radiators have no influence on speed

[TomcatViP]

Hi Dav,

I don't see the same here. Nearly closing fully the rads of my 109 is what give me the 500-kph.

Did you close the oil rad as well and fly the ball centered ? This does impact the speed by raising the drag dramatically IMHO

S!

[David198502]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Hi Dav,

I don't see the same here. Nearly closing fully the rads of my 109 is what give me the 500-kph.

Did you close the oil rad as well and fly the ball centered ? This does impact the speed by raising the drag dramatically IMHO

S!

well yes i have the oil rads as much closed as possible too.regarding the ball centered...no
i dont have rudder pedals yet, so therefore i have the rudder set on a hatswitch on my joystick, which is not really precise, because its devided into steps.
but without changing anything during flight, except opening the water rads, the speed will not decrease.and i zoomed into the gauges to look if it makes a minor difference.but i just couldnt find any in speed.

oh and ace i will not argue with you...you dont have to believe me...you can try it by yourself if you want to, and if you want you can call it pilot error,...i dont care.

[KG26_Alpha]

Providing a track is usually the best way to observe bugs claimed by pilots.

Also "usually" some one will try to replicate your observations and confirm it.

looks like this threads all about standing around puffing on pipes drinking tea and generally hmming and ahhhing.



Bring forth a chart monkey please...............



.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Providing a track is usually the best way to observe bugs claimed by pilots.

Also "usually" some one will try to replicate your observations and confirm it.

looks like this threads all about standing around puffing on pipes drinking tea and generally hmming and ahhhing.

Agreed, a track file is the minimum thing that should be provided when making a claim of an FM error. In that upon observing said track 9 out of 10 can be debunked within the first min of viewing, as in you can see the sim test pilot made a error

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Bring forth a chart monkey please................

Agreed! Log the data as you fly, you will be amazed at the errors you can make!

[BP_Tailspin]

This place never ceases to entertain me …

Originally Posted by David198502

i surprisingly just found out that the rads settings of the 109 have no impact on speed at all...

Should they have an impact on speed?

Originally Posted by David198502

normally i fly with them as much closed as possible, to avoid engine overheating, while maintaining the minimum air resistance...however i found out that one can leave the rads fully open and still reach and hold the top speed in level flight....

Keeping your 109 cool sounds good to me and without a performance hit is even better.

Originally Posted by David198502

that should be looked into by the devs,

I think there busy trying to make the “game” playable.

Originally Posted by David198502

cause i would assume that a fully opened radiator should cause enough surface to slow the aircraft down...

Key word here is “assume”

Originally Posted by David198502

i have to say that this fact is extremely disappointing,

Fact? Please quote your aeronautical engineering data.

Originally Posted by David198502

as CEM and FMs are supposed to be the strengths of this game(sim?)

Key word here is “game” but maybe it’s more of a “sim” than we think. The P51 Mustang’s radiator has a low/no drag design.

“The duct for the radiator was designed to slow the incoming air down. The air could then absorb more heat from the radiator, but the radiator needed to be made larger because of the slower air velocity, which meant installation in the rear fuselage. After the air passed through the radiator, it expanded due to the heat and was accelerated out the back, producing some thrust to counter the drag the radiator caused.”

I don't have the time or energy to do the research the 109’s cooling but here’s some cool (pun intended) data about the pesky little 109 I did find. Instead of beating up the devs … research it and present the data to the devs.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...09g-14026.html

[Flanker35M]

S!

Addman, try to find the book called Lentäjän Näkökulma II (Pilot's Point of View II freely translated). Written by Jukka Raunio. ISBN 951-96866-0-6

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Since David was unable, or unwilling to provide the real 'data' his claim is based on, I figured I would give it a quick look.

To see what all the fuss is about, ie are we talking about

10?
20?
30?
40?

In doing so I found some 109G data but not E data, here is the sorce

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...9/14026pg9.jpg

Now it is really hard to read the speed axis, but it 'looks' like it goes

520
530
540
550
560

If that is the case, than the 'difference' in speed between open and closed is..

5 kph

Which is well within the pilot error noise

Thus, IMHO, the only way to detect this small change is to log the data and account for the pilot errors

PS correct me if I am wrong, but the rads on the 109 changed alot from the E to the G, so, assuming Jerry did a better job on the new rads, we can only assume that the older E rads caused more drag, and thus impacted speed more. But, even if the change was doulbe this, say 10kph, it is still well within the pilot error noise

[addman]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

Addman, try to find the book called Lentäjän Näkökulma II (Pilot's Point of View II freely translated). Written by Jukka Raunio. ISBN 951-96866-0-6

Thanks! Found it at the city library, time to practice on that Finnish of mine.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by BP_Tailspin

This place never ceases to entertain me …

You just contributed quite a few jokes yourself

Originally Posted by BP_Tailspin

Should they have an impact on speed?

Of course.

You're right with a P-51, but completely wrong with a 109 (and Spitfire and Hurricane)

No offence dude

[BP_Tailspin]

Originally Posted by Robo.

You just contributed quite a few jokes yourself



Of course.

You're right with a P-51, but completely wrong with a 109 (and Spitfire and Hurricane)

No offence dude

Jokes? What jokes?

What did I say that was wrong with a 109?

"No offence dude" none taken