PDA

View Full Version : A suggestion about max. dive speeds, Oleg, please, take a look here...



XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 10:52 AM
We have collected some data regarding dive speeds together with CSL_TurboLover.

We realized, that it is impossible to find a "breaking speed" for planes as many planes simply did not brake, ran into compressibility effect instead and some recovered upon reaching lower levels. Some damaged and some perfectly undamaged. However, this can not be modelled in FB as we understand, so we tried to determine what could be a possible system for modelling the "breaking speed" in FB.

We found out that many planes in FB have their breaking speed roughly at about 100km/h higher than stated in pilotāĀ“s manual as maximal allowed speed in dive. (We spent some time searching and downloading as many scanned pilotāĀ“s manuals as we could). That sounds pretty reasonable. But some planes are way off and what we would like to see is this system working for all the planes in a fair play way.

What you see in the following table is:

1 - the maximum allowed dive speed as stated in pilotāĀ“s manual

2 - the maximum allowed dive speed as reached in real life - basically figure 1+100km/h (mostly even accounts of pilots diving these planes over limits speak about reaching these speeds)

3 - the "breaking speed" of said plane in FB version RC01

4 - the necessary correction to be made before final patch release

http://www.turbolover.wz.cz/il-2/files_fb/tables/RC01_DiveSpeed.jpg


For the plane types that donāĀ“t have all figures filled in we were not able to find the pilotāĀ“s manuals and we will try to find it and we will also welcome help of anyone willing to contribute. If you have pilotāĀ“s manuals for these planes, pleas PM me, or post excerpts regarding maximum allowed dive speeds here.

Also please post your opinions about this system. I think that it would mostly right the current wrongs in this area.

Thank you

CSL_Kocour



Message Edited on 11/12/0309:55AM by CSL_Kocour

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 10:52 AM
We have collected some data regarding dive speeds together with CSL_TurboLover.

We realized, that it is impossible to find a "breaking speed" for planes as many planes simply did not brake, ran into compressibility effect instead and some recovered upon reaching lower levels. Some damaged and some perfectly undamaged. However, this can not be modelled in FB as we understand, so we tried to determine what could be a possible system for modelling the "breaking speed" in FB.

We found out that many planes in FB have their breaking speed roughly at about 100km/h higher than stated in pilotāĀ“s manual as maximal allowed speed in dive. (We spent some time searching and downloading as many scanned pilotāĀ“s manuals as we could). That sounds pretty reasonable. But some planes are way off and what we would like to see is this system working for all the planes in a fair play way.

What you see in the following table is:

1 - the maximum allowed dive speed as stated in pilotāĀ“s manual

2 - the maximum allowed dive speed as reached in real life - basically figure 1+100km/h (mostly even accounts of pilots diving these planes over limits speak about reaching these speeds)

3 - the "breaking speed" of said plane in FB version RC01

4 - the necessary correction to be made before final patch release

http://www.turbolover.wz.cz/il-2/files_fb/tables/RC01_DiveSpeed.jpg


For the plane types that donāĀ“t have all figures filled in we were not able to find the pilotāĀ“s manuals and we will try to find it and we will also welcome help of anyone willing to contribute. If you have pilotāĀ“s manuals for these planes, pleas PM me, or post excerpts regarding maximum allowed dive speeds here.

Also please post your opinions about this system. I think that it would mostly right the current wrongs in this area.

Thank you

CSL_Kocour



Message Edited on 11/12/0309:55AM by CSL_Kocour

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 11:03 AM
Interesting!
One would assume that Oleg and team, being clever enough to create FB would have already worked out a similiar system already.
Still no harm in making the suggestion.
Interesting to note your figure on the Zero

S!

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 11:15 AM
The Zero info was taken from here:

http://www.chuckhawks.com/best_fighter_planes.htm

The A6M5a had an improved wing cannon, and carried more ammunition, and the dive limiting speed was raised to 460 m.p.h.

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 12:08 PM
You are aware that all FW's were incapible of breaking up in a dive right?

All of them were able to reach terminal velocity, with no damage to the airframe.

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 05:51 PM
I know, Hero, sturdy planes with big radial engines ran into compressibility and slowed down in lower levels due to the increased drag and were able to recover, but I was told FB can not model compressibility so at least this system was proposed to at least get nearer to what each plane could do in a dive. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-12-2003, 06:48 PM
i want to comment on the MIG3 figure (all but 3U). they lose control surfaces at 610-630 and break the wing at 630+ before this patch (in game)


this i have tested with years of flying the MIG - my question is : have you tested this ? has the MIG3 been changed so it can dive faster now ???? that would be great because not being able to dive faster then 620 was this plane's greatest weak point.

can't test myself until later !!! you guys better watch out for my deadly small MG fire when i get down to some miggin LOL

see ya on hyper for some RC_04 testing

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 12:27 AM
100% agree with your system koncur. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 03:16 PM
Thank you for the work Kocour.

As maps and planes from the ETO are introduced into the game, high alt. engagements will become more frequent, and the relative dive performance of planes, therefore, becomes critical.

I agree that if compressibilty can't be modelled then perhaps a scale as you propose is the next best thing to gain balanced performance.



<CENTER>http://home.cogeco.ca/~jkinley/FB_JG27.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 04:51 PM
why do use IAS speed without designated height? or is it ment IAS at sea level(so it equals TAS)?

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 05:30 PM
i just checked ... the MIG3 values in the table are very wrong .... it is still like it was ... you lose control surfaces at 620-630 and snap the wing at 650+

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 05:39 PM
johann_thor wrote:
- i just checked ... the MIG3 values in the table are
- very wrong .... it is still like it was ... you lose
- control surfaces at 620-630 and snap the wing at
- 650+

Not in RC01. The Mig3, 1940 doesn't lose control surfaces or wing parts until 690-700kph.



<CENTER>http://home.cogeco.ca/~jkinley/FB_JG27.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 06:31 PM
Difference between P-51D and Fw-190A dive limit speeds=

210 km/h!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-13-2003, 07:06 PM
i tried the AM-38, the ud, and the shvak version in the public beta.

they all lose control surfaces at 620-630 IAS and snap the wing at 650+

i did not try the 1940 but i find it strange that its any different.

starting public beta..........testing




Chadburn wrote:
-
- johann_thor wrote:
-- i just checked ... the MIG3 values in the table are
-- very wrong .... it is still like it was ... you lose
-- control surfaces at 620-630 and snap the wing at
-- 650+
-
- Not in RC01. The Mig3, 1940 doesn't lose control
- surfaces or wing parts until 690-700kph.