Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   Daidalos Team discussions (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=202)
-   -   FW190 FM Change (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=29083)

JtD 05-30-2012 05:05 AM

Regarding the speed figures from ww2aircraftperformance. You'll see the effect of the engine gap. This was not sealed in real life. In performance calculations it was assumed sealed, because the model wasn't exact enough. So tests with gap sealed as well as Fw performance calculation show higher speeds than were attainable with the real D-9. So for reasonable real life performance, take the green line (Fw Flugmechanik, 15.12.44), and subtract 10-15 km/h for the effect of the engine gap.

3250 rpm were allowed for 30 mins max., unless the engine exceeded temperature limits.

Z1024 05-30-2012 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JtD (Post 430168)
Regarding the speed figures from ww2aircraftperformance. You'll see the effect of the engine gap. This was not sealed in real life. In performance calculations it was assumed sealed, because the model wasn't exact enough. So tests with gap sealed as well as Fw performance calculation show higher speeds than were attainable with the real D-9. So for reasonable real life performance, take the green line (Fw Flugmechanik, 15.12.44), and subtract 10-15 km/h for the effect of the engine gap.

If you are basing your La7 FM on the "эталон"(prototype) La7, why not use the FW's figures with the sealed engine gap?
The real life La7s that saw combat would surely be noticeably slower than the prototype?

So if you choose top stats for FMs that green line would be a good model for the 44 Dora, and the C3 line would be a good model for D9 45.

In reality, the Il2 compare figure @2000m is 625km/h and FW data shows at least 650km/h. Even the captured D9 (sealed gap) shows 645km/h.
And finally, even the captured 190 with the gap not sealed shows 630km/h.

So across the board FW190D9 MW50 figures are (often way)lower than it was in reality, while La7s(for example) is represented by the prototype model (so it was in the perfect shape for those trials when they got 680km/h) or even slightly better (Il2 Compare shows 682km/h). Many Russian sources(not just Wikipedia) state La7s top speed was 661km/h. So why 682km/h? That's even more than the prototype's figure!

Is it just me of this does indeed look biased?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JtD (Post 430168)
3250 rpm were allowed for 30 mins max., unless the engine exceeded temperature limits.

If 3250 was allowed for 30 min max that kinda gives a ballpark estimate of the engine endurance, doesn't it? Why would they allow it for 30 min if engine overheated in under 2min and died in 5 even with the open radiator while going ~600 km/h? That doesn't make any sense.

And what about the 1944 vs 1945 issue - why the 1944 D9MW50 is in 1945 plane set but 1945 La7(3 cannon version) is in 1944?

Z1024 05-30-2012 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadBlaster (Post 430113)
To measure the time to overheat, you should really start from take-off when the "virtual" engine of the D-9 is cold with rad open, then see how long it takes. Not when the engine is already warm. Also keep in mind each map is modeled different temperature, effects of cooling from airspeed.

There is no ground take off in QMB. It always starts mid-air. Are you sure quick missions start with the warm engine?
Either way, in my tests(on the Crimea map, 100m alt) D9 MW50 overheats in 1:05m, La7 in 1:30 and Spit 25lbs in 1:55m. (all closed/auto radiator)

So 4.11 Dora is seriously crippled not only top speed wise, but also engine endurance wise as well.

Another interesting observation - the spit flew full 19 mins @110% before the engine died and it didn't show any signs of damage until maybe 12min into flight. D9 died in ~3:30 and La7 in 4:30. I understand that the time to failure is not fixed in this new patch, but still, these are the figures I got.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadBlaster (Post 430113)
Think about it. 3250 is very high rpms even today for piston engine. This isn't even water cooled! High rpms creates more heat and that will break down the oil/lubricant chemical bonds and then the engine damage.

Sorry but Jumo213A IS liquid cooled and it was rated for 30 min at that rpm.
Now that might look high, but Junkers engineers allowed that, so they probably knew their engine better and knew what they were doing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadBlaster (Post 430113)
Learn to use force of gravity in combination with your engine, this will get you your speed in any plane. Use the high rpms to get torque at your low speeds for acceleration, then lower the rpms and atas to keep it cool when your moving fast.

I just leave pitch at auto and control in with the throttle.
My problem is not that it overheats, but that water cooled Dora overheats faster than air cooled La7 and much faster than water cooled Spitfire 25lbs.
This is not correct, besides, MW50 should actually cool the engine, and increase its efficiency.

csThor 05-30-2012 10:41 AM

*Cough* Select "Scramble" in QMB and you get your take-off. ;)

Z1024 05-30-2012 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 430219)
*Cough* Select "Scramble" in QMB and you get your take-off. ;)

Where is that? I can't see anything called "Scramble" in the QMB

csThor 05-30-2012 11:04 AM

There must be a dropdown menu to choose the type of mission. That list includes a scramble type mission.

Z1024 05-30-2012 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 430225)
There must be a dropdown menu to choose the type of mission. That list includes a scramble type mission.

Oh, the "Target" menu. Not very intuitive :) Thank you, much appreciated :)

MadBlaster 05-30-2012 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Z1024 (Post 430217)
There is no ground take off in QMB. It always starts mid-air. Are you sure quick missions start with the warm engine?
Either way, in my tests(on the Crimea map, 100m alt) D9 MW50 overheats in 1:05m, La7 in 1:30 and Spit 25lbs in 1:55m. (all closed/auto radiator)

So 4.11 Dora is seriously crippled not only top speed wise, but also engine endurance wise as well.

Another interesting observation - the spit flew full 19 mins @110% before the engine died and it didn't show any signs of damage until maybe 12min into flight. D9 died in ~3:30 and La7 in 4:30. I understand that the time to failure is not fixed in this new patch, but still, these are the figures I got.


Sorry but Jumo213A IS liquid cooled and it was rated for 30 min at that rpm.
Now that might look high, but Junkers engineers allowed that, so they probably knew their engine better and knew what they were doing.


I just leave pitch at auto and control in with the throttle.
My problem is not that it overheats, but that water cooled Dora overheats faster than air cooled La7 and much faster than water cooled Spitfire 25lbs.
This is not correct, besides, MW50 should actually cool the engine, and increase its efficiency.


- you can always use full mission builder to make your own mission and take off from the ground.

- okay, so it's water cooled. whatever. 30 minutes, whatever. it's virtual. there is no water, there is no air, there is no plane. it is all pretend.;)

- iirc, the 213 is modified/beefed up 211. the 211 had much lower rpm power band. the point is 3250 is a high rpm for piston engine, creates a lot of heat no matter water cooled or not, and you can't expect to cruise around in your plane like that. that's not what the high rpm part of the power band is for.

- even if there is a cooling effect from mw50 and the engine is water cooled, it is not enough to overcome the additional heat caused by running the engine at 3250 rpms! eventually, there is no more heat exchange with the oil, radiator water and outside air. The engine just keeps getting hotter and bad things start to happen to the engine.

-i forgot to mention, to engage the mw50, your supposed to reduce your throttle first or you get engine damage. unless they changed that in 4.11. but I fly up3 rc4 based on 4.10.

JtD 05-30-2012 02:44 PM

Il-2 compare date is not corrected to standard conditions, full throttle altitudes are lower than they are in real life data corrected to standard conditions. This effects speeds.

I have no intention of discussing the La-7 in a Fw 190 flight model topic.

Time limits and temperature limits are separate limits, they are about as related as dive and load limits.

You should install 4.11.1.

Z1024 05-30-2012 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JtD (Post 430284)
Il-2 compare date is not corrected to standard conditions, full throttle altitudes are lower than they are in real life data corrected to standard conditions. This effects speeds.

What are the standard conditions then and what is the value of IL2Compare if they are not indicative of the il2 plane specs?

I can't achieve even the il2 compare speeds in a FW - usually 25-30kmh slower. In a La-7 the it is only 5kmh slower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JtD (Post 430284)
I have no intention of discussing the La-7 in a Fw 190 flight model topic.

Fine, I might create a new topic.

I am using 4.11.1m


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:23 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.