Author Topic: Dynamic flight model? (Read 1079 times)

F4UDOA · « **on:** March 25, 2003, 02:09:34 PM »

Heya,

In "Unlimited Air Racing" Simm they have a dynamic flight model.

This means being able to modify certain area's of your A/C to improve performance. It has already been done so why can't it be done here.

Such as

1. Being able to remove external stores pylons on A/C to reduce drag.

2. Able to vary ammo load on takeoff to reduce weight.

3. On A/C that could do it allow overboost for short periods of time. This was common practice in WW2.

4. Being able to clip wings on A/C that had them.

In other words add variables to A/C to improve/Change performance within certain guildlines. Every change for the positive would obviously have a negative change as well.

Think outside the "Boxed simm"!!

Chairboy · « **Reply #1 on:** March 25, 2003, 02:10:52 PM »

All but #4 are already in AH, afaik.

(edit)

Let me clarify my remarks.

Quote

1. Being able to remove external stores pylons on A/C to reduce drag.

If you choose an Me-110 w/ rockets, you will get drag from the rockets. Once you fire them, you will still have some drag from the pylons, but if you choose on your next flight not to fly with rockets, there will be no extra drag from the weapons hardpoints.

Quote

2. Able to vary ammo load on takeoff to reduce weight.

A Lanc with 14K in bombs will have a heavier takeoff weight modeled in the game then a Lanc with fewer bombs. On a fighter, there are often at least two ammo (bullets, cannon shells) loadouts, each presumably with a different weight. If this is not enough, are you suggesting modelling this the way fuel is, so you would be taking off with 25% ammo as well?

Quote

3. On A/C that could do it allow overboost for short periods of time. This was common practice in WW2.

War Emergency Power seems to be the way this is modeled in the game. Is that adequate?

Quote

4. Being able to clip wings on A/C that had them.

By clip, are you referring to the racing practice of clipping a bit off the outside of the wing to get higher top speeds (and an associated loss in lift, increase in landing/takeoff speeds, etc)? If so, was this something that was actually done on the battlefield in WWII?

acepilot2 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 25, 2003, 05:24:49 PM »

I think we already have all of these, if not, most of them. The way i lighten my ammo load is actually get rid of it before i take off. Yes, if I have Jug with 2 500 lb bombs, and I only want one, I drop it on the runway before starting my engine. As it said above we have the WEP, too.

F4UDOA · « **Reply #3 on:** March 25, 2003, 06:05:46 PM »

Chairboy,

1. You may be unaware of this but when you jettison ordinance on some aircraft the pylons and the drag fom them remains. In fact even if you take off with no bombs or tanks you still have them on the F4U-1D.

Specifically the F4U-1D. I have confirmed this with HT and Pyro. Pyro says that as long as it is a typical loadout it does not have to be "clean". Just as long as it is close. This is not all A/C, just some.

2. I don't mean on Buffs, I mean fighters. Example again the F4U-1D has 2400 rounds of .50 cal on takeoff weighting over 700LBS. Even with 50% of that I have as much ammo as a fully loaded P-51B. So why should I have to carry an extra 350LBS if I am not going very far? The Jug has options most do not.

3. When I say overboost I mean beyond the limits of the Flight manual. In the F4U-1D WEP is 60" of MAP. Using WEP in AH means you have a certain amount of water limiting your WEP time but in reality you could boost with or without water to well beyond 60" without damaging a Pratt&Whitney. You could run it up to 72" for long periods of time. It is all based on temperature not boost limits or Water amounts.

4. Yes I mean clipping wings as was done for air racing. It was also done on the Spitfire, F4U and P-47 during the war for various reasons. Why not have the option in AH if it was possible during the war??

Karnak · « **Reply #4 on:** March 25, 2003, 08:27:57 PM »

I want zero length rocket rails on the Mosquito. The long rails we have now add a LOT of drag, even after the rockets are fired. For that reason I don't like taking the rockets.

Midnight · « **Reply #5 on:** March 25, 2003, 09:55:59 PM »

Related - sort of

The P-51D has no visable wing pylons for bombs/drop tanks.

So the question is, is the drag of the pylons modeled?

Actually, I was rather disapointed to see the new P-51D visually modelled without them. The bombs look kind of hokey just floating there under the wings.

addy · « **Reply #6 on:** March 26, 2003, 02:27:39 AM »

I can see the comments now!!! Everyone already yells about "spit dweebs" ( and yes I am one!!!! a spit is easy to fly yes. to fly well is a different story). Can you imagine a clipped wing MK IX or XIV!!! The clipped winged spits were faster, out climbed AND out turned most fighters it ever encountered

akak · « **Reply #7 on:** March 26, 2003, 04:55:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by F4UDOA

4. Yes I mean clipping wings as was done for air racing. It was also done on the Spitfire, F4U and P-47 during the war for various reasons. Why not have the option in AH if it was possible during the war??

Because those weren't options like fuel/ammo load outs but rather sub-variants of certain plane models. An example is the Spitfire Mk IXe, it had clipped but was just a sub-variant of the Mk IX. The pilot couldn't just tell his ground crew to clip off the wings.

ack-ack

Nilsen · « **Reply #8 on:** March 26, 2003, 07:28:06 AM »

Very true AKAK

The P47N had the clipped wings aswell as ALOT of other improvements.

Just redesigning the wing would give us a plane that never existed (maybe just an experimental model or 2..dunno)

fats · « **Reply #9 on:** March 26, 2003, 11:12:40 AM »

Designing an interface for something like this that would be extensible enough could be a nightmare. I mean once it is found that some Spitfires removed the 4th propeller blade to reduce drag or something even more obscure is desired that couldn't been foreseen.

// fats

F4UDOA · « **Reply #10 on:** March 26, 2003, 12:54:32 PM »

The clipped wing idea is just an example of a variable that could be used.

In WW2 if there was to much weight many pilots would remove certain items they felt they did not need. Many ground crews overbosted engines etc. In fact the Japanese pilots would fly without parachutes, take out what little armour plate they had just to get a maneuver advantage.

I think we should be afforded some of the same benifits if we are truely on a "tour of duty".

Why not be able to shed armour, fly with reduced armament or Overboost your engine when you need to bug out in a hurry?

SKurj · « **Reply #11 on:** March 27, 2003, 09:29:55 AM »

I say no to being able to clip the wings of whatever you want...

Just add new models with clipped wings... probably the only way it could be done anyways

SKurj

F4UDOA · « **Reply #12 on:** March 27, 2003, 11:58:59 AM »

Frankly there is no differance between a F4U-1 clipped or not except the wing tips.

The Spit had different models with and without.

The P-47 was the only varient with them but aside from carrying more fuel and higher HP could someone tell me one improvement in the P-47N that would be an advantage in AH?

Everybody want 6 different mods of the FW190, Spit, P-47 etc. I am just giving people an opportunity to do these things without waiting for HTC to give us a new model once every three or four months.

The fact is there were far more subvarients of A/C that saw service than will ever be modeled here or anywhere else. The question is do you want to try them or not?

I'm not saying put a R2800 in a Spitfire. I am just saying that we should be able to have control within historic guildlines of options on a given A/C.

BTW Addy,

Could you tell me how clipped wings would make a spitfire turn better? It would improve roll rate but have a higher stall speed and more induced drag because of the lose of the eliptical shape of the wing and wing area. And why would it climb better?

The question is do you want a Simm of revolution or evolution?

We don't have detailed engine managment. (Targetware)

We don't have Box Simm Graphics. (IL-2)

We don't have very many A/C to choose from relative to FA and WB.

What we do have have is a superior physics model.

So why don't we expand what we have (physics model) instead of trying to compete with Simms that are more eye candy than reality based?

SKurj · « **Reply #13 on:** March 27, 2003, 05:34:23 PM »

I just say new model because... I don't want to fight a clipped wing aircraft that I cannot tell is clipped wing visually....
There were also Spits with extended wingtips for hi-alt work...

Were these mods often reversed? was it a simple field mod? I kinda wonder if thats NOT the case with most aircraft...

Modelling the ability to "clip" the wings may also be much more complex than just copy paste the current model, modify wing sections, add correct FM voila...

Engine tweaks, weight mods fine... just when it comes to visuals I think ya gotta watch complexity...

SKurj

fats · « **Reply #14 on:** March 27, 2003, 09:31:58 PM »

SKurj,

what you see visually is piece of cake, switching to a different model would be like - uh - 2 lines of code. Developing a system for the FM changes is a different thing.

// fats