Quote:
Originally Posted by Igo kyu
There will be variations between runs at exactly the same settings (unless they are flown by utterly flawless autopilots)....
|
Oh absolutely and the difference in the graph between 87 and 100 tested in game appears small - repeat tests may well show the difference is due to random variation between tests rather than a real difference between the models in game. Perhaps I misread your post, I was merely pointing out that there should not be a real difference between 87 and 100 octane without boost.
Something that does seem off in the Spit 1a 100Oct vs 87Oct is engine overheat, particularly in the climb and at altitude (not using boost) where the Spit 1a 100Oct is far more sensitive to overheating and so I find I have to use lower power settings in the 100Oct version currently than in the 87Oct version. I haven't done much testing in the Hurricane versions but it wouldn't surprise me if it was a problem here also. It's important to have people testing the new FM as they are WIP and so they can be modeled properly and it's great that people are doing so.
The big cause for concern at the mo is the difference between the modeled ac and rl performance which is off in both the Spit 1a and Hurricane, I haven't seen much data for the 109 but would love to as it's important that all aircraft in game are modeled as accurately as possible and it may well turn out that the 109 is also suffering under-performance.
07-11-2012, 03:32 PM
Threaded Mode