Friday 2010-10-22 Dev. update and Discussion

[Flanker35M]

S!

I remember the Whaa-Whaa when discussing the option of it being clickable. Oleg stated it would be and discussion faded. Now the bandwagon is oohh aaah..Go figure Oleg for sure has put thought to this and not made an half arsed implementation as you can see.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

I remember the Whaa-Whaa when discussing the option of it being clickable. Oleg stated it would be and discussion faded. Now the bandwagon is oohh aaah..Go figure Oleg for sure has put thought to this and not made an half arsed implementation as you can see.

You're right, and I was wrong. Clickable cockpits look very nice.

Cheers,
Insuber

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

AFAIK the position of the mixture control will be set to get the most efficiency. I've never flown a plane with a CSU or super charging, but I think once your plane is set up at a given RPM/throttle you would alter the mixture to get the correct Exhaust Gas Temperature.

In emergency/combat with full throttle and high RPM's to avoid the possiblity of pre-ignition and detonation, I think you'ld be using full rich mixture most of the time. (less efficient but safer - of course when we're up at 20,000 feet that may be different).

In a light plane it's easy, once you've settled into your cruise you reduce your mixture from rich until you you obtain the highest RMP (indicating the most efficient Fuel/Air mixture) then bump the mixture in a bit so your not running to lean.

[EDIT]
Those throttle quadrants didn't have RPM leavers- Hmmm early fixed pich props maybe????????
[\EDIT



Did you mean shooting down a plane with a Bazooka? or was there another equally impressive scene I missed?

Actually i think they are wondering if the mixture lever operated "backwards". In most planes lever forward=rich. However, i've seen a freeware FSX tiger moth add-on and it too had it backwards (lever back=full rich, while in most cases the full back position is the fuel cut-off). Even more so, if you pulled the throttle back in the Moth it would pull the mixture lever back along with it.

Essentially, it was a crude "auto-mixture" method to ensure that the engine was running rich when at low throttle settings.

As for how mixture is set, it's just like you said. If you have a fixed pitch prop you can do it by leaning for maximum RPM at the given throttle setting. If you have a constant speed prop however the RPMs will be constant. In some cases you can still observe a small jump in the RPM needles until the governor system stabilizes under the new forces.

When this is not possible leaning in general aviation aircraft is done with the help of cokcpit instruments, either a fuel flow/power gauge or an exhaust gas temperature (EGT) gauge. It usually involves leaning for magimum EGT, then enriching just a touch to make sure the engine doesn't run too hot (too lean a mixture can cause somewhat of an overheat).

However, i have absolutely no idea how they did it back then in planes with constant speed props (that don't exhibit enough of an RPM difference to indicate the proper leaning point) but no EGT gauges. It's ok doing it in a civilian aircraft, but when people are shooting at you i guess it's a bit harmful keeping your head inside the cockpit for long periods of time, looking to catch a glimpse of a tiny jump of the RPM needle before it stabilizes again due to the pitch governor. I guess it's one of the reasons that mixture was automated to a large extent early on in many designs, either completely in the German ones, or partially like in the US designs (cut off, full rich, plus two automatic settings, one for auto lean for economy during cruise and one for auto rich to keep temps a bit cooler during climb out and combat).

Maybe it was also done "by ear", listening for changes in the engine's sound? Would be interesting to know.

As for running full rich without taking altitude into account, it won't kill the engine (in fact engines run cooler with richer mixture) but it's generally not advisable if you want to develop any kind of serious power. Restored warbirds run richer than specified in the manuals to preserve their old engines, but back in the day they were more concerned with delivering peak power during combat.
I doubt they would ever go to full rich over 8000 feet or so, unless the engine was starved of fuel/stalling due to battle damage and they tried to keep it running no matter what, at the cost of optimum power.

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

I remember the Whaa-Whaa when discussing the option of it being clickable. Oleg stated it would be and discussion faded. Now the bandwagon is oohh aaah..Go figure Oleg for sure has put thought to this and not made an half arsed implementation as you can see.

Yeah, i remember that too, almost nobody wanted it
Just as i was saying at the time, it might not the best interface but it's the easiest one if you want to do in-depth modelling of aircraft systems as we'd be out of available shortcuts (or don't remember them) if we had to map everything to keyboard and HOTAS.
So, it was a question between optionally using the mouse for some controls (i doubt people will be clicking the gun triggers or other vital stuff, things like that will stay on the joystick) in exchange for extra realism, or not using the mouse and not modelling the extra stuff because we lack the controllers for it. The correct answer is of course obvious

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

Actually i think they are wondering if the mixture lever operated "backwards". In most planes lever forward=rich. However, i've seen a freeware FSX tiger moth add-on and it too had it backwards (lever back=full rich, while in most cases the full back position is the fuel cut-off). Even more so, if you pulled the throttle back in the Moth it would pull the mixture lever back along with it.

....
However, i have absolutely no idea how they did it back then in planes with constant speed props (that don't exhibit enough of an RPM difference to indicate the proper leaning point) but no EGT gauges. It's ok doing it in a civilian aircraft, but when people are shooting at you i guess it's a bit harmful keeping your head inside the cockpit for long periods of time, looking to catch a glimpse of a tiny jump of the RPM needle before it stabilizes again due to the pitch governor. I guess it's one of the reasons that mixture was automated to a large extent early on in many designs, either completely in the German ones, or partially like in the US designs (cut off, full rich, plus two automatic settings, one for auto lean for economy during cruise and one for auto rich to keep temps a bit cooler during climb out and combat).

Maybe it was also done "by ear", listening for changes in the engine's sound? Would be interesting to know.

As for running full rich without taking altitude into account, it won't kill the engine (in fact engines run cooler with richer mixture) but it's generally not advisable if you want to develop any kind of serious power. Restored warbirds run richer than specified in the manuals to preserve their old engines, but back in the day they were more concerned with delivering peak power during combat.
I doubt they would ever go to full rich over 8000 feet or so, unless the engine was starved of fuel/stalling due to battle damage and they tried to keep it running no matter what, at the cost of optimum power.
...

I found a copy of the MKII Spitfire pilots notes on Zeno's war birds (close as I could find to a MK I)

There is very little said about adjusting mixture except for the pre-start (Mixture Control -RICH), engine test(test cruse power (WEAK mixture) followed by maximum boost (RICH)), and pre-takeoff (Mixture Control - RICH) checklist. Then two paragraphs use WEAK mixture for maximum range and endurance.

The description of the control is as follows
--------------
14 .
Throttle and mixture controls - The throttle and mixture
levers (10 and 11) are fitted in a quadrant on the port
side of the cockpit . A gate is provided for the throttle
lever in the take- off position and an interlocking device
between the levers prevents the engine from being run on
an unsuitable mixture . Friction adjusters ( 8 ) for the
control s are provided on t he side o f the quadrant.
----------------

I guess the pilots had enough on their plates as it was.

I was never quite happy with the mixture in IL-2 which was basically wait for the brown smoke to start coming out and then drop the mixture one step.

Cheers!

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by Insuber

You're right, and I was wrong. Clickable cockpits look very nice.

Cheers,
Insuber

Now I'm right again, because clickable cockpits only in flight (not for startup) are pretty much useless, as I said then and now. Maybe 1% of people will use it.

Cheers,
Insu

[Sutts]

I am disappointed about no startup procedure. Hopefully third parties can deliver the goodies at a later date. I'm quite happy to wait.

I think many folk have got the wrong idea about these procedures. On most fighters they are very straight forward with very few steps to remember. It's the little details that sometimes give the immersion. For instance the way the engine behaves when you over/under prime it...makes it feel like you're operating a real engine.

I do hope we don't have instant oil pressure and engine temperature. Things like that really kill it for me. I'm hoping the days of hitting the start key, firewalling the throttle and taking off are well and truly over.

At the end of the day I can live without the fully clickable pit but it would be nice to see most systems modelled correctly, either by Oleg or third parties.

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by Sutts

1. On most fighters they are very straight forward with very few steps to remember. It's the little details that sometimes give the immersion.


2. For instance the way the engine behaves when you over/under prime it...makes it feel like you're operating a real engine.

3. At the end of the day I can live without the fully clickable pit but it would be nice to see most systems modelled correctly, either by Oleg or third parties.

1. I think you didn't read starting procedures of WWII time figters... and bombers...Its not very few. Usually more than 20 steps.

2. You'll get more immersion with what we are modeling.

3. Systems and starting procedure is different thing. We model the system(s), instead of table for the start of engine.

[JtD]

Originally Posted by Insuber

Now I'm right again, because clickable cockpits only in flight (not for startup) are pretty much useless, as I said then and now. Maybe 1% of people will use it.

Probably the same 1% that will use a clickable cockpit for startup procedure.

[rollnloop]

I intend to use the mouse for every "no need instinctive access" function.

I' ll most probably will use keyboard for gear, flaps, guns, bombs, and so on, but if there are advanced functions like "select fuel tank", "select preset radio frequency" "switch magnetos on", "press ignition buttons", "use boost pumps", "set reticle lighting" "switch windshield deicing" and so on, i'll use the mouse for these, just to know where the levers and buttons are and when and why use them is extremely immersive imho.

I am very happy to know cockpits are clickable and hope 3rd party will add many clicking functions.

[Antoninus]

Dito. There is plenty of time to use the mouse when you're not engaged in combat; and no need to access many functions during a dogfight.