Quote:
Originally Posted by Flanker35M
S!
I recall Oleg mentioned a clickable cockpit in a post not too long ago so that could indicate we get procedures. But I would guess this feature is tied to difficulty settings, that at lower settings it works like in IL-2 by pressing a single button engine starts etc. For me having to start up the engine and warm it etc. is part of the immersion and a way to emulate what these lads did back then. But tastes are different..
|
That was on the check-six interview. It was confirmed that everything was modelled, from start-up sequences to turning on the de-icers when climbing through clouds in order to clear the canopy of the mist.
Plus,
Quote:
Originally Posted by robtek
One should not forget that those "procedures" have a great influence in the air combat!!!!
If one doesn't follow the procedures in i.e. the engine handling one will pay for it big time in power loss!
What is a spit or a 109 with 500hp? right, a sitting duck waiting to be shot at.
The engine start up is a procedure that always is the same, with very minor modifications.
There is no reason not to put it on 1 key and the switches and handles are moved automatically, but manually one should be just a bit faster doing it 
Also the procedures in the stuka for the dive attack, cooler closed (engine stays warm!), prop pitch to "feather"(no over rpm), trim to neutral (straight dive), "Hoehenlader" to "Bodenlader" (no manifold overpressure), release altitude set, dive brakes out.
Just one thing missed and one won't be on target or gets problems getting away. |
Robtek is right on the money here. Why do you think that most of the pilots who got shot down and survived to talk about it shared a common phrase among them? "I didn't even see him coming".
Because these birds are not supposed to be easy to fly, "turn the nose around and have at it" affairs, which requires people to keep their heads in the cockpit for extended periods of time, even taking quick looks at the instruments during combat. If this wasn't the case then aircraft designers wouldn't bother inventing the head up display as it would not be needed, but history and practical application suggest otherwise.
Bottom line is that up to now, we've been having it way too easy in combat simulators that focus on prop-driven warbirds. This is neither realistic nor conducive to extra gameplay possibilities, as it takes out a huge chunk of tactical considerations and decision making process from combat. It is also not easy to model, because in many cases we lack the interface to do it properly. We either have to use the entire keyboard plus a HOTAS with profiler software (more realistic but more expensive too), or resort to using the mouse and clicking on things (a bit clunky at times but as cheap as the price of your mouse).
Of course, some people might want it easy and that's their choice on how they want to fly the sim. No worries at all, use the difficulty settings and tone it down a notch, fly in the appropriate relaxed difficulty servers and everyone is happy
As for the topic at hand, i agree that exceeding manifold pressure limits (or specified time limits during which over-boosting is briefly allowed,eg WEP) should damage the engine. Maybe not outright seizing it, but resulting in a more subtle and gradual degradation of performance which, if left unattended, would result in the engine seizing, starting a fire or blowing a cylinder or two. Also, using high MP with low RPM should result in damage from exceeding the torque limits as well.