Author Topic: Wep and cooling....... (Read 3014 times)

Wotan · « **Reply #105 on:** October 14, 2002, 10:58:20 AM »

Heres cap info

Quote

More CAP event info
The new Saturday event "Combat Air Patrol" will attempt to simulate WW2 in a chronological order, starting with events in Europe and the Nordics 1940. The campaign will be constantly re-written to take advantage of new aircraft from HTC so each run through should be different.

CAP events will be at 6pm EST - 11pm GMT - 12am CET in the SEA. Please aim to be there early. The campaign will be starting Saturday the 14th of September.

The campaign

We have laid out the plans for 5 sections of the campaign, each simulating a year in game time. Each campaign section will be 4-8 frames in length depending on the branches so the entire war could take 40 frames. Scheduling for 3 weeks on, 1 week off as a break. We will also be pausing the event for future scenarios held on Saturdays, so it's possible that the entire war could take 1 year in real time to get through.

The missions

Each frame with lean more towards objective based gameplay than score based. The side COs will be given their objectives each week and it's up to them how they go about reaching them. We will not be setting any restrictions on gameplay other than the airframes available, anything goes. If your side CO wants to try an MA style furball then fine, but the side CO that plans patrols and organised strikes will probably win.

The Commanders

For each section of the campaign we want to have 1 pilot serving as country CO to provide some continuation. At the end of a section the CO deemed to be the loser will be relieved of command and replaced by another pilot. The winner will be kept on to lead his side through another year of war. It is possible we will introduce a second set of side COs when the Pacific theatre of operations opens up in late 1941, US and Japanese commanders.

The medals

The medal system worked out will reward pilots both for success and dedication in the CAP event. Each countries medal system is slightly different but sticks to the same general theme of 3 types of medals:

Bravery medals: Awards given for success in combat (i.e. kills)

Achievement medals: Awards given for reaching long term targets of numbers of kills, streaks without death, frames flown, etc.

Service medals: Awards given for long service as a pilot or CO and squadron unit citations.

Medals awarded are scripted, however, the CMs have the option to upgrade or downgrade an award depending on AARs of the event. For example, as a British pilot if you shot down 2 aircraft and landed safely you'd be awarded the Conspicuous Gallantry Medal, if AARs indicated that during these engagements you were outnumbered 4:1, your wingy was calling for help and you went back to save him, the medal awarded would be upgraded to a
Distinguished Flying Medal.

At present we have medal systems for the RAF, Luftwaffe, USAAF, USN, USMC, Italian Air Force, Russian Air Force and IJN. Each system differs slightly, for example the Luftwaffe system awards an Iron Cross for pretty much anything but only one of each medal can be awarded, the USAAF system includes more unit situations and medals for being best something or other.

In order to be eligible for awards please register at:

http://www.webtreatz.com/medal/register.html

Registration is not compulsory, however you will need to register in order for medal awards to be automatically e-mailed to you. If you do not wish to register for the awards you don't have to, flying in the event itself is still open, you just wont earn any awards.

Respawn

Instead of 1 life per frame we will be re-opening fields every 30 minutes for 5 minutes. As the event will be under way there is a distinct possiblity of some vulching going on so choose your start field carefully. If you are vulched then take off again from another field, provided it's still within the 5 minute re-up window. We are also considering allowing vehicle spawns at any time but this still needs to be confirmed.

Squads

MA Squads are invited to fly on the side of their choice. Once the first country CO's have been recruited we request that squad CO's contact the country CO and let him know numbers so he can plan accordingly. For any imbalance in numbers the CMs will try to balance things out with walk on pilots, however, in the event that one side outnumbers another by a large margin we may request a squadron to move to the opposing side. Squadrons that are integral to the country COs planning stand a lesser chance of being requested to move. Hopefully squads will not be asked to move and we can fill gaps with walk on pilots.

The lw has won every frame so far.

Nashwan · « **Reply #106 on:** October 14, 2002, 01:01:12 PM »

Quote

AFAIK the 150 octane fuel didn't arrive in frontline units.
I think one of the RAF-addicted players (Karnak/Nashwan/funkedup) said that the 150 octane fuel was used in the V1 interceptor units, but not over germany.
That was some time back in the discusssion why we just have an +18lbs WEP Spitfire XIV.

It was always difficult to find info on 150 octane. Few books even mentioned it, and none went into much detail.

However, Neil Sterling, who sometimes posts here, has been researching the official documents in the UK public records office. You can read some of the info he's found in the following threads:

http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm31.showMessage?topicID=535.topic

http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm42.showMessage?topicID=274.topic

http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm42.showMessage?topicID=211.topic

http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm42.showMessage?topicID=92.topic

150 octane was used in almost all British based fighters from spring 44, all US 8th AF fighters from summer 44, and all British fighters based on the continent from Jan 45.

hazed- · « **Reply #107 on:** October 14, 2002, 05:12:34 PM »

guys i know its tempting to go onto other issues but please stick with this cooling thing, I have to know one way or another if its right

GScholz · « **Reply #108 on:** October 15, 2002, 02:08:05 AM »

Thanks again Wotan. I'll be there on the 26th.

hazed- · « **Reply #109 on:** October 15, 2002, 04:04:02 AM »

just saw this web site on LA7: take a look at the max time for sustained 2600rpm and then tell me why it has 5 minutes of wep in AH? http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Engine.html

am i somehow missing something here???

so far we have been told in real life:

p51 had 3-5 mins sustainable wep
P47 had 3-5 mins sustainable wep
190d9 had 2-20 mins sustainable use MW50
La7 had 30 seconds sustained (2600rpm) ?

in AH

p51 has 5 mins
P47 has 5 mins
190 has 10 mins
La7 has 5 mins

so how are these worked out???

Bombjack · « **Reply #110 on:** October 15, 2002, 04:20:58 AM »

Quote

so far we have been told in real life:

p51 had 5 mins sustainable wep
P47 had 5 mins sustainable wep
190d9 had 2-20 mins sustainable use MW50
La7 had 30 seconds sustained (2600rpm) ?

Please can you point me to the references where we managed to establish these things as fact? In my limited experience, data as to actual WEP usage (rather than pilot's manual ratings, which are quite a different matter) are hard to come by.

You are aware that the P47 used water injection too, right?

hazed- · « **Reply #111 on:** October 15, 2002, 04:55:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bombjack

Please can you point me to the references where we managed to establish these things as fact? In my limited experience, data as to actual WEP usage (rather than pilot's manual ratings, which are quite a different matter) are hard to come by.

You are aware that the P47 used water injection too, right?

bombjack this is the WHOLE POINT, jesus how many more times does it have to be said in here.thats why i said 'we have been told' rather than 'we know for a fact'........

I DONT know any of this for sure as I cant find information on it all but what i have got i have given you the references for.Thats why im ASKING HTC to tell me one way or another how they set it. Whether they have set it to conform to a chart they have or if its just a formula like the 1 min wep = 2 min cool etc

bombjack how about i say to you the p51 and p47 have 3-5 minutes in real life and ask YOU to prove otherwise? As all we have to go by is pilots manual ratings they are a damn sight more accurate than pure guesswork.If it ISNT pure guesswork then WHERE can we read about it. Its a simple request.

like i said UNTIL i see information that proves otherwise I do not believe the 190d9 takes 20 minutes to cool down from 10 minutes of boost/wep.

why? because every book i have states the 190s could use 10 minutes of wep before a cooling period of 5 minutes(GM1)up to some 40 odd minutes total fuel supply.Another book and its quoted earlier mentions MW50 could be run for periods of 2 to 20 minutes.Now FFS its pretty simple, I give you references to my info and if you disagree you are supposed to tell me why and where your info differs or comes from.

I post info showing what is written on German training manuals in 1944 and you then say prove it is correct?????

PROVE ITS INCORRECT. im sick of this crap.

you say im wrong well prove it yourself.Oh and i want original data charts verified by the actual hand that wrote the damn things out blah blah blah. no photocopies!! lol you guys are hilarious.

lets turn this around a bit further shall we? how about you prove to me the P51D or P47 could use 5 minutes of wep and then cool down in 9- 10 minutes. ANY reference you like, as long as its from a printed book or old copy of a test report.Not some web page written by some x-warbirds player who has just typed it out in his spare time. If you cant then how come you are so sure its correct?

Bombjack · « **Reply #112 on:** October 15, 2002, 04:58:58 AM »

I think you need to calm down for a moment. I asked for the references because you posted that we had information about RL wep times for four planes. I looked up the thread and could not see actual quoted references for them. There is no need to take this personally.

Bombjack · « **Reply #113 on:** October 15, 2002, 05:32:41 AM »

For the record I am not disagreeing with you about the apparent error in the D9's WEP modelling. Read that again, I do not disagree.

I called you on the other figures primarily because they were unsupported as far as I could see - and such a table of factoids can often gather the force of myth if not immediately questioned.

Wilbus · « **Reply #114 on:** October 15, 2002, 05:41:54 AM »

Bombjack, I think not so much you, but overall players who don't fly LW planes much always say, when an LW pilot show a chart that is dated to WW2 time, every time there are lots of players who come and claim it to be face or just made up by the author then they ask us to show some more proof etc etc. Getting tired of that BS.

Not directed at you, just explaining.

Wilbus · « **Reply #115 on:** October 15, 2002, 05:43:45 AM »

As for HT, he still haevn't givven us an answer, he comes in here and gives us some code. This doesn't in ANY way explain WHY the 190 takes longer to cool down.

If HT come in and say, "we decided to modell all planes with a 2 minute cool down, it may not be historical accurate but that's how we do it" that would be an OK answer.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #116 on:** October 15, 2002, 05:52:24 AM »

Wilbus, it is not a matter of HiTech, he showed us how it is coded, but the values of wep temperature increase per second and no wep temperature decrease per second per plane is a matter only of Pyro.

Bombjack · « **Reply #117 on:** October 15, 2002, 05:56:22 AM »

Fair enough Wilbus. It's a fine line to walk in this sadly polarised community - on the one hand we want to exercise our diligence in getting to the 'truth' as far as it is available. On the other we have to temper that with openmindedness and the fact that many of the data we seek may not be available any more. With goodwill and honesty on all sides, I believe something like a fair resolution is always possible.

Wilbus · « **Reply #118 on:** October 15, 2002, 06:51:14 AM »

VV Bombjack.

And Mando aswell, I just want an answer from HTC "WHY?".

Willi Winzig · « **Reply #119 on:** October 15, 2002, 10:46:50 AM »

And now to something quite different...

Quote

Originally posted by hazed-
(...)
consider this, the 190s are already muted in the roll to avoid warping , and as such are a LOT slower in the roll than they really were.Other aircraft have not been reduced in roll in proportion to this and as such the 190s have lost a lot of their greatest asset.This i can accept but i do think its wrong really.
(...)

Is this true? Really?? Really true??? This can't be true. Tell me it's not true.

If it is true yet I want the turn ability of the spits being reduced to avoid warping!