. The oil pumps are meant to work in gravity-fed situations. Many (if not all?) aircraft have restrictions in the manual saying do not fly inverted for "X" period of time.

In that regard I think HTC could improve it a bit. It might cut down on a lot of the gamey fish-out-of-water manuvers, but it wouldn't stop short, rapid moves (i.e. "jinks" etc) that are under that duration.

I know Merlins could not pull negative Gs for long periods of time, but I'm not aware of any aircraft that had the same problem. It's not a hard thing to make, the Super Decathlon that I used to fly had a dry sump oil system and a 2nd fuel tank under the instruments so it would be able to pull constant negative Gs.

[MachFly]

I know the Mustang is limited to 10 seconds inverted due to oil starvation with prolonged negative G.  That probably pretty much goes across the board for WWII fighters. There really wasn't much need for sustained negative G.

Are you sure that it goes for all? Your right about the Merlins but I never heard of other engines have such problems.

[Chalenge]

In the MA these days the primary escape method is a vertical push and pull routine while simulataneously rolling and yawing. My question concerns the effects that would have upon the fuel delivery system and thus the fuel pump. If it cannot be done with a WWII setup as it was flown during the war then it shouldnt work here. If a failure would occur to engines or pumps or carbs during the war then they should fail in AH.

[Krusty]

I agree there. I'm against random failures, but if you CAUSE it to fail, fail it should.

Machfly, I've read similar limitations for a number of common engines in WW2 planes. As I mentioned the F4u, which shares an engine with F6Fs, and a couple of inlines I've read about had similar issues.


EDIT: I'd like to see the heat meter spike super fast as soon as you go neg-G... 10 seconds and it pegs red and dies, like you ran out of radiatior fluid or oil. That way you have a little visual cue how much time you have. Of course, time any plane to its historic limit (10 seconds, 20 seconds, whatever).

[colmbo]

Are you sure that it goes for all? Your right about the Merlins but I never heard of other engines have such problems.

No, I'm not.  I don't expect that the aircraft would have been designed/built with the expectation of sustaining negative G.

[Ack-Ack]

I wonder if the OP is talking about the inverted push-up planes do for extended periods of time to stick stir their way out of a sure death? In THAT case it's been proven most engines cannot operate for more than a few seconds (15 seconds in some cases) inverted due to the oil starvation or some such. The oil pumps are meant to work in gravity-fed situations. Many (if not all?) aircraft have restrictions in the manual saying do not fly inverted for "X" period of time.

In that regard I think HTC could improve it a bit. It might cut down on a lot of the gamey fish-out-of-water manuvers, but it wouldn't stop short, rapid moves (i.e. "jinks" etc) that are under that duration.

It's not going to be changed.  This has already been wished for by myself and others close to 10 years ago and HiTech stated then that it's in place for game play reasons and will not be changed.  I don't think he's moved from his stance in the last 10 years.  We used to have this feature in AW and it did force you to be aware of this limitation while doing ACM, wish HiTech would change his stance and add it.

ack-ack

[colmbo]

Warbirds has engine failure with sustained negative g, but you have to go quite a while for it to take effect -- about long enough for a low inverted pass. 

[RTHolmes]

if the oil starvation is an overheating issue the 109s would be screwed with the heads at the bottom (top if you're inverted)

for the other Vs I imagine its more of an engine life constraint with the big end not getting enough lube.

cant see how it would make much difference for the radials since the heads are arranged ... um ... radially.

 

[Ack-Ack]

Warbirds has engine failure with sustained negative g, but you have to go quite a while for it to take effect -- about long enough for a low inverted pass. 

From my time in WB, I think the P-38 had 10 seconds of inverted flying time before engine damage, which was the same in AW as well.

ack-ack

[EVZ]

It's not a hard thing to make, the Super Decathlon that I used to fly had a dry sump oil system and a 2nd fuel tank under the instruments so it would be able to pull constant negative Gs.

It seems inverted flight and negative G force are being confused here ... VERY different things ... as are Radial and Rotary Engines. Positive flow lubrication has been around for a VERY long time. NEG G -May- affect some WWII lube systems, Inverted flight doesn't. I've seen the porposeing escape manuver some have refered to here, it definately DOES pull negative, but it's a terribly ineffective manuver that get's them killed real quick. Not sure WHO is teaching this to noobs but I suspect their motives ???   

[RTHolmes]

... unless you're in a slightly faster aircraft and hes almost out of guns range and you want to extend and reset