Spit Mk1 Boost?

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by =XIII=Wedge

Isn't that because all you are doing is overriding the automatic boost control system.

With an engine modification to the Merlin III and the use of 100 octane fuel it was possible to to override the automatic boost control system and get up to + 12 lbs boost although this is considered an overload condition.

With the automatic boost control engaged the boost is limitied to + 6.25 lbs.

Unfortunately we do not have this in the game currently - e.g unmodified Merlin III engine using 87 octane fuel.

Oh no here it goes again with the 12lb

Ohooo and what a surprise it's a new name

I tell you one thing oh great devs for the sake of this forum, never put a new Spit in game.

[SEE]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

I tell you one thing oh great devs for the sake of this forum, never put a new Spit in game.

.....fixing the ones already in it would be nice ......Spit Mk1a top speed 230/240mph at 18K, wrong prop and 0.002lbs boost? They neeed to check the MOD performace reports carried out in 1938 on the Spit Mk1 ...even with a two speed prop it is signicantly better than in CloD!

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

Agreed, same with the 109. All the FM's are off, most worse than others (IIa is the exception for fighters). But should they fix the FM's and not worry about the actual game engine first? That's counter-productive, as then fixing the engine would break the FM's again (the FM's are coded according to the engine). Give it time... 1946 is what, 13 years old? And its still being patched...

1946 certainly didn't come out in 1998, it was Dec 2006 and in NA in March 2007. Il-2 Sturmovik was released Nov 2001.

[Ze-Jamz]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

I tell you one thing oh great devs for the sake of this forum, never put a new Spit in game.

They can put what they like in TC on whatever side they too just make sure the both sides have the correct FM's to play with

[=XIII=Wedge]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Oh no here it goes again with the 12lb

Ohooo and what a surprise it's a new name

I tell you one thing oh great devs for the sake of this forum, never put a new Spit in game.

I do not see how having a low post count makes me a new name, having joined this forum 8 months before you kind self.

I answered the question of why I understand there is no affect when disabling the ABC in the Spitfire Mk1.

I have no problem with what we have in the game, however would support any changes to the FM for any plane of any nation that would be more in line with the factual reality or close approximation based on historical sources.

However, you clearly do not share this goal.

[TomcatViP]

Seems I alrdy read this ... and I know how it goes when they say "based on historical sources" and bla bla bla

No offense Wedge but I tell you this way of putting the case frwd is alrdy over done.

What is surprising me most of the time is that this kind of debate turns always ard the myth of 12lb eng when the FM of the Spitfire we have in game is alrdy grossly over enthusiastic and so much wld hve to be done. Only Flipper the Dolphin won't see that. But that is seldom heard

[SEE]

In fairness, Wedge is supporting accurate FM for all ac. Thats the holy grail and tough to get right. Some of these ac are still flying, we have many Pilot accounts as well as technical literature avaialble to get it 'approximate' .

It may well be that we would be mightily disappointed if the FM were modelled 100% ....

I spoke to a BoB vet Spit pilot at the Duxford Air Show (Group Captain Peter Gilpin - CBE, DFC 253 Squadron). I asked him many questions about the various Spits he flew. He answered every question then, out of curiosity, asked why I wanted to know such intricate and precise details. I explained to him I had a 'Simulator' and described CloD as a piece of software, the MP aspect, etc........he replied......" How interesting, sounds like a good game'......if only he knew how serious we take it.

[TomcatViP]

I don't think we are taking it seriously (I don't) but has long grown kids we pay attention to details and are unforgivable about what a modern Sim shd be.

As I hve alrdy said I am not expecting CoD devs to accuratly simulate the full range of mechanical and fluids mechanical behavior of a WWII plane. What we are expecting (and let me talk not only on my own name) is an average comprehension of the environment where things behave in an orderly manner with drag, lift, gravity, eng pw and dyn forces and so on the only words spoken by the FM engine. And not popularity, pubic expectations, dark lobbying etc...

IMHO CFS & IL2 did prove that the contrary is not anymore enjoyable by the masses of potential players (take a look at the nbr of copies sold and the average nbr of online players). Only some dozen heavily represented on public forums were satisfied with that.

The future lies on Online gaming. This is where the revenue's margins would be taken.

It is just like any sport. The first thing to do is to draw a squared box on the ground and write a few rules that the enjoyment begin.ANd billions are made on that very basic principles !

But wait .... it seems fairly opposite to any savage modding

[SEE]

I agree Cheesehawk, BTW, I never asked Peter Gilpin any questions regards the Axis ac, just techy questions about the various Spits he flew.

As for Spit Pilot recollections, a good read for Spit Jockeys is 'Malta Spitfire' which was written during and shortly after the Malta campaign by Canadian Spit Pilot George Beurling. You pick up all sorts of useful info - MG Ammo Loadouts, etc, (Inc - Tracer - Ap - Ball).

Also, not only a useful discussion for ourselves but feedback to the Devs.....look at the number of hits on these FM threads alone.

[=XIII=Wedge]

Realism in IL2-Cliffs of Dover
"The flight sim we've built in Cliffs of Dover is much bigger than anything we've built before. We made it more realistic in every respect: graphics, plane models, physics, aerodynamics, weapons, customisability, and more."
Ilya Shevchenko - Pilot's Notes - Special Edition

The goal of greater realism is one the development team share.

For example, if the game currently modelled the Spitfire Mk 1A with 2 x 20 mm Hispano cannon, I would conclude that this was an genuine mistake on the part of the developer and raise it as a bug. If the developer then responded that this was by design then I would not be interested in using such a sim, they might might as well have modelled X-Wing fighters instead.

Also what would be the value in modlling different models of the same aircraft, not just the different marks, but even down to different propellors.

The fact is they wouldn't if they did not intend to strive for greater realism.

Whilst we can all discuss the merits of various sources regarding aircraft performance, ultimately it is down to the developers to decide on what parameters they want to use.

However if they did not want to strive for realism then it seems strange to spend time developing and engine to model so many features. If realism was not a goal then a simpler engine design would suffice saving time and money.

Whilst FM discussions are difficult, some elements can be modelled with a reasonable level of realism, hence...

Back to the Boost Cutout
So getting back on topic we end up with a couple of questions

Given a Spitfire Mk1A with with an unmodified Merlin III engine using 87 octane fuel.
When the boost cutout is engaged
Then what behaviour is expected? (as intended by the developers)
And how does this correspond with actual behaviour observed in the current version of the game.

Another question is what would the actual effect be on a real 1940's Spitfire?

The first question is easy for the developer to answer, the second is something that I am interested in from an understanding point of view.