Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Yeager on August 06, 2001, 10:57:00 PM
-
Pyro said in a post made on Jun 20, 2001:
"there are some issues with N1K2 flight modeling that require some further work and changes"
====
Pyro, I cant express to you how useful it is for me to come back and read this statement often. Ive just come from the main arena and the ACM moves this FM makes are just plain rediculous compared to all the other FMs (weight and flaps and other stuff notwithstanding).
The only question I would have for you is this: When would it be appropriate to remove an item from selectability in the hanger due to newly diagnosed errors found within the physics modeling of that item (and not returned to selectability until such time as those errors are corrected).
Its seems that if the N1K1 is truly broken, and everyone agrees that it is in light of the original post, it then should be sent to the shop until its fixed.
<S>
Yeager
-
Yeager,
I predict that you will be woefully disappointed with the revised N1K2-J. It sounds like you are expecting it to suck, I don't think it will. I think that it will be slightly less prone to retaining E, but that's about it.
I don't think the current model is anywhere near far enough off to justify removing the one good Japanese fighter.
-
It's so broken that the game engine even refers to it as the N1K2-J!
The N1K1 Kyofu (Allied: REX) is a seaplane fighter.
-
In all my prodigious niki complaining all I ever said was that it was wierd in the vertical, especially after pulling a very hard, supposedly E draining, move just before. This is all really needs fixing in AH. Well a possibly related issue is its climb ability at 28k, where it outclimbs P51Ds.
-
GRUNHERZ,
I'll bet the flight model issue is that it doesn't lose enough E in those hard E draining turns.
Don't know about the climb thing, never take it up that high.
-
who cares give us lf.ixe clip wing and niks will quake in fear
-
People have to have somting to complane about, now the Chog is on a leash, the next available target is of Course the George, Face it folks In every flight sime i have played people always complane about it, Why shouldent they It was a truly outstanding plane in many respects, and it's flap system was amasing, fromm all I have read on it the flight model is what I would expect it to be.
-
People have to have somting to complane about, now the Chog is on a leash, the next available target is of Course the George, Face it folks In every flight sime i have played people always complane about it, Why shouldent they It was a truly outstanding plane in many respects, and it's flap system was amasing, fromm all I have read on it the flight model is what I would expect it to be.
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwD6d1wJwXqupnHucOvBw9GkN78zmM3Z2MljEaalK0KYtKnWxOWC8G0mf3TiLu*G)
-
Yeager,
Exactly what manuver or maneuvers are you speaking of? While I am no fan of the NIK2, I haven't really had the same experiance that some others have had. Much like the Zero in 1942 the A/C held much mystery for me until I flew it for a few sorties. While it ability to turn tightly is no surprise it can still be beaten by Spits and Zero's. And it's level speed is no match for many in the MA. I have just never witnessed the UFO type manuevers that this bird is supposed to be capable of.
My own issue with this A/C however is the mythical 1900+HP that the engine produced. Never happened since the Japanese never used better than 92 Octane fuel and the 1900HP rating was at 100 octane fuel. Also the ability of this A/C to turn was never reputed to be that good. In fact there where several battles between the F4U, F6F and NIK2 where just the opposite happened.
This is the result of any simulation which is totally dependant on data and not on history. Not that the data would give you the wrong flight characteristics, but that the right data isn't always available. I would luv to see a fligth test comparison of the NIK2 and any other fighter of it's time.
-
Here we go again...I agree with F4UDOA if we take the Nakajima Ha-45-21 Homare of the N1K2-J and Ki-84 at the face value in the books. If you compare the output of the Pratt-Whitney R-2180 E series engines to the Homare you can get a reasonable comparison. Since both engines are of a similar volume this is about the closest youare going to get.
The P&W R-2180E is exactly 2181 cu in. Bore and stroke of 146 by 152.5mm. The same cylinders as the R-2800 but in 14 cylinders. Max RPM is 2800 and MAP is 54”.
The BHP performance figures are:
(Fuel is 115/130)
Take off
1650 SL
1800 ADI (this data comes from NACA Aircraft engine spec E-257 rev 1, P&W Twin Wasp E1, Dec 14, 1949)
WEP (ADI)
1800 to 2700'
1550 to 13Kft
MIL
1650 to 3000’
1300 to 16Kft
Normal
1400 to 6000’
1250 to 15.5Kft
Max Cruise
1300 to 8000’
1150 to 17.5K
The Nakajima Ha-45-21 (NK9H) Homare 21 is exactly 2186 cu in. Bore and stroke are 130 by 150mm. The same cylinder as the Nakajima SAKAE 21 but in 18 cylinders. The max RPM is 3000 and the MAP is unconfirmed.
The BHP performance figures are;
Take off
1670 SL
(1830 to 1970 ADI)
WEP (ADI)
1830 to 5700'
1610 to 16Kft
MIL
1655 to 9300’
1360 to 20Kft
Normal
1400 to 12Kft
1250 to 18.5Kft
Max Cruise
1200 to 15Kft
1100 to 21Kft
Remember the RPM are faster and probably the fuel is 115/130 octane from the captured A/C tests. Also the supercharger is made for a fighter application whereas the R-2180 is made for the SAAB 90A airliner.
As a comparison of an engine which normally runs on “Hi-Test” is the R-2800-B series is rated at 2100-54in (2400-56in ADI) takeoff and 1800-45in SL max continuous. With 91 grade fuel the take off is reduced to 1650-42in (no ADI) and 1380-38.5in SL max continuous.
There are other relationships which can be used to extrapolate (guess) at the power but I feel this should be close and maybe I'm on the high side...for what it is worth...
[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: kreighund ]
-
The P&W R-2180E is exactly 2181 cu in. Bore and stroke of 146 by 152.5mm
The Nakajima Ha-45-21 (NK9H) Homare 21 is exactly 2186 cu in. Bore and stroke are 130 by 150mm.
Theoretically given the same quality of fuel the Homare 21 should produce a better torque curve than the P&W due to its undersquare bore and stroke.
Could this partially explain it's ability to zoom and hang on its prop so well?
They don't give me much trouble in the Yak-9U as long as I don't get stupid and turn with them.
[ 08-07-2001: Message edited by: jihad ]
-
"I'll bet the flight model issue is that it doesn't lose enough E in those hard E draining turns"
Completely, totally DEFINETELY agree on this.
You can pull extremely high g's and not lose 20 mph. THAT is the UFO manouver. N1k actually ZOOMS up with any plane because the plane that zooms in front of it loses most of its E on pointing its nose upwards, n1k barely loses E on that. Thats about an 80-100mph advantage right there. Then this so-called 1900HP monster engine can hang on the prop, gives it the added ability to keep its guns pointed while the other guy's plane has had to turn around or zoom down. Pingpingping n1k kills target and lazily, torquelessly noses down.
And it eats a crapload of bullets to shoot down too.. HO it in a 38 with all guns blazing from d1.0 to d200 hits scored all over it and n1k flies away undamaged or at most with a fuel leak.
-
You HO?
-
Yea, he's a HO. Thats what Gijoe said once anyway.
xBAT
-
On the issue of reasons for the N1K2 "hanging on it's prop"...
Of the four forces acting on the airplane – thrust, drag, lift, and weight – thrust is the most difficult to measure or predict.
- Dr. John T. Lowry
It's a little more complicated than just comparing engine BHP. There are other variables that need to be factored in such as propellor efficiency and engine exhaust thrust.
Engine BHP alone doesn't tell the whole story. Infact THP (Thrust HP) is a more important indicator because we need to take into account how BHP is converted into thrust and the associated losses. Propellor efficiency plays a key role in this which then means that we have to model prop efficiency well. Remember that prop efficiency varies for a particular propellor for different flight conditions. What is the prop efficiency curve for the the N1K2? Once we get that right we might be close to estimating the amount of thrust generated by the propellor as it converts BHP into thrust.
Then we have to consider any other factors that add to the thrust as well such as engine exhaust thrust. How much thrust does the Homare of the N1K2 add to the total thrust through its exhaust?
All this serves to illustrate the complexity that HTC faces in FM's and the difficulty involved from taking "data" (assuming we can find the right data) and translating them into a FM.
-
Yeager i always read your posts with one thought in my mind and that is that you never did moan just for the sake of it in all the time ive known you.
I flew yesterday and met a niki co alt at 18k.i was in 190a8 60% fuel full speed for 5 mins or so before encounter.the niki climbed and i continued full speed toward him so at this point it is very unlikely that the nik is faster right?(possible ill agree but unlikely) well he was 2k or so ahead and a bit higher and he began to dive towards me(HO :)),as he dived i nosed down slightly to make him go even steeper.when i knew he was not going to get his shot i zoomed into a vertical climb under him, watching him streak past me.He was almost dead vertical and i continued up knowing he would only be able to gain back all the alt if he performed a steady reclimb keeping his energy(no hard turns) BUT no ! he reverses from vertically down to straight up hard.Im now a lot higher and leveling out at top of zoom climb(almost stall).i watch him come up thinking theres no way with such a hard reverse from vertical that he could match my height right? wrong. he keeps coming up and up until hes within 700-800 yards! i was so annoyed i didnt evade, i just watched thinking how is that possible? at engagement we passed at very high speeds...me going up him going down almost cockpit to cockpit.I was light on weight full speed 2x20mm not 4 etc.
I was so disgusted at how he was gaining i nosed down and broke for a furball to lose him.I refuse to fight that sort of energy plane now and ill avoid fights with them until i hear its fixed.
karnak you say yeager will be woefully dissapointed with just the E-retention being remodeled but id say that will be exactly what he expects.Its not the performance/guns etc I think its the unpredictability of its zoom climb and e retention that makes it such a sod to fight.other planes you can learn to read but to me it seems the nik is very hard to judge.it looks to be going slow but it will STILL fly up and bite yer ass.
Im NOT complaining! I left AH for long enough to lose that angry feeling i used to get when this sort of thing happened and i suspect this anger is what has made yeager post this.This sort of frustration made me leave,true im back :) but HTC lost $60-$70 because of it.
Yeager I asked similar things in my posts and just got abuse when all i was doing was asking for answers.
Just remember some of us DO read these posts for what they are, I dont attribute hidden agendas to them like some others.Theres no hate of a plane or a type of flyer/pilot.I see a pilot who i know knows his stuff commenting on an aspect of the game that can really spoil the whole enjoyment for him and making a simple request, which after yet another quirky encounter(above) i can only agree with.
<S> yeager
ive flown the niki and its not the perfect killer i know, im not claiming they are SUPERPLANES but i do think they are unpredictable in their energy state compared to all other aircraft in AH.Its those times when you think 'ok theres no way he can....wtf? he HAS!' :D
[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: hazed- ]
-
about energy states,
What's guns range? Let's say 3000 ft?
How much of a speed advantage do you need to keep a 3000 ft altitude advantage in a zoom climb? If you're flying at 300 mph and he is at only 100 mph, you will gain about 3000' to his ~300', provided he has just enough speed to point his nose up. He is still in guns range and that's a 200 mph speed advantage...doesn't matter what plane...the N1k2 could be a 109F. If you had a 100 mph speed advantage (300 vs 200 mph), he could still zoom to within 400m of you. If you want to be safe in such an attack, you need a 6000' altitude advantage, so you can dive on the target, starting at slow speed (~100 mph), so you don't blow too much E by diving beyond the speed that your engine can take you.
-
wells, then tell me why that does not apply to other planes.. particularly those with good zoom rate(infact, MUCH better zoom rates than n1k)?
I know the ONLY planes I cant pull a hammerhead on because of the inherent danger are the la7 if co-E or high E, the 109g10, other 38's and a high E yak or P51 or F4u. Any other plane WILL fail to get within d700 or if they do, will be losing control or stalling or having torque screwing up their aim. Just get a 109g10 and a n1k, have the n1k fly level until it gets to its max speed. have a 109g10 dive 3k higher behind the n1k, fly below the n1k, and pull up in front of its nose. Make the n1k do a HARD pull up and zoom after the g10. N1k will stay within d500 of the g10 and the g10 will lose control FIRST and stall, the n1k is able to maintain that nose up and aim without any torque problem.. the g10 will be spinning its bellybutton waaay before that.
1900HP engine on light plane.. much power aye, also lotsa torque. Not in AH though.
-
Copy that hazed, we read the same book here!
I was chasing down a N1k who was in turn chasing down a squad mate. They were level at 17k and the 51D was moving with a good head of steam (maybe 380-390ias) being caught somehwat unaware of the N1k while feasting on more mortal nibblets. The N1k wasnt catching the 51D but wasnt losing ground either. I started a shallow dive against the N1k from up aft about 4k out and maybe 2k higher. Having good speed (maybe close to 420ias) I was loaning out altitude and closing slowly but steadily on the N1k.
As I closed to just under 2k that damned thing looped straight up and over -pointing right at me in less time that it takes to fart. Ive seen this before so I broke shallow right and nose down maybe 10 degrees to extend out and give my squaddie a chance at the reversal. Nope... that damned N1k closed in at the bottom of the barrel after that 10g pullover and killed me with a sustained burst out at about 800 yrds.
Ive seen N1k oddities enough to know I should just keep to vulching them and no more. But I am hopefull to the last ;)
PYROs post does excite me with the possibility of bringing the thing (at least somewhat) back into the realm of believable physics.
The N1k has an anomoly (remember v1.03 vs 1.04). It gives many the impression of being slightly devoid of the normal restrictions placed on mass by gravity.
I salute Pyro for making the comment. It provides hope and insures continuous quality improvement.
Yeager
-
Originally posted by Tac:
wells, then tell me why that does not apply to other planes.. particularly those with good zoom rate(infact, MUCH better zoom rates than n1k)?
I know the ONLY planes I cant pull a hammerhead on because of the inherent danger are the la7 if co-E or high E, the 109g10, other 38's and a high E yak or P51 or F4u. Any other plane WILL fail to get within d700 or if they do, will be losing control or stalling or having torque screwing up their aim. Just get a 109g10 and a n1k, have the n1k fly level until it gets to its max speed. have a 109g10 dive 3k higher behind the n1k, fly below the n1k, and pull up in front of its nose. Make the n1k do a HARD pull up and zoom after the g10. N1k will stay within d500 of the g10 and the g10 will lose control FIRST and stall, the n1k is able to maintain that nose up and aim without any torque problem.. the g10 will be spinning its bellybutton waaay before that.
1900HP engine on light plane.. much power aye, also lotsa torque. Not in AH though.
I don't rope P51's in a 109G10- I generally try to force them into a turn fight (which I will win). Never had any trouble roping F4U's or Yaks- the LA7 is tough to rope. The P38 is really easy to rope..
Also- one of the very FEW things that the 109G10 CAN do to the N1K2 IS rope it. I've never had any success with dogfighting them, but I can rope them with probably 75% effectiveness. This won't work if the N1K2 is on your tail when you try to rope him, but you can go vertical on the merge (headon), and the N1K2 will generally not be able to get a good guns solution. It has happened before, but generally the 109g10 will outclimb the N1K2 by about 6-700 yards if they are co-E. You will nose over first, just chop the throttle and pop flaps- the N1K2 will still be pointed at you as you start down, but he will be going so slow you have about a 75% chance of getting him RIGHT as he noses over (from about d250-300). That is the ONLY way I've found to reliably kill N1K2s in the 109G10- the other 109s and 190s can't do it though.
EDIT- And to the original question- no, I do not believe the removal of the plane is justified. I DO NOT enjoy seeing the plane so often, but HTC IS a business- they would lose money if the removed the N1K2- and I believe they will lose money if they perk it as well, even though I do think perking it is justified.
[ 08-08-2001: Message edited by: Urchin ]
-
urchin, I went to MA with my squaddie and had a G10 zoom up with higher E in front of me, he with full wep. My n1k stayed nose up the whole way, if I had been shooting that g10 wouldve been dead when it nosed down and I still had 100 mph ...and no problem ruddering to aim I might add. I believe your ropes work because you had a bit of horizontal separation, what im talking about is a 90 degree climb. Try it, you'll be surprised.
-
Hum, thats interesting. How fast were both of you going? Also, how far away from you was he went he went vertical? I generally start to pull up around d700 on my FE (so maybe 500 on his). Generally, I dive below them while heading to them, and they generally go for the shot- maybe that is why it works? I don't know.
-
Tac, that's because you aren't supposed to just zoom straight up. YOu extend in a climb, zoom, and nose down.
That's probably why you keep getting shot down.
-SW
-
Read the above urchin. Fly n1k level till it gets as fast as it goes. Have the g10 dive on wep from behind, fly under the n1k and pull up 90 degrees in front of its nose. The n1k can pull an extremely hard G pull to nose up 90 degrees AND will follow the G10, always inside d700 range or so, the G10 will stall and nose down, the n1k will still keep its nose up for enough time to shoot and kill.
"The P38 is really easy to rope" interesting fact vs a plane whose zoom ability is renowned..and much better than the pony. :rolleyes:
[ 08-09-2001: Message edited by: Tac ]
-
Hum, ok- I have never actually dove under the N1k2 and zoomed back up, i usually extend away then zoom. Or rather, on those I never really zoom, I make a fairly steep (maybe 30 degrees or so) climb once I get about 1k away- if i miss the bounce. I only pull a steep climb on really slow planes.
Maybe the 109G10 couldn't rope the P38 in real life- but it sure as hell can in AH. I wouldn't try it with Citabria in the P38, but anyone else is getting roped ;-)
-
Tac, in that situation the n1k will never be pulling as hard as the g10. Given it is at level top speed, as you indicate, the g10 driver would be lucky to ever live (same situation with any plane over 300 top speed). This is not a simulation of actual combat, as a level n1k in that situation should be dead, or the g10 driver can't hit a stationary target anyway, so the confrontation is already decided.
-
Let me rephrase my intent.
If an object is released into the game and is later found to be wrong (i.e. in need of correction), and this flaw is having a demonstrable negative impact on gameplay: should the object be disabled from selection rather allowed to remain selectable? (until the next release or patch which is either weeks or months away)
PS. the N1K, F4U1C, P47D11, GV damage model, high alt ack, field ack, engine damage model etc etc.... all need further work imo. I try to remain objective by saluting HTC for an awesome, absolutely stunning job on AH yet I want them to remain sharp knowing that I do more than simply notice flaws and brush them aside (for too long anyway).
<S> HTC
Y
-
Yeager wrote:
this flaw is having a demonstrable negative impact on gameplay....
This is completely subjective. You may feel that there is a significant negative impact on gameplay but I certainly don't. I expect the N1K fix to be similar in effect to what will happen when the weight for the D11 is corrected. That is to say: noticeable but hardly major.
Whatever flaws exist in the N1K flight model, they bother me very little. From the number of N1Ks I see in the MA it is quite clear to me that a lot of players like the aircraft and would not want it removed. From the posts on this thread, it would seem that among the minority that read and post here, very few think it is a sufficient problem (a problem that we don't even really understand the scale of) to warrant its removal.
If almost everybody agreed with your statement that I quoted, then perhaps the problem should be dealt with precipitously (i.e. a special patch rather than removal). Apparently however, only a small minority agree with your position.
Hooligan
-
I see no difference between the AH n1k and the Fighter Ace spitfire/hurricane.
Fatty, the example is not a combat situation, its to demonstrate a weirdness in the n1k: lack of torque on a 1900HP lightweight plane. In combat, that n1k wouldve turned and zoomed after the g10..and still cought it.
-
Agreed hooli!
I doubt the N1K change is sufficient. However, some results from my work in and against v1.07 GVs really had me seeing redbluegreenyelloworange. Some bad things there.
As for the D11 and F4U1-C, I really am doubtfull that 300 lbs on the lightside is even in the ballpark.
End analysis: who knows, but one thing I am certain of: mathmatical computations dumped into software code are easy to screw up. Dont be surprised to see some big tweeks as the months (and years hopefully) allow AH mature more completely.
Y
-
All the example shows Tac is that if you pull hard enough when you undershoot a bounce, it's possible for the plane if it's max level speed to catch you. Even if you're well over 400, if you pull so hard that you're 90 degrees (considering you dove under, about a 120 degree total variation being extremely conservative) where the other plane in that case would have to casually pull at most about 60 degrees, you're going to be sitting as a target.
If you are suprised at the outcome under those circumstances or see it as illogical, then I think that explains a lot of those zoom infinately complaints.
[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: Fatty ]
-
take a n1k and pull all the way on the stick until its 90 degrees up. See how much E you lose.
Thats the point.
-
Tac:
1g pullup or 5g pullup? There are a lot of gray areas here. If you know a little about E-management it is pretty easy to beat 90% of the pilots in the MA in a Co-E fight with identical E-fighters. The guy who pulls less g's pretty quickly ends up with an advantage.
Prediction: When the N1K FM gets modified, its usage will be little affected. It will still be easy to fly and because it is a light aircraft with a lot of horsepower, its outstanding acceleration and climb will still lead to a lot of "suprises".
Hooligan
-
As Hooligan said, that's compeltely ambiguous. I can stall in a 90 pullup in any plane here, or I can have a gentle rise with no E lost in any plane here.
It has nothing to do with the experiment either. I don't quite see what is wrong with a 109G10 trying to pull twice the degrees a N1k is in a tighter radius at a higher speed, but loses more energy. In what universe is this incorrect modelling again?
-
again, pull as hard as you can on the stick on a n1k. see how much E it loses. I dont mind its acceleration, its cannons or that it eats unholy amount of lead to bring down. But when something pulls extreme G's with little loss of E, there's something quite odd in there. And that's aside from the almost nonexistent torque effect on a 1900hp light plane.
Fatty: When the G10 is 90 degrees it is going up at a faster speed than the n1k is on the horizontal. N1k pulls up real hard without losing any significant E (what? 5mph?)and follows. the g10 has more E on the vertical plane to begin with. Yet the g10 will stall and the n1k, who had less E still has its nose pointed upwards... hanging by the prop at 100 mph or less..with negligible torque.
-
Which is why it's not wise to climb out pure vertical. If the n1k was losing energy at a slower rate, it would actually catch up to the 109. Even if the n1k losing energy at a faster rate and the g10 starts out faster, it's going to close the distance as both planes decelerate at a rapid rate. Throw in the ability to shoot 900 rounds, and you have a dead front plane.
If you can't hold that much slower than 100 mph in any plane here (bombers aside (well, you can throw in TBM and IL2 also)) you need to look at your joystick spiking.
[ 08-11-2001: Message edited by: Fatty ]