Any thoughts on new neg G cutout post beta patch?

[Targ]

This is directed at people that were thought it was off and to sensitive.

What are your thoughts on it now?

[IvanK]

Pretty good.

[41Sqn_Banks]

(old values were sneezing at .5G, and cut-out at .25 which we felt were dead on, but this apparently confused most of the players)

The old values were right, the new values are wrong.

[Wolf_Rider]

here's something to mine...

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/archive/f-59.html

[Extreme_One]

I couldn't get the engine to cut out last night no matter what I did.
I even ended up doing a complete push over loop and still the engine kept running. The revs were reduced but the engine didn't die even under extreme negative G.

Doesn't seem right to me.

[Targ]

I dunno Ivan,

seems way off to me now. It did seem a bit sensitive before and may have needed to be tweaked a bit but now?



I pushed the stick all the way forward until a red out happened and the plane righted itself going in the opposite direction and the engine never sputtered or cut out. It did seem to lose some RPM but kept pushing the plane thru the air.

I did barrel rolls, loop de loops and everything else I could think of and the most noticable cut out was when pushing the stick all the way forward and pointing the nose straight down it did seem to lose RPM and than after a slow bit cut of very gently but came back to full power as soon as any pressure was lifted off the stick.

[klem]

Originally Posted by Targ

This is directed at people that were thought it was off and to sensitive.

What are your thoughts on it now?

First of all we no longer have a ridiculously overmodelled reduced G effect for the Merlins.

Secondly we do have an engine cut on heavily reduced or -ve G which hits performance and is a lot nearer to the truth than the original. I haven't had the opportunity to pitch it against a diving 109 yet.

Lets think about what might be right. We all want that. Someone posted reduced/negative G notes from the pilots General Flying Notes, well these are not specific Merlin notes. I set a lot of store by a current Hurricane I pilot's actual flying experience and opinion and frankly there's a lot of guessing and wishful thinking going on here from people who have never flown one themselves. Even carefully calulated assessments may not be correct although Viper's calculations are detailed, explanatory and pretty close to what our friendly pilot has said. Just how much nearer to the truth do you think you are going to get without specific Merlin notes and performance charts?

So much for what might be right.

But, is it now modelled correctly? I don't know, I suspect it might be a little off (pure speculation), and I was surprised when Luthier said:
"* Completely removed overload assessment from carburetters. Rolls-Royce engines will now cut if overload is negative, and will not cut if it is positive. (old values were sneezing at .5G, and cut-out at .25 which we felt were dead on, but this apparently confused most of the players)"

His original values of 0.5G and perhaps 0.25G weren't that far off what we have been hearing from good sources. So why did we have problems? One or two people may have touched on the answer. If the onset delay was not included or modelled reasonably we may well have had problems because the starvation and rich cut were not instantaneous but they appeared to be instantaneous in level flight assuming there was some turbulence.

Currently we have a workable Merlin engine model. The engine does cut, as IvanK has demonstrated, and more sensibly than it did before. No it won't STOP if only due to windmilling and if I understand Viper correctly he is saying that there may still be combustion occurring at some level. The 109s still have an advantage diving away.

In the longer run 1C may have time to review how they are modelling this and perhaps find a need to revise it, just as they may need to look at the 109 pilot's gripes, but meantime the Merlin is reasonably on track.

At the moment there are now many other issues that need sorting (which may well include any performance issues for the 109).

I really hope that during the following patched they do find a good tweak for the Merlin that is fairly representative for the realistic behaviour. With the current patch the behaviour is just like old IL2. Back then it was alright but now completely different story.

Also the 109 needs an overhaul. I did many repetivite flights and I think the performance is not quite right on some points. I cannot yet tell what exactly apart from the speed issue. However my perception may be falsified by the uber-AI capabilities which also needs to be addressed in one patch or another.

But with the new patch the dev team showed what they are capable of and if this continues like this CoD will be a benchmark for flightsims for the next 10 years as the old IL2 was in its time.

[IvanK]

Please read this related post from the realism thread:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...9&postcount=33

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Please read this related post from the realism thread:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...9&postcount=33

I have no problem if cutout is now modelled correctly since the planes are easier to fly and I like them. I am not qualified to comment.

However, the change log did state that the devs thought they had it right in the first place. I think this is where the dumbing down comments stem from. I.e. they changed the model from what they thought was correct to something else. Also, I don't think there's anything wrong with luthier's English, assuming he wrote it!