PDA

View Full Version : Acceleration and speeds changes Pacific Fighters vs. AEP 2.04



Jumoschwanz
10-28-2004, 09:47 PM
Here are the figures: All were got without complicated engine management, and were got with any form of boost or WEP turned on. Fuel load was 25% to simulate online fuel load. Map was Smolensk at noon on river bed for top speed. Acceleration runs were done the length of a concrete airstrip on Online summer 1 map at noon.
These changes are not good or bad, but are just flight model tweaks that PF has that may be putting the planes closer to actuality? I did the European planes as that is what I usually fly and so they could be compared to AEP 2.04.

These tests are valid only relative to themselves. I tested the planes from both AEP 2.04 and PF 3.0 not under any conditions Oleg uses, but under the same conditions never the less so the performance increases or decreases should be similiar in roughly similiar conditions. These are just guidlines and not labratory results.

km/hr loss at sea level:

E7b loses 9 km/hr down to 464

F4 loses 5 down to 503

G2 loses 10 down to 513

G6 loses 11 down to 511

G6late loses 9 down to 513

K4 loses 6 down to 563

Bf-110 gains 5 up to 492!

A-4 same top speed but slower acceleration!

A5-8 each down 3-5 km/hr

Ta-152 gains 4 km/hr up to 571


Allied Changes:

Hurri IIc gains 9 km/hr up to 412

La-7 loses 5 down to 601

P39 N-1 loses 3 down to 508

P47 D-27 loses 10 down to 565!

INteresting facts:

I-16 Type24 accelerates as fast as P47 D-27 up to 356 km/hr, and faster than a late P-51 and all 1941 and earlier 109s.

Many planes in PF have the same top speed but slower acceleration indicating a weight increase.

P-40 field mod is fastest accelerating P-40 in PF.

P51b is 7 km/hr faster than p51c on the deck.

Fastest planes by year at sea level:


1940 Mig 498km/hr, 109E4 460km/hr

1941 Mig3ud 507km/hr, 109F4 503km/hr

1942 la-5 552km/h, P-51B 543km/h,Mig3u 545km/h,190A4 536km/h,Spit5bL.F.519km/hr, 109g2 513km/h.

1943 La-5fn 582km/hr,190A5 564km/hr,P38J 553km/h,P47 d-10 537km/h,Lagg3(66) 540km/h, Spit9e 534 km/hr 1943 109g6late 513km/hr.

1944 La-7 601km/h, Ta-152 571km/h, 190 d-9 570 km/h,P47 D-27 565km/h, 109K4 563km/h,P51 d-20 558km/h,Yak3535km/h.

Many of these planes top speeds are after a very long run. So they are not really useful. Especially the 190A4-9 series are as slow or slower to accelerate than all early war planes.

I spent a lot of time measuring the acceleration and sea level speed of the European planes. Any questions I can answer that are not answered above let me know and I can probable grab some figures off my list. S!

Jumoschwanz

Jumoschwanz
10-28-2004, 09:47 PM
Here are the figures: All were got without complicated engine management, and were got with any form of boost or WEP turned on. Fuel load was 25% to simulate online fuel load. Map was Smolensk at noon on river bed for top speed. Acceleration runs were done the length of a concrete airstrip on Online summer 1 map at noon.
These changes are not good or bad, but are just flight model tweaks that PF has that may be putting the planes closer to actuality? I did the European planes as that is what I usually fly and so they could be compared to AEP 2.04.

These tests are valid only relative to themselves. I tested the planes from both AEP 2.04 and PF 3.0 not under any conditions Oleg uses, but under the same conditions never the less so the performance increases or decreases should be similiar in roughly similiar conditions. These are just guidlines and not labratory results.

km/hr loss at sea level:

E7b loses 9 km/hr down to 464

F4 loses 5 down to 503

G2 loses 10 down to 513

G6 loses 11 down to 511

G6late loses 9 down to 513

K4 loses 6 down to 563

Bf-110 gains 5 up to 492!

A-4 same top speed but slower acceleration!

A5-8 each down 3-5 km/hr

Ta-152 gains 4 km/hr up to 571


Allied Changes:

Hurri IIc gains 9 km/hr up to 412

La-7 loses 5 down to 601

P39 N-1 loses 3 down to 508

P47 D-27 loses 10 down to 565!

INteresting facts:

I-16 Type24 accelerates as fast as P47 D-27 up to 356 km/hr, and faster than a late P-51 and all 1941 and earlier 109s.

Many planes in PF have the same top speed but slower acceleration indicating a weight increase.

P-40 field mod is fastest accelerating P-40 in PF.

P51b is 7 km/hr faster than p51c on the deck.

Fastest planes by year at sea level:


1940 Mig 498km/hr, 109E4 460km/hr

1941 Mig3ud 507km/hr, 109F4 503km/hr

1942 la-5 552km/h, P-51B 543km/h,Mig3u 545km/h,190A4 536km/h,Spit5bL.F.519km/hr, 109g2 513km/h.

1943 La-5fn 582km/hr,190A5 564km/hr,P38J 553km/h,P47 d-10 537km/h,Lagg3(66) 540km/h, Spit9e 534 km/hr 1943 109g6late 513km/hr.

1944 La-7 601km/h, Ta-152 571km/h, 190 d-9 570 km/h,P47 D-27 565km/h, 109K4 563km/h,P51 d-20 558km/h,Yak3535km/h.

Many of these planes top speeds are after a very long run. So they are not really useful. Especially the 190A4-9 series are as slow or slower to accelerate than all early war planes.

I spent a lot of time measuring the acceleration and sea level speed of the European planes. Any questions I can answer that are not answered above let me know and I can probable grab some figures off my list. S!

Jumoschwanz

woofiedog
10-28-2004, 10:25 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gifExcellent study Jumoschwaanz.
The La-7 seems to have the Uber seat again.
Appearately... IL-2 staff has taken some time to adjust each aircraft closer to it's orginal flight characteristic's. Very Nice.
This must have taken you some time to put togeather and run each test for this data.
Thank's for the Hard Work!
I'll save this info for later use.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2004, 10:55 PM
Impressive work Jumo, thanks for the data!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
I-16 Type24 accelerates as fast as P47 D-27 up to 356 km/hr, and faster than a late P-51 and all 1941 and earlier 109s.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The I-16 has always disturbed me because even after studying the model in detail I just can't see where its rocket engines protrude from...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Many planes in PF have the same top speed but slower acceleration indicating a weight increase.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It may not be as simple as a mass increase... In real life if you add to the weight of an aircraft, it's level max speed drops because the wings cause more drag trying to hold the plane up. Extra weight needs more lift which invariably induces more drag and that slows the plane down. If the game's physics engine implements this causal sequence then perhaps something more systemic was tweaked like a coefficient in one of the primary equations or something?

Hunde_3.JG51
10-28-2004, 11:52 PM
And here I was told FW-190A seemed to accelerate better than before http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif.

Were 190A speeds with 100% prop-pitch?

What about FW-190A-9 at SL?

If your data is correct then alot has changed:

At SL (compared to my 2.04 test results using Olegs procedure):
-Ta-152 about 30km/h slower.
-D-9 about 30km/h slower.
-P47D about 13km/h slower
-P-51D about 30km/h slower
-P-38J about 25km/h slower
-Mig-3U about 30km/h slower
-P-51B about 30km/h slower

This is the most interesting thing I have seen by far, and I can't wait to test these out. I have to say some planes speeds look much closer to what I have seen more consistently as opposed to factory type specs. Hard to believe P-47 faster than P-51 down low, with the P-47 being almost as fast as the Dora http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif.

Like I said, I can't wait to test these myself on Crimea map, at noon, over water, cockpit off, and see what I get. I am not doubting you, but this would be a very drastic change.

JG77Von_Hess
10-29-2004, 12:48 AM
Hello there!

Just before anyone runs out and breakin their PF CDs in anger,

The test should be carried out under norm temp (15) Degs Celsious sealevel. Crimea map gives u optimal test conditions.

My Test FW190A4 Favorite bird http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Accel roughly same or perhaps slightly better.
Topspeed sealevel : 539-542 Kmh. (Autopitch as it should be) Smack in the eye as it should be for an non MW50 Burning A4

Same test for FW190A5
Topspeed sealevel : 569-572 Kmh. Doh i love it.

So before and premature detonations lots more test for various planes should be carried out.

Regards.

VH.

BuzzU
10-29-2004, 01:00 AM
How come no PF planes?

WOLFMondo
10-29-2004, 02:51 AM
The P47 seems to slide through the air even better at high alts. Maybe its just me.

Are the '47-d27's climb rates or anything else changed at different altitudes, She doesn't feel that different but there is somthing there.

Has anyone compared the early MkIX to the 1942 MkVIII spit? The former seems to be a little heavier and mushes a little in tight turns.

Aaron_GT
10-29-2004, 04:00 AM
"The I-16 has always disturbed me because even after studying the model in detail I just can't see where its rocket engines protrude from..."

It is a light plane with a very powerful engine for its size, i.e. a high power:weight ratio so the acceleration (from low speeds where drag is lower, at least) is not unreasonable. At higher speeds its aerodynamics hamper it, though, which seems to be reflected in the game.

Hunde_3.JG51
10-29-2004, 06:32 AM
Wolf, I would be interested in hearing the differences between the Mk.IX and Mk.VIII.

However, this is another error IMO, as the Spitfire VIII did not see action until 1943. Just like the 1942 P-51B, 1942 Yak-1B, 1944 Ta-152, etc. The Spitfire.VIII entered service after the Spitfire.IX despite the earlier numerical designation.

Agreed Hess, the proper testing procedures set forth by Oleg are:

-Crimea Map
-Noon
-Over water
-Cockpit off
-100% fuel

This can easily be done in QMB as default time is noon and you can simply dive for the water, bleed enough speed to where you are sure you are below max, and go from there.

clint-ruin
10-29-2004, 07:54 AM
Couple of things I've seen now in PF make me wonder if the base data and code they worked with are from substancially prior to FBAEP 2.04. Maybe more on this later.

Jumoschwanz
10-29-2004, 09:03 AM
Sure those who's favorites lost speed might be disheartened and those who gained speed might be happy. But this thread was not meant to be positive or negative, just an observation of two small aspects of Pacific Fighters aircraft.

I was interested for myself in what the low speed acceleration and speed on the deck with WEP was as it seems 90% of the dogfighting online takes place at low altitude or ends up at low altitude after starting high. I just wondered if I was still going to be able to run away from any VVS planes in my 109G6late on greatergreen.

I tested fifty planes from the European theatre for low speed acceleration, which is very important in low alt dogfighting, and sea level speed under WEP, important for escaping a low alt dogfight when the odds are against you.

This took many hours and I just did not feel like doing any of the new PF planes or the Japanese planes. I stuck to the ones in Europe that were in AEP 2.04. I am going to sort out and post the acceleration figures as soon as I can. S!

Jumoschwanz

TheGozr
10-29-2004, 09:24 AM
I have differents results like the B1 10 + the D9 10 +

Ect.

I'll trty to do some more testing as well because i get diff numbers.

JG14_Josf
10-29-2004, 10:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>I spent a lot of time measuring the acceleration and sea level speed of the European planes. Any questions I can answer that are not answered above let me know and I can probable grab some figures off my list. S!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you have relative acceleration for the SpitV 1941 vs the 190A-4 and the P-51B vs the 190D-9?

How about relative acceleration between the P-47D vs the Spit IX and 190A-5 (no wep on A5).

Hunde_3.JG51
10-29-2004, 06:01 PM
Just got PF from Best Buy and did quick test under Oleg's conditions:

At sea-level (50% fuel instead of 100%):

P-51D: 595km/h
P-47D: 574km/h
FW-190A-9: 595/km/h (auto), 602km/h (manual 100% with quick overheat)


Just did very quick test, I am going to rest up now and test more later, but initially it doesn't seem as though anything has changed to me. Did a couple quick fights with FW-190A and it doesn't feel any different either. Shame, I was pretty pumped there for awhile.

jagdmailer
10-29-2004, 06:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BuzzU:
How come no PF planes? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Who cares ??

Jagd