From the Blenheim IV Pilot's Notes...

[ElAurens]

I received my digital copy of the Blenheim IV (Two Mercury XV engines) Pilot's Notes today.

Very enlightening.

First, Climbing...

"The aeroplane may be climbed in coarse pitch at full throttle (+5lb. Sq. In. boost) if necessary, but this is uneconomical.

(i) Watch the engine temperatures and if these approach the limiting figures, which are only allowed for a comparatively short duration of a climb, the cowling gills should be opened a little. These limits are:

Oil Temperature...................80 C.

Cylinder Head Temperature....210 C (30 minute limit)

The absolute limit of engine speed in level flight (for not more than five minutes) is 2750 rpm at +5lb. boost.

Limits for continuous cruising.

(a) Mixture control NORMAL. 2400 rpm +3.5 lb. boost.

(b) Mixture control WEAK 2400rpm +1.5 lb. boost."


Sure does not sound like the junker we have in the sim does it?

Everything about temperature control of the engines in the sim is whacky.

The real warm up and take off procedure is sort of close to the manual, except of course that you keep the cowl flaps closed on the real aircraft on takeoff and open on warm up. Also our ability to throttle up to taxi should occur much earlier than it does as well.

In short, the Bristol Mercury engines in real life were no more fragile or finicky in their operation than any other air cooled radial. They most certainly were not the fragile egg shells we currently have in game.

I sure hope that luthier and his FM programmer are aware of just how far off they are regarding the air cooled radial engines in the sim.

[furbs]

You clearly have a agenda and are totally wrong and nuts.

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by furbs

You clearly have a agenda and are totally wrong and nuts.

So the in game plane can run 2400 rpm at 3.5 till it runs out of fuel? These performance numbers come directly from the official RAF Pilot's Notes, so you are saying the RAF didn't know it's own aircraft limits?

And why get personal?

Post reported.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by furbs

You clearly have a agenda and are totally wrong and nuts.

No he isn't.

There're a lot of things amiss with all the FM's, we all realise this and evidently so do the Dev's.

There's a slowly growing number of people who also realise that flying the Blen as it is, is a lot of fun.

I'm really looking forward to these two aspects of the Blenheim meeting up, but in the meantime I'm not going to cut my nose off to spite my face!

Flying the Blenheim is really rewarding, and come the day it matches more closely with the pilot's notes, that growing number of people is already racking up hours on the 'training' version.

As I said to El the other day though, the last thing we need is CEM simplifying to 1946 level as a result of critical 'community feedback'.

P.S. @ El, I don't think Furbs was being personal, just a bit ironic, is all

[furbs]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

So the in game plane can run 2400 rpm at 3.5 till it runs out of fuel? These performance numbers come directly from the official RAF Pilot's Notes, so you are saying the RAF didn't know it's own aircraft limits?

And why get personal?

Post reported.

El just read my post again and turn sarcasm radar on mate.

[jimbop]

Interesting, ElAurens. It fits with Blackdog's earlier extracts and is certainly not well modelled in game. Still possible to fly (see ATAG_Dutch's thread) but I challenge anyway to take off with radiators closed! And you definitely can't fly on fine pitch all day.

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

So the in game plane can run 2400 rpm at 3.5 till it runs out of fuel? These performance numbers come directly from the official RAF Pilot's Notes, so you are saying the RAF didn't know it's own aircraft limits?

And why get personal?

Post reported.

You and I have been around this bunch for years *eons.

You definitely know how to ignore the one liners.

[Blackdog_kt]

Yup, just like i said in another thread, it's incorrect yet flyable. I'm a glass half full kind of guy, so i just like to think that if i can get the current, temperamental model up in the air and keep it flying then it will be all the more easier for me to work with the corrected one when it comes.

In other words, yes it should definitely be fixed but it's far from unusable in the meantime. We'll just have to re-learn how to fly it once it gets corrected.

Or, as someone else put it, the pessimist sees the glass as half-full with water, the optimist sees it as half-full with vodka

[ElAurens]

Heartfelt apologies to furbs.

And yeah, I should know better after all these years.

I do have an agenda though.

I want the aircraft performance, for all the aircraft, red and blue, to be as historically accurate as possible.

Sorry for the fuss.

[furbs]

NP mate and thanks for posting this, with luck and more people posting real world data we can get to a FM we can enjoy.