Updated RAF FMs in 1.07.18301

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by Ernst

There is so much misunderstanding here. I remember seeing a SPITFIRE Ia manual stating that 12 lbs time limits were 3 minutes.

Now you come here and says its 5 minutes for the IA. There is another manual stating 5 minutes but that was for the IIa i guess. There is so many that use general desinformation and try to using data from other aircraft (IIA) to provide performance of others (IA). Or comparing the best data from one ac with worst of others, or using extra arguments and aproximation much beyond the data to prove their points. The data should talk by themselves with minimal interference of the interpreters.

"short periods"

March 1940: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/ap1590b.jpg

August 1940: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...3&d=1332111666

November 1940: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...9&d=1334724569

"5 minutes"

August 1940: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/dowding.pdf

[Robo.]

Great post, Banks!

Just to evaluate the current model - it is possible to engage the BCC-O in a Spitfire Mk.Ia (100 octane) with following results:

- with mixture at auto rich, full boost (incorrect at +9lbs) and 2600rpm. Any more rpm and engine starts shaking (also incorrect, should be alright even at 3000rpm with the temperatures rising accordingly).

- with mixture at auto lean, full boost, it is possible to engage the BCC-O and fly at +12lbs AND 3000rpm for short period of time. Just watch your temperatures and adjust your power before it's too late.

The altitude where boost reads +9lbs with BCC-O on is around 12.000 feet (seems about right).

With the dodgy mixture and other things still incorrect, the devs are getting there I'd say. The BCC-O and 100 octane fuel can be very useful at lower altitudes, you need to be good with your CEM to get full use of it.

[Flanker35M]

S!

CEM is way too forgiving and simple in this game at this point, FM/DM so porked that really hard to tell if it resembles a RC plane or what? And this goes for both sides, I repeat BOTH SIDES so there will be no commotion that I am biased to either side.

For me the biggest gripe are the oversensitive rudder and elevator trim inputs. I've tried to adjust it in the Controls but no..move the pedals 2-3mm and your plane wiggles like crazy making it hard to keep ball centered on 109 for example. Spitfire and Hurricane has trim so it easens the task a bit for these guys. Elevator trim is the same, making precise adjustments is very hard as merely touching the trim makes plane bop up or down. There is a RANGE of movement for a reason. And just check the Controls -> Axes how LAGGY the input indicators are, like it polls the inputs every 3 seconds or what? Compare to original IL-2 where you could instantly see the effect.

Also controls feel a lot twitchier online than offline. Can be the lag or whatever but very annoying at times when you try to execute precise maneuvers like aiming during a bomb dive or dogfighting.

In short the FM feels too much like the original IL-2 one with minor differences. For one I do not understand making Bf109 twitchy as it was not unless one the VERY edge of it's envelope where one should not be anyway. Where the Hurricane was said to be a stable work horse, but not so much here. Spitfire the full bred fighter but not without vices and punished you if could not tame her proper.

I think Chernarus calls again

[David198502]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

CEM is way too forgiving and simple in this game at this point, FM/DM so porked that really hard to tell if it resembles a RC plane or what? And this goes for both sides, I repeat BOTH SIDES so there will be no commotion that I am biased to either side.

For me the biggest gripe are the oversensitive rudder and elevator trim inputs. I've tried to adjust it in the Controls but no..move the pedals 2-3mm and your plane wiggles like crazy making it hard to keep ball centered on 109 for example. Spitfire and Hurricane has trim so it easens the task a bit for these guys. Elevator trim is the same, making precise adjustments is very hard as merely touching the trim makes plane bop up or down. There is a RANGE of movement for a reason. And just check the Controls -> Axes how LAGGY the input indicators are, like it polls the inputs every 3 seconds or what? Compare to original IL-2 where you could instantly see the effect.

Also controls feel a lot twitchier online than offline. Can be the lag or whatever but very annoying at times when you try to execute precise maneuvers like aiming during a bomb dive or dogfighting.

In short the FM feels too much like the original IL-2 one with minor differences. For one I do not understand making Bf109 twitchy as it was not unless one the VERY edge of it's envelope where one should not be anyway. Where the Hurricane was said to be a stable work horse, but not so much here. Spitfire the full bred fighter but not without vices and punished you if could not tame her proper.

I think Chernarus calls again

+1

especially with this beta patch, the elevator and aileron controls are really a mess....ive tried today the steam version again, to see the difference, and there is a big one....this beta patch is a big, really big step backwards regarding the elevator and aileron sensitivty in the 109...its hardly possible to aim accurately now.its a shame and damn its annoying...the rudder is maybe a bit better, but just like you said, its still hard to keep the ball centered in straight and level flight, with the slightest rudder input resulting in big reaction of the plane...

[Redroach]

Is that true for all airspeeds? At least the elevator controls SHOULD get heavier when going very fast.

[David198502]

thats the strange thing,....its pretty much the same when flying really fast

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by David198502

+1
with the slightest rudder input resulting in big reaction of the plane...

I noticed the same with Spitfire last night.
A tiny touch of my z-axis threw the rudder out and I got the wind/buffet sound effect. I can't confirm this, but I am of the opinion that this is much more marked than previously.

I have a Joystick with the rudder on the Z-axis. Obviously this makes turning difficult now because I almost always accidentally shift the Z-axis slightly when turning.

I tried increasing the dead-zone on my joystick Z-axis to 10% at both the 0 had 100 marks but his had no effect. A tiny input still results in a very unsubtle movement of the control surface.

I'm not sure if people playing with rudder pedals have noticed any change in sensitivity.. it wouldn't matter so much if I could get the dead zone to work, then my accidental inputs would not result in a control surface change.

[David198502]

well, i play with rudder pedals...
though for me, although i notice a difference in rudder behaviour as well, its not my main concern...to be honest, i think the rudder of the 109 had a okish behaviour before both betas, the first beta messed the rudder up, and now its better again(though still too sensitive)...

my main concern(note im a 109 guy) is the elevator and aileron control behaviour with this patch...it just sucks

[Jatta Raso]

the elevator is also very twitchy with the Spit, considerably more than before, has caused me a lot of missies from dead six, i end up fine tuning with the vertical trim on approaches and even so it's not easy; regarding rudder, it's the same situation with a sudden response on slight inputs. i find the control surfaces' response more sluggish at high speeds, although maybe more with the ailerons than with elevators.

as for the CEM questions, about WEP (boost cut-out in my case), well i don't think i can reach 2min at 3000rpm on cut-out without blowing the engine, and that with slight variations from level flight; i may fly for quite some time with cut out on 2700rpm, or i may be unable to sustain it at 2640rpm, it really depends on the given situation and speed; speed is another variable in the fray, i have been squeezing 300-310 mph at level flight with rad at 30-35% with cut-out at 2640rpm and getting away with it, i think because of the extra speed meaning extra cooling.

furthermore, i've realized there seems to be some random factors on the engine's thermal behavior; also there's a tendency to overheat when reaching 10000ft, sometimes forcing me to reduce rpm just below 2640rpm,or to reduce boost (throttle) which makes sense to me, as the air should be thinner and the prop would get less opposition, in turn heating up the shaft, governor and engine itself. right?

last note: i've read extensively that in RL the Spit was really childish to fly, "anyone could fly a Spitfire", so i don't think it's harmonic behavior is that far off... slightly overdone probably; what may be lacking to destabilize it some more is some wind conditions and different air masses with dissimilar air density

[41Sqn_Banks]

I want to add a little bit of interpretation from my side. I don't think the time limits are directly connected to the engine overheat. The reason for the time limits is to ensure a reasonable engine life. Of course the time limits are indirectly connected with engine overheat as the temperatures will be higher with higher settings.

You may run the engine on "5 minute all out" setting for 1 hours without overheating, however this would reduce the time between overhauls considerably (maybe to 20 hours compared to 100 hours).
On the other hand you may run the engine on "30 minute climb" setting for 10 minutes and damage the engine due to overheating, because radiator was shut and speed was to slow.

So a "5 minute" limit doesn't mean it will only overheat after 5 minutes, it may overheat earlier and actions must be taken to prevent this. It also may overheat later or not at all and there won't be any trouble during this flight if the engine is new. There might be trouble in the next flight or you are grounded because of required engine overhaul