Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-24-2013, 11:48 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxGunz View Post
Those are the ones in IL2Compare 4.07m, the last IL2C I have.
There's a 4.11 IL2 Compare kicking around. Haven't seen a 4.12 yet...
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-25-2013, 07:34 AM
Monty_Thrud's Avatar
Monty_Thrud Monty_Thrud is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceFire View Post
There's a 4.11 IL2 Compare kicking around. Haven't seen a 4.12 yet...
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=29744

Scroll down for 4.11
__________________

Last edited by Monty_Thrud; 07-25-2013 at 09:11 AM. Reason: wibble
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-25-2013, 09:54 AM
MaxGunz MaxGunz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 471
Default

I've had IL2C 4.11 and 4.07m for a while it turns out, just only a shortcut to 4.07m on the desktop. 4.07m version is off now, 4.11 link in place and holy cow now I see the confusion! I forgot about the rabbit Spitfire versions and now I have to wonder why is there no P-51D with empty fuselage tank and CoG to match? Then we could hear a new verse or chorus to 'stang-whining based upon stick forces too high.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-01-2013, 09:52 PM
pandacat pandacat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 87
Default

It's quite interesting to see post-510kph, 2700rpm actually accelerates faster than 3000rpm for p51c. Btw, do you have similar data on P51Ds? 5nt and 20na. I would expect slightly worse performance. Also, it's surprising to see 109G series has slower acceleration than mustangs given 109 has higher power to mass ratio.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-02-2013, 12:55 AM
MaxGunz MaxGunz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 471
Default

Consider how CSP's work in the case of the P-51.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-02-2013, 01:25 PM
pandacat pandacat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 87
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxGunz View Post
Consider how CSP's work in the case of the P-51.
But doesn't everybody else have CSP, too? Spit, 109, 190? Or P51's CSP is somewhat special? For spit and 109, it seems from the charts that 3000rpm always accelerates faster than 2700rpm
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-02-2013, 03:12 PM
MaxGunz MaxGunz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 471
Default

At what speed and altitude? Compare the whole Ps graphs.

Consider the drag as size and coefficient, P-51 is bigger.

Where is the supercharger working best compared to the alt?

The speed of the plane has much to do with the optimal blade angle but mostly...

When you command more prop rpm than the plane has power to support, the prop will flatten a bit and you'll lose some thrust.

Most IL2 planes have some form of pilot-controlled CSP and some are even more automated though there are pre and early war models that don't have CSP all the way down to fixed props.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-02-2013, 08:39 PM
horseback horseback is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 190
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pandacat View Post
But doesn't everybody else have CSP, too? Spit, 109, 190? Or P51's CSP is somewhat special? For spit and 109, it seems from the charts that 3000rpm always accelerates faster than 2700rpm
Mustang's throttle is supposed to control manifold pressure directly, rather than just the amount of fuel going to the engine,as in other types. During the 10k tests, I ran the Spit IX LF at 2700 and 3000 rpm to see if there was a difference, and 3000 rpm was always superior at all speeds.

The Mustang is a bit different. If you look at the 10k charts, there is a point at which the Mustang at 2700 rpm will accelerate more quickly than at 3000rpm, and it reaches top speed much sooner after the three or so earlier 10 kph intervals. In the thicker air at 100 meters, this doesn't seem to happen, or at least it isn't as obvious.

Currently building my 5k database, which will probably show a transitional difference somewhat less than the 10k tests for the Mustang at 2700 vs 3000rpm; it will probably be more pronounced at 15k and 25k.

cheers

horseback
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.