Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: mthrockmor on June 28, 2013, 12:51:45 PM
-
For all of the improvements, new birds etc there is one glaring error in the existing planeset: The Dora's radiator.
It has been well discussed. Pervert went so far as to post a graphic showing how the radiator in-game extends well beyond the radiator in real life. A hit on the nose cone sets of the radiator, as an example.
Of course, I flew the Dora yesterday and took the 'one-ping wonder' hit in the radiator. There is ZERO chance the Dora was this 'nancy' in real life. Please, fix it! It should be about 60-seconds worth of coding.
boo
-
For all of the improvements, new birds etc there is one glaring error in the existing planeset: The Dora's radiator.
It has been well discussed. Pervert went so far as to post a graphic showing how the radiator in-game extends well beyond the radiator in real life. A hit on the nose cone sets of the radiator, as an example.
Of course, I flew the Dora yesterday and took the 'one-ping wonder' hit in the radiator. There is ZERO chance the Dora was this 'nancy' in real life. Please, fix it! It should be about 60-seconds worth of coding.
boo
Don't forget the tailwheel, also (I think it is the Dora that doesn't retract all of the way) :D
-
Don't forget the tailwheel, also (I think it is the Dora that doesn't retract all of the way) :D
I think it's all of the 190s except Ta152.
Yep, I'd like too se the radiator taken a look see. Pervert provided very good evidence through testing that shows it really deserves a look.
-
Nobody flies that thing anyway. :devil
<------------(absolutely addicted to it).
-
Nobody flies that thing anyway. :devil
<------------(absolutely addicted to it).
Really? ;)
By the way, Boo, the rules of flying Lady D:
1: never ever accept a head on
2: do not attack a bomber unless its above your base, so you can glide home.
3: turn with the ponies and make them look funny
;)
Otherwise yes, Pervert posted some nice material in this subject.
-
Dora's also never ran from a 1 v 1 in real life,please fix this also :rolleyes:
-
Dora's also never ran from a 1 v 1 in real life,please fix this also :rolleyes:
Those are not Dora pilots but shameless imposters. Kill them all.
-
For all of the improvements, new birds etc there is one glaring error in the existing planeset: The Dora's radiator.
It has been well discussed. Pervert went so far as to post a graphic showing how the radiator in-game extends well beyond the radiator in real life. A hit on the nose cone sets of the radiator, as an example.
Of course, I flew the Dora yesterday and took the 'one-ping wonder' hit in the radiator. There is ZERO chance the Dora was this 'nancy' in real life. Please, fix it! It should be about 60-seconds worth of coding.
boo
Don't get hit ;)
-
109's have 2x radiators, and were pretty 'nancy' at one time; however, I for one believe they've been improved. Still not two separate systems with a switch to close one side but tuffen'ed up good though. :salute
-
I don't.HO
It was ground fire. Literally the only ping I took...voila....radiator.
boo
-
Ms. Dora also had two radiators...
-
Pervert's evidence was met by the usual "nothing needs to be fixed" answer from HTC.
It still needs to be fixed, every plane with dual radiators should be treated as such, and the areas of damage should be respected.
-
I'd fly the ta152 more agressivlt if that darn radiator wasn't there :old:
-
I've seen the posts on this showing where hits on the D-9 caused radiator leaks and I definitely support this being looked into for the D-9 and 152
Ms. Dora also had two radiators...
Bf109 and later Spitfires too. Be nice to have that feature modeled for them.
-
Be nice to have that feature modeled for them.
2radiators = twice the chance to get a radiator hit. They were not redundant afaik.
-
2radiators = twice the chance to get a radiator hit. They were not redundant afaik.
The twice the chance to get hit is modeled, the cutoff valve that closed if one was leaking is not. You couldn't run at MIL for long on one radiator, but you could fly home.
-
Pervert's evidence was met by the usual "nothing needs to be fixed" answer from HTC.
I don't recall any reply from HTC in the previous threads? Did I miss one?
-
The twice the chance to get hit is modeled, the cutoff valve that closed if one was leaking is not. You couldn't run at MIL for long on one radiator, but you could fly home.
they could probally model like fuel, shift+S to switch radiators or something.
-
I have never seen a reply from HTC on this issue.
There are two discussions going now. The first engages real life attributes of the Dora with duel radiators. This means twice the chance of getting a radiator hit versus redundancy. I am not engaging in this discussion.
The second, and the original post has to do with the coding of the computer model in AH. I am not a Dora aficionado though it is clear, when you get hit a disproportionate number of times you will get a radiator hit first. Everyone knows this. It is a coding error. Just like a fighter going 500knts, pulling high Gs at 20k gets hit with CV flak on the first burst. AH has worked to correct this error.
Pervert took the time to land a Dora, then drive up to it in a jeep and shoot at it with the .50 cal. He clearly demonstrated that hits on the Dora that do not correlate with the radiator would infact cause a radiator leak. For me the most obvious, if you hit the propeller spinner it would cause a radiator leak.
Much as the Ki-84 apparently loses flaps above a certain speed, regardless; the La gets pilot wounds like candy at Halloween; CV puffy ack could take out a rapidly jinking fighter at 20k BVR while buffs receive almost no damage; the Dora gets a radiator leak just looking at it.
These are coding discussions.
boo
-
I don't.HO
It was ground fire. Literally the only ping I took...voila....radiator.
boo
What kind of ground fire.
Most ground fire you take is usually 20mm or larger so getting a leaking radiator sounds like something to be happy with considering the amount of damage most of the weapons we have shooting from the ground could inflict in real life with a single hit.
I shot a dora nearly point blank on the spinner with a HE 75mm round as a strafer flew right down the barrel of a m4 tank and he simply flew off with a little bit of smoke.......engine still running.
-
What is the average results of hitting any inline engine of our fighters forward of the firewall? Has anyone tested all of them to present a Lusche style presentation?
What was the result in WW2?
Are our odds of hitting in the damage area in question for the D9 set too high. I fly thru ack, HO, and bomber defensive gunnery in many other inline engine fighters and do not receive the same frequency of oil or radiator damage hits.
It might help to run a jeep up to all fighters single and twin in this game with inline engines and perform the pervert test. Preferably single taps and counting rnds\dmg. Then you would have something to work with. Aside from the IL2 what kind's of armor solutions are in place for each of the testing list historically?
I'm sorry if this seems involved. I performed something similar offline with the drone circle and the 50cal on the YakT. The D9 was surprisingly weak in the lower part of the area in front of the firewall. K4 were much tougher. I haven't tested it lately but, P47 caught fire easily shooting them underneath just back of the firewall in the same test.
Something to think about. From the 8th AAF analysis of fighter damage\loss and small arms fire and light ack. Hitech is giving us a free pass over auto ack at fields. Sadly the D9 in this game damages about as frequently and easily as the loss and damage analysis disturbingly showed. So what do you want. Realism and all fighters get more vulnerable or game play centric and the D9 gets dolled up?
1.- all get real
2.- D9 dolled up
Wonder if the D9 is a programing oversight or a test of our sincerity and tolerance for more realism?
-
For all of the improvements, new birds etc there is one glaring error in the existing planeset: The Dora's radiator.
It has been well discussed. Pervert went so far as to post a graphic showing how the radiator in-game extends well beyond the radiator in real life. A hit on the nose cone sets of the radiator, as an example.
Of course, I flew the Dora yesterday and took the 'one-ping wonder' hit in the radiator. There is ZERO chance the Dora was this 'nancy' in real life. Please, fix it! It should be about 60-seconds worth of coding.
boo
If they're not fixing it now because it will get some major loving "soon"™©®, I can wait. :pray
-
+1 Dora radiator fix
-
Pervert's evidence was met by the usual "nothing needs to be fixed" answer from HTC.
Care to show me that quote?
I cannot find it and I am certain HiTech would not appreciate anyone from HTC making such a statement, given the fact it flies in the face of our support policies.
-
Care to show me that quote?
I cannot find it and I am certain HiTech would not appreciate anyone from HTC making such a statement, given the fact it flies in the face of our support policies.
Pun intended?
-
Care to show me that quote?
I cannot find it and I am certain HiTech would not appreciate anyone from HTC making such a statement, given the fact it flies in the face of our support policies.
You're right I cannot quote it. Even without the specific quote the actions talked for themselves, the problem was never acknowledged as one and nothing has been done about it. But its nice to have someone looking at this thread.
On another topic, what is the repercussion of loosing 1 of 2 radiators on those V12 engines? Can the engine still run at a lower rate?
-
On another topic, what is the repercussion of loosing 1 of 2 radiators on those V12 engines? Can the engine still run at a lower rate?
No. None of them have a shutoff valve modeled. They lose all radiator fluid just like a Spitfire Mk I or V.
-
No. None of them have a shutoff valve modeled. They lose all radiator fluid just like a Spitfire Mk I or V.
I meant in real life
-
+1 fix the Dora.. and the 152 radiator as well, its just as bad.
oh and while HTC is fixing them.. please add some bullet holes to the 152 glass.. http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,349958.0.html.. can't be too hard.
-
+1 - I know much of the evidence is "anecdotal", but when enough people see it happening there is often something to it.
-
Were at it, give us a D12 or D13 :banana:
perked of coarse :old:
-
If they're going to "fix" the radiator, they also need to address taking a 75mm shell point blank on the spinner and flying away with nothing but an oil leak.......engine still running.
I just don't see any WWII airplane taking that kind of damage without at least killing the engine.
-
If they're going to "fix" the radiator, they also need to address taking a 75mm shell point blank on the spinner and flying away with nothing but an oil leak.......engine still running.
I just don't see any WWII airplane taking that kind of damage without at least killing the engine.
film?
-
film?
icepac always posts films to back up his outrageous claims
i'm sure he will have it uploaded momentarily to shut down all naysayers!
-
I see hope since Skuzzy jumped in.
Let's keep this thread to something that works. Sans film on the 75mm and requests for new versions of the Dora, can we keep this to something that should be quick an easy and not delay any current and future projects of value in Grapevine.
Please, some tweaking of the code on the radiator leaks of our current Fw-190D-9. :pray
boo
-
icepac always posts films to back up his outrageous claims
i'm sure he will have it uploaded momentarily to shut down all naysayers!
No need to post film for Coombz sake because he simply ignores the refutation in film form because it does not suit his agenda.
I did check and it seems it was a LA7 rather than a 190 who took a 75mm tank round to the spinner at near point blank range and flew long enough to make another pass before trying to RTB but came up a little short.
My point is that these planes can take a 75mm tank shell to the engine and continue flying and that many hits people complain about are either a large amount of 50 calibers landing all about the engine or a much larger cannon shell landing.
I've oiled a 262 taking off with a pistol but it took 13 hits to the same engine to do it.
-
If our engine is the Jumo 213A, the annular radiator is for the engine coolant. Only a single coolant port at the top and two at the bottom. The coolant and oil was kept at high pressure like in the DB60X engines so their boiling point would be kept high as altitudes increased. If not pressurized, liquids boil at a lower temp as alt increases.
With a 1 : 2 radiator port arrangement to service two banks of cylinders under pressure. Damaging either side is moot. Your pressure will drop and your feed will eventually run out the hole. If you look at the engine's cutaways and cross sections. It's a high pressure oil leak waiting for the first API, 20mm, or 30mm round to breach the block\cylinder heads or to crack it. If you put enough armor plate around the whole engine to make it API\cannon proof, look at maybe the SL WEP speed as your overall alt top speed. The armor in the annular ring is betting on the bullet path to strike at an angle compounding the relative thickness of the plate.
It's a big toe waiting to get stubbed on a rock except where the engine mount arms are. Everything else will get broken or chewed up. Lots of high pressure tubing and feed lines to shred.
If it's the DB603 it's got the oil cooler sitting on top of the reduction housing as a small oil cooler box and the coolant radiator laying in the lower part of the annular housing ring. Another big toe waiting to be stubbed along with the engine block.
Back to my questions.
1.- Is this an area effect calculation needing the forward region pulled back to the annular ring?
2.- Is this a bug?
3.- Is this a test of your reactions to the reality of how vulnerable inline engines were in WW2 for future considerations to realism?
So are all of our inline engines equally vulnerable except with the IL2?
Link to one of the JUMO 213A D9 manuals: http://www.scribd.com/doc/122004586/focke-wulf-fw-190-d-ersatzteil-liste-konstruktionsgruppe-6-triebwerk-oktober-1944
-
No need to post film for Coombz sake because he simply ignores the refutation in film form because it does not suit his agenda.
I did check and it seems it was a LA7 rather than a 190 who took a 75mm tank roundm to the spinner at near point blank range and flew long enough to make another pass before trying to RTB but came up a little short.
My point is that these planes can take a 75mm tank shell to the engine and continue flying and that many hits people complain about are either a large amount of 50 calibers landing all about the engine or a much larger cannon shell landing.
I've oiled a 262 taking off with a pistol but it took 13 hits to the same engine to do it.
when have you ever posted a film to support any of your fairy stories? please provide quotes and links :aok
and still no proof of the plane surviving a 75mm hit, colour me surprised
-
when have you ever posted a film to support any of your fairy stories? please provide quotes and links :aok
and still no proof of the plane surviving a 75mm hit, colour me surprised
It did happen to me too.
I was in an m18, trying to shoot a 190D strafing me with an AP shell. Hit him on the spinner and he flew away leaking oil. No film though.
It only happened once and in every other case, the plane exploded (fuselage hit) or lost a wing. Pony, 190, il-2, lancaster, b25, anything, both when i was shooting them and when i was shot in the face :)
-
I also hit a plane with an AP round one time, from one of the M4s, and to my surprise it flew off.
-
I'd throw the 109 in with the paper radiator crowd for adjustment also, perhaps wishful thinking on my part though.
-
when have you ever posted a film to support any of your fairy stories? please provide quotes and links :aok
and still no proof of the plane surviving a 75mm hit, colour me surprised
Tickled me pink
:D
-
when have you ever posted a film to support any of your fairy stories? please provide quotes and links :aok
and still no proof of the plane surviving a 75mm hit, colour me surprised
Yes, films were posted.
You will have to find them yourself because I feel no need to do any work searching that you refuse to do.
And your clown twin dolby shows up to cast a stone.
Why don't you ask airjer about the tank that shot his LA7 in the spinner at HQ with the main gun since he was the one flying the plane. (it happened in late war tour 137)
-
You know there is an easy fix for the radiator problem, stop running your aircraft into bullets/
shells..tadaa problem fixed! :D
-
If you test all fighters per pervert's testing method. Shoot each one in the prop spinner forward of the prop. If you get an oil hit response, that may be a sign of code simplification. What happened in the real world if the prop hub was hit or anywhere in the first 18 inches of an inline engine?
Then your question would be towards realistic odds on that ever happening with the frequency it does in our game.
Can you create an offline mission where the enemy plane sits forever on the runway and you get spawned into it's airfield in a jeep along with all auto ack disabled? Then simply change the aircraft for each run to test damage. Otherwise it's herding cats to convince another player to give up an afternoon testing every single fighter with you in a custom arena. My wife would help me but, we only have the single IP and MAC interface to the game from home.
-
i have lots of time to waste :x