Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: SmokinLoon on May 12, 2010, 04:20:41 PM
-
Not "wow" as in good, but in dire disappointment. Im not finding any charts that mimic the speed chart and performance of the new Mossi FB Mk IV. The previous Mossi had better speed performance!!! Change it back!!! :headscratch:
The new flight model is quite nice though. It is much more smooth in the dive and egress. Compression is not as much of a widow maker now.
The new graphics, etc all look great. Many kudos to Greebo and the others for giving the Mossi and very smooth look. :aok
-
Not "wow" as in good, but in dire disappointment. Im not finding any charts that mimic the speed chart and performance of the new Mossi FB Mk IV. The previous Mossi had better speed performance!!! Change it back!!! :headscratch:
The new flight model is quite nice though. It is much more smooth in the dive and egress. Compression is not as much of a widow maker now.
The new graphics, etc all look great. Many kudos to Greebo and the others for giving the Mossi and very smooth look. :aok
You should check your numbers again. The new Mossie is 18mph faster at WEP OTD. At MIL 2 mph slower though. Still a good deal.
-
You should check your numbers again. The new Mossie is 18mph faster at WEP OTD. At MIL 2 mph slower though. Still a good deal.
I did. I've been writing down numbers just like you posted in your thread. So far, I've got stats on near empty fuel w no ammo/ords and fully weighted down for the two models (old vs new). The differences are not what I expected to see. Supposedly, the new FB Mk IV has the newer engines. So with the airframe being lighter and the more powerful engines one could assume... better speeds at MIL? Not finding any corresponding charts is troubling as well.
-
The engines themselves were the same mark. The difference was the engine exhaust setup, so the overall engine package gave more thrust (from the ejector stubs) and thus flew noticably faster.
-
I am at work, so I can't comment on the actual game, but the old Mossie's guages displayed data for Merlin 23s or 21s while they had the performance of Merlin 25s with flame dampers.
-
I did. I've been writing down numbers just like you posted in your thread. So far, I've got stats on near empty fuel w no ammo/ords and fully weighted down for the two models (old vs new). The differences are not what I expected to see. Supposedly, the new FB Mk IV has the newer engines. So with the airframe being lighter and the more powerful engines one could assume... better speeds at MIL? Not finding any corresponding charts is troubling as well.
Weight has little influence on speed and the engines have the same power.
The speed decrase at MIL may be a bug, but the increase at WEP is plenty, and should be attributed to the cleaner airframe with no flame dampers.
Even if the decrase in MIL speed is right and proper, I gladly trade that for +18 mph on WEP any day.
-
do props not also effect speed?
-
do props not also effect speed?
Props shouldn't have changed.
-
Having never flown a Mossie for real, I can only imagine, but the Cartoon Mossie I flew tonite seemed much more like the ones I've read about. It can really move. Always felt slow in the old AH Mossie. This one felt right.
-
do props not also effect speed?
Props shouldn't have changed.
Ok, the props were visually modeled as the toothpick props found on F.Mk IIs and not the paddle bladded props on FB.Mk VIs. Minor, but would be nice to see it fixed.
-
Well, I have to correct my earlier statement. The engines did indeed change, they have a different altitude behavior than before:
Old Mossie
(http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-vreckova/moss1.jpg)
New Mossie:
(http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-vreckova/moss2.jpg)
Unfortunately the graphs are not the same scale, but the differences are clear.
EDIT:
I manually plotted the old curves into the new graph, just to highlight the differences:
(http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-vreckova/moss3.jpg)
green: old MIL
blue: old WEP
-
What's the new FTH alt, where WEP drops off above it? Seems to be noticably higher than 15k.
-
What I want to know is, why is there a decrease in MIL power on the new mossie than in the older version? Wouldnt the removal of flame dampers actually increase speed at MIL power? :headscratch:
-
Just FYI. The WEB based comparison utility is not updated yet, so its numbers still reflect the old Mossie. I am working on it.
-
What I want to know is, why is there a decrease in MIL power on the new mossie than in the older version? Wouldnt the removal of flame dampers actually increase speed at MIL power? :headscratch:
I am still working on a detailed post. Other than at 5,000ft, MIL speeds are almost exactly the same between the old Mossie and the new Mossie. Why? Well, we don't know if the old MIL speeds were based on a dampered or undampered Mosquito, remember, it was a hybrid model.
I am puzzled why the MIL speed of the Mossie is different at 5,000ft though. I almost suspect a typo in the model is doing it. Here is what I have so far, for speed tests, all tests done by acceleration to speed, not deceleration, 50% fuel, no ordnance or drop tanks, overload ammo, fuel burn set to 0.001:
100ft:
MIL: New: 319mph Old: 320mph
WEP: New: 357mph Old: 338mph
5,000ft:
MIL: New: 334mph Old: 347mph
WEP: New: 374mph Old: 363mph
12,000ft:
MIL: New: 361mph Old: 357mph
WEP: New: 384mph Old: 376mph
13,000ft:
MIL: New: 363mph Old: 362mph
WEP: New: 386mph Old: 380mph
-
I am puzzled why the MIL speed of the Mossie is different at 5,000ft though.
It seems the old Mossie did gain TAS faster at increasing altitudes than the new one. It also looks like that the new model's supercharger's first stage has a higher FTH than the old ones.
-
It seems the old Mossie did gain TAS faster at increasing altitudes than the new one. It also looks like that the new model's supercharger's first stage has a higher FTH than the old ones.
I'll need to do more tests, but my charts in books put the Merlin 25's FTH at 13,000ft, which is why I tested it there. Got higher speeds even though boost wasn't hitting +18lbs once I got over 12,000ft. Boost in the old Mossie was almost entirely disassociated from actual performance, so I ignore it.
Also note that the new Mossie's MIL starts out the same, well, 1mph slower, and ends up slightly faster. The dip at 5,000ft is a dip.
-
Does anyone have handy the weight of the old Mossi as tested for speed/climb? The new model is lighter... but I cant find the exact figure for teh old model. I've misplaced that sticky note. :)
-
Does anyone have handy the weight of the old Mossi as tested for speed/climb? The new model is lighter... but I cant find the exact figure for teh old model. I've misplaced that sticky note. :)
If you check Boozeman's post he listes the weights old and new! :aok
:salute
-
If you check Boozeman's post he listes the weights old and new! :aok
:salute
But is that the weight at what the old Mossi was rated for the speed/climb charts? I am under the impression that Boozeman's data is controlled for his testing.
-
I have the old chart saved at home. I can answer when I get home, but that will be about five hours from now.
-
I have the old chart saved at home. I can answer when I get home, but that will be about five hours from now.
The old speed/climb charts do not show the weights, at least the one I have printed off from the trainer's website.
-
I also have a copy of AH 2.18.8 that I have been using for testing purposes. I can get you any weight you like, just tell me the configuration.
I recall the original charts were at 22,221lbs, 100% fuel and 2,000lbs of bombs.
-
From AHWiki:
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/1/1b/Mossie6spd.jpg)(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/a/a4/Mossie6clmb.jpg)
-
The Mossie has a positive K/D ratio for the first time that I have ever seen:
Mosquito Mk VI: Kills: 2051 Deaths: 1904 Kill/Death Ratio: 1.08
-
The Mossie has a positive K/D ratio for the first time that I have ever seen:
Mosquito Mk VI: Kills: 2051 Deaths: 1904 Kill/Death Ratio: 1.08
maybe cuz the good pilots started flying it :D :P
-
maybe cuz the good pilots started flying it :D :P
That's gonna leave a mark.
Ya b*s***d.
:D
-
I'll need to do more tests, but my charts in books put the Merlin 25's FTH at 13,000ft, which is why I tested it there. Got higher speeds even though boost wasn't hitting +18lbs once I got over 12,000ft. Boost in the old Mossie was almost entirely disassociated from actual performance, so I ignore it.
Also note that the new Mossie's MIL starts out the same, well, 1mph slower, and ends up slightly faster. The dip at 5,000ft is a dip.
Actually, it's not just a dip at 5000 ft. The difference is there form SL all the way up to 12 kft. The gap is widest at 8.5k, then gets narrower and at 12-13 k the speeds are almost identical.
North of 13k the gap widens again, and at 15k there is again a clear advantage of almost 20 mph for the old Mossie. Unfortunatly the new graphs do not go above 15k, it would be interesting to see how the performance is at higher altitudes.
-
Does anyone have handy the weight of the old Mossi as tested for speed/climb? The new model is lighter... but I cant find the exact figure for teh old model. I've misplaced that sticky note. :)
The new model is lighter indeed, but those 800 lbs will only make a minor difference on an 18000 lbs aircraft.
Actually, on MIL the climbrates have decreased by about 10%, on WEP they got a tiny bit better. This will vary at different altitudes though.
-
Boozeman, at sea level the difference is 1mph. At 5,000ft it is 13mph. At 12,000ft it is 4mph in favor of the new one. At 13,000ft it is 2mph in favor of the new one.
-
Boozeman, at sea level the difference is 1mph. At 5,000ft it is 13mph. At 12,000ft it is 4mph in favor of the new one. At 13,000ft it is 2mph in favor of the new one.
Your testing involves %50 fuel, no ords, etc. Does the chart and actual flight performance match up when the chart weights are the same? I'll do some more testing to find out.
I'm still having a difficult time accepting the new Mossi's speed/climb chart as accurate. There is much evidence pointing to a faster Mossi, not a slower one. :frown:
-
My testing is 50% fuel and no ordnance for both the new and old ones. I still have AH v2.18 in another folder so that I can test both of them.
Also, keep in mind that all the charts Sherf and I worked on were WEP performance. It is entirely possible that the old Mossie's MIL was modeled with ejector stacks and only its WEP was being hampered by flame dampers.
The other thing I am having some trouble with is climb rates. Even when I have my speed at 170mph in autolevel and then switch to autospeed (what most think of as autoclimb) and go to +18, 3000rpm it doesn't smoothly hit maximum climbrate. It spikes to over 4,000fpm, both new and old Mossies, before oscillating above and below 3400fpm on the new or 3300fpm on the old one, eventually settling on about those speeds.
This report suggests the climb on WEP should be a bit better:
ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO. 74 on TACTICAL TRIALS - MOSQUITO VI
........
6. The climb has also improved considerably at full power so that the Mosquito can pull up from low level into a cloud 2,000 ft. above it in less than 30 seconds from fast cruising. Near the ground the rate was approximately 3,800 ft. per minute in a steady climb.
........
-
So the 'dog-leg' ejector stacks keep the ex gasses from the rad intakes?
-
Having never flown a Mossie for real, I can only imagine, but the Cartoon Mossie I flew tonite seemed much more like the ones I've read about. It can really move. Always felt slow in the old AH Mossie. This one felt right.
Agreed
-
I also have a copy of AH 2.18.8 that I have been using for testing purposes. I can get you any weight you like, just tell me the configuration.
I recall the original charts were at 22,221lbs, 100% fuel and 2,000lbs of bombs.
Could you please verify weights on the old Mossi at 25/50/75/100 fuel, w no ords??? Thanks!
-
Sure, I get off work in 2 minutes. I'll do it when I get home.
-
AH v2.18.8, Mosquito Mk VI, overload ammunition, no ordnance weightsL
25%: 17,913lbs
50%: 18,727lbs
75%: 19,541lbs
100%: 20,354lbs
-
So the 'dog-leg' ejector stacks keep the ex gasses from the rad intakes?
And away from the leading edge of the wing.
-
Thanks for posting the fuel weights. :)
The only way I am able to replicate the new Mossi's given weight for the speed and climb charts it to take %100 fuel and the 50 gallon DT's.
Karnak, could you see what it takes to replicate the previous Mossi's 22,221lbs weight for their speed and climb charts? If they did use 2000 lbs of ord, the discrepancy between the 2 versions is even higher than what is listed.
EDIT:
btw... there must be a decent jaunt in the speed performance chart from 15k to 20k, Im trying to get the Mossi to settle into a speed at 20k. So far it seems to be 376mph TAS with a weight of 17,752 lbs. I lifted from the 20k field, went level flight with %50 fuel, and watched. The best WEP performance I could reach was 384 mph TAS, weight was 17,610 lbs.
I did the same for 16,500 alt as well. All recorded speeds were reached via acceleration.
16.5k alt @ 17,733lbs: MIL 364mph TAS, WEP 386mph TAS
20k alt @ 17,752lbs: MIL 376 TAS, WEP 385mph TAS
-
I have no problems with the Mosquito and have always liked it. The performance has always good, but this latest re-vamp has me enjoying it more.
-
I hope we get an updated performance chart on the scores and stats page soon.