Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Vinkman on July 08, 2013, 09:43:20 AM
-
I have noticed in recent weeks that the Ki-67 can fly significantly higher than the alt specified in the game specs. I was chasing him in a 410 and persued within Icon range for about an hour but could not get closer than 2K. His plane was clearly above me and my 410 maxed out at 30K, where full WEP on Autoclimb produded a climb rate of zero. Yet the Ki-67s were six thousand feet above me, and I could not get up to them. I tried getting level at higher speed, and as I began to get out in front and pulled up slowly (or quickly, I tried everything) the slats popped out, the plane buffetted, slowed, fell behind, and dropped in alt. Yet the charts say there is no way a Ki-67 can out run or outclimb a 410. Here are the charts. So how did that Ki-67 get to 36K? Are the charts wrong?
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3676/9237830847_d7185755b5_o.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7436/9237830851_82e0eb8269_o.jpg)
-
I'm curious what the exact altitude and speed of that Ki-67 was?
(Don't say you did not run film at that time :uhoh)
-
I'm curious what the exact altitude and speed of that Ki-67 was?
(Don't say you did not run film at that time :uhoh)
I have the film, but I'm not at home now. Perhaps I can stop home for lunch and post.
-
I have the film, but I'm not at home now. Perhaps I can stop home for lunch and post.
No need to rush it :aok
-
And a follow up point. Many have disparaged the 410 but I find it to be a great buff killer. For this tour my record against buffs is 19-0. I've only been killed by fighters, except for an A20 they got me low and slow while I was attacking a GV base. But have yet to get killed by a bomber this tour. I even got a few fighters in return.
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3670/9238035465_2f3db30603_b.jpg)
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7336/9240814410_2ed59794ff_o.jpg)
-
What was the loadout condition of the Me410 and Ki-67? I suspect the stats shown on the website do not involve a 50mm cannon on the Me410 and do involve 100% fuel for the Ki-67.
-
What I can say from my bomber tests at this moment: If you take 100% fuel (which ain't that much in the Ki-67 anyway) and 8x100kg bombs, your rate of climb runs close to 0 once you have passed 30k. So the service ceiling in AH and 'real world' match quite well.
I suspect the Ki-67 was already going home, devoid of bombs and having spent most of it's fuel already.
-
So how did that Ki-67 get to 36K? Are the charts wrong?
Because it didn't get to 36k? Have you actually reviewed the altitude of the Ki-67 from your own film?
I've tested the Ki-67 altitude performance and I'm positive that all your film is gonna show is that it wasn't flying at 36k.
-
Because it didn't get to 36k? Have you actually reviewed the altitude of the Ki-67 from your own film?
I've tested the Ki-67 altitude performance and I'm positive that all your film is gonna show is that it wasn't flying at 36k.
yes that's lusche's point. I'll check it after work today. But I was at 30K and the Ki-67 was 2k (icon reading) directly above me. We'll see what it says.
-
What I can say from my bomber tests at this moment: If you take 100% fuel (which ain't that much in the Ki-67 anyway) and 8x100kg bombs, your rate of climb runs close to 0 once you have passed 30k. So the service ceiling in AH and 'real world' match quite well.
I suspect the Ki-67 was already going home, devoid of bombs and having spent most of it's fuel already.
So are the charts fully loaded? Then does that mean the 410 chart is fully loaded too? Bk5 weighs 1200lbs. Don't know what's considered fully loaded in a 410.
-
yes that's lusche's point. I'll check it after work today. But I was at 30K and the Ki-67 was 2k (icon reading) directly above me. We'll see what it says.
Well, my point was that why even open a thread like this before reviewing one's own film? Perception of what happened in the MAs can really play tricks to everyone. Film tells what actually happened.
-
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7251/7455568556_5a05e7b933_b.jpg)
-
(http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7251/7455568556_5a05e7b933_b.jpg)
How is this image relevant to the ceiling of the Ki-67?
-
Well, my point was that why even open a thread like this before reviewing one's own film? Perception of what happened in the MAs can really play tricks to everyone. Film tells what actually happened.
Yes I got lazy. I was flying yesterday when it happened, and didn't want to log out to go to the film viewer and make screen capts etc. I remembered it today and started the post. While not ideal, the question could be answered if someone knows the answer. It doesn't require checking my facts if someone knows that Ki-67 have a 36K ceiling when empty. Or knowing that the charts are "fully loaded" vs empty.
:salute
-
How is this image relevant to the ceiling of the Ki-67?
I met him with me at 36,000 feet and he at 34,000 feet.
That picture is where we were after my chasing him for two full sectors and not gaining.
-
I met him with me at 36,000 feet and he at 34,000 feet.
That picture is where we were after my chasing him for two full sectors and not gaining.
In other words your pic has zero relevance regarding to the ceiling of the Ki-67. Your film on the other hand would be more relevant. Although your film wouldn't show a Ki-67 at 34k because Ki-67 can't climb to 34k in AH.
Testing shows that with ~50% fuel Ki-67's (absolute) ceiling is ~32,4k which matches real life data quite well.
-
I've gotten a Ki-67 up to 32K after drop, but have never tested max theoretical altitude. Although I've seen some rather excessive f***ery in AH before, so who knows. But I've never seen something that was flight model related, and not clearly a bug.
Worst thing I've seen was a Tiger surviving a direct hit from an 1800kg bomb, 3 rounds of Pz.Gr 39/42 to the side at 600m, and no less than 4 rounds of unknown type to the side by a T-34/85. All that did was break his left track and turret him.
There was also that infinite rocket thing a while back...
It's clear the game isn't perfect, and there are issues. But that being said, we need the film to know what's exactly going on.
-
you might want to remove that second to last sentence there Ace...that kind of talk will get you a perma vacation.
-
There was also that infinite rocket thing a while back...
It's clear the game isn't perfect, and can even be hacked/exploited. But that being said, we need the film to know what's exactly going on.
You might want to reconsider your posts! Something similar to this warranted a PNG just recently.
HTC frowns heavily on this type of statement.
:salute
PS: it's a good thing I'm not a mod!
-
lol, quoted for truth
-
Here's a clip of the 45min film. It showes an alt for the Ki-67 of 34.4K. An alt he maintained dispite turning, and slowing to 180mph (shown here.) He was also as fast as 250mph. but through his turns and speed changes the plane never went below 34K. So perhaps the chart is for fully loaded, but if so, the 410 would be fully loaded too, correct? I don't think the 600KG gun, and 25% fuel make it more than fully loaded. So I'm still not sure why I can't catch him. To be clear...no acusations of any funny business...from me. I just think the charts are not clear, or perhaps up to date. 410 should have a clear advantage here.
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3685/9241418315_5232c71b0b_o.jpg)
-
The fighter charts, other than the Mosquito Mk VI and perhaps the Il-2, are not fully loaded. I am not sure what they are, but I would not be surprised if it was for the basic gun package and 75% or 100% fuel. I think the Mosquito Mk VI is 100% fuel and 2,000lbs of bombs as a legacy of being introduced in the bomber category, the Il-2 may share this "feature".
What gun package did your Me410 have?
-
Everything I've read on the Ki-67 says it's max service ceiling was 31,070 ft.
ack-ack
-
What gun package did your Me410 have?
The 50mm as you can see in the post above yours. unsure if rockets or external fuel tanks were fitted at the start of the flight or his remaining fuel load.
-
The 50mm gun significantly reduces the performance of the Me410. I also suspect that fuel and bombs make up a larger percentage of a bomber's weight than do fuel and guns on a fighter.
Everything I've read on the Ki-67 says it's max service ceiling was 31,070 ft.
ack-ack
Max service ceiling is the altitude at which climb drops below a certain rate (varies from air force to air force), not the altitude at which climb is 0. In addition we don't know the weight at which the 31,070ft is the max service ceiling.
-
Here's a clip of the 45min film. It showes an alt for the Ki-67 of 34.4K. An alt he maintained dispite turning, and slowing to 180mph (shown here.) He was also as fast as 250mph. but through his turns and speed changes the plane never went below 34K. So perhaps the chart is for fully loaded, but if so, the 410 would be fully loaded too, correct? I don't think the 600KG gun, and 25% fuel make it more than fully loaded. So I'm still not sure why I can't catch him. To be clear...no acusations of any funny business...from me. I just think the charts are not clear, or perhaps up to date. 410 should have a clear advantage here.
(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3685/9241418315_5232c71b0b_o.jpg)
All I can really say to that is I'd still like to see the relevant parts of the film. At least using alt-x auto climb it didn't go higher than 32,4k with 50% TA. I did have 500kg bomb on board but I remember dropping it. The film viewer is acting a bit weird regarding what it shows the load out to be in the cockpit. I have to redo the test it seems. The climb speed naturally was quite high at that point at over 280mph TAS so doing an inertia climb would have resulted in higher altitude but only momentarily.
There have been changes to bomber flight modes to address max. alt issues before like the recent change of the Lancs. It's really hard to say off hand if Ki-67 can go higher than it should. That was the reason why I ran the test and came to a conclusion that the absolute ceiling is "within limits" (32,4k) compared to the real world service ceiling. Knowing the Japanese war time definition for service ceiling would be very helpful for comparison with AH.
Everything I've read on the Ki-67 says it's max service ceiling was 31,070 ft.
Same here. Service Ceiling has some margin of climb/turn rate left depending on the exact definition service/country uses. And it obviously varies depending on the weight of the aircraft. So at extremely lightly loaded and with no climb rate left the aircraft can go higher.
For Me410's Service Ceiling I've seen several different figures.
----------------------------------------
If I botched up that test, my humblest apologies for claiming that you are wrong when it was me that was wrong.
-
Here's a clip of the 45min film.
Ah, Hevermayr, the ole Ki-67 ace. He goes by the name of molybdenum (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=34449) on this forum. You can ask him about his loadout at that time.
-
Could it that old bug that allowed some planes to go above max altitude, like the old bug with the C-47 that allowed it to fly above 40,000ft and in excess of 300mph?
ack-ack
-
Could it that old bug that allowed some planes to go above max altitude, like the old bug with the C-47 that allowed it to fly above 40,000ft and in excess of 300mph?
ack-ack
I don't think so. It wasn't much above service ceiling and it isn't going very fast. Probably was just very light on fuel and had no bombs with a very slow climb up there.
-
Speaking of planes flying higher and faster than commonly known.............did Wmaker ever catch the plane he was pursuing in his ME163 earlier today?
-
Test offline at 25% fuel and no bombs, used .wind command to get to 30k quickly then turned it off. My offline fuel burn multiplier is set to 0.02 for easy testing purposes, 1/100th of the MA's.
As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.
At 32,500ft my climb rate was 102fpm.
At 32,750ft my climb rate was 45fpm. At this point I decided to dump all ammo. I emptied the nose gun first and the recoil pushed me into a 90fpm decent. Using the top turret I aimed slightly to the side and down causing the 20mm as well as the starboard waist gun and the tail gun to all fire, spiking my climb rate to just over 500fpm until the ammo ran out. The port waist gun, aimed down and back, produced a climb of 90fpm while it lasted.
Empty of ammo and at 25% fuel my climb rate was 7fpm at 33,100ft. It took me 17 minutes to get from 31,070ft to 33,100ft, including using my ammo as thrust.
-
What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?
We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.
-
What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?
We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.
That should only affect its ground speed. The speed at which it flies through the air is its airspeed.
-
Sounds like ~33,000ft the maximum theoretical altitude, since Karnak needed to empty the guns to provide an artificial boost to climb rate, and it still took him 17 minutes to gain a mere 2030ft of altitude. If he got above it, something wonky was going on.
-
Speaking of planes flying higher and faster than commonly known.............did Wmaker ever catch the plane he was pursuing in his ME163 earlier today?
If I had actually logged in earlier your choices would have been either to get shot down or turn back in time. I only logged in when you were on top of the Me163 field at 40k. At that point, there's isn't enough fuel to give chase and climb to a 40k Arado (no, it shouldn't be able to do ~480mph@40k) at the same time. Had I had the choice to climb to altitude while you were still heading towards me, it would have been another story. This again has nothing to do with this thread but then again, you are known for your constant chest thumping.
-
Test offline at 25% fuel and no bombs, used .wind command to get to 30k quickly then turned it off. My offline fuel burn multiplier is set to 0.02 for easy testing purposes, 1/100th of the MA's.
As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.
At 32,500ft my climb rate was 102fpm.
At 32,750ft my climb rate was 45fpm. At this point I decided to dump all ammo. I emptied the nose gun first and the recoil pushed me into a 90fpm decent. Using the top turret I aimed slightly to the side and down causing the 20mm as well as the starboard waist gun and the tail gun to all fire, spiking my climb rate to just over 500fpm until the ammo ran out. The port waist gun, aimed down and back, produced a climb of 90fpm while it lasted.
Empty of ammo and at 25% fuel my climb rate was 7fpm at 33,100ft. It took me 17 minutes to get from 31,070ft to 33,100ft, including using my ammo as thrust.
This very much reflects my experiences in that test I made. I never emptied the ammo from the guns though. But your results are very much inline with the results I got.
-
If I had actually logged in earlier your choices would have been either to get shot down or turn back in time. I only logged in when you were on top of the Me163 field at 40k. At that point, there's isn't enough fuel to give chase and climb to a 40k Arado (no, it shouldn't be able to do ~480mph@40k) at the same time. Had I had the choice to climb to altitude while you were still heading towards me, it would have been another story. This again has nothing to do with this thread but then again, you are known for your constant chest thumping.
It's to illustrate a point that some planes overperform at altitude.
I was at 33% throttle.
It will go a lot faster.
-
It's to illustrate a point that some planes overperform at altitude.
My name has nothing to do with it, however. Yes, there indeed can be loop holes in the flight models. A lot of them have been fixed, Lanc and C-47 being two examples. Arado's high altitude performance seems to be one of them aswell. Hopefully HTC looks into it.
-
In my film the 67 is at 33-34k making 260-235mph with plenty of lift to maneuver. I could barely make 30k with a 410 with 30mms and 50% of fuel to begin with and with tanks almost empty I could not get past 30k or 260mph. If it seemed that I was getting too close the 67 made a slight turn and any maneuvering sent me fluttering down. The chase began from our strats and ended at Bish strats when I ran out of fuel.
My source says that the service ceiling for 410A is 10,000 m with 9,500 kg. Gross weight for 410B with 30mms is 11,030 kg which I presume is with full tanks (7,940 kg empty).
I think that when my tanks were almost empty I should have been able to get past 30k.
Maybe the AH 410 is just a sick bird liftwise... :uhoh
-C+
-
I believe there are some flight modelling issues with the 410, especially at 30k+. I've run into several just-plain-unexplainable behaviors and also find the handling is extremely poor. Not in an "I'm banking and stall in a turn" but in a "this is level freaking flight, it shouldn't do that" kind of way.
I also suspect the elevator authority is somewhat underpowered, but that's a different topic entirely.
-
I'd agree with that Krusty. At times the 410 just feels.... unstable... in a way I find hard to imagine being realistic.
As to the elevator authority, IDK. It certianly doesn't feel as crisp as something like a 110, but then it looks like the 410 is typically packing around a fair bit more weight towards the nose, and so it may also be an inertia thing.
-
What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?
We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.
Thats what I'm thinking - I'm betting he is in a 2K layer with a headwind giving him the alt, and the 410 is in another layer.
-
Headwinds don't help you climb. They just slow your rate of travel over the ground. Your airspeed is your speed through the air and it doesn't matter if you have a head wind or not your airspeed will be where your thrust and drag balance.
-
Everything I've read on the Ki-67 says it's max service ceiling was 31,070 ft.
ack-ack
Service ceiling is the altitude at which the climb rate drops to 100 feet per minute. It is not the same as the maximum ceiling obtainable.
-
As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.
As mentioned, I have no idea what was the Japanese wartime standard definition for service ceiling but if I had to bet I'd say it is closer to the modern universal standard (100fpm) than ~500fpm...
It is true though that in your test the plane was rather lightly loaded.
It is quite hard to resolve the issue without knowing the parameters at which the original service ceiling was obtained.
-
A quick test with 100% fuel and 800kg of bombs gave a climb rate of 50fpm as the Ki-67 crossed 31,070ft.
-
In my film the 67 is at 33-34k making 260-235mph with plenty of lift to maneuver. I could barely make 30k with a 410 with 30mms and 50% of fuel to begin with and with tanks almost empty I could not get past 30k or 260mph. If it seemed that I was getting too close the 67 made a slight turn and any maneuvering sent me fluttering down. The chase began from our strats and ended at Bish strats when I ran out of fuel.
My source says that the service ceiling for 410A is 10,000 m with 9,500 kg. Gross weight for 410B with 30mms is 11,030 kg which I presume is with full tanks (7,940 kg empty).
I think that when my tanks were almost empty I should have been able to get past 30k.
Maybe the AH 410 is just a sick bird liftwise... :uhoh
-C+
This :aok
Not being a Aero engineer, I'm not sure of the right terms, but the 410 wing suffers more lift loss per angle of attack than any plane in the game. It's like if you climb or turn the plane at al lthe wing becomes useless. Fairly low angles of attack seem to produce wing stalling, and any touch of the stick brings the slats out. And even with them out, the wing is contantly stalling. I wonder if this plane needs a little High alt tuning.
-
What is curious is that offline I got 410B with 30mms rather easily above 30k and ultimately to 33,5k still making 260mph (15%fuel left).
What could explain different performance offline and online?
-C+
-
What is curious is that offline I got 410B with 30mms rather easily above 30k and ultimately to 33,5k still making 260mph (15%fuel left).
What could explain different performance offline and online?
-C+
Wind?
:salute
-
Wind?
How?
-C+
-
There seem to be a surprising number of posters here who think that a head wind allows one to climb higher than in still air.
Guys,
If you have a speed of 275mph in still air your true airspeed and ground speed will both be 275.
If you are in a 25mph headwind your true air speed will be 275mph and your ground speed will be 250mph. Your speed through the air and the speed of the air over your wings and the lift provided by your wings is not changed by a head wind.
-
There seem to be a surprising number of posters here who think that a head wind allows one to climb higher than in still air.
Guys,
If you have a speed of 275mph in still air your true airspeed and ground speed will both be 275.
If you are in a 25mph headwind your true air speed will be 275mph and your ground speed will be 250mph. Your speed through the air and the speed of the air over your wings and the lift provided by your wings is not changed by a head wind.
:airplane:
If you have a speed of 275mph in still air your true airspeed and ground speed will both be 275. Not always, depends entirely on the existing density altitude! The higher the altitude, the ground speed in "zero" wind, the ground speed will always be greater than the true airspeed.
Aircraft flight instruments, however, don't compute true airspeed as a function of groundspeed and windspeed. They use impact and static pressures as well as a temperature input. True airspeed is equivalent airspeed that is corrected for pressure altitude and temperature (which define density). The less dense air at altitude allows the aircraft to move faster over the ground but because of the less dense air, the IAS would be about the same, and the true airspeed, after correcting for pressure altitude and temperature, would be greater and in zero wind, the ground speed would always be greater.
-
I think Karnak means that regardless of whether I have a tailwind or a headwind it does not affect the ability to reach any specific altitude.