Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-13-2012, 12:58 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

It doesn't matter. If you had a 109 on your backside or gave chase then you'd hammer the thing. I'm pretty sure that most 19 year olds don't drive 'according to approved ratings' but it doesn't mean it can't do it
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-13-2012, 01:14 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

It does matter, because it was necessary to modify the automatic boost control in order to have it deliver 12lb when in override. It would always have been possible to override it, but in the worst case you could end up with boost exceeded 30lb and destroy the engine instantly.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-13-2012, 01:17 PM
Kurfürst Kurfürst is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Indeed JtD.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg spit29.jpg (92.7 KB, 22 views)
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200
Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415

Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-13-2012, 01:19 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

And there you have it....12lbs boost up to 1000' for take off or for a maximum of 3 minutes otherwise.

I'm sure nobody is suggesting 3 minutes was used to get to 1000'
__________________


Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-13-2012, 01:24 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

A different system, bongodriver. It was limited to low altitude and could not provide boost at higher altitudes. Simply put, it had a full throttle altitude of 1000 feet, which would give you less than 9lb at altitudes exceeding 4000 feet. It's really just a take off setting.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:31 AM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
It does matter, because it was necessary to modify the automatic boost control in order to have it deliver 12lb when in override. It would always have been possible to override it, but in the worst case you could end up with boost exceeded 30lb and destroy the engine instantly.
Not with the Spitfire II which is what Kurfurst is talking about. This has a Merlin XII engine designed for 100 only.

I am not sure why Kurfurst agreed with you in the subsequent post unless he forgot which aircraft he was talking about

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
A different system, bongodriver. It was limited to low altitude and could not provide boost at higher altitudes. Simply put, it had a full throttle altitude of 1000 feet, which would give you less than 9lb at altitudes exceeding 4000 feet. It's really just a take off setting.
I agree, I don't have a problem with that, but it's the clearance to use it I'm talking about.

When I was 18 I didn't have clearance to take my engine in my Ford Fiesta 1300S into the red all of the time but when my six was occupied by another kid in an Escort or Golf I pulled the tit and away we went down those country roads like dickheads. After a while I blew the camshaft out of the side of the block, I'm pretty sure Ford didn't recommend this.



I should scan a photo of my heap of crap, I would've killed for one of these.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:41 AM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Not with the Spitfire II which is what Kurfurst is talking about. This has a Merlin XII engine designed for 100 only.

I am not sure why Kurfurst agreed with you in the subsequent post unless he forgot which aircraft he was talking about



I agree, I don't have a problem with that, but it's the clearance to use it I'm talking about.

When I was 18 I didn't have clearance to take my engine in my Ford Fiesta 1300S into the red all of the time but when my six was occupied by another kid in an Escort or Golf I pulled the tit and away we went down those country roads like dickheads. After a while I blew the camshaft out of the side of the block, I'm pretty sure Ford didn't recommend this.



I should scan a photo of my heap of crap, I would've killed for one of these.
A fellow country road boy racer........My 2.0L Mk4 cortina was a beast.
__________________


Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-14-2012, 09:43 AM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

I read the rest. Firstly, Kurfurst, would you mind not ranting please, your post looks like it comes from a luftwhiner and you've lately managed to curtail that. As such people began to take you more seriously. Your comments about RAF fliers are offensive, when have you ever heard me rant about 109 boost use? My only complaint with your figures is that your graph is 30 kmph faster than any actual test and nobody can account for it - that's why you are in a constant argument and the only people who agree with you are the 109 fliers with an agenda for Spit bashing.

It should ALL be modelled for ALL types, then it's up to the pilot if he breaks it. In the future with scripting (and even now with Banks co-op) you will only get one flight, one life and one engine so fine - break it and die in the channel. Let's concentrate on getting 1C to model this as close to the evidence we have at our disposal as possible and use some damn common sense!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-14-2012, 11:11 AM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Not with the Spitfire II which is what Kurfurst is talking about. This has a Merlin XII engine designed for 100 only.
Also with the Merlin XII. You would need to modify the automatic boost control so that it would be limited to 12 lb boost when disengaged. IIrc, this was done with reducing the cross section of the bypass.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks
However I doubt that any Merlin XII had a unrestricted boost cut-out.
I agree, but I'd look at it the other way round - I can't be sure it always had. Do you have the Merlin XII handbook?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.