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

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-14-2012, 08:34 PM
MadBlaster MadBlaster is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 666
Default

just try it. the idea is to generate incremental additional thrust and lift for a brief period (1 or two seconds) the instant you hit the end of the deck. it works. I've been flying this sim for at least four years. Cranking the pp axis value from 100% (fine pitch) to 0%( course pitch) puts sudden load on the prop and generates a bit of acceleration for few seconds. Of course, it's modeled constant speed prop, so the rate of change on the blade pitch is in the game...so this is not a cheat. Also, it takes time for the flaps to fully extend. by the time they are fully extended, you will be ready to start retracting them. Get devicelink and look at the accel parameter.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-15-2012, 08:22 PM
Tolwyn Tolwyn is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 250
Default

Ok ok. I see what you're saying. Didn't mean to bite your head off.

That and the next post from mine says it will be fixed (adjusted, whatever).
My only point was that many campaigns/single missions would also exhibit the same issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadBlaster View Post
just try it. the idea is to generate incremental additional thrust and lift for a brief period (1 or two seconds) the instant you hit the end of the deck. it works. I've been flying this sim for at least four years. Cranking the pp axis value from 100% (fine pitch) to 0%( course pitch) puts sudden load on the prop and generates a bit of acceleration for few seconds. Of course, it's modeled constant speed prop, so the rate of change on the blade pitch is in the game...so this is not a cheat. Also, it takes time for the flaps to fully extend. by the time they are fully extended, you will be ready to start retracting them. Get devicelink and look at the accel parameter.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-15-2012, 08:32 PM
jameson jameson is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 222
Default

Some actual numbers courtesy of the the US Navy for F4U-4 (Declassified) from this PDF:

www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/f4u-4.pdf

It gives take off deck lengths in feet for various conditions, main ones being:

1)With 1x 150 Gal drop tank into 25knot wind =400ft (standard fighter loadout)

2)With 1x 150 Gal drop tank in calm conditions =800ft (1 and 2: Gross weight 13 597 pounds

3)With 2x 11.75in AR+ and 8x5in HVAR into 25knot wind = 700ft

4)With 2x 11.75in AR+ and 8x5in HVAR in calm = 1400ft (3 and 4: Gross weight 16 160 pounds)

See post# 77 by Madblaster. if we are discussing the smallest carriers and MB's image is correct then at 150m (492.12 ft) deck length take off in calm condition is not possible.

The next biggest carrier is 250m (853.008 ft) and just doable in calm conditions. Note though this is only for the fighter loadout with one 150 droptank, With rockets takeoff would only be possible into 25 knot wind and with only 100ft to spare.

The largest carrier shown is 300m (984.24) ft and rocket laden in calm conditions you won't get off that either.

I'm no expert on carrier planes or operations but from the above if your getting off any carrier fully laden in calm conditions you're doing very well, (and the Corsair should be nerfed somewhat more lol!). The PDF has lots of other info, scroll down past magazine article. Any complaints on a postcard to the US Navy, please.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-15-2012, 10:06 PM
dpeters95 dpeters95 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 23
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jameson View Post
Some actual numbers courtesy of the the US Navy for F4U-4 (Declassified) from this PDF:

www.history.navy.mil/branches/hist-ac/f4u-4.pdf

It gives take off deck lengths in feet for various conditions, main ones being:

1)With 1x 150 Gal drop tank into 25knot wind =400ft (standard fighter loadout)

2)With 1x 150 Gal drop tank in calm conditions =800ft (1 and 2: Gross weight 13 597 pounds

3)With 2x 11.75in AR+ and 8x5in HVAR into 25knot wind = 700ft

4)With 2x 11.75in AR+ and 8x5in HVAR in calm = 1400ft (3 and 4: Gross weight 16 160 pounds)

See post# 77 by Madblaster. if we are discussing the smallest carriers and MB's image is correct then at 150m (492.12 ft) deck length take off in calm condition is not possible.

The next biggest carrier is 250m (853.008 ft) and just doable in calm conditions. Note though this is only for the fighter loadout with one 150 droptank, With rockets takeoff would only be possible into 25 knot wind and with only 100ft to spare.

The largest carrier shown is 300m (984.24) ft and rocket laden in calm conditions you won't get off that either.

I'm no expert on carrier planes or operations but from the above if your getting off any carrier fully laden in calm conditions you're doing very well, (and the Corsair should be nerfed somewhat more lol!). The PDF has lots of other info, scroll down past magazine article. Any complaints on a postcard to the US Navy, please.

OK, I thought I would do some testing using these numbers. First, I may not be the best pilot out there but I am pretty good and I have been playing this game since the original release. I loaded the 1st F4U-1A carrier takeoff mission into FMB and replaced the carrier each time while setting the speed to 0 Km. It resets it to 4 Km for some reason but I would call that calm as stated in the previous specs. I also added one drop tank to the loadout. Here is what I found using MadBlaster's ship diagram:

1) CVE USS Casablanca - 150 m - Can't be done by me or the AI
2) HMS Illustrious - 240 m - Can't be done by me or the AI
3) USS Essex - 260 m - I do it 50% of time, AI does it 100% but we both have to skim the water to do it
4) USS Lexington - 300 m - I do it 75% of time, AI does it all the time. We don't have to skim the water but it falls off the end of the deck quite a bit.

I think this shows that something is not right. Even if you use the above specs, the plane is under-performing. A decent player should be able to, at least, do this from the Lexington 100% of the time without dropping down to water level. I know someone said that this would be adjusted in an earlier post and I just hope they were sincere. Also, please take a look at the F6F's they also seem to struggle off the carriers now.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-15-2012, 10:54 PM
jameson jameson is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 222
Default

The F4U-4 is a different plane which didn't enter service until Oct 1944, sorry for any confusion. I found this for f4u-1
F4U-1
Fighter Bomber Fighter
(Normal) (Overload)

Gross Weight (lbs.) 11,142 11,399 12,656

Take-off distance in calm, ft. 482 507 664
Take-off distance in 15-knot wind, ft. 313 332 447
Take-off distance in 25-knot wind, ft. 217 232 318

Note that plane weighs less, and has less powerful engine, hence longer calm take off distance.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-15-2012, 11:21 PM
MadBlaster MadBlaster is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 666
Default

Just to be complete.

Here's the link to the pilots manual I was using:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/42209938/F...ok-FOI-1944pdf

page 7 say the bit about F4U-1 being ~ 800 lbs heavier than the F4U-1C/1D under full fuel and ammo loadout with no external loading (i assume this means no droptank) also, you figure the pilot weighs ~ 200 lbs and that probably isn't included in the figures.

page 65- the takeoff chart under varying scenarios (hard surface, soft...etc.)

it looks like the information from different sources differs a bit. not sure what is considered "official" for the game.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-15-2012, 08:55 PM
MadBlaster MadBlaster is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 666
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tolwyn View Post
Ok ok. I see what you're saying. Didn't mean to bite your head off.

That and the next post from mine says it will be fixed (adjusted, whatever).
My only point was that many campaigns/single missions would also exhibit the same issue.
okay. just to be really really clear. when you move the pp axis from 100% to 0% suddenly, there is a built in delay in the game. you have no control over that rate of change. that is hard-coded in the game I assume based on historical rate of change on the blade pitch for typical constant speed prop. so it is not a cheat imo. the prop pitch is a control the player maps to and can move it up or down at will. all your doing is moving the power band as fast as the game will allow to try to get as much additional acceleration as you possibly can to get off the carrier. I guess it's like a car. you cruise around in first gear, push the clutch in, step on the gas to get the revs up,if your engine is torquey enough, you can burn rubber in second gear. But I think in a plane the prop blade stalls out after a certain point when your out of the power band. something like that.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-15-2012, 09:06 PM
Janosch's Avatar
Janosch Janosch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jameson View Post
Some actual numbers courtesy of the the US Navy for F4U-4 (Declassified) from this PDF:
Does the chart assume that the carrier is moving at the top speed? Because in calm condition, I sure can't take off a F4U-1D with tinytims, hvars and full fuel load if the carrier (Saratoga) isn't traveling at top speed.

At carrier top speed, it's still a challenge, but possible. I was the only plane flying in the test mission I tried it out with. Winds were at zero.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-15-2012, 10:05 PM
jameson jameson is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 222
Default

From reading the pdf the impression I had was that wind refered to carrier speed + wind (sailing into it). 25 knots windspeed seemed also to be the maximum desirable from the charts shown. Take off distances can read off for differing windspeed and loadouts.
I have no idea if this data correlates with ingame takeoff or not, but assuming it is accurate, it's a good base from which to start discussing if it's porked or not.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-15-2012, 11:34 PM
Tolwyn Tolwyn is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 250
Default

It is allowed "in game" but would never be done "in real life." So yes, it wouldn't be a cheat, just not even close to realistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadBlaster View Post
okay. just to be really really clear. when you move the pp axis from 100% to 0% suddenly, there is a built in delay in the game. you have no control over that rate of change. that is hard-coded in the game I assume based on historical rate of change on the blade pitch for typical constant speed prop. so it is not a cheat imo. the prop pitch is a control the player maps to and can move it up or down at will. all your doing is moving the power band as fast as the game will allow to try to get as much additional acceleration as you possibly can to get off the carrier. I guess it's like a car. you cruise around in first gear, push the clutch in, step on the gas to get the revs up,if your engine is torquey enough, you can burn rubber in second gear. But I think in a plane the prop blade stalls out after a certain point when your out of the power band. something like that.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 02:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.