Quote:
Originally Posted by greybeard1
REALLY?
REALLY? What about the top realism fame of this game during last ten years? And who grants that's not still so... a joke, I mean?
Actually, heat to waste in internal combustion engine is about three times power developed and this latter is directly proportional to MAP, not to RPM, which is a consequence (that's to say an output, not an input) and, secondarily, by mixture, that contributes to take away some warm before the cooling system does.
There are official values for max time allowed for each power setting in standard atmosphere on aircraft flight manuals: if matched in game they're correctly modeled, otherwise NOT (no matter how many testimonies and fancy theories we can take out).
Regards,
GB
|
For one, starting the first quote from where you did takes what was said out of context and completely changes the meaning. Really.
Secondly, the "top realisim fame" you mention, though warranted when making a general comparison to other WWII flight games, was never by any means a trait homogeneous within the sim. There were numerous unrealistic aspects, including how the engine temp/condition model was implemented. When set up and flown properly, oil and water/cylinder head temps of a given aircraft shouldn't tease the upper limits of the maximum temperature range while configured and established for economy cruise, and quickly go beyond pegging the indicators when adding more mercury and adjusting the RPM accordingly when you needed to do something urgently, which is exactly what happened in pre-4.11 aircraft. The indications in v4.11 show much more plausible indications and now can be read with much more confidence than in the past, which is the reason I suggested turning off the HUD messages. The simulation of the current model my not be
Transas-level realistic, but is sure is a hell of a lot better than what it was before. If you're inclined to believe that the current model is a joke, as you eluded to, then by all means you are certainly welcome to do so. Really.
What you talk about in the relation of MP, mixture, and RPM makes
some sense in simplistic terms, but I get the impression that, for the sake of validating your argument, you minimized the importance and utility of RPMs. When you're talking about complex, military grade, turbo, super, or turbo-supercharged WWII era aircraft piston engines and their propeller systems, discussing such operating principles to any appreciable understanding can become lengthy. There are plenty of sources online and at bookstores and libraries that can explain this subject in great detail.