PDA

View Full Version : New patch 1-11 bug -- 262



XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:06 PM
ASI does not match the 'box' number above 400kph.

ie.
850m > 740kph(ASI)/670kph(box)
5000m > 700kph/520kph


Flaps jammed when lowered at a speed below 500kph, the speed recommended when landing for TO flap postion.

Engine overheats before wheels leave the runway. "Full load" throttle postion to be used in TO.

as per L.Dv.T2262 A-1

Trim is next to useless - at a constant speed the trim requires constant adjustment and level flight is impossible to achieve.

Impossible to do air starts unless engines are at 0%. Nothing like dropping 1500m before the engines spool up because they burst into fire if any other throttle position is used.

What is with the crappy altimiter - all the other instruments are easy to read?

http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"



Message Edited on 09/08/0308:24PM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:06 PM
ASI does not match the 'box' number above 400kph.

ie.
850m > 740kph(ASI)/670kph(box)
5000m > 700kph/520kph


Flaps jammed when lowered at a speed below 500kph, the speed recommended when landing for TO flap postion.

Engine overheats before wheels leave the runway. "Full load" throttle postion to be used in TO.

as per L.Dv.T2262 A-1

Trim is next to useless - at a constant speed the trim requires constant adjustment and level flight is impossible to achieve.

Impossible to do air starts unless engines are at 0%. Nothing like dropping 1500m before the engines spool up because they burst into fire if any other throttle position is used.

What is with the crappy altimiter - all the other instruments are easy to read?

http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"



Message Edited on 09/08/0308:24PM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 08:54 PM
The overheating problem isn't a bug. This airplane was known for its quick engine overheating. It hasn't changed from before the bug.

The engines were also known for catching on fire. You have to remember, these engines had no computers controlling their fuel intake. If you put too much fuel to the engine, it couldn't spool up fast enough and simply became a roman candle. Again, this isn't a bug. It shows the technology difference between today's modern airplanes and the aircraft of yesteryear. Modern jets have computers controlling the fuel intake, so engine fires due to throttle increases are all but a thing of the past.

As far as your other issues, I have no idea. I only know that most people expect that plane to perform and be as reliable as jets of today, and that simply wasn't the case.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 09:10 PM
What's up Milo, got that uber feelin'?


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:06 AM
But you've got a point with the flaps. I hope they fix that. Nothing worse than high speed jet with jammed flaps, especially if they jam at a lower speed than the POH says.

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb24962.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72600.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb72327.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb10373.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb70750.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 01:31 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- What's up Milo, got that uber feelin'?
-
-
-

Whats with with your gum flappin Huckie? Your post serves no useful purpose except to be a very sad attempt at TROLLING./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif At least I did not claim the '09 could do M1.19 like your bud Issy./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
---------------


waterinthefuel:

"Full Load" is max throttle - The PoH would not say to use if the engines overheated so quickly especially during TO! Above 6000rpm there was a 'black box' that controlled fuel flow and allowed any quickness to the movement of the throttle. The 'overheating' can occur if cavitation happens snd this does not happen with slow throttle advancement to 6000rpm. This cavitation can be seen if the gas pressure drops 5%. This results in a rich mixture and the overheating. Though could not get 8700rpm during TO, one test before TO was to run the engines up to 8700(+/- 200)rpm for 1 minute with a constant gas temperature.


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 06:55 AM
I might be doing something wrong, but I cant get the plane to stay level at 9000M and higher. Even on auto-pilot, or leveler, it wont stay at that altitude.

Also, I might not be doing something correctly on this one either, but I cant get the engines to restart in flight. Say I shut off one engine, I cant get it to start back up, why is that? Bug, or something I am doing wrong?

Fehler

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 07:24 AM
Wow, I guess I learned something! LOL

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 08:53 AM
waterinthefuel wrote:
- The overheating problem isn't a bug. This airplane
- was known for its quick engine overheating. It
- hasn't changed from before the bug.
-
- The engines were also known for catching on fire.
- You have to remember, these engines had no computers
- controlling their fuel intake. If you put too much
- fuel to the engine, it couldn't spool up fast enough
- and simply became a roman candle. Again, this isn't
- a bug. It shows the technology difference between
- today's modern airplanes and the aircraft of
- yesteryear. Modern jets have computers controlling
- the fuel intake, so engine fires due to throttle
- increases are all but a thing of the past.
-

Did it stay a roman candle if you backed off on the fuel? Did it blow the fire out the back and so what or did it go through the burn cans, burn up the turbine or otherwise set the whole pod and then the plane on fire? I would expect the former with the flame from extra fuel not being as hot as the right amount, but then I don't know. Too bad the germans hadn't come up with bypass airflow in the engines, but then maybe that's a good thing for the Allies.


Neal

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:12 AM
Actually the BMW engine didn't catch fire while in flight if the throttle was moved too quickly what actually happened was that the engine flamed out. It did catch fire in engine start up that's why you had crew members with fire extinguishers while the engine was starting, all they had to do if it caught fire was turn off the engine extinguish the flame and try to restart it again.

The risk of fire while in flight although there is not was not as the caricature we see in FB although I don't have any idea how Oleg could model it other than replacing the code to instead of catching on fire like a roman candle to flmae out and you would be left unable to restart with while in flight,like it was in RL.


Glasses-"I may have four eyes but you only have one wing"

"Kurt Tank is your daddy"

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:18 AM
The 262 had Jumo engines not BMW engines./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The He162 used the BMW engine.

Glassess wrote:
- Actually the BMW engine didn't catch fire while in
- flight if the throttle was moved too quickly what
- actually happened was that the engine flamed out. It
- did catch fire in engine start up that's why you had
- crew members with fire extinguishers while the
- engine was starting, all they had to do if it caught
- fire was turn off the engine extinguish the flame
- and try to restart it again.
-
-

http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

Message Edited on 09/09/0304:18AM by MiloMorai

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:31 AM
instead of catching on
- fire like a roman candle to flmae out and you would
- be left unable to restart with while in flight,like
- it was in RL.


Where do you get this? I have read in two sources (I will have to wait until I get home to my books to tell you the names) that one tactic for extending the endurance of the 262 was to fly with one engine. However it was recommended that the second engine should be started if flight was under 10,000 ft. Also, making a landing was possible on one engine but considered extremely hazardous. So, if you cant start the engine in flight, how could you re-start it at 10,000 ft? Yes the engines needed an exterior power source to start them on the ground, but I can only assume that air flow was enough to re-start the engine in flight.

Hmmm, perhaps that's why I cant get an engine to re-start in the air. If so, based on what I have read, that is not modeled correctly.

Fehler

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 09:35 AM
In flight re-start was only possible under 4000m. Speed must be between 300-350kph with ~3000rpm showing on the tach.


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 10:24 AM
Thx Milo, you are correct. 10000 ft = 3048 meters. I was not aware of the RPM necessary for restart, however. I did assume you had to be going fairly fast in order to get the engine to "Spin" fast enough for a restart (Common sense there I think) I will try making a restart with your figures and see if it works.

In any event, the 262 is a lot of fun to fly. Perhaps we will get some B17's to shoot at one of these days! (As long as they dont fly too high, because I stall cant seem to get level flight at 25000 ft like I should)

I must say that my interest in this plane has only come to light within the past month or two. I figured that I would start learning it with the remodeling of the Mk108 and the possible addition of the B17 in the future add-on. So far, I have to say that it is a very challenging aircraft to fly and will be a great deal of fun (Once I come a little closer to mastering it)

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 10:30 AM
Fehler, only stating what it says in L.Dv.T-2262 A-1, Pilot Operating Instructions.

Not that FB follows the PoI./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


http://a1276.g.akamai.net/7/1276/734/625ed428e022ef/www.harley-davidson.com/PR/MOT/2004/Softail/images/DOM/img_Softail_FXST.jpg

http://www.redneckengineering.com/photogallery/photo23581/curves-done-03.jpg


"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"