4.11 overheat and engine damage test results

[MicroWave]

Originally Posted by JG27_PapaFly

...

***EDIT***
I've just tested the TA152, FW190A6, SpitIX 25lbs, LA7 3xB20, F4U-1D and I-185 M71 inflight on the same map: max performance takeoff and climb at a constant 260kph IAS.
I used manually open rads on the TA, FW190 and I-185, auto rads for the spit.

Here are the times to overheat at 260kph IAS:

Plane_________time to overheat____notes__________________
TA152-H1........3'24''......................oil temp near upper limit
SpitIX 25lbs.....2'56''......................oil at 80°C, glycol at 110°C
FW190A6.........3'48''......................oil at less than 80°C
F4U-1D............3'52''.....................oil temp 80°C, cylinder head 200°C at overheat message
LA7 3xB20........3'48''......................oil temp is above 100°C from 1'56''on; cylinder head temp above 200°C at overheat message
I-185 M71........5'08''.....................oil temp is above 100°C from 2'08'' on; cylinder head temp above 200°C at overheat message

Something seems to be wrong with the I-185. For one, it overheats on the ground just like any other plane, but much later in the air.
While most other planes overheat when the oil has 80°C, the I-185's oil temps hits the end of the dial (125°C) before the overheat occurs. At that stage, the cylinder head has well above 200°C. This behavior is very different from that of other radial engine fighters in the test (F4U, FW190A). The LA7 also shows that oil temp increase, but the overheat message comes earlier, at almost the same time with the FW190A and F4U.

Maybe someone from TD could explain why the I-185 is different?
***EDIT END***

Cheers

First of all thank you for performing such tests.
Since you've already proven that RPMs are the main factor in generating heat (also stated in the manual), my guess is (without testing) that I-185 engine can maintain fairly low RPM for the target speed.
I have no idea if that is realistic, but that's probably the situation for v4.11 I-185. As already mentioned, this type (and his evil twin sister) fall into category of 'what if' planes. I was able to find the readme for 2.0x patch clearly stating so:
http://ubisoft.custhelp.com/app/answ...ep-v2.04-patch.
But this 'what if' adjective applies to the plane itself, from what I gathered the engine was not that special and might have been used by other, serial production planes. Maybe this unusual behavior can be replicated on those planes, too? This would be more serious problem, but hopefully there is sufficient documentation floating around which would help to rectify the problem (if indeed there is a problem).
Regarding the temperature redouts, I'm not sure which one you should actually monitor (oil_in?, oil_out? whatever) and the dials might show wrong values. It would be better to use devicelink to actually read ingame variables. Dials are individual for each plane and there is usually some small function converting actual temperatures to angles. There could easily be a bug on the dial (wrong function from T->angle), while actual temperatures are OK.

And finally a disclaimer:
I'm no engine expert and no expert on aviation history and I have never performed any serious FM tests.
If anything of what I just said makes no sense or is wrong, feel free to blame it on my ignorance.

[jermin]

Yes, I doubt few of you self-proclaimed experts can match up against WD in a duel.

And I wouldn't call a private online match or coop a part of online community.

The online playing is dying. It is definitely true. Back in 2005, I wouldn't have to search Xfire for hours but failed to find a decent server to play in.

Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk

[CWMV]

Originally Posted by jermin

...The online playing is dying. It is definitely true. ...

Woah what are you doing wrong?
Spits V 109's always has someone on it, and there were around 40 on the last ghost skies test mission last night.

The only ones that are dying are the stock servers, as no one wants to play a 10 year old game in its pure (obsolete) form.

[jermin]

Originally Posted by CWMV

Spits V 109's always has someone on it, and there were around 40 on the last ghost skies test mission last night.

The only ones that are dying are the stock servers, as no one wants to play a 10 year old game in its pure (obsolete) form.

I've said it many times before that I prefer consistent content managed by TD.

Besides, you don't have a clue about how many populated full-real (or near full-real) servers there are back in 2007.

[WhistlinggDeath]

Sorry, Luno, I see your confusion. WD Fights was up till about 7:21 PST but that is when Bad could not get Xfire installed. We just went to private server from that point on.

Apologize for confusion. Did not understand your question.

[WhistlinggDeath]

Galway, ssssssssssssssssshhhhh. Dont give away simple answers.

Hehe

Got to get back to work tonight guys. Signing off for today. Lets try to move this thread to a more productive plane tomorrow. I already suggested several other good fliers and one chimed in. Lets await others and learn more.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by jermin

Yes, I doubt few of you self-proclaimed experts can match up against WD in a duel.

And I wouldn't call a private online match or coop a part of online community.

The online playing is dying. It is definitely true. Back in 2005, I wouldn't have to search Xfire for hours but failed to find a decent server to play in.

Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk

You miss the point.

If anything, being good online means you must be prioritizing gaming over historical reality.

Hence having good skills online means either nothing at all, or worse that you are biased towards the gaming aspects of the sim and hence LESS qualified to make comments on the historical correctness of flight models.

[ElAurens]

So many broad brush statements now.

So, all online virtual flying is just "gaming" because it's online?

You know better.