PDA

View Full Version : Oleg get rid of the prop pitch cheat



bolillo_loco
07-19-2005, 04:29 PM
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.

faustnik
07-19-2005, 04:43 PM
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

Thanks! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Maple_Tiger
07-19-2005, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.


You may want to try the P-38 Late. This way, you can actualy catch them.

JG53Frankyboy
07-19-2005, 05:31 PM
most propably in BoB the Emils will habe no auto modus anymore http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

but the real LW pilots used the manual pitch very well , they decreased the pitch to keep the supercharger at higher revs.

and yes, to get the max power in a Fw190 only in manual mode is weird

MEGILE
07-19-2005, 05:33 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

Thanks! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

II_JG1_Schpam
07-19-2005, 06:14 PM
I'll echo the others, get rid of the manual pitch thing and make the autopitch work right.

Chuck_Older
07-19-2005, 06:22 PM
Cheat- a code or 3rd party program that alters play experience unfairly

Exploit- using a bug, unexpected feature, or overlooked aspect for benefit in the game


BIG difference

p1ngu666
07-19-2005, 06:48 PM
make teh 190 perform right on auto, make manual CSP
spitfire IX and VIII have that system ingame, so its doable.

remove manaul mode from 109, or change power curve to a flatline above max auto rpm, (ie get no increase in performance)

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

This is a shocker, so everyone might want to sit down, but I'm with Faustnik. It looks like the propeller pitch is indeed an unrealistic exploit, but that the Focke-Wulf should reach the speed without the exploit that it now can with it. I'm taking Faustnik's word for it, since he is as knowledgeable about the Focke-Wulf as Bolillo is about the P-38, and has also proved his objectivity about it by arguing against it having a better turn (as well as arguing for it's deadliest opponent, the P-38 L "Late").

But what all of the blues consistently fail to address is the fact that even if the propeller pitch exploit were realistic, the Allied airplanes which could switch to manual in real life should have it in the game as well as the German planes. And yet they do not! This means that German aircraft have an advantage over American ships that they did not have in real life!

Manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch! While the two automatic systems were quite different from each other, manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch. If you cannot see that, then you are hopeless.

Stefan-R
07-20-2005, 01:37 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
remove manaul mode from 109, or change power curve to a flatline above max auto rpm, (ie get no increase in performance)

Thats unrealistic, ie Helmut Wick regulary overev the engine of his Bf109E for better performance (therefor his mechanics had to change his engine very often).
To overrev the engine gives you more power but destroys the engine (what in fact is part of the game).

xTHRUDx
07-20-2005, 01:44 AM
its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change,

good thing i drive a automatic transmission car instead of the manual version of it. i must be much faster, right?

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 02:33 AM
Propeller pitch differs from car gears in that gears must be done in increments, whereas propeller pitch can move gradually. Some car companies are experimenting with an automatic transmission that will work like propeller pitch - gradually. Instead of using gears, they use a cone, so that to shift it just slides down the cone to a smaller section.

Currently, automatic shifting is very ineffective since it is limited to increments. Because of this, a human can sometimes shift faster by correctly judging the best speed at which to shift.

Now, I don't know how refined automatic propeller pitch was, but there's no reason why it would be slower than a human, since there are no increments which it must wait at for a certain speed. And, unlike a human, it should consistently choose the best pitch.

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 02:34 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
But what all of the blues consistently fail to address is the fact that even if the propeller pitch exploit were realistic, the Allied airplanes which could switch to manual in real life should have it in the game as well as the German planes. And yet they do not! This means that German aircraft have an advantage over American ships that they did not have in real life!

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by Stefan-R:
Thats unrealistic, ie Helmut Wick regulary overev the engine of his Bf109E for better performance (therefor his mechanics had to change his engine very often).
To overrev the engine gives you more power but destroys the engine (what in fact is part of the game).

Interesting; can you provide me with sources? I am not certain whether or not it is realistic.

What I do know that either way, the German planes have an unrealistic advantage. If the propeller pitch trick is realistic, then Allied airplanes are getting an unrealistic disadvantage by not being able to switch to manual as they could in real life. If the propeller pitch trick is not realistic, then Axis airplanes are getting an unrealistic advantage by being able to use it. Either way, you blue players do have an unrealistic advantage!

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-20-2005, 02:56 AM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.

Yeah yeah Oleg, give them the ability to use Manual pitch so they can (as in an german plane) overheat and break their engine very quickly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

No more "neveroverheating red planes".

Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.

...


Ah ... They want manual pitch W/O overheat and engine failure... And you will give them...

Ah ...

As usual... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Ok. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Nubarus
07-20-2005, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.

Yeah yeah Oleg, give them the ability to use Manual pitch so they can (as in an german plane) overheat and break their engine very quickly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

No more "neveroverheating red planes".

Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.
Let them overheat if they want.

...


Ah ... They want manual pitch W/O overheat and engine failure... And you will give them...

Ah ...

As usual... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Ok. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have absolutely no idea how this exploit works do you?

You don't have to answer, your utterly lame post say's enough about it.

Maybe you should first ask someone to explain it to you before you start mixing yourself in a discussion. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

Stefan-R
07-20-2005, 03:20 AM
DB601A had "Kurzleistung, erh√¬∂ht" (which was allowed for 1 min) with 2500 U/Min [rpm].

Auto prop. pitch in the game only goes up to 2300 rpm in the game, which would be "Dauerleistung, erh√¬∂ht" (which was allowed for 30 min)

The only way to get the "real" max. power in the game is to use manual pitch.

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-20-2005, 03:34 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
You have absolutely no idea how this exploit works do you?

You don't have to answer, your utterly lame post say's enough about it.

Maybe you should first ask someone to explain it to you before you start mixing yourself in a discussion. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

And YOU don't obviously have any idea of what silly thing are asked in the beginning of this post ... Read a bit more carefully mr "we are serious here".

"either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board."

The Real 109 has a switch under the throttle to cut the auto pitch, all the aircraft DON'T have it ot S/T simmilar.

The topic of this post is to suppress a feature the real plane has or to give it to planes who don't.

In a silly post i make silly response IF I WANT mister "So serious".

Nubarus
07-20-2005, 03:46 AM
Yawn, yes I know it had a switch to manual pitch, as you can see from my response I DIDN'T say it didn't have it.

But the exploit in this game is unrealistic because when used correctly it doesn't break the engine at all.

So, as before, ask someone to explain how it works since it pretty obvious that you have no clue at all about it.

JG53Frankyboy
07-20-2005, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

This is a shocker, so everyone might want to sit down, but I'm with Faustnik. It looks like the propeller pitch is indeed an unrealistic exploit, but that the Focke-Wulf should reach the speed without the exploit that it now can with it. I'm taking Faustnik's word for it, since he is as knowledgeable about the Focke-Wulf as Bolillo is about the P-38, and has also proved his objectivity about it by arguing against it having a better turn (as well as arguing for it's deadliest opponent, the P-38 L "Late").

But what all of the blues consistently fail to address is the fact that even if the propeller pitch exploit were realistic, the Allied airplanes which could switch to manual in real life should have it in the game as well as the German planes. And yet they do not! This means that German aircraft have an advantage over American ships that they did not have in real life!

Manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch! While the two automatic systems were quite different from each other, manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch. If you cannot see that, then you are hopeless. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

im curious, which allied planes had a manual propellerblade pitch ? beside its ConstantSpeedPRopeller rev control ?

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-20-2005, 04:10 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
Yawn, yes I know it had a switch to manual pitch, as you can see from my response I DIDN'T say it didn't have it.

But the exploit in this game is unrealistic because when used correctly it doesn't break the engine at all.

So, as before, ask someone to explain how it works since it pretty obvious that you have no clue at all about it.

As i said ... You are unable to understand what this topic is about, giving planes a feature they didn't have for better "Balanced GAMING".

And ... If i understand what you just wrote, the switch exist on the real plane BUT if the pilot press him it must break the engine.

Interesting ...

An "instant engine jammer button". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Hetzer III
07-20-2005, 04:52 AM
Yes, lets get rid of that proppitch thing....once and for all!

http://1000aircraftphotos.com/401Squadron/Me262-1.jpg


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Nubarus
07-20-2005, 05:30 AM
Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
Yawn, yes I know it had a switch to manual pitch, as you can see from my response I DIDN'T say it didn't have it.

But the exploit in this game is unrealistic because when used correctly it doesn't break the engine at all.

So, as before, ask someone to explain how it works since it pretty obvious that you have no clue at all about it.

As i said ... You are unable to understand what this topic is about, giving planes a feature they didn't have for better "Balanced GAMING".

And ... If i understand what you just wrote, the switch exist on the real plane BUT if the pilot press him it must break the engine.

Interesting ...

An "instant engine jammer button". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unable to read I see.

I didn't say that it breaks the engine right away IRL, but as I said BEFORE, this EXPLOIT allows you to use it WITHOUT ANY risk of breaking the engine and THAT is what needs to be looked at.

I know now for sure that you have absolutely no idea what so ever how this exploit works in this game so it's pretty useless to discuss this further with you.

Maybe you should find that out first and then come back....

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-20-2005, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
.

But the exploit in this game is unrealistic because when used correctly it doesn't break the engine at all.

So ... Assuming that the real planes have the ability to switch manual to auto.

Assuming that the PF german planes are able to switch manual to auto too.

Prove me that a Real life pilot is unable, even if he use it "correctly", to avoid the jamming of his engine.

And i know this exploit well an i can tell you that you are wrong when you say that there is no risk to jam the engine, this exploit minimize the risk but he still exist (that's why i don't use it, being in the tail of a plane and loosig the fight because i jam my engine is a real shame).

This exploit can be solved by forcing the engine to to come back to a "neutral point" every time the manual pitch is engaged, but if it don't work like this on the real plane that will make the plane "unrealistic".

If you have a better solution ???

I notice that you avoid constantly the fact that this topic is about to suppress a feature the real plane has or to give it to planes who don't(may i understand you agree with the original poster?).

jurinko
07-20-2005, 07:49 AM
Whats going on here? All CSP planes can fly at 100% rpm all the time and manual propeller management just allows the German planes to fly at 100% as well, instead of carefull 85-90% set by the prop automation.

I would say, the bigger nonsense is when CSP planes fly at 100% rpm only in all regimes of flight without any overheat/overrev penalty.

Sturm_Williger
07-20-2005, 07:51 AM
Let me see if I've got this right ... in the hands of a noob like me, there is a 95% chance of stuffing the engine if I engage Manual Prop Pitch on a 109 and monkey with it. Even an expert probably runs some risk of this ( maybe as low as 5 - 10 % ).

And the red flyers want this ability ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

jurinko
07-20-2005, 08:01 AM
what more, I noticed that a hit into the prop governor in Hurricane causes its malfunction, however, the plane flies (screaming terribly) with rpm far over the red line without major problems..?

lbhskier37
07-20-2005, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by jurinko:
what more, I noticed that a hit into the prop governor in Hurricane causes its malfunction, however, the plane flies (screaming terribly) with rpm far over the red line without major problems..?

This has been brought up many times, but it just gets forgotten about with some people claiming that the merlin was tough enough to scream over redline for an entire flight.

Tvrdi
07-20-2005, 08:56 AM
and please remove the overheating because its poorly modeled....prop hanging..please remove the whole game and make real and expensive military simulator for us rich ppl

Nubarus
07-20-2005, 09:49 AM
Originally posted by jurinko:
what more, I noticed that a hit into the prop governor in Hurricane causes its malfunction, however, the plane flies (screaming terribly) with rpm far over the red line without major problems..?

Are you kidding?

If you leave it like that your engine breaks before you can say "I want desert that can be consumed with a spoon".

The only thing you can do is reduce is pitch and throttle around 50% and try to get back to base with minimal speed and even then you are lucky if you can make it back since your engine will grind away slowly.

Nubarus
07-20-2005, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
I notice that you avoid constantly the fact that this topic is about to suppress a feature the real plane has or to give it to planes who don't(may i understand you agree with the original poster?).

I avoid it yes because I don't agree with the original poster, but I guess your a little too dense to see that.

All I pointed out is that this is an exploit that needs to be looked at.

Your initial response came off as that you didn't think there was an exploit at all.

But as you say that this exploit is a lot of work you are seriously mistaken.
All you need to do is map the auto/manual pitch toggle key to an easy access location and your all set.

faustnik
07-20-2005, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:

The only thing you can do is reduce is pitch and throttle around 50% and try to get back to base with minimal speed and even then you are lucky if you can make it back since your engine will grind away slowly.

Yeah, I've had the same issue in the P-40. You can't go over 50% as you limp back to base.

faustnik
07-20-2005, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:

All you need to do is map the auto/manual pitch toggle key to an easy access location and your all set.

That's what throws me with the Fw190 auto pitch. The button was very conveniently mapped. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/190throttle1.jpg

It was placed for easy use, but, I sure can't find any reference to its use in combat. I get the feeling that the kommandogerat maintained RPMs so well that using the manual switch was not a consideration. Why fiddle with a switch when a nifty automatic device lets you focus on maneuvering?

Crumpp has posted that although manual use of prop pitch was possible, it could quickly damage the engine if 2700 RPMs were exceeded. If the Fw190 perfromance with kommandogerat was brought up to spec and exceeding 2700 RPM in manual led quickly to negative consequences, we'd all be good. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

(I'm only discussing the Fw190 here, not the Bf109 which had a different system.)

JG5_UnKle
07-20-2005, 11:27 AM
It is a pilot account but in a book covering JG26 I read about manual prop pitch being used for takeoffs (heavy load/ short runway) and of course if the auto failed. Can't remember the reference but I know early 190's had issues with the CSP failing.

If the Fw-190 performed properly (as Faust and me have both stated over and over..) in auto then there wouldn't be an issue.

As for the 109 I only use manual PP in the Emils as they rev at 2300 rpm on auto http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif and I only use manual PP in climbouts.

In combat I never touch the PP, and in the later 109's never have done. It just never entered my head to do it.

p1ngu666
07-20-2005, 12:13 PM
u could point out that over rev gives u undocumented performance, and therefore is iffy and probably unfair.

also with the merlin u will be much slower if the csp is hit and u overrev, there isnt a performance gain at all from it, plus u haveto use low throttle and pitch.

cps planes can fly at 100% prop pitch all the time because as heat isnt only from revs, its from manifold pressure too, heat is mostly related to how much power is produced.

german planes can fly with high power settings and not many issues aswell.

when i used to fly 190F, my cruise setting was WEP, 110% throttle and 95% pitch (radiator open), id also have a full bomb load slowing me down.

lbhskier37
07-20-2005, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
u could point out that over rev gives u undocumented performance, and therefore is iffy and probably unfair.

also with the merlin u will be much slower if the csp is hit and u overrev, there isnt a performance gain at all from it, plus u haveto use low throttle and pitch.

cps planes can fly at 100% prop pitch all the time because as heat isnt only from revs, its from manifold pressure too, heat is mostly related to how much power is produced.

german planes can fly with high power settings and not many issues aswell.

when i used to fly 190F, my cruise setting was WEP, 110% throttle and 95% pitch (radiator open), id also have a full bomb load slowing me down.

When you lose the CSP unit in a merlin, you turn obscenely high rpms, which I would guess are well above where the power curve drops off. In a 109 when you go to manual you only over-rev it a small amount, staying within the power curve. If you ran a 109 in this game the amount over redline that the merlin does when the CSP unit dies, it would be instant engine death. I'll bet if you could run an rpm just above what the CSP unit lets you in the spits you would probably get a boost too. Could spits run on auto, I know its been said that at least the P38s could.

p1ngu666
07-20-2005, 01:45 PM
that is true, if u turn off overheat u can experiment, u can make the db engine rev so fast it goes silent http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

GR142-Pipper
07-20-2005, 01:47 PM
Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
Cheat- a code or 3rd party program that alters play experience unfairly

Exploit- using a bug, unexpected feature, or overlooked aspect for benefit in the game


BIG difference Not really. The end result is a one-sided artificial performance enhancer that shouldn't exist.

GR142-Pipper

p1ngu666
07-20-2005, 01:47 PM
u also dont go very fast, with teh massive over rev

GR142-Pipper
07-20-2005, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by jurinko:
Whats going on here? All CSP planes can fly at 100% rpm all the time and manual propeller management just allows the German planes to fly at 100% as well, instead of carefull 85-90% set by the prop automation.

I would say, the bigger nonsense is when CSP planes fly at 100% rpm only in all regimes of flight without any overheat/overrev penalty. Flying at 100% in and of itself does NOT cause any overheat/overrev issues. What causes overheat issues predominantly are two conditions: 1) when you are at LESS than 100% prop pitch and have high manifold pressure (it's called overboosting) and 2) airflow cooling is simply inadequate. Overreving is caused by a failure in the prop's governor.

GR142-Pipper

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 02:04 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
im curious, which allied planes had a manual propellerblade pitch ? beside its ConstantSpeedPRopeller rev control ?

The P-38 Lightning could, at the very least. I don't know about others.

JG53Frankyboy
07-20-2005, 02:04 PM
arent the original pilotmanuals are saying reduce RPM when going in a fast dive in CSP planes ?

JG53Frankyboy
07-20-2005, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
im curious, which allied planes had a manual propellerblade pitch ? beside its ConstantSpeedPRopeller rev control ?

The P-38 Lightning could, at the very least. I don't know about others. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the 109s and 190s hag a gauge that showed the pilots the angle of the blades - the P-38 too ?
and when , is it modelled in PF ?

AerialTarget
07-20-2005, 02:29 PM
There was no guage. No, its ability the switch to manual is not modelled in the game, which is precisely my complaint in this issue.

III-JG27_DV8
07-20-2005, 06:11 PM
So you've been outflown by someone in a 109. Don't fret about it, learn and move on.

Wining an engagement takes more than flat turns, prop pitch, flaps, etc; and this is what people fail to see. Your knowlege of ACM vs your adversaries will tilt the advantage either for or against you.

Like chess, there is more to wining than what tools you have.

S!
JG27_DV8

___________________________
Proverbs 30:5 NLT

Every word of God proves true. He defends all who come to him for protection.

p1ngu666
07-20-2005, 09:23 PM
Originally posted by III-JG27_DV8:
So you've been outflown by someone in a 109. Don't fret about it, learn and move on.

Wining an engagement takes more than flat turns, prop pitch, flaps, etc; and this is what people fail to see. Your knowlege of ACM vs your adversaries will tilt the advantage either for or against you.

Like chess, there is more to wining than what tools you have.

S!
JG27_DV8

___________________________
Proverbs 30:5 NLT

Every word of God proves true. He defends all who come to him for protection.

tools help alot tho...

Kettenhunde
07-20-2005, 09:57 PM
the 109s and 190s hag a gauge that showed the pilots the angle of the blades - the P-38 too ?
and when , is it modelled in PF ?


Yes, it is the VDM clock. 12 noon is fine pitch. The earlier from 12 noon you get the coarser the pitch. For the FW190, depending on the prop, around 1030hrs is the limit.

All the best,

Crumpp

Copperhead310th
07-20-2005, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AerialTarget:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

This is a shocker, so everyone might want to sit down, but I'm with Faustnik. It looks like the propeller pitch is indeed an unrealistic exploit, but that the Focke-Wulf should reach the speed without the exploit that it now can with it. I'm taking Faustnik's word for it, since he is as knowledgeable about the Focke-Wulf as Bolillo is about the P-38, and has also proved his objectivity about it by arguing against it having a better turn (as well as arguing for it's deadliest opponent, the P-38 L "Late").

But what all of the blues consistently fail to address is the fact that even if the propeller pitch exploit were realistic, the Allied airplanes which could switch to manual in real life should have it in the game as well as the German planes. And yet they do not! This means that German aircraft have an advantage over American ships that they did not have in real life!

Manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch! While the two automatic systems were quite different from each other, manual propeller pitch is manual propeller pitch. If you cannot see that, then you are hopeless. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

im curious, which allied planes had a manual propellerblade pitch ? beside its ConstantSpeedPRopeller rev control ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know that the P-47 had both Manual and Auto.
as well as the P-51. It was there for redundantcy more than anything else.
P-47 Pilots could switch back & forth between auto & manual in both prop & supercharger.

Badsight.
07-20-2005, 11:07 PM
it takes time to lean to fly full-time in manuel pitch mode

its not easy

what is too easy is . . . . . the ability to switch between auto & manuel modes

it simply wasnt this easy & quick to do in the Bf-109 IRL

that & engine over-rev damadge need to be looked at in FB-PF

NonWonderDog
07-20-2005, 11:25 PM
A couple people here seem to be alluding to some kind of exploit instead of typing coherent sentences. Is there some kind of bug that I don't know about, or are people calling manual control itself an "exploit"? Is there some kind of glitch attached to quickly toggling manual and automatic modes or something?

I don't see how the manual control itself could be seen as an "exploit." The manual mode on the 109s is just a normal variable pitch prop control. All the 109s had this control. The 109E probably shouldn't have the *automatic* mode, to be honest. The 109's manual prop control is a bit more important than the emergency override on a Curtiss Electric CSP, but I wouldn't mind having that one modelled as well. Not that I would ever find a need to use it.

The "manual" pitch control on the FW-190 acts rather oddly, though. It's not really manual *anything.* It doesn't even react like a normal CSP. All it seems to do is tweak the RPM settings for the Kommandogerat. About 65% "pitch" seems to be identical to automatic mode in *every* way. Higher settings seem to run the RPMs a certain percentage higher than it would normally, and vice versa for low settings, but the overall behavior is unchanged from automatic mode. Is this accurate? Would something like this be controllable from the cockpit?

Badsight.
07-21-2005, 12:34 AM
I don't see how the manual control itself could be seen as an "exploit." The manual mode on the 109s is just a normal variable pitch prop control.
manuel pitch allows you to rev the engine higher than Auto does

this gives increased performance

in a 109 , any time over 3000 Rpm is going to shorten your flying time , but it wont terminate the motor straight away if your carefull

manuel to auto & back again works much faster & eaiser than IRL , this makes it eaisly useable in a DF situation

& its true , the BoB 109 Emils had manuel control , no auto at all untill later models

Aaron_GT
07-21-2005, 12:54 AM
manuel to auto & back again works much faster & eaiser than IRL , this makes it eaisly useable in a DF situation

& its true , the BoB 109 Emils had manuel control , no auto at all untill later models

Yes, the speed of being able to switch and the ability to go from modest revs to high revs and back again (almost indefinitely) seems to be the problem. The other is that it seems that the performance using KG is not as good as it should be.

So it seems like there are 4 bugs:

1. Too easy to change from KG to manual PP without sufficient negatives on engine life if changing quickly. This is probably due to simplified CEM (an oxymoron?). Who knows if this is fixable in the current code.

2. Performance of some 190 models in KG is too low.

3. 109E should lose auto mode.

4. Some CSP planes should gain a manual control.

JG53Frankyboy
07-21-2005, 03:48 AM
why the 109Es should loose auot mode ?

this game is generaly based on the easternfront with its 109s - ore better the time frame begins there.
and in 1941 the Emils had auto.........

if you remember, when the Emils were relased in a gameupdate they had only manual - and that was wrong for operations over the UDSSR.


btw, if you change from auto to manual the actual pitchsetting from auto should be the one in manual - which is not http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

i think we all agree:
the CEM of PFm has some facts that are "strange". but i doubt anything will change. the Maddox team have sure enough to do to make a last big update with some bugfixes for this game - and then totaly move on to the BoB engine . with a much more simulated CEM.

Codex1971
07-21-2005, 06:16 AM
Some of you need to read this article before posting...this article has been posted 100's of times here but it I think it good to have a refresher once in a while http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html

And for something completely http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif

Zero Flight: http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/185354-1.html

Hurricane Flight:
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/185674-1.html

tsactuo
07-21-2005, 06:59 AM
Risking engine failure by doing crazy boost is realistic.

Engine Failure doesn't mean that it has to fail the time you do it. If you do "correct use", maybe after 10-20 hours of flight time, then the engine will die, and not instantly. This isn't modeled in IL2 as every time you start a mission or you press the refly button the planes is like new just made thing.

Changing prop pitch so fast is realistic. A blade is going to change an angle of some degrees. This doesn't seem to be time consuming process. less than second is enough, and that's how it is in the game.

Also the FB manual seems to give some speciallity to the BF/FW series in terms of prop pitch:

http://users.forthnet.gr/her/katafraktis/pitch.jpg

What is questionable for me is if the boost amount is correct, and if other planes had the mechanism to do the same.

faustnik
07-21-2005, 09:41 AM
On the subject of the kommandogerat and prop pitch, the Fw190D series spools up beautifully. There is no reason to switch to manual. Switching to manual results in very quick overheat or engine failure for little gain. If the "auto" system with all the 190s worked as well as the D's there would be no temptation to go to "manual".

Badsight.
07-21-2005, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
btw, if you change from auto to manual the actual pitchsetting from auto should be the one in manual - which is not http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. fly in Auto

press your "lower pitch" key

swop to manuel , pitch will not be 100% but will be reduced

bolillo_loco
07-22-2005, 03:40 AM
I would not be at all shocked if english aircraft also employed a system similar to american aircraft.

all american aircraft had a constant speed prop and a manual system. the constant speed unit could be turned off and the manual used. I too can also find reports of americans using manual prop pitch, but it wasnt for enhanced performance (because a CSP is by and far more efficient than any human) it was used by some P-38 groups to check the turbo regulator. in cruise the pilot would set desired rpm and map in auto rich. he would then turn off the constant speed unit and revert to manual control. the pilot would then switch to auto lean and if the prop rpm dropped more than 60 rpm there was a problem with the regulator and a field mod to fix it.

I could really care less when it comes to real aircraft because I have serious doubts about a humans ability to be more accurate than a constant speed unit for maintaining maxiumum rpm during rapid changes in speed. also since the bf 109 used 2,700 rpm what do you think would happen to the real DB if you let the prop rev to 3,500 rpm? whats the gear reduction of crank shaft to prop? 2.36:1??? with the prop turning at 3,500 rpm the crank shaft speed would be in excess of 8,000 rpm.....it doesnt take a lot of common sense to figure out what would happen to an engine that is turning at those speeds and has a 5-6 inch stroke.

In this game however you can set the throttle of the bf 109 series to 103% and then map a key for increase decrease pitch and toggle pitch on and off. by doing this you can rev the prop up to 3,200-3,500+ rpm for a very brief time and then bring it back down to 2,700 rpm, repeat the process over and over again and you will leave other bf 109s with the same load out as you in the dust. side by side drag race style takes offs will have you in the air with gear retracted before the other guy is still on the ground. this is against a person in the exact same bf 109 as you with the exact same load out, but using auto pitch. by using the above methods the engine rarely over heats.

if you do not have another slider (mouse wheel will work BTW) for prop pitch then simply map 6 keys for, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, and "auto pitch" (I use the 6 keys between the numb pad and keyboard) this method is nearly as effective, but takes a bit more pratice. you snap auto pitch off and let the engine spool up to 3,500 rpm and then snap auto pitch back on. you must select the percentage of pitch you want before you do this and it varies with true airspeed.(I believe it took me 5-10 smoked motors to get to the point where I rarely smoke an engine and this was after only playing this game for a month so its not like its real difficult)

the benifits of doing this in a bf 109 vs the same bf 109 that isnt doing it are simply out standing. you can chop power go to 0 pitch and slow down like you have an air brake, once the guy over shoots and tries to run away you simply use manual prop pitch to run him down before he even gets 100 meters away from you. in the climb it provides 35-50% more performance, the same with acceleration, and some top speed as well. show me one other a/c that does this in this game. the 190s benifit a little from this as well although not to the degree of the bf 109.

it is a bogus game feature that should be eliminated and not given to other aircraft. a lot of people deny it, well thats great if you do not use it then it will not affect you if it is eliminated. to those of you (and this includes myself) it is a pretty shallow way of out performing people. it is an exploit that a lot, but not everybody uses. in historical servers the bf 109s already out climb their historical counterparts, why do you need an even more significant advantage? manual prop pitch also helps the bf 109 turn a lot better.

dont believe american a/c had manual prop pitch? pick up a copy of america's hundred thousand and flick through all the american a/c you will see they had manual prop pitch. dont care to spend 60 us dollars on the book? pick up any copy of a pilots manual for american aircraft (about 8 us dollars) you will find that they had manual prop pitch. still too much? pick up any copy of roaring glory warbird videos and watch pilots check the manual prop pitch before take off to ensure that it is properly working..........videos are 5-7 us dollars. that is pretty cheap to put any doubts in your mind away, or shut up people who claim american a/c had it because now you can counter their claims.

JG5_UnKle
07-22-2005, 09:13 AM
In this game however you can set the throttle of the bf 109 series to 103% and then map a key for increase decrease pitch and toggle pitch on and off. by doing this you can rev the prop up to 3,200-3,500+ rpm for a very brief time and then bring it back down to 2,700 rpm, repeat the process over and over again and you will leave other bf 109s with the same load out as you in the dust. side by side drag race style takes offs will have you in the air with gear retracted before the other guy is still on the ground. this is against a person in the exact same bf 109 as you with the exact same load out, but using auto pitch. by using the above methods the engine rarely over heats.


I would like to see a track of this, after the appalling conduct at the China air competition I thought this exploit had been taken care of.

If this lame example of gaming the game still exists it should be removed from the game. Having never used it anyway I just figured it was gone. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

Jetbuff
07-22-2005, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest.

And of course that's why all F1 cars use an automatic transmission... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Pitch control on CSP != VSP of the 109 on manual != Kommandogerat of 190

lbhskier37
07-22-2005, 10:22 AM
Originally posted by Jetbuff:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest.

And of course that's why all F1 cars use an automatic transmission... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Pitch control on CSP != VSP of the 109 on manual != Kommandogerat of 190 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

F1 cars use sycronous transmissions (exuse spelling). You tell it when to shift, but you don't control the clutch, the computer is much better at that then you arehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Maybe what needs to be done is make it take longer to disengage the auto pitch. If it took 1-2 seconds to get into manual pitch and 1-2 seconds to get back into auto that would kill the quick switching back and forth exploit. Then also making the engine get damaged faster when over-reving, (this applys to allied planes too, a Hurri turning at 4000+rpm should not be long for this world unless the pilot was good enough to chop the throttle quick enough to get those revs down)

AerialTarget
07-22-2005, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by Jetbuff:
And of course that's why all F1 cars use an automatic transmission... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Pitch control on CSP != VSP of the 109 on manual != Kommandogerat of 190


Originally posted by AerialTarget:
Propeller pitch differs from car gears in that gears must be done in increments, whereas propeller pitch can move gradually. Some car companies are experimenting with an automatic transmission that will work like propeller pitch - gradually. Instead of using gears, they use a cone, so that to shift it just slides down the cone to a smaller section.

Currently, automatic shifting is very ineffective since it is limited to increments. Because of this, a human can sometimes shift faster by correctly judging the best speed at which to shift.

Now, I don't know how refined automatic propeller pitch was, but there's no reason why it would be slower than a human, since there are no increments which it must wait at for a certain speed. And, unlike a human, it should consistently choose the best pitch.

Cars do not equal airplanes!

bolillo_loco
07-23-2005, 03:51 AM
Originally posted by Jetbuff:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest.

And of course that's why all F1 cars use an automatic transmission... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Pitch control on CSP != VSP of the 109 on manual != Kommandogerat of 190 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you obviously have little grasp of how a propeller works or you would not compair it to a car transmission. an F-1 car has a very small speed envelope that is far less than half that of a WWII a/c. an F-1 car has no where near the acceleration of a WWII a/c that is diving. It is impossible for a pilot to manage a 2,000 hp engine's maximum prop pitch during periods of high acceleration. anybody who would make a statement such as you just have obviously understands little about how a CSP changes prop pitch with any little speed change.

and I do not care what the germans call it I am not here to learn what a constant speed prop is called in german. this entire board is here for people who use the english language.

the bottom line is american a/c had manual prop pitch, yet the do not have this bogus feature in the game which gives them 35-50% increases in climb and acceleration.

since your so keen on bf 109s what do you think would happen to a real bf 109 that let its prop rev to 3,500 rpm? its a bogus game feature period. I do not understand why somebody would defend such an exploit other than somebody who only uses bf 109s and fights non german a/c so that they can enjoy special gaming advantages that are bogus not to mention they are historically inaccurate.

BTW since you enjoy compairing cars to airplanes via the auto vs manual transmission, take a look at cars which accelerate very rapidly, ie zero to 300 mph in 4 seconds, none of them use manual transmissions. the reason???? like anything else that happens very rapidly, humans are unable to keep ahead of the system, hence an automated system must be inplace.

Fehler
07-23-2005, 04:31 AM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
BTW since you enjoy compairing cars to airplanes via the auto vs manual transmission, take a look at cars which accelerate very rapidly, ie zero to 300 mph in 4 seconds, none of them use manual transmissions. the reason???? like anything else that happens very rapidly, humans are unable to keep ahead of the system, hence an automated system must be inplace.


Advantages
Manual transmissions are typically more efficient than automatic transmissions. This is because manuals generally involve a clutch instead of a torque converter, which can cause significant power losses. This results in both better acceleration and fuel economy.
It is generally easier to build very strong manual transmissions than automatic transmissions. Manual transmissions usually have only one clutch, whereas automatics have many clutch packs.
Manual transmissions normally do not require active cooling, because not much power is dissipated as heat through the transmission.
A driver has more direct control over the state of the transmission with a manual than an automatic.
Manual transmissions are typically cheaper to build than automatic transmissions.
Manual transmissions generally require less maintenance than automatic transmissions.
In addition, many people feel that driving a manual forces the driver to pay more attention to the road and to other cars, making it more difficult to become distracted.
Manual transmissions use less fuel than an automatic transmission. Manual cars will do an extra 2 miles per gallon.

Disadvantages
Manual transmissions require more driver interaction than automatic transmissions.
A driver may inadvertently shift into the wrong gear with a manual transmission, potentially causing damage to the engine and transmission as well as compromising safety.
Manual transmissions are more difficult to learn to drive as one needs to develop a feel for properly engaging the clutch.
The smooth and quick shifts of an automatic transmission are not guaranteed when operating a manual transmission.
Manual transmissions require more controls than automatic transmissions. This is an issue in cramped cockpits, cars where a floor-shifter is inconvenient, or in vehicles equipped for disabled drivers.
Manual transmissions make it especially challenging to start when stopped upward on a hill, especially for newer drivers.

Applications and popularity
Many types of automobiles are equipped with manual transmissions. Small economy cars predominantly feature manual transmissions because they are relatively cheap and efficient, although many are optionally equipped with automatics. Economy cars are also often powered by very small engines, and automatic transmissions can make them comparatively very slow.

Sports cars are also often equipped with manual transmissions because they offer more direct driver involvement and better performance. Off-road vehicles and trucks often feature manual transmissions because they allow direct gear selection and are often more rugged than their automatic counterparts.

Very heavy trucks also feature manual transmissions because they are efficient and, more importantly, can withstand the severe loads encountered in hauling heavy loads.

Conversely, manual transmissions are no longer popular in many classes of cars sold in North America. Nearly all cars are available with an automatic transmission option, and family cars and large trucks are sold predominantly with automatics. Most luxury cars are unavailable with a manual transmission. In situations where automatics and manual transmissions are sold side-by-side, the manual transmission is the base equipment, and the automatic is optional‚‚ā¨"Ěalthough the automatic is sometimes available at no extra cost.

Some cars, such as rental cars and taxis, are nearly universally equipped with automatic transmissions in the US.


Driving technique
See Manual transmission driving technique.

Maintenance
Because clutches use changes in friction to modulate the transfer of torque between engine and transmission, they are subject to wear in everyday use. A very good clutch, when used by an expert driver, can last hundreds of thousands of kilometres, whereas weak clutches or inexperienced drivers can lead to more frequent repair or replacement.

Manual transmissions are lubricated with gear oil, which must be changed periodically, although not as frequently as the automatic transmission fluid in a vehicle so equipped. Gear oil has a characteristic aroma, due to the addition of molybdenum disulfide compounds, to lubricate the large degree of sliding friction seen by the teeth due to their helical cut, which in turn is done to eliminate the characteristic whine of straight cut gears. Some manufacturers, however, such as Honda, do not use this additive in their gear lube, specifying regular motor oil until recently, and now their own brand of gear lube which seems to be an enhanced version of motor oil.

Badsight.
07-23-2005, 04:32 AM
up untill the late eighties , the car with the fastest 0-60 Mph time was the Manuel equipped 427 Shelby Cobra

Fehler
07-23-2005, 04:53 AM
That was simple cut and paste.

I do agree it is difficult to equate the way a constant speed prop works versus an automotive transmission, but it gives a novice a refernce point of understanding.

(Most of us have driven a car, and have a general knowledge of the workings of an automobile, but only some of us have piloted a plane and even less have full working knowledge of automotive mechanics)

As far as this prop pitch cheat, I really have to say this...

If you perceive there is a bug, then do some testing, record some tracks and send them to Oleg.

Stop bothering all of us with this continuous whining; please.

If you are merely looking for popular opinion, then allow me to make you realize that none of us here have the ability to change the game. In other words, popular opinion means nothing, only Oleg controls the coding.

Simply present your facts, state your opinions, and send them to Oleg.

If you still not satisfied after all of this, then you can either chose to continue to play the game or move on to better things (What they would be is beyond me) But I guess you could play CFS3 or something.

But seriously, you should consider either 1) actually doing something about it, -OR- 2) Live with it.

The course you are on now, continuously complaining, will only cause you grief.

bolillo_loco
07-23-2005, 07:04 AM
actually I have moved on fehler, check my stats over at war clouds.........I think it has been well over three weeks. hum you had some rather fine points about collecting data and presenting it to oleg, but considering that you calling me a whinner is nothing more than you whinning about me. then there is your clever language a few weeks back which you spelled incorrectly to get by the filters. your tactics included name calling and everything else. your futile attempts to sound reasonable and like a man of wisdom are smashed by your behavior in other posts.

then again this forum is for discussion of game issues.........so whats wrong with me posting this?

I posted about the fw 190 and what I found and you were one of the very first whinners there. my goal at that post was to have other people test the a/c and then present their data so we could compair findings and try and duplicate data, your only response to that was no testing but to tell me how I "finger ***ed the test"

yes I have moved on, im sick of all the heil hitler nazi squad name having nazi siggy pic havin guys who whine and whine and whine about how the german a/c are under modeled.

the best advice you have given me is to move on the air in here has grown foul with people like yourself and the ultimate german a/c ideas.

p1ngu666
07-23-2005, 07:06 AM
f1 cars now have "manual" gearboxs, but u just flick a paddle and hydrolics and other clever systems change the gear VERY fast, less than .2 of a second, easily http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

the auto boxes where the same, it just did it itself at teh correct rpms exactly.

varible pitch mechnisms are different, probably infantily variable within the angle range...

imo the exploit is well dodgy, if it was removed ud still have 109s performing as they should..
apart from 109E :\

x__CRASH__x
07-23-2005, 09:13 AM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
...im sick of all the heil hitler nazi squad name having nazi siggy pic havin guys who whine and whine and whine about how the german a/c are under modeled.
And you tell other people they are being unreasonable! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Go back to flying your n00ber spit and stop whining about things you have proven you don't understand, and making claims you cannot prove with fact.

faustnik
07-23-2005, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:

I posted about the fw 190 and what I found and you were one of the very first whinners there. my goal at that post was to have other people test the a/c and then present their data so we could compair findings and try and duplicate data, your only response to that was no testing but to tell me how I "finger ***ed the test"

yes I have moved on, im sick of all the heil hitler nazi squad name having nazi siggy pic havin guys who whine and whine and whine about how the german a/c are under modeled.

the best advice you have given me is to move on the air in here has grown foul with people like yourself and the ultimate german a/c ideas.

That post reveals your true colors Bollilo. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Your Fw190 post was nothing more than an "us against them" troll with bogus statements (not questions) by you based on limited data. It was absolutely no different than Kurfurst's "P-38L Late is the new fantasy plane" thread.

Keep whining, we are on to you now.

Fehler
07-23-2005, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
my goal at that post was to have other people test the a/c and then present their data so we could compair findings and try and duplicate data, your only response to that was no testing but to tell me how I "finger ***ed the test"

Totally out of context, but hey, that's OK. (It is called misdirection, a common way to debate, especially here) You gave your test results, I expained how your test didnt confirm to Oleg's procedures. You got pissy, and I commented again.

Apparently, the manner I spoke angered you, or you felt like I was being too brash. Fine...

I then apologized for the term, and explained it wasnt directed in a derogatory way toward you. Did you even read that? Nope. Here is the link:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/9361001633/p/8

I will say again, my statement was only a figure of speech. My apologies are once again extended.

Personally, I never defended the prop pitch issue as a bug, just presented you with the basis of testing done in this sim. If it is a bug, and I really cant tell you if it is or not, it should be eliminated. But in case you havent noticed by the lack of attention in this forum by Oleg, he doesnt come here much any more. Thus, you must be on a mission to win some sort of public opinion with your continuous posts in several threads about the subject. Well, OK, I'll give you my vote. If there is something in the game that is broken, it should be fixed. It matters not if it is for or against these "Nazi" planes you like to point out, nor if it is for or against US planes. Realsim will then be the winner here, not sides.

As far as being a Nazi, please dont tell my dead European-Jewish relatives http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif, they might roll over in their graves; oh that's right, they never got a grave. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Hey, should I be offended by you implying that I am a Nazi? Well, I dont wear my feelings on my sleeves. But I am reviewing my sig... Nope, doesnt say I am a Nazi. It does depict an aircraft in historical coloration for the virtual on-line group of friends I fly with. Perhaps having friends makes one a Nazi.. I dont know, you will have to explain that one to me... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

And yet, even with my family's history, I am able to realize that this is a game. And the wonderful, yet terrible machines represented in this game held no political affiliation; they killed regardless of affinity, for both sides. I fly German because the on-line wars I participated in usually had no "Blue side players." I have also held a liking for the Focke Wulf, so flying blue was not a bad thing in all.

-After all-

This is a game. I hope you enjoy it and it stops giving you so much grief. And what ever crusade you are on, I hope it works out best for you.

Codex1971
07-23-2005, 05:44 PM
I'm staying out of this personal **** on this so my post is back to the topic re the prop pitch.

I see this as an exploit more than a bug. If you take two 109s side by side, one staying on auto the other swapping between auto and manual logic tells you the second 109 will eventually have higher speeds due to the increase in overall rev count. I know nothing about the internal workings of the 109 props but I'm looking at this logically, when the 109 is put in manual and the throttle remains constant the revs go through the roof, this is dangerous in terms of engine wear but it does also produce more power thus more speed. If this behaviour is modelled correctly then regardless of weather you like it or not, it's realistic.

p1ngu666
07-23-2005, 06:10 PM
fehler, u could always replace it with teh mossie, it did bomb teh gestapo in famous raids, and later in teh war it bombed the factories that produced the furnaces for the camps http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Lixma
07-23-2005, 06:22 PM
Idea.....

Why not just turn off 'Complex Engine Management' in the servers ?

No more prop-pitch whining.

The downside is that everyone is limited to a radiator with only 2 settings...Auto and Open. Big deal.

It wouldn't stop some people seething behind their monitors "you only shot me down because you had an automatic radiator" but it might help in achieving a percieved level playing field.

x__CRASH__x
07-23-2005, 06:27 PM
That might be fine for the arcade servers Bolillo flies in. But for those who fly full switch, it won't do at all.

Atzebrueck
07-23-2005, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
yes I have moved on, im sick of all the heil hitler nazi squad name having nazi siggy pic havin guys who whine and whine and whine about how the german a/c are under modeled.


I think it's time to ban somebody http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif.

carguy_
07-23-2005, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
yes I have moved on, im sick of all the heil hitler nazi squad name having nazi siggy pic havin guys who whine and whine and whine about how the german a/c are under modeled.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I don`t know what experiences you or your family had with nazizm but I can tell you my ancestors have been hit by communism and nazism at THE VERY SAME TIME.Even though my grand fathers and grandmothers,their brothers and sisters never wanted to speak about what they experienced I managed to gather some information,photos or plain feelings.From a little brat I`ve been told that communism and nazism are two greatest evils in the hitory of human civilisation.

However,I do not feel bad flying German planes nor do I feel hate when I`m downing my next Lavochkin with red stars.
For me this game is all about the wonders of human machinery and competing with each other to whom will find the best use of their machines.


I see that you connect the swastica on the tail of my Bf109 with my feelings about world,humanity,politcs,religion,etc.

Let me tell you THIS.You bought the game,you`re entitiled to have,express your opinions here.
I will not tell you to go f*ck yourself with those fellings that you present towards LW flyers because I simply do not care.

Making a allies vs nazis war out of this little game,and this little issue,places you on the very bottom of online IL2 community pot with all other confused people and degrades this thread into "nazis are winning" whine.


PS.I stopped using manual pp when v2.04 came out.

MEGILE
07-23-2005, 06:43 PM
When you resort to the Nazi word, you loose the interweb debate.
Fin
No more lives
Please leave.

I truly shudder to think that Oleg reads this rubbish.

x__CRASH__x
07-23-2005, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by Megile:
When you resort to the Nazi word, you loose the interweb debate.
He lost this debate when he hit the "Start new discussion" button. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

GR142-Pipper
07-23-2005, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by JG5_UnKle:
I would like to see a track of this, after the appalling conduct at the China air competition I thought this exploit had been taken care of. What exactly happened at the China air competition?

GR142-Pipper

Badsight.
07-23-2005, 07:58 PM
Originally posted by JG5_UnKle:
the appalling conduct what he means is where the prop pitch was used as its normally used online

they were not even using it as good as it can be by staying under manuel control

GR142-Pipper
07-23-2005, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by Fehler:
If you perceive there is a bug, then do some testing, record some tracks and send them to Oleg.

Stop bothering all of us with this continuous whining; please. Bolillo is by no means whining whatsoever. He's merely pointing out an artificial game exploit that is common knowledge and saying it ought to be corrected...which it should.

GR142-Pipper

Willey
07-23-2005, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
Yes, please eliminate any exploits and raise Fw190A performance levels on "auto" settings to historical levels.

Thanks! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Lixma
07-23-2005, 09:13 PM
Re: Appalling conduct in China.

There was a pilot's briefing before the tournament began where it was agreed (grudgingly, perhaps, by some) that if it's in the game it was OK to use.

Therefore no-one did anything 'illegal' there and none of the matches IMO were won or lost by the use of any of these tricks.

Fehler
07-23-2005, 11:11 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fehler:
If you perceive there is a bug, then do some testing, record some tracks and send them to Oleg.

Stop bothering all of us with this continuous whining; please. Bolillo is by no means whining whatsoever. He's merely pointing out an artificial game exploit that is common knowledge and saying it ought to be corrected...which it should.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When my children were smaller they might ask for a toy at the store. If I would say no, I might even entertain them giving a reason they absolutely needed the toy.. LOL

But when they asked, and asked, and asked, and asked, and asked, I called it whining.

Now, I am not saying I have never been guilty of whining! Far from it. I still whine about the view in the FW-190! Every 190 view thread that has popped up has been called whining (Even though evidence has been repeatedly presented about the view for some 2 to 2.5 years now).

Go count the threads since 4.01 that the pitch exploit has been raised. Look at the subjects posting this. Now say that one is whining (190 view), yet the other isnt (Pitch exploit viewpoint).

All I am saying is, if folks think it is an exploit, get it changed. The poll of public opinion is not needed to make something historically correct. Evidence of a problem, submitted correctly, IS!

And I will further this by saying, if it truly is "Common knowledge" as you say, then Oleg must already know it. He must have some reason it is still in the game. -Or- perhaps it is not as common as you believe, because I for one, thought they had removed the speedy on/off exploit from the game several patches ago.

So, we are back to square one. Make a track, present your problem, or dont cry about it if it never gets fixed.

If you do all these things, and nothing is done, or your question is not answered by a developer, then by all means whine away. I will even join you in the thread by posting pics of the FW-190 forward view, and we can whine together... They can call us Brother-in-whines, or gamewhiners, or whine-O's. LOL

WWMaxGunz
07-23-2005, 11:54 PM
If the exploitable part is the ability to escape overrev damage while enjoying overrev
power by switching between auto and manual then the fix should not be "take the manual
mode out". The fix should be something more basic and intrinsic to the code which none
of us here have so suggestions especially as crude as the ones fielded are just shots
in the dark.

I never read anywhere about real 109's being flown that way so perhaps somehow the code
change needed would reflect better the way the real plane worked (perhaps the prop pitch
did not adjust infinitely quick, the drawings I've seen of the mechanism of the 109 prop
control did not lend to snap changes over wide ranges --- nor did any of them though the
hydraulic props certainly show capability for faster and better regulated change than the
centrifugal weights vs spring force and seperated contacts to actuate a motorized screw
to control the pitch of the 109 (which I've seen that one and the Hamilton) and possibly
the Curtiss Electric which I forget just how close it is to the 109 but it is close and
an older design than the Hamilton though lighter and devoid of pressure lines and seals.

Some delay of the 109 system was noted and when your system works somewhat like a house
thermostat where activation is literally by moving through some part of a range until
reaching a limit before any adjustment is made then changing direction of change will
have some slop and take some time even if it's only so much hesitation.

Add to that the prop. Were all these props set so that prop AOA was the same from inside
to tip at any speed? Or were they even slightly like non-variable props that have a
graduated twist so that for any rpm and speed only one area is delivering near full thrust
while the other parts of the length work better at different rpm's? I.E. does the prop
twist allow it to cover some band of rpm's at any speed or is it only efficient at the
proper pitch for any speed? I dunno about this and I'm not about to guess on what seems
the best to me but I'm sure that to some the answer just has to be obvious even if they
don't know. Somehow, I doubt such people design aircraft.

GR142-Pipper
07-24-2005, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by Fehler:
And I will further this by saying, if it truly is "Common knowledge" as you say, then Oleg must already know it. He must have some reason it is still in the game. -Or- perhaps it is not as common as you believe, because I for one, thought they had removed the speedy on/off exploit from the game several patches ago. Oh, it's common knowledge alright. Furthermore Oleg probably does know about it and doesn't give a d@mn. This isn't new ground that's being covered. Many things have been presented here by folks who know what they're talking about and little gets done. Consequently few are interested in devoting much time providing evidence when most of the people here have no idea whether it's right or not. I'm a fan of this game and my impression is that overall interest in it is on the decline.

...and so it goes.

GR142-Pipper

JG5_UnKle
07-24-2005, 05:17 AM
Originally posted by Lixma:
Re: Appalling conduct in China.

There was a pilot's briefing before the tournament began where it was agreed (grudgingly, perhaps, by some) that if it's in the game it was OK to use.

Therefore no-one did anything 'illegal' there and none of the matches IMO were won or lost by the use of any of these tricks.

Yep, appaling was too strong a word. I was hoping for less "gaming the game" though.

Plus I thought we were rid of this exploit.

As for the Nazi comments well...... 'moron' would be an insult to morons. I'm tired of this rubbish on this forum and posters should be permanently banned for it.

Grey_Mouser67
07-24-2005, 06:13 PM
I think the AI knows about the prop pitch thing and I don't think they overheat their engines! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

rednine
07-24-2005, 07:49 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif so whats the point with the endless arguing??next patch will just get people mad a diffrent way,

Abbuzze
07-25-2005, 02:34 AM
I understand the problem with the 109 propellerpitch. But at the end I think many people overestimate the number of pilots that use it!

I don‚¬īt use it, because I‚¬īm to lazy and it is unrealistic. I only fly manual in Emils on the way to the target, cause the engine works like on barbiturates. And in all other 109 in the final landing aproach (11.30 position).

Maybe many Pilots in Spits and P51 think that they are killed by a 109 with manual proppitch, but I fear the situation will not change even if Oleg rework the pitch.

GR142-Pipper
07-25-2005, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by Lixma:
Re: Appalling conduct in China.

There was a pilot's briefing before the tournament began where it was agreed (grudgingly, perhaps, by some) that if it's in the game it was OK to use.

Therefore no-one did anything 'illegal' there and none of the matches IMO were won or lost by the use of any of these tricks. Unfortunately, that story doesn't surprise me a bit.

GR142-Pipper

CVK_Monkey
07-25-2005, 07:02 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

As blue player I can say only this: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Functio
07-25-2005, 08:35 AM
Seeing as prop-pitch in this sim is a bit strange in LW and Allied planes alike, IMHO all of it needs to be looked at. Currently, the automated systems still work in a strange way (especially WRT throttle inputs and the time to attain equivalent RPM). And the constant speed/manual stuff just might as well be not there in most Allied aircraft, as the pilot rarely (if ever) needs to think about it. The reason that people can exploit both is because both don't work as they should.

p1ngu666
07-25-2005, 09:29 AM
the allied or cps system the prop pitch sets the engine rpm, the propeller blade angle is adusted from that.

the propeller acts similer to a brake, ie u set to run at 2500rpm, the cps unit alters the angle of the blades so theres sufficent load to slow the engine down, or to ease up so the engine accelorates to 2500rpm.

ingame many dont have multiple axis controllers, so we cant alter the pp as easily as a real pilot (levers right next to each other most often). we fly like alot of russians did in combat, full rpm and adusting power with the throttle.

incidently, cps was designed for multi engine long range aircraft, so its ment tobe easy and u dont haveto moniter all the time.

HelSqnProtos
07-25-2005, 10:48 AM
Fascinating to see the blue side defend this glaring exploit....... luftwhiners indeed.

WWMaxGunz
07-25-2005, 10:49 AM
I knew a B-29 pilot and he said that for them, engine management was a big issue. They were
out for peak efficiency at all times and the air doesn't stay consistant in reality. They
would sometimes also be able to kill or minimize contrails through pitch or rpm adjustment
and would fiddle with those to still get the most efficiency they could. Given a 7 hour
flight to the target, there was time for fiddling. Given your fuel tanks could be pierced
and lose fuel, there was ample reason to save as much as possible. It could be a long swim
home to Guam or Tinian.

He did mention that a lot of fighter pilots tried to move in to multi's after the war as
that was where a lot of the work went. Most didn't make it he said because of the discipline
needed for multi's didn't suit the ex-fighter jocks, they didn't have the practice.

WWMaxGunz
07-25-2005, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
Fascinating to see the blue side defend this glaring exploit....... luftwhiners indeed.

Fascinating I've read and watched videos about pilot workload in Allied planes that
doesn't occur in the the game either. Just set and forget. You can get more speed
in a long dive by cutting pitch but note how many players have no idea and complain
about diving too slow.

It would be good if 1C would do something about the quick-switch gimmick but it's not
the only advantage present.

Easy solution is to fly with people you know don't do that or play print-screen or do
whatever else the cheat-du-jour is.

p1ngu666
07-25-2005, 12:42 PM
nice post on the b29s max, in a bomber fuel management was really important, and on the b29 they had a fair few engine problems, so babying the engines when u could was deffinatly worthwhile.

curious about the contrail thing, would of thought there wasnt much u could do about that

Chadburn
07-25-2005, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.

lol...just tell me, what squad are you with again?

GR142-Pipper
07-25-2005, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
nice post on the b29s max, in a bomber fuel management was really important, and on the b29 they had a fair few engine problems, so babying the engines when u could was deffinatly worthwhile. Plus in B-29s (as with most large aircraft) they have a flight engineer on-board whose primary job was to monitor the engines.

GR142-Pipper

RedDeth
07-25-2005, 08:46 PM
Chadburn
Posted Mon July 25 2005 12:21
quote:
Originally posted by bolillo_loco:
Im sick of seeing 109s and 190s being able to over boost their engines via prop pitch which only german a/c can do. get rid of this bogus feature.

american and english a/c also had manual prop pitch yet none of them increase performance by using it.

its total b/s to think that a human could control prop pitch better than a mechanical unit which adjusts pitch as soon as there is any power or speed change, oh but yea "luftwaffe experten" could do this.........give it a rest. either neuter the 190s and 109s to allied a/c standards of prop pitch or give it to all a/c across the board.


lol...just tell me, what squad are you with again?




Chadburn ... bolillo flys mainly german planes unless in warclouds.

lame remark that does nothing for the thread pro or con. just an insult plain and simple.

btw are you representing your squad with that attack?

or is this your personal opinion?

AerialTarget
07-25-2005, 08:51 PM
I'll not stop pointing out that, regardless of who is right in the argument of whether or not the propeller pitch trick is realistic or not, the blue side has an unrealistic advantage over the red side because only German airplanes can switch to manual in the game. In real life, however, American ships could switch to manual as well as German ones.

There are two things that must be done in order for realism to be achieved. The first thing is to give all aircraft which were able to switch to manual propeller pitch in real life the ability to do it in the game. Oh ho! You don't want that, do you, blue? The second thing is to determine whether or not the performance boost obtainable from using manual is realistic or not, and change it accordingly.

NonWonderDog
07-25-2005, 10:19 PM
The idea is that German planes don't have a separate RPM control without including the manual controls. For short field take offs and landings a way to set full fine pitch is almost a necessity. American, etc. planes can do this simply by pushing the RPM control to 100%, so a manual control mode there is not strictly necessary.

The only real problem (gameplaywise) is the available pitch range. 100% in the CSP-equipped planes is always the max rated RPM. In the German planes, however, it is very easy to exceed max rated RPM at high speeds when using manual pitch control. This is, of course, accurate. What may be a bit iffy is the amount of performance that can be gained with no risk of engine damage. Then again, none of us here has *any* idea of WHY the rated RPM values are what they are on any of these planes. It may very well have been possible to gain a large performance increase with increased RPM, but it may have unacceptably shortened the life of the engine if used.

As to adding manual control mode to the American planes that had it (most of them) just to keep online parity, it's almost certainly not going to happen at this late stage. Practically speaking, manual control mode is completely unnecessary on these planes for normal operation. Its main purpose on CSP-equipped planes was as a backup in case the CSP governor failed. It's not going to be added just so online pilots can exploit it in combat.

Of course, Luftwaffe pilots shouldn't be exploiting the manual pitch mode in combat, either. I guess it would be possible in real life, but I definitely wouldn't do it. There's already too much to keep track of in combat, unnecessarily risking your engine and calling down the wrath of your crew chief just to gain a 5% performance increase is stupid.

Badsight.
07-25-2005, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by HelSqnProtos:
Fascinating to see the blue side defend this glaring exploit....... luftwhiners indeed. coming from you , thats a joke !

faustnik
07-25-2005, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by RedDeth:
just an insult

For insults go back a couple pages and Bolillo's rediculous posts. I'd like to hear your comments on those.

WWMaxGunz
07-26-2005, 01:16 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
nice post on the b29s max, in a bomber fuel management was really important, and on the b29 they had a fair few engine problems, so babying the engines when u could was deffinatly worthwhile.

curious about the contrail thing, would of thought there wasnt much u could do about that

Joe W. flew a LOT of missions in them and didn't mention any engine problems to me.
There was the time they got caught in the thermal over a burning city they had just
hit in front of the devastated area. The plane was lifted, flipped and dropped before
they got control back. They made it to Guam for emergency landing and the plane was
so badly warped between heat and stress that it was scrapped. But they flew a long
way (unloaded of course) just to get to Guam. That one got him a Silver Star, he was
the Norden Man who committed the plane and crew to mission before danger.
You can find his WWII pic inside the fullsize box that B-17II came in, he flew in
some of those as well as at least one other bomber.

Contrails could *sometimes* be killed that way. The other side of that is that if you
fly it wrong then you make contrails that you didn't have to. I think that those
contrails are signs that perhaps the props are just beyond critical AOA. Go high enough
and any water vapor will condense out just from pressure changes over the wings.

Yeah Pipper, the Flight Engineer and really all experienced crew were into the mix but
I think it was the pilot who made the adjustments. Engineer seat was a bit more back.

Aaron_GT
07-26-2005, 01:24 AM
Joe W. flew a LOT of missions in them and didn't mention any engine problems to me.

In the early versions of the B29 there was an issue with (from memory) the exhaust venting leading to a number of engine failures and fires. Abort rates were rather high. These were later essentially corrected.

AerialTarget
07-26-2005, 02:03 AM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
Practically speaking, manual control mode is completely unnecessary on these planes for normal operation. Its main purpose on CSP-equipped planes was as a backup in case the CSP governor failed. It's not going to be added just so online pilots can exploit it in combat.

Of course, Luftwaffe pilots shouldn't be exploiting the manual pitch mode in combat, either. I guess it would be possible in real life, but I definitely wouldn't do it.

That is the fundamental issue! Either way you argue, one of these two facts is true: either the blue has something that they shouldn't, or the red doesn't have something that they should. Again, either way you look at it, there is a slant toward blue that should not be there and was not there in real life. This is true whether or not the propeller pitch trick was possible in real life!

Of course, I want the realistic solution to be found more than anyone else, regardless of which it is. If it's taking it away, then so be it! If it's giving it to the American aircraft which should have it, then so be it! Either way, I'm not happy that the blues are enjoying an advantage over the reds that they did not have in real life.

Hey blues, how would you like it if your airplanes couldn't switch to manual propeller pitch, even though they could in real life? Hmmm?

JG53Frankyboy
07-26-2005, 03:27 AM
Bf109E4 only manual
Bf109E4/B & 7/B & 7/Z only auto
Bf109F-K only auto

Fw190 only auto IF it can reach its max revs also in this mode - not only like on manual that means in game using a CSP.

would be wonderfull !

flying 109s im personaly using manual only in the Emils.
and sure in the Fw190s , the performance gap is to huge between manual and auto in this plane.

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-26-2005, 03:36 AM
Hey blues, how would you like it if your airplanes couldn't switch to manual propeller pitch, even though they could in real life? Hmmm?

Not bad... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

As explained before a lot of people doesn't use it (you know those who fly mainly Fw 190 or Zeros you include in your moronic allegations http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif) because this exploit need a lot of practise before being able to unharm your engine each time you use it.

NonWonderDog
07-26-2005, 06:07 AM
I thought I'd said that there are times when it's advisable, nay, necessary to select full fine pitch. The most obvious of these is a short field landing, where you need all the engine braking you can get. This can be accomplished very simply in a CSP-equipped plane just by pushing the RPM to 100%. In the German planes you *must* use manual pitch mode to accomplish this. That was the way it was done in real life. The takeoff and landing modes of the Kommandogerat (apparently they were special in some way?) might not be modelled completely accurately in game, either.

Like it or not, there *is* a reason the German planes have manual mode included while the others don't. It's not because Oleg hates you.

Adding manual mode to the Allied planes that had it would be good, but it's probably too time intensive to happen now. And if it's not accompanied with more complex CSP modelling and failure modes it would be a complete farce. Adding manual mode to all planes just so online pilots can use it in dogfights and for no other reason is something I'm completely against. German planes at least have *some* reasons for having manual control mode, the allies have *none.*

Making the transition from auto to manual more time intensive could keep people from going to manual mode for 10 seconds in order to slow down faster in a dogfight, but I really doubt it would do much. Anyway, as far as I know all they had to do was throttle down and flip a switch. Throttling down probably wasn't even strictly necessary, but it's the safest way to do things by far.


And before I get berated for saying that the "Bf-109 manual pitch airbrake exploit" is real in my first paragraph, know that the Bf-109 at full fine pitch slows down at nearly the exact same rate as a Yak-3 does at full fine pitch. Test it yourself.


Also, I still see people stating that the FW-190's manual pitch mode acts like a normal CSP in the sim. It doesn't. Look closely at the propeller clock when you change the throttle; there's no difference in behavior between auto and manual modes. 100% on manual just sets higher RPM at all speeds and throttle settings, 0% sets a lower RPM at all speeds and throttle settings, and ~60% is identical to automatic mode. If you want to see what CSP operation looks like on a propeller clock, fly the I.A.R. 80. (Which, by the way, probably shouldn't have a CSP. It was added in a patch for some reason.) I have no idea how accurate any of this is. None.

Hoarmurath
07-26-2005, 07:05 AM
The feature is nice, but frankly, it is not essential, even for take off and landing. It could be removed without altering my ability to fly either 109 or 190.

To be honest, i never use it, and don't have much problems to take off with heavy load, or land on short runways (never saw runways so short that it was needed in FB).

I think it would be as good to get rid of it, and instead concentrate on a better modelisation of the kommandogerat...

AerialTarget
07-26-2005, 01:31 PM
...And of the engines with constant speed propeller unit. I want to have to wrestle with my engines to get them to stay running, just like the real things!

Hoarmurath
07-26-2005, 02:01 PM
you wrestle with your engines? man, lmet me know if you put a track of your flight online, it must really be great fun....

Chadburn
07-26-2005, 03:36 PM
Chadburn ... bolillo flys mainly german planes unless in warclouds.

lame remark that does nothing for the thread pro or con. just an insult plain and simple.

btw are you representing your squad with that attack?

or is this your personal opinion?

Red, you genuinely found my remark offensive? or are you on a fishing trip for your vacation?

I honestly thought it was amusing...equivalent to RBJ returning to complain about the trim-on-a-slider "cheat".

Nubarus
07-26-2005, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
because this exploit need a lot of practise before being able to unharm your engine each time you use it.

This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

I don't know how many people need a 3 week training course to learn that but someone with the mental capacity to walk and chew gum at the same time can get the hang of this within a few minutes....

I really wonder how you and your fellow "defenders" of this obvious exploit would react if the Allied planes could overboost their engines to 3300 RPM every few seconds this way while you where stuck at your rated RPM no matter what.....

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-26-2005, 05:34 PM
I really wonder how you and your fellow "defenders" of this obvious exploit would react if the Allied planes could overboost their engines to 3300 RPM every few seconds this way while you where stuck at your rated RPM no matter what.....

...And how would YOU react if some whiners post here some request to supress a feature implemented in your precious FB spit regardless of the historic presence or not of this feature on the real, just for "game (dogfight) balancing"?

And how would YOU react if your planes were unable to reach historical RPM'S without switching auto to manual, and some malicious people ask to suppress this ability to switch?

And ... Remember me... Did your fellows "the anti-109-ayatollahs" present here some realistic solutions to this exploit???

NO! Just whining whining and whining, supress it... Supress it ... Even if the real plane had the feature, we dont care ... supresssss supresssss.

Some people here (open your eyes, mainly blue or boths sided) propose some solutions, sometimes acceptables compromises in a SIMULATION.
Always rejected by the ayatollahs!

But ... I think it's normal here ... It's Ubizoo after all.

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-26-2005, 05:45 PM
Ah yes... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I'm still waiting YOUR solution for this "exploit" Mr Uber mental capacity.

I've already proposed mine.

Kettenhunde
07-26-2005, 07:38 PM
I really wonder how you and your fellow "defenders" of this obvious exploit would react if the Allied planes could overboost their engines to 3300 RPM every few seconds this way while you where stuck at your rated RPM no matter what.....

The FW190 cannot achieve it's normal settings without manual in this game. 1.42ata @ 2400U/min is a completely fictional setting in the FW190. Even on manual a pilot is instructed to keep the propeller rpm within certain limits and settings. 1.42ata @ 2400U/min represents an overboosted motor swinging a slow prop. IMHO it would damage the motor.

The VDM propeller on the FW190 is not physically able to exceed 2700U/min without failure due to gearing AFAIK.

When a sim pilot flying an FW190 pushes the throttle to full, he should read 1.42ata @ 2700U/min on his gauges. This would be allowed for 3 minutes in the FW190A. This was possibly raised in the FW190A5 or later varients to 5 minutes as we have found some pilot data cards with the 3 overstamped with a 5.

All the best,

Crumpp

NonWonderDog
07-26-2005, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

Alright, see? Was that so hard? *Thank* you for actually being the first one to say anything about an actual exploit.

But if this is the case, why the H*LL does it warrant the complete removal of manual pitch mode? It simply does not follow. If there's a bug, the bug should be fixed. There should be absolutely no advantage of switching manual pitch mode on and off rapidly. There should be no advantage not just because it's an online exploit, but because it's physically impossible for such a procedure to cause the engine to create more power.

If this is really the bug, why don't you petition for the bug to be fixed instead of whining for the removal of manual control mode? I really don't understand this.

A.K.Davis
07-26-2005, 08:27 PM
Easy fix. Immediate engine damage if the engine exceeds certain RPMs. I imagine there was a real world limit to RPM, otherwise this is not really an exploit.

WWMaxGunz
07-26-2005, 09:24 PM
At the least and I am sure either within the game mechanism or close, over-revs should
generate heat quicker by some progressive rate. So a little over will heat the engine
in a minute but a lot over will fry it like a CPU with a dead cooling fan. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Such a thing may already be in the code and just need adjustment of constants or limits.
OTOH the formula for heat may need for this an extra check or something. May not happen.

p1ngu666
07-26-2005, 10:03 PM
a overreved engine would rip and crush itself from the rotational forces.

if u dont belive me, walk upto a pole, grab it and swing around it, now do it faster and ull feel the loading increase.

ull get valve float, where the valves dont work properly anymore as they dont travel as much as they should, the spring isnt strong enuff too force it back up, any long shafts will bow to some amount (real problem in ww1 times, hence napier lion had 3 banks for 4 cylinders)

i supose u could change the manual mode to cps for 190 which it should be anyways, and 109, can easily pull full rpm for short takeoff then http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

and max thats true, if the air is worked hard or undergoes alot of change, then you get vapor trails and similer, u can see it on modern jets, and sometimes on f1 cars when its ****, little vorticies at the edges of the wings http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ive seen footage of b17s with condensed air pooring off the wings and engines http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

IRL the conditions changed, so there was valueable work tobe done checking condensation level and stuff

WWMaxGunz
07-26-2005, 10:31 PM
It depends on how much you over-rev and what load is on the engine.
1% over is not going to blow the thing up.
Valve float is going to reduce the power and really heat up the exhaust.

Running power at too low a pitch in the 109 will allow the engine to over-rev
but there is less than full load, not necessarily good at all.

At some point I'd expect the engine to throw a piston if nothing else.
Cars do it. Blow up real good! (ty John Candy for that)

But what is possible in the limits of the game engine?

Is the exploit one of being able to crank the engine at low loading and then switch
mode to auto where the full overspeed is applied to a loaded pitch that doesn't slow
down immediately let alone not tear the engine or prop gearing apart? If so then
that is what needs fixing.

OTOH we might just end up with another trim fix as bad or worse than the problem was.

JG5_UnKle
07-27-2005, 02:24 AM
Originally posted by Chadburn:
I honestly thought it was amusing...equivalent to RBJ returning to complain about the trim-on-a-slider "cheat".

There is a good reason for that http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

JG5_UnKle
07-27-2005, 02:32 AM
Sure give allied aircraft manual settings, we might end up with Allied engines that can actually over-rev http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

then there will be even more whining....

Simple solution - as proposed by me and several other so called 'luftwhiners'

Make auto performance historical

Allow manual PP operation without performance gains

Slow down the switch between manual/auto on the 109 so it can't be switched rapidly on/off.

Job done, 'simple' solutions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif be sure

p1ngu666
07-27-2005, 07:56 AM
unkle i said that pretty much, dont think im a luftwhiner http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

JG5_UnKle
07-27-2005, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
unkle i said that pretty much, dont think im a luftwhiner http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Pffft! Labels http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Nubarus
07-27-2005, 10:24 AM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

Alright, see? Was that so hard? *Thank* you for actually being the first one to say anything about an actual exploit.

But if this is the case, why the H*LL does it warrant the complete removal of manual pitch mode? It simply does not follow. If there's a bug, the bug should be fixed. There should be absolutely no advantage of switching manual pitch mode on and off rapidly. There should be no advantage not just because it's an online exploit, but because it's physically impossible for such a procedure to cause the engine to create more power.

If this is really the bug, why don't you petition for the bug to be fixed instead of whining for the removal of manual control mode? I really don't understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you please point out where I said manual mode has to be removed completely?
Or where I said the 190 and 109 should be supressed for that matter before Kartofe does another case of selective quoting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Hoarmurath
07-27-2005, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

Alright, see? Was that so hard? *Thank* you for actually being the first one to say anything about an actual exploit.

But if this is the case, why the H*LL does it warrant the complete removal of manual pitch mode? It simply does not follow. If there's a bug, the bug should be fixed. There should be absolutely no advantage of switching manual pitch mode on and off rapidly. There should be no advantage not just because it's an online exploit, but because it's physically impossible for such a procedure to cause the engine to create more power.

If this is really the bug, why don't you petition for the bug to be fixed instead of whining for the removal of manual control mode? I really don't understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you please point out where I said manual mode has to be removed completely?
Or where I said the 190 and 109 should be supressed for that matter before Kartofe does another case of selective quoting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nowhere, your only contribution to this topic so far have been to whine about using manual prop pitch as being an exploit. You have suggested absolutely nothing to issue what you see as an exploit. And this is exactly what Kartoffe was accusing you of, being here whining without trying to be constructive and find a solution. Obviously, he was right.

NonWonderDog
07-27-2005, 10:53 AM
I meant "you" in the plural sense.

Fehler
07-27-2005, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by AerialTarget:
That is the fundamental issue! Either way you argue, one of these two facts is true: either the blue has something that they shouldn't, or the red doesn't have something that they should.

-OR- 3, the auto mode does not allow for full boost as specified in German test data. You want a bug? there it is. FACT

You want an exploit? flipping from manual to auto rapidly allows a 109 (Not a 190) the ability to get full ata rating without overheat threat; or so some say, I still roast the DB engines attempting to do this in anything but a zoom climb.

AerialTarget
07-27-2005, 03:19 PM
I understand that the Focke-Wulfs are undermodelled. I have felt this to be true, even though I hold no love for them, since day one in the IL-2 series.

I am talking about the One Oh Nine, which, unlike the FW-190, has not been shown to have worse performance than it should when using automatic.

Nubarus
07-28-2005, 02:52 AM
Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

Alright, see? Was that so hard? *Thank* you for actually being the first one to say anything about an actual exploit.

But if this is the case, why the H*LL does it warrant the complete removal of manual pitch mode? It simply does not follow. If there's a bug, the bug should be fixed. There should be absolutely no advantage of switching manual pitch mode on and off rapidly. There should be no advantage not just because it's an online exploit, but because it's physically impossible for such a procedure to cause the engine to create more power.

If this is really the bug, why don't you petition for the bug to be fixed instead of whining for the removal of manual control mode? I really don't understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you please point out where I said manual mode has to be removed completely?
Or where I said the 190 and 109 should be supressed for that matter before Kartofe does another case of selective quoting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nowhere, your only contribution to this topic so far have been to whine about using manual prop pitch as being an exploit. You have suggested absolutely nothing to issue what you see as an exploit. And this is exactly what Kartoffe was accusing you of, being here whining without trying to be constructive and find a solution. Obviously, he was right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He accused me of saying that these planes should be supressed, pretty clearly too.
My discussion with him was more about the fact that he was constantly stating that this exploit can only be used by "experts" and that it wasn't a really serious exploit to begin with, I challenged him on that point.

That you 2 see that as whining say's enough for me, just as the rest of your posts on this board.

And as for the matter that I didn't say anything regarding what I see as an exploit, all I can say about that is that you must learn how to read.

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-28-2005, 05:35 AM
Originally posted by Nubarus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nubarus:
This exploit need a lot of practice???

Don't make me laugh, all you have to do is map the toggle auto/manual pitch key to an easy access location and tap it on/off every few seconds.

Alright, see? Was that so hard? *Thank* you for actually being the first one to say anything about an actual exploit.

But if this is the case, why the H*LL does it warrant the complete removal of manual pitch mode? It simply does not follow. If there's a bug, the bug should be fixed. There should be absolutely no advantage of switching manual pitch mode on and off rapidly. There should be no advantage not just because it's an online exploit, but because it's physically impossible for such a procedure to cause the engine to create more power.

If this is really the bug, why don't you petition for the bug to be fixed instead of whining for the removal of manual control mode? I really don't understand this. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Can you please point out where I said manual mode has to be removed completely?
Or where I said the 190 and 109 should be supressed for that matter before Kartofe does another case of selective quoting. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nowhere, your only contribution to this topic so far have been to whine about using manual prop pitch as being an exploit. You have suggested absolutely nothing to issue what you see as an exploit. And this is exactly what Kartoffe was accusing you of, being here whining without trying to be constructive and find a solution. Obviously, he was right. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">He accused me of saying that these planes should be supressed</span>, pretty clearly too.
My discussion with him was more about the fact that he was constantly stating that this exploit can only be used by "experts" and that it wasn't a really serious exploit to begin with, I challenged him on that point.

That you 2 see that as whining say's enough for me, just as the rest of your posts on this board.

And as for the matter that I didn't say anything regarding what I see as an exploit, <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">all I can say about that is that you must learn how to read</span>. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apply your precious advices to yourself before!

Page 6 of this thread i wrote that
and some malicious people ask to suppress this ability to switch?


Regards! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

x__CRASH__x
07-30-2005, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by faustnik:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RedDeth:
just an insult

For insults go back a couple pages and Bolillo's rediculous posts. I'd like to hear your comments on those. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Of course he won't.

RedDeth
08-02-2005, 04:53 PM
i stopped reading this thread a week ago. please p.m. me about what it is you are confused i said. or spell it out.

everything i say i say in plain english. just follow the freekin thread. im not about to cut and paste what everyone wrote.

faustnik
08-02-2005, 05:17 PM
You didn't say anything RedDeth, your buddy Bolillo did.