Intake burnt, oil gasket leak.

[seiseki]

So, as I try out a mission, with complex engine management and all, flying in a spitfire, my engine gets messed up as soon as I take over the controls from the AI.

Says:
Engine 1: Intake burnt!
Engine 1: Oil gasket leak!
Engine 1: water radiator perforated!

I'm most likely doing something wrong, just curious as to what.

[Deadstick]

I'm most likely doing something wrong, just curious as to what.

Not reading about Complex Engine Management in the manual?

From what I read, it is a step up from IL 2 in realism. They advise turning OFF engine overheating in the realism options to start out with, and do not use Neg G's in Spits or Hurris, roll inverted if you must do those kinds of things.

[Toaster]

Originally Posted by Deadstick

Not reading about Complex Engine Management in the manual?

From what I read, it is a step up from IL 2 in realism. They advise turning OFF engine overheating in the realism options to start out with, and do not use Neg G's in Spits or Hurris, roll inverted if you must do those kinds of things.

Im guessing thats due to the fact that the Fuel System is Gravity fed?

[seiseki]

Interesting, I thought it was just like in IL-2..

I set my radiator to 50% and it seemed to be working..

The engine goes nuts a bit each time I push the stick forward slightly..
What a pain

[Deadstick]

Im guessing thats due to the fact that the Fuel System is Gravity fed?

Yup, they have modeled the Carburettors how they really were apparently...another reason to fly 109s.

[Toaster]

Originally Posted by Deadstick

Yup, they have modeled the Carburettors how they really were apparently...another reason to fly 109s.

I just try never to fly nose down :p il take a Black out over a Red out any day...i like my eyes too much

[Moggy]

Originally Posted by Deadstick

Yup, they have modeled the Carburettors how they really were apparently...another reason to fly 109s.

However, did you know that if the 109 had the same fuel system as the Hurricane and Spitfire...it would of had greater engine power? The Merlin puts it fuel through the supercharger thus cooling the air and providing greater horsepower. The 109 with it's direct fuel injection didn't and thus loses out on the extra power. 1 less reason to fly 109s

This is explained by Sir Stanley Hooker in the excellent BBC documentary Spitfire! Two seconds to kill. If you're in the UK, you can view it here (watch from about 26:00 in);

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/battleo...in/11405.shtml

[Erkki]

Originally Posted by Moggy

However, did you know that if the 109 had the same fuel system as the Hurricane and Spitfire...it would of had greater engine power? The Merlin puts it fuel through the supercharger thus cooling the air and providing greater horsepower. The 109 with it's direct fuel injection didn't and thus loses out on the extra power. 1 less reason to fly 109s

This is explained by Sir Stanley Hooker in the excellent BBC documentary Spitfire! Two seconds to kill. If you're in the UK, you can view it here (watch from about 26:00 in);

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/battleo...in/11405.shtml

And yet the light DB engine had better power-to-weight ratio.

[TeeJay82]

ill take fuel injection over carburator any time... in the end i think the extra HP you got, you will loose due to constant engine management

Originally Posted by Moggy

However, did you know that if the 109 had the same fuel system as the Hurricane and Spitfire...it would of had greater engine power? The Merlin puts it fuel through the supercharger thus cooling the air and providing greater horsepower. The 109 with it's direct fuel injection didn't and thus loses out on the extra power. 1 less reason to fly 109s

This is explained by Sir Stanley Hooker in the excellent BBC documentary Spitfire! Two seconds to kill. If you're in the UK, you can view it here (watch from about 26:00 in);

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/battleo...in/11405.shtml

Oh puh-lease Moggy

You really expected to hear Sir Stanley Hooker saying "actually...erm... our engines were a bit like cottage farm compared to the German ones, but hey, we had a little gizmo that they didn't have!"

Allowing to fly a plane with an engine that didn't permit negative G manouvres was simply criminal, but that's all they had, so let's not get carried away with your love for the Spit and Hurri, you can't change the fact that the DB601 was a superior engine,period.

I reckon that the struts for the tail horizontal surfaces on the Me109 as opposed to the clean Spit and Hurri tail section makes more of an interesting story, there's actually an espionage tale about it too, with a German agent was trying to steal the secret of the tail structure in the UK. I remember overhearing the conversation some years ago, but cant remember the details.