Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: olds442 on May 06, 2011, 09:22:23 PM
-
can we get real gauges?
when your on the ground the manifold pressrue is not at 0 in because at sea level the "pressrue" is around 30 in of Mercury. and when you start your engine that number drops why? because of this think of a engine as a "air pump" and that air pump needs air (of course) when your throttle valve is closed, there is a vaccum when the piston goes down.
when you give the plane power the manifold goes back up because you open your throttle valve the vaccum force goes down and down and down these may change with alt
look at this video to help >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C49vFMcdr5o&feature=related skip to around 1:44 to see what i mean?
<S>
-
That was pretty good info.
When you're starting the engine you watch MAP....if it starts to go back up you "tickle" the primer...if MAP drops and stays low it's running.
It's not uncommon to see different MAP or RPM if the throttle levers are matched up. In the B-17 there is a LOT of cable and pulleys between the throttle lever and the engine...it is very time consuming to keep the throttle levers all perfectly matched up.
One check that is done to test engine performance is something called a "Field Baro Check". You bring MAP up to whatever field barometric pressure (frankly, we just used 30 inches) and then check RPM. It's been a while since I've done one, I think it's 2200 RPM your looking for. If you're getting less RPM than called for you're not getting the power you expect from the engine.
With the Wright 1820s on the B-17 if you have a bad cylinder you'll know it. It'll pop and fart and run rough. Tooling along one day and felt a shake. ?? We started looking around, figured out it was #1...you could see the cowling shudder. We're all thinking we'll probably have to shut the engine down when it made the decision for us -- big ball of fire out of the cowling followed by lots of smoke and vibration. Shut it down, feathered the prop and found a place without a crosswind to land. The #1 cylinder head had departed the cylinder.
With the PW 1830s on the B-24 it was harder to tell if you'd lost a cylinder. Took off out of West Yellowstone and when we did the wing check (after gear up look out at the wing/engines and look for fire, smoke, oil or anything else bad) the copilot noticed a little smoke from #4. We eased the power back a bit and the smoke lessened -- we thought we probably had a push tube O-ring leaking oil causing the smoke so we continued the flight. Upon landing the ground crew told us "something didn't sound right". When I pulled the bottom cowling piece off I noticed a piece of piston ring about 1/2 inch long --- Hmmmm. Grabbed a ladder and climbed up to take a peak and discovered I could look right through top cylinder -- the head had seperated. It was running smooth and I didn't notice any power loss from the engine during our 30 minute flight.
Round engines are fun.
-
why change/spend time coading something that doesn't really affect the airplane. I would rather they spend the coading time to stop the bombs from falling on negative g's or while the airplanes are upside down. same for the c-47's. I dont think paratroopers were able to jump while the c47 was spinning around with only 1 wing and no tail. on second thought, i would like to see the troops falling out when the tail is missing :).
semp
-
-1 I dont have 4 throtels to compensate for the one "week engine" .... And there are SOOOOOOOOOOOO many things that NEED to be added like the PBY
-
why change/spend time coading something that doesn't really affect the airplane. I would rather they spend the coading time to stop the bombs from falling on negative g's or while the airplanes are upside down. same for the c-47's. I dont think paratroopers were able to jump while the c47 was spinning around with only 1 wing and no tail. on second thought, i would like to see the troops falling out when the tail is missing :).
semp
lol, the things I see guys doing in those C-47's. The Paratroopers inside the plane wouldn't even be able to get to the door much less exit the plane alive. Also, I'm no Jumpmaster but I think speeds in excess of 200mph are a little fast for airborne operations :uhoh I also think 800 AGL is a little higher than what is actually required in combat, and as I understand the higher the drop speed the lower the drop alt can be. My lazy Googling has failed to turn up any good data from WWII but I found this page below that supports what little has stuck in my head about how we do it today:
https://rdl.train.army.mil/soldierPortal/atia/adlsc/view/public/10629-1/FM/3-21.220/chap15.htm
I guess so long as no excess G's are pulled during the jump and the speed is more reasonable I'd be happy enough.
/hijack
-
-1 I dont have 4 throtels to compensate for the one "week engine" .... And there are SOOOOOOOOOOOO many things that NEED to be added like the PBY
when did i say there was week engine?
EDIT: if your talking about the video i just ment look at the MANIFOLD part of it not the week eng and etc.
oh and ment go to 1:00 in the video not 1:44 my bad...
-
I'm no Jumpmaster but I think speeds in excess of 200mph are a little fast for airborne operations
I'll ask my brother, or maybe some of our resident Rangers can enlighten us... I know my bro did quite a few jumps from C-141's when he was with 3rd Rangers (almost 20 years ago, where does the time go), and said the 141 didn't have the ability to "get slow" like the C-130's or C-17's...... jumping from the door of a C-141 involved approaching the door opening and almost literally being sucked out. It may not have been 200mph but I remember him recounting that it was pretty damm fast, a lot faster than they were used to.
-
I'll ask my brother, or maybe some of our resident Rangers can enlighten us... I know my bro did quite a few jumps from C-141's when he was with 3rd Rangers (almost 20 years ago, where does the time go), and said the 141 didn't have the ability to "get slow" like the C-130's or C-17's...... jumping from the door of a C-141 involved approaching the door opening and almost literally being sucked out. It may not have been 200mph but I remember him recounting that it was pretty damm fast, a lot faster than they were used to.
ok stop with the hijacking
-
ok stop with the hijacking
Oh dear lord..... whatever. :huh
By all means, continue with the completely pointless thread about something that means absolutely zero to the playability of the game, on a subject that has been discussed many times.....
How about next give us a thread complaining about how the compass in AH works backwards from a real one in an aircraft.
I apologize. I forgot that you owned this thread. :rolleyes:
-
Oh dear lord..... whatever. :huh
By all means, continue with the completely pointless thread about something that means absolutely zero to the playability of the game, on a subject that has been discussed many times.....
How about next give us a thread complaining about how the compass in AH works backwards from a real one in an aircraft.
I apologize. I forgot that you owned this thread. :rolleyes:
you know there is rule # 2 thats why. it happens with all threads now hjacked by the 4th or 5th post sad very sad
EDIT: your right guys we don't need updated planes i mean what dose it do to help game play right! and why advace graphics doesn't help me shoot people, and who gives about skins!
and you say this will do nothing to game play well it will
i have a book that has B17 power ratings and for the best fuel range but it useless because full power should be around 29in of mercury but in game its around 50
-
you know there is rule # 2 thats why. it happens with all threads now hjacked by the 4th or 5th post sad very sad
There are also rules #3 and #5 that you are violating, Mr. BBS Thread Nanny. I was only responding to someone else's comments concerning aircraft performance in-game and the relative value of this wish.
EDIT: your right guys we don't need updated planes i mean what dose it do to help game play right!
...snip...
and you say this will do nothing to game play well it will
What the guage on the instrument panel displays has ZERO effect on how they have modelled the engine and aircraft performance. If they were to make the change you have requested today, the aircraft will still fly EXACTLY as they did before, the only thing that will have changed is the guage on the IP will react differently to throttle inputs.
-
There are also rules #3 and #5 that you are violating, Mr. BBS Thread Nanny. I was only responding to someone else's comments concerning aircraft performance in-game and the relative value of this wish.
What the guage on the instrument panel displays has ZERO effect on how they have modelled the engine and aircraft performance. If they were to make the change you have requested today, the aircraft will still fly EXACTLY as they did before, the only thing that will have changed is the guage on the IP will react differently to throttle inputs.
i know this but 20in of mercury is diffrent in game than in RL so my fuel range and power book is useless
-
i know this but 20in of mercury is diffrent in game than in RL so my fuel range and power book is useless
OK, I got it... you don't necessarily want the aircraft power modelling changed because you feel there is a discrepancy in the performance based on manifoild pressures not being in-game as they are in real life, as much as you just want the guage to just read in a more realistic/accurate manner so that you can use a chart from your book to find optimal power settings for fuel economy....
:aok
Still, pretty minimal importance. Of all of the thingsthat need doing in this game, I'd say this should be a few hundred down the list, but that's just my opinion.
Try going offline with your chart, a B-17, and the E6B and modify your chart's numbers to reflect the in-game B-17. Then you can sell it to other bomber dweebs! :rofl :aok
-
i know this but 20in of mercury is diffrent in game than in RL so my fuel range and power book is useless
You are incorrect fuel burn rates & speeds will match real world settings per the gauges.
All you are asking for is simply for the gauge to read ambient when prop is not turning. :rolleyes: Next you would be asking for it to change as the engine is starting and sputtering. Then to change with feathered props and changes in altitudes so it measures atmospheric.
All of which have zero impact on plane performance or game play.
HiTech
-
it useless because full power should be around 29in of mercury
A turbo-supercharged engine that can only get to ambient air pressure?
Sounds legit
-
A turbo-supercharged engine that can only get to ambient air pressure?
Sounds legit
thats with turbos and surper chargers off
-
You are incorrect fuel burn rates & speeds will match real world settings per the gauges.
All you are asking for is simply for the gauge to read ambient when prop is not turning. :rolleyes: Next you would be asking for it to change as the engine is starting and sputtering. Then to change with feathered props and changes in altitudes so it measures atmospheric.
All of which have zero impact on plane performance or game play.
HiTech
i understand your point im just saying it cant be that hard to code however i could be worng
-
i understand your point im just saying it cant be that hard to code however i could be worng
he didnt say it was hard, he said it was useless.
semp
-
i understand your point im just saying it cant be that hard to code however i could be worng
now i can't resist this one...how would you go about coding that in a make believe environment? all the effort to make one non-factor gauge read what you think it should read in a make believe world...do you also spend a lot of time contemplating the growth rate of grass in kansas?
-
thats with turbos and surper chargers off
They're always on in Aces High
-
he didnt say it was hard, he said it was useless.
semp
ya but whats so useful about advance grafics and eye candy
-
grafics?
-
Thinking about it, I have over 1k hours in my RV. I have no idea what the MP reads when the engine is stopped , simply because I never look at it , and most of the time it is turned off when the engine is off.
2nd I can not even tell you what that gauge reads at ideal. Again it is not something any pilot cares about and I have never considered looking and committing to memory what it reads.
I can tell you where it should be when doing lazies eights to maintain alt and speeds.
I can tell you where it should be when doing verticals.
I can tell you what it almost allays reads at 5500 ft.
I can tell you where to put it form normal cruise down low.
I can tell you where to put it after crossing 500 ft.
I can tell you what it looks like when oil runs down the tube and fills the gauge.
I can tell you what it does when pulling back 200 rpm.
But again I have no idea what it does with a stopped prop, in fact I cant even tell you what the minimum read out is on the gauge that I have looked at 10, 000 times.
And finally it really is not all that easy to make it read correctly with out the engine running.
HiTech
-
And with how many people I see that use auto-takeoff most players don't spend a moment stopped on tarmac without their prop spinning.
Hey, olds, kudos for linking that video though. I learned some neat stuff and I've enjoyed watching the other videos on A2A's profile. :aok
-
And with how many people I see that use auto-takeoff most players don't spend a moment stopped on tarmac without their prop spinning.
Hey, olds, kudos for linking that video though. I learned some neat stuff and I've enjoyed watching the other videos on A2A's profile. :aok
thank you :)
and HTC thank your for thinking about it
-
i have a book that has B17 power ratings and for the best fuel range but it useless because full power should be around 29in of mercury but in game its around 50
Who told you full power should be 29 inches MP? Even using just 100LL we routinely used 40-44 inches MAP for takeoff in the Nine O Nine, 36 inches for climb and 28-20 for Cruise...and that was all without the turbocharges being used.
-
-1, HiTech explained why.
But again I have no idea what it does with a stopped prop, in fact I cant even tell you what the minimum read out is on the gauge that I have looked at 10, 000 times.
That's exactly what I was thinking when I read the OP.
-
So HT I'm assuming this is engine oil that is running down to fill the gauge? If so is that how you decide when it's best to change the oil? Some how I'm picturing you sitting there flying along and looking at it going "Hmm getting a lil dark batter get it changed when I land." lol Or maybe your one of the "Ahh it's not tar yet, got a few more hours of run time in it." :P
Sorry just funny random thoughts popping into my head. :)
-
Who told you full power should be 29 inches MP? Even using just 100LL we routinely used 40-44 inches MAP for takeoff in the Nine O Nine, 36 inches for climb and 28-20 for Cruise...and that was all without the turbocharges being used.
as i said later that is with out the turbo superchargers
-
as i said later that is with out the turbo superchargers
That's wrong...without turbochargers you can get up well over 42-44 inches at Sea Level. The B-17 I flew did not have working turbochargers, the numbers I poster are without a working turbocharger.
-
That's wrong...without turbochargers you can get up well over 42-44 inches at Sea Level. The B-17 I flew did not have working turbochargers, the numbers I poster are without a working turbocharger.
if i rember the B17G had suprerchargers and turbos
-
if i rember the B17G had suprerchargers and turbos
Yes, the supercharger is built into the engine, you have no control of it.
-
Yes, the supercharger is built into the engine, you have no control of it.
well im taking this book to one of my friends who knows just bout everything bout the B17 (his gradfather flew one)
also he has A2A simulations so he can test there
-
well im taking this book to one of my friends who knows just bout everything bout the B17 (his gradfather flew one)
also he has A2A simulations so he can test there
If you haven't figured it out yet, colmbo flew one too.
Primary source.
wrongway
-
If you haven't figured it out yet, colmbo flew one too.
Primary source.
wrongway
i know but i think we are not understanding each other
-
So HT I'm assuming this is engine oil that is running down to fill the gauge? If so is that how you decide when it's best to change the oil? Some how I'm picturing you sitting there flying along and looking at it going "Hmm getting a lil dark batter get it changed when I land." lol Or maybe your one of the "Ahh it's not tar yet, got a few more hours of run time in it." :P
Sorry just funny random thoughts popping into my head. :)
You generally want to change it every certain amount of hours, I can't tell the the exact amount as that would depend on the engine.
-
i know but i think we are not understanding each other
no, your not listening to what he is saying, therefore assuming he is wrong and you don't believe him, so your friends grandfather is going to run tests on it, just to most likely tell you the same thing.
-
no, your not listening to what he is saying, therefore assuming he is wrong and you don't believe him, so your friends grandfather is going to run tests on it, just to most likely tell you the same thing.
<sigh>
the book was right it was labeling it werid that is at a very high alt
-
so this "book" out smarted HiTech who has over 1K of flight time and it out smarted colmbo which im sure has numerous hours in a B17. ok, yeah your book out smarted them.
-
so this "book" out smarted HiTech who has over 1K of flight time and it out smarted colmbo which im sure has numerous hours in a B17. ok, yeah your book out smarted them.
no its just a high alt....
-
Olds...what book are you getting the info from?
-
Olds,
Perhaps you're misreading the info? The B-17 Pilot Manual I have shows that with the R-1820-97 engine in the B-17F and G you can maintain 46 inches of MP all the way up to 27,000 where you become limited by turbocharger turbine RPM (can't exceed 22,400). You can maintain 41.5 inches MP up to 30,000 and 35.2 inches MP up to 35000.
-
Olds...what book are you getting the info from?
U.S. military bombersOlds,
Perhaps you're misreading the info? The B-17 Pilot Manual I have shows that with the R-1820-97 engine in the B-17F and G you can maintain 46 inches of MP all the way up to 27,000 where you become limited by turbocharger turbine RPM (can't exceed 22,400). You can maintain 41.5 inches MP up to 30,000 and 35.2 inches MP up to 35000.
and yes i belive i am
there is a E6B in the back off the book for the B17,B24,B25and B29
I THINK im doing the E6B worng
-
At least one of the reasons for the RPM limit on the turbo is that the turbine wheel "buckets" can come apart spraying shrapnel around. On the B-17 it isn't too bad since the turbos are pretty much below the airplane, but on the B-24 it was a very bad thing, especially if the #3 turbo came apart. It was pretty much along the midline of the fuselage abeam the bomb bay and nearly all of the hydraulic lines are along the right wall of the bombbay. Nothing like shooting yourself down. :D
On the B-24 there is a very slight lip around the perimeter of the turbine wheel to help contain them. That lip isn't present in the photo of a B-17 turbo.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r122/seitzfjs3/B-17%20detail%20Shos/B-17TurboRear.jpg)
-
Oh dear lord..... whatever. :huh
By all means, continue with the completely pointless thread about something that means absolutely zero to the playability of the game, on a subject that has been discussed many times.....
How about next give us a thread complaining about how the compass in AH works backwards from a real one in an aircraft.
I apologize. I forgot that you owned this thread. :rolleyes:
It is a sim right?
-
It is a sim right?
The point is simply what you are trying to simulate. Simulating a stationary plane with engines not running is not exactly high on the list.
HiTech