Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: olds442 on November 23, 2013, 01:20:46 PM
-
In this training video, the instructor says WEP can be used for a max of 11 minutes as opposed to our 5 minutes now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KnwIYwEh6o
skip to about 10:00
-
I think that is 11 minutes total time available guessing the restriction was based on water tank size.
In AH we have unlimited water but the head temperature controls the duration of each WEP run.
My Dad an aircraft mechanic during WW2 had said water injection was a big reason for having to change engines. I think he noted bad heads and water in the oil but that was a long time ago.
-
In AH we have unlimited water but the head temperature controls the duration of each WEP run.
In AH it's actually purely time based. This may seem as if I'm only nitpicking, but the difference is that reducing power or even shutting down your engine does not reduce the cooldown time. The 47's have a 5/10 minute cycle.
-
I wouldn't mind too much if HTC decided to model the temperature and water injection.
However, I feel we should also model the variable flow injection systems for the Germans if we go that route.
-
I wouldn't mind too much if HTC decided to model the temperature and water injection.
However, I feel we should also model the variable flow injection systems for the Germans if we go that route.
Yea lets do bad supplies for the germans too in that case ;P
-
Yea lets do bad supplies for the germans too in that case ;P
Why? That does not have a thing to do with modeling WEP and its derivatives per each aircraft.
-
If WEP is modeled realistically what stops Merlin and Allison engined fighters from simply using WEP 100% of the time? There needs to be some control on it otherwise players will abuse it.
(I still want to know why Merlins in British aircraft, even American built Merlins, have a 5/15 cycle but in American aircraft they have a 5/10 cycle.)
-
If WEP is modeled realistically what stops Merlin and Allison engined fighters from simply using WEP 100% of the time? There needs to be some control on it otherwise players will abuse it.
Wouldn't heat be a limiting factor? I mean aren't they just ramping up the boost pressure, same as the DB 601's and early 605's?
-
Why? That does not have a thing to do with modeling WEP and its derivatives per each aircraft.
It was a joke poking fun at the fact he is in love with German iron :P
-
It was a joke poking fun at the fact he is in love with German iron :P
As far as I know, the Germans were the only one to use variable rate injection systems.
I may prefer German aircraft, and may make posts for them more often than I ask for the Meteor III, but I'm quite fair about this type of thing.
-
& for a bit of a historical reality check..
On 23rd Jan `45 Kiwi Tempest pilot Ron Dennis went rat-catching
[with wingman F. Mac Leod] - in WFO pursuit of an Me 262 flown by
H. Holzwarth for 50+ miles - to catch it & shoot it down..
Regarding the Tempest's Napier Sabre mill,
he commented..
"The engine loved tough handling & never objected to maximum revs or boost for extended periods."
-
"The engine loved tough handling & never objected to maximum revs or boost for extended periods."
Funny, my car doesn't mind getting the crap beat out of it...
Wonder what the guy who worked on it says... Probably the same thing my repair shop says.. :noid
-
He'd say,
Great work sir!
& we really showed that bloody fancy-pants
Nazi blow-job what's what - didn't we sir..
& would we like a paint finish with extra wax & high polish too sir?..
-
(I still want to know why Merlins in British aircraft, even American built Merlins, have a 5/15 cycle but in American aircraft they have a 5/10 cycle.)
Because mossies on WEP are just not fair.
-
He'd say,
Great work sir!
& we really showed that bloody fancy-pants
Nazi blow-job what's what - didn't we sir..
& would we like a paint finish with extra wax & high polish too sir?..
I'm fairly certain the pilot would get b***hed at, and I'm fairly certain you know this.
Out of curiosity, do you/have you done any serious work on engines? Cause from my experience, it can be rather unpleasant, and that's with relatively small, naturally aspirated automotive engines that aren't running at high compression ratio, high RPM, and getting shot at.
-
A, Don't think so,
since the ground crew would be pleased as bloody punch to be part of bagging a fat rat like that..
B, Well, funny you ask, I run a DOHC 4V Benz, & that loves a good thrashing too..
However, my personal preference is for hammering hi-po 2-stroke motorcycles..
i.e. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1N5rm0glYwY [Rotate..L.O.L.]
My relative Bob Spurdle was C.O. of 80 Sqd when they moved from Spitfires to Tempests, & he concurred with his countryman Ron's findings..
He reckoned it was like having a Gov't sponsored hot-rod to thrash..
-
A, Don't think so,
since the ground crew would be pleased as bloody punch to be part of bagging a fat rat like that..
He's still a mechanic, and the pilot is still abusing the engine past 1) what is safe and 2) what is good for the engine, causing excessive wear and tear, burning through spare parts, increasing the general load on support personnel and the logistics train.
B, Well, funny you ask, I run a DOHC 4V Benz, & that loves a good thrashing too..
However, my personal preference is for hammering hi-po 2-stroke motorcycles..
My relative Bob Spurdle was C.O. of 80 Sqd when they moved from Spitfires to Tempests, & he concurred with his countryman Ron's findings..
He reckoned it was like having a Gov't sponsored hot-rod to thrash..
That's not what I asked you. I rather aggressively don't care what you drive, or how poorly you treat your possessions. So I'll ask again, and hopefully you'll give me a strait answer next time.
Do you or do you not do major work on engines?
-
'Strait' back at ya, T-A, - hell yes..
It aint bloody rocket science, ah, wait, yes it is..
- actually the key to the hi-po 2-stroke was in fact, being
paid for by uncle Adolf via V 1 cruise missile development at Peenemunde..
Bagging any Nazi jet, [ & Tempests got the full set, plus all the long-nose FW types flying] got you big kudos, T-A , just like in Aces High..
Those big Sabres were specifically designed & built to take it..
Unlike those fat, lazy radial transport mills..
-
Those big Sabres were specifically designed & built to take it..
Those big Sabers were notoriously unreliable and difficult to maintain.
-
In AH it's actually purely time based. This may seem as if I'm only nitpicking, but the difference is that reducing power or even shutting down your engine does not reduce the cooldown time. The 47's have a 5/10 minute cycle.
Same same. It is just a model. No it is not nitpicking just setting the story right.
The OP original question wondered why AH WEP in 47 was not longer when comparing it to the WW2 film.
If AH limited the total time of WEP oh how it would change the game.
In a real P47 was there a water tank level indicator or something to tell how much water injection you had left?
-
A Spit V pilot panicked and ran WEP for 30 minutes to no ill effect on his engine.
What running WEP did was shorten the time between overhauls, something we don't deal with here as we always get a brand new airplane. WEP would increase the chance of engine failure due to the greater strain and pressures put on the engine, but we also don't deal with that here. Heat, like AH or like Il2, is a gameplay mechanism to force the player not to over use WEP.
-
He reckoned it was like having a Gov't sponsored hot-rod to thrash..
you just made our point. With the word thrash.
-
Ground crews certainly didn't enjoy the extra work involved in changing engines that were badly abused. However, they would be far more upset if their pilot and plane failed to come home.
The more considerate pilots took an interest in their crew's work. I could tell you many incidents where pilots can home from a mission, debriefed, had a meal, an maybe got a couple hours of sleep. Then, they showed up on the flight line in overalls to pitch in with that engine change or repair. More than a few would bring them hot coffee, or cold beer or sandwiches. Pilots who cared for the ground crews were beloved. The better officers understood that the effectiveness of that fighter was a team effort. Everyone was important to a successful sortie. These officers made sure that the maintenance crews knew this and showed them appreciation in many useful and practical ways.
Inversely, crews took great pride in their pilots and aircraft. Many a long night was had without complaint. If the Lt. had to abuse his engine to shot down enemy fighters and escape to home, that was alright with them.
Crews beamed with pride when their fighter was festooned with victory symbols. If a pilot and plane were lost, they grieved openly. In the AAF, some Group commanders gave crews time off to grieve, before assigning them to a new plane.
Crew chiefs would raise hell with pilots if they foolishly or needlessly abuse their aircraft. But, should a pilot need to run WEP for 30 minutes in combat, it was different. The pilot and plane came home, and that was all that really mattered.
-
If someone wants to know how AH would be if WEP was limited by irrelevant time between engine overhauls, he can ask the Yak-3 pilots how often is their throttle not jammed all the way forward.
-
Those big Sabers were notoriously unreliable and difficult to maintain.
The Sabre was a prodigious achievement, & yes - it did have development
issues, but, like Grand Prix racers, those pilots flying behind them knew they were operating something special, & went for it..
& Widewing, thanks for your well put & thoughtfully considered post, - in a closely related way, those pilot/ground crew relationships were really quite like those of championship racer & pit crew teams today..