4.11 and Engine Overheat

[IceFire]

Been flying the P-40 quite a bit recently and although it will overheat a fair bit, especially on desert maps where the ambient temperature at low altitudes is higher, backing off on the prop pitch settings to bring the RPM down just a bit usually solves all overheat issues. I think I was running at 90% or 95% and the power is still there but the overheat is dramatically reduced.

[Kwiatek]

What i think new overheat model is not so realistic like some think. Most WW2 planes had 5-10 minutes emergency power use and about 1/2 hour for nominal power. I doubt it is possible to fly now in 4.11 in most planes for about 1/2 hour nominal power ( 100% power without WEP) without overheating. I think in most planes previous overheating model was more realistic then with 4.11.

[EZ1]

Seems to me that the official release is a bit more like a beta.

[Aviar]

I do hope DT continues to refine the overheat functions. Overall, I think they are doing a great job with it. However, some planes may need a little tweeking. For instance, I fly the Tempest and the P-38 a lot.

The P-38 overheats very quickly, especially on a Pacific map. Don't even think about using 100% throttle...even 90% will get you in trouble. Forget about anything higher. Also, other US planes such as the F6F and F4U run much cooler than the P-38. The P-38 in particular just does not seem right....at least when compared to it's contemporaries.

Now with the Tempest, I rarely get an overheat situation, and I run it at much higher throttle settings than the P-38.

The strange thing is that both engines are liquid cooled, so you would think they would have similar overheat qualities. They are not even close, as far as the game is concerned.

Aviar

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Aviar

The P-38 overheats very quickly, especially on a Pacific map. Don't even think about using 100% throttle...even 90% will get you in trouble. Forget about anything higher. Also, other US planes such as the F6F and F4U run much cooler than the P-38. The P-38 in particular just does not seem right....at least when compared to it's contemporaries.


Aviar

According to pilot reports the p38 overheated if the leading edge of the wing was damaged or the turbo was out but otherwise did not really overheat even at excessive boosts. Apparently the turbo blew first.

Note however the anecdotes below are about using high boost for sustained high speed flight. They are NOT talking low speed turn fights, Vx climbs or stall climbs.

MAJOR JOHN W. MITCHELL, USAAF and CAPTAIN THOMAS G. LANPHIER, USAAF, P-38 Pilots - Guadalcanal, interviewed Bureau of Aeronautics 18 June 1943 http://www.researcheratlarge.com/Air...dalcanalP-38s/

Page 6 -
... the whole leading edge of the wings is inner-cooled, and a lot of our planes were damaged in the leading edge of the wing, and eventually the motor acted up. In most of our engine failures they've had some warning and feathered the propeller.

Q. Could you use the engine with the turbo cut out?

A. It heats up.


Page 10 -
... we abused the supercharger somewhat. On the mission just mentioned, chasing a Jap full throttle, I was getting about 45 inches and indicating 265-270. Another time I was right down on the tree tops, indicating 310 miles an hour with almost a full ammunition load, full throttle. The needle went clear around past the two so-called stops, to about 10. I guess I was getting about 65 Inches out of each engine, and I held that for about eight or nine minutes, two or three minutes on the ground until the Japs got down to my level. Then, with all that speed, I started to climb, and immediately left them behind. For about eight or nine minutes I gave those two Allisons full power, and the supercharger had turned in long since. Neither engine heated up ...

[FC99]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

Most WW2 planes had 5-10 minutes emergency power use and about 1/2 hour for nominal power. I doubt it is possible to fly now in 4.11 in most planes for about 1/2 hour nominal power ( 100% power without WEP) without overheating.

Who says that 100% in game is equivalent of nominal power in RL?

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by FC99

Who says that 100% in game is equivalent of nominal power in RL?

THIS pretty much solves all problems.

the one thing about il2 engine management was that 100% was considered the "use at all times safe engine setting" this was not, it isn't , and it will never be true.

most planes have the "use at all times safe engine setting" at maybe 60-70%, some planes have it lower, some have it higher, but it will never be 100% and it will never be the same for all planes.

jsut as an extra, the plane i flew, a 1946 chipmunk, we flew it at about 60% throttle at all times. time limit in 100% was 6 seconds. over about 70% ( you don't have percentages there, so im guessing a bit) the engine would very rapedely overheat, and over rev., BUT it wouldnt blow up, and possible we could fly it like that for HOURS, but when we got home, and the mechanic went to check the engine, it would go directly to garbage.

[Pips]

Originally Posted by pupo162

most planes have the "use at all times safe engine setting" at maybe 60-70%, some planes have it lower, some have it higher, but it will never be 100% and it will never be the same for all planes.

It would be nice then if TD stated just what the heat management parameters were for each aircraft (or group if that's what they've programmed).

At least everyone would know where they stand then, and do much to cut out the quibbling about overheating.

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by Pips

It would be nice then if TD stated just what the heat management parameters were for each aircraft (or group if that's what they've programmed).

At least everyone would know where they stand then, and do much to cut out the quibbling about overheating.

i agree with that.

For example RL Spitfire MK IX at nominal power +12 lbs 2850 RPMs could run 1 hour according to manual.

In game SPitfire MK IX at nominal power ( 99% power - 12lbs, 90% prop pitch - 2850 RPM) after few minutes overheat.

overheat is difeernet from engine blow up. check your temps, if you are in slight over head 1º 2º 3º the engine will not blow up. it wouldnt probably blow up in +20º either. it would simply wear out quicker and be sent to garbage or maintenance sooner.

[Treetop64]

I genuinely mean no disrespect by this, but I think that many (not all, but many) of the complaints of the new overheat model are sired from honest ignorance on how piston aircraft engines actually overheat.

Pre 4.11 engine temps were effected more by manifold pressure than by engine RPMs or mixture settings, which simply is not realistic at all. The pre 4.11 engine temp model was a joke, and I, for one, am glad it's been fixed.

With 4.11 you actually have to resort to some semblance of real-world procedures to manage engine temps in a given situation, and for many of us that meant re-learning how to fly aircraft in the sim that we may have long-since established methods of getting the most out of. It's inevitable that there will be some resistance to do that. More than ever before engine RPMs and mixture settings have more of an effect on temps, as it should be.

Also, as has been stated nearly a hundred times in different threads, the triggering of the ENGINE OVERHEAT HUD message is very, very conservative. Unrealistically so. It's display does not indicate imminent engine destruction if you don't immediately pull back on the levers. One should either turn off HUD messages and learn to use the gauges, or simply ignore the OVERHEAT message. Trust me; you'll find that you can reliably push your chosen aircraft much harder, and for a much longer period of time, than you could if you make yourself a slave to the HUD message.