Bf 109 and Mixture
 

Hi Pilots,:)

have a Question about the Bf109 and Mixture. Is it realism that
the Bf109 haven´t a Mixture Lever. I fly the Bf109 with propeller
pitch and flaps, at the online gaming, to fight real. So i miss every
Time the Mixture lever in the Bf109, to control the Petrol Mixture
in 10000 feet ( 3000 Meter ) altitude.:(

Each real Engine will got in trouble, when the Plane reach a particular
altitude. The Mixture will be to rich and the Engine will be flooded and
die off.

Can it be that the original Bf109 haven´t a Mixture Lever?
I cant believe it?:confused:

So i am right, or is it a falsity?:rolleyes:

By the Way:

The older Spitfire have a gasifier , as i know. Why can you make with each Spitfire in IL2
a loop without Engine problems? One Plane in IL2 the "double decker" (dont know the name at this time)
have this gasifier, and act correctly when you make a long loop. Only the Bf109 with the DB 605 Engine
has an injection. This was the great advantage of the BF109. Please correct me, when i make a mistake!

Thanks for your response. I will be very pleased for corrections and opinions.

However, IL2 is the best Simulator which i find on the PC. Only Condor Soaring have a better Flight Dynamic.
The Microsoft FS-X is a very bad Simulator. Every Time when i try to land a Plane on a runway, i
can´t believe how unreal Simulators can be!

Greetz
Rote Dreizehn

Modelled Bf 109 types had historically fully automated mixture settings, no need for input from pilot.

By Gassifier, I assume you mean Carburator. The problem with the early spits and many other planes was negative G's; at the top of a loop, if you are still moving you still have positive g's (usually), so this is not the problem, it's when you push the nose down that the cutout happens. None of the Spits modelled in the game had this problem, but several others do. Try the Hurricane I it has the same engine ad the early spits and the same carburetor problems.

I hope that in BoB we'll have even better engine management and realistic automatic systems as well.

Right now in IL-2 some planes with manual controls require minimal management (some allied planes i've tried mostly), while others that were fitted with automatic systems perform better if you do it manually (namely the A series of fw-190s, the Dora's and the 109s are good on auto but not the Antons).

Of course, these are the limitations of a 7 year old gaming engine, but i'd like to have to fly with proper settings in the next sim, like paying attention to manifold pressure and rpm instead of simply memorizing throttle positions. "Hmm, this is a Dora, i can run 100%+WEP all day long with rads closed, this is an Anton, i can run 100%+WEP with 80-90% pitch and high speed, this is a Mustang, i can ask someone what his memorized settings are, and this is a 109, i can't touch anything except the throttle or the engine will die" :grin:

One of the BIG problems with this kind of simulation: while it doesn't significantly add to the „realism” (short of hiking into a cockpit and putting someone fire .45 rounds at you), it's a hindrance to the people that don't want to memorize some stupid button presses. I mean... When I take off, my sequence is F2-mousepan-L-I-F8-mousepan vertical-PgDown-V-V.
Explanation: in German planes (which I'm flying the most) the pilot is supposed to be a midget, and the cockpit is exageratedly obstructing the view so... F2, to check if there's anyone else taxiing on the runway brackets; the mousepan/TrackIRpan would serve the same purpose, but here I'm explaining why I have to press F2.
Next: L for lights, because (even with the lights on) some other people don't bother to check if I'm already taxiing, and at least my navlights should tell them something.
And so on, and so forth; everybody here knows that right after you press Refly, we're starting an already too long list of keypresses, even before the plane moves a single inch.

My point: complex engine management is just something for the MS FlightSim guys, obsessed to cheat themselves into believing that they really can fly a plane, if faced with a situation. Yeah right... The bad part? Because of the CEM somebody that casually flies a Bf109-G6 A/S can be chased and hunted down by a *theoretically* slower plane, like LaGG, because the LaGG player learned the quirks of the game. So then I ask you, gentlemen: is this really simulation, or just adds to the fact that it's only a game and you can "win" by robotically typing some predefined keysets, memorized by heart and not really calculated?
It's as useless as the separate engine start... It might be realistic, but it just substracts from the fun. Do remember, it's a game and nobody pays you to memorize sequences.
Finally, the last thing that hurts everyone here, lurking to find out sooner some info about the next upcoming patch or the potential Korea sim: each and every "feature" takes time to research and program. Does anybody benefit from this delay? Maybe only the MS guys, programing the CFS4...

Is it really THAT easy? If you want less realism, you always have the option to disable CEM. For those of us who want complex engine management, to modell the flaws of some machines and the difficulties the pilots had during WW2 to use them effectively, this comment is really what you said: YOUR POINT.

If I were you, I wouldn't be so self-confident to call this personal opinion anything close to the common view of the IL2-players, though!

I wonder why this is the case?

Remembering your fuel mixture, prop pitch setting and supercharger heights is what makes this game great.
On ADw we fly ultra realistic...
I would have it no other way.

Well, nobody should stay between you and your happiness to click 7-8 keys :) even if that doesn't accomplish anything but making the "simulation" work as intended, ergo a game where you need to press those 7-8 keys just to make it work.
I suppose from now on it's clear that there are some strong opinions here (which came from the guys used to... press buttons), so the rest of the conversation is just for the sake of it, 'cause I agree that is OK to disagree; at least until I'm going up on a server which (e.g.) enforces the use of CEM. It's a least a nuissance, because on HL you can hardly come about a server which doesn't. I've played this game since 1.02, and it became (sorry, but that's the truth) bloated with conventions and tricks that you need to keep notes of, even if you'd take only a few weeks of pause. Does anybody remember how hard was to keep up-to-date with the whole plethora of add-on instalations? At least the smartest move was to launch an undivided (after that) DVD with 1946, which I run to get even if I had all the content on it.
Does anybody happen to have heard about a Russian guy named Pavlov? He kept around him a soul, and succeeded in making it happy just by turning on a red bulb. Problem is that I don't wanna be forced to jubilate like the pack of red-bulb lovers, but that's the norm online (and sniffed/frowned upon if one dares to say anything against that, much like the case here). And you'd be surprised, but there are a lot of guys that use CEM just because they're forced to comply to that stuck-up rule, or else be banished to precious few and unpopulated servers. It's just a tradition that prevents new players to hop onboard and this doesn't bode well for the future sales, nor for the continuation of this great sim.
The point where nobody tried to answer: why waste valuable resources in implementing a finicky thing that's a pain in the a$$ to use? I fail to see the reason, especially since the documentation about it is kinda scarce and mostly comes in the form of predefined tables obtained by experiment? The PDF docs that came with the game (I don't remember, about 5-6 years ago when it was implemented) present just a generalization, vague norms for some specific planes and not even then as an algorithm, just the info about magnetos, sketchy things about mixture richness etc.

Odd. Why do you think so many servers on HL have enforced CEM if nobody wants it?
Only to turn down rookies? Well, I honestly doubt that many rookies are rushed away because they do have to select their different engines for startup in while using one of the 6 or 8 multi-engined planes in 1946. And Prop-Pitch? Honestly, what rookie does care about that? If you don't fight the aces, you can very well survive without changing these settings (most aces I know have the settings 70 or 100% prop-pitch only, anyway).

I can hardly believe that these 3 or 4 buttons turn down any rookie who is willing to learn to deal with gyro-effects, turbulences, drag, loosing control-surfaces, engine damage, fuel leaks, carrier-takeoffs, different bomb-munitions, bomb-delays and rocket-delays, etc.


On another note the very few planes that have mixture-settings-controls were in the initial release, whereas planes with "press W for unlimited afterburner" were added later on. There is even a settings for using automatic radiators on planes who didn't have such a system. (and radiators only cause light drag, which is not nearly as devastating on flight-performance as the real things, e.g. for the 109.

As I posted before: There is always the option to disable those and there are many servers without CEM. It's just a fact that if you are searching for realistic servers with realistic missions and settings, there is simply no way around getting those few keys memorized or mapped to a joystick. Maybe you should give Falcon4 a try?