PDA

View Full Version : Ki-61 Windscreen Oiling...Remove it please....



LEBillfish
03-04-2006, 08:53 AM
Ki-61 Windscreen Oiling...Remove it please....
as dependant upon cowling/louvering/heat venting design the following plane types should exceed it (from worst to best).

Worst;
Radial Engined Planes
Upright Inline Engined Planes
Inverted V Inline Planes
Ki-61
Twin Engined Planes
Best:

I thank you..............

Enthor1
03-04-2006, 02:47 PM
LEBillfish, I agree, those oil splatters are one of my least favorite pieces of eyecandy.

rugame
03-04-2006, 04:32 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

LEBillfish
03-04-2006, 05:55 PM
It's not a matter of it being my least favorite eyecandy. It's a matter of it being incorrect, unrealistic, and most of all unfair and unbalanced compared to other planes in the sim.

Enthor1
03-04-2006, 08:01 PM
LEBillfish, the "least favorite eyecandy" remark was not directed to you, please, please put the frying pan down....

I am aware of and applaud your quest for equity for the K1-61 and hope Oleg and crew will do something about it.

Stigler, let us know when your masterpiece is ready for prime time, I am sure that announcement will empty this place out.

alert_1
03-05-2006, 08:06 AM
Ha 40 (copy of DB601) HAD inverted inline design...(?)

LEBillfish
03-05-2006, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
Ha 40 (copy of DB601) HAD inverted inline design...(?)

Yes, yet in that regard all other similarities end as it was NOT a DB601 copy but designed based upon it........What sets it above "some other" (as I do not know the details of some other Inv. V planes)....Inverted V based planes was the design of the balance of the plane actually making windscreen oiling probably one of the least likely events it would encounter.

Excluding the use of fuses (line breaks stopping al flow in that line)...which it has been commented on few planes had (though I can't say which did or did not).....What will essentially happen is anywhere that is hit that has an oil galley or line rupture will continue to lose oil till the systm runs dry (if not leaking back to a collection point)....That oil naturally needing to go somewhere.

If you consider a radial it tends to be more durable in the regard that you have seperate catsings for cylinders about a rather sturdy crank casting...Hit one cylinder and the rest very possibly are fine all intact.....Yet as to oiling it's problem is cooling "louvering".....As If the oil leaks from a high cylinder hit to a non collection point out of the engine, the basic design will blow it forcefully back and then out the cooling louvers at the rear of the cowling (front 1/10th of the plane).....Often these louvers surround the cowling, So oil has the abilty to wash out far forward, also high...Then will be forced by the design out all areas....This will quite simply cover the plane.

An upright V has it's highest volume of oil requiring components at the top....As well as some collection points.....So a hit to the engine high up again "dependant on cowling/sheet metal design" has a greater chance of oiling the screen as well yet much less then many radials.

An inverted V has virtually nothing above the centerline except the crank that could leak, and that crank in a huge empty box where oil flows to the bottom to be collected......EXCEPT on some types it has been stated having their oil resivoirs in front of or on top of the engine...(though I'm not sure)....Again all dependant on sheet metal design.

The Ki-61 besides being an inverted V has virtually no lines above center to hit....All oil resivoirs are in the cockpit and behind, it's sheet metal it rediculously well sealed at the top, and all it's venting takes place underneeth.......So in the end as I have "shown with documented proof" as to the design....The Ki-61 is very high on the list to NOT oil the windscreen.

Add to that Windscreen design, engine positioning, and numerous other factors it would rank as one of the least likely to oil the screen.

However in the sim....A hit that angles in any way toward the engine to an extreme distant back ALWAYS oils the screen first hit....I have even had cases where the wings have just been hit no visible damage to the front 1/3 of the plane...and the windscreen oils up. In contrast few radials do, few upright V planes do and so on.

So here we have one of the best getting a result of the worst and visa versa.

alert_1
03-05-2006, 10:19 AM
Rgr that Billfish, thank you for explanation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

GerritJ9
03-05-2006, 02:18 PM
If an inverted-Vee engine is hit and has a chunk smashed out of the top of the crankcase, i.e. above the crankshaft you will definitely lose oil. Yes, gravity will let much of the oil fed to the crank drop down- but a lot will also be slung around by the crank and end up leaving through the "artificial crankcase ventilation". Even crankshafts of low-speed two-stroke marine diesels running at less than 100 r.p.m. throw huge amounts of oil around from their main and big-end bearings, never mind an aero engine running at 2,500 r.p.m. or so.
While the oil loss from an inverted-Vee engine might not be as great as that from a normal Vee engine, you WILL lose oil. Where that oil ends up depends on various factors- size of the hole, location, attitude of the aeroplane, engine revs, cowling damage etc. etc. etc.

_VR_ScorpionWorm
03-05-2006, 06:39 PM
Wow, can't get anymore off topic than this can they?

LEBillfish
03-05-2006, 07:00 PM
Note how as one hits the other figuratively causing damage.....The cowling flaps full open to expel the hot air in an attempt to cool the engine, the spew of rhetoric slams back toward their outlooks, covering them so completely they can no longer see the topic at hand.....

This would not be the case in a Ki-61 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
03-06-2006, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by LEBillfish:
furthermore utilizing both Stigler & Tagert as examples of Radial engines pumping out in all directions I submit the following....

Note how as one hits the other figuratively causing damage.....The cowling flaps full open to expel the hot air in an attempt to cool the engine, the spew of rhetoric slams back toward their outlooks, covering them so completely they can no longer see the topic at hand.....

This would not be the case in a Ki-61 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The above example working well for a radial engine vs. a Ki-61 Ha-40, the new example of "AKA" dispute makes and excellent example of the difference between all other Inline engine planes and the Ki-61.....

Cosmetically they seem similar, all inline engine planes seeming as though they would be the same, yet nothing is further from the truth. Tagert's sensitive spots more easily exposed would clearly demonstrate him as and "Upright V or Inline" Just below the upper surface (of the sheet metal skin) are numerous components sensitive to any probing....Valve train, heads, lubrication for cylinders, easily struck from above making the possibility of windscreen oiling hence outlook to become obscured....Though not so much so as a radial.

Most other "Inverted V" engines seem to have relieved this problem to some degree....As Hitcher demonstrates at first....Unfortunately it is soon discovered that hit enough times most other inverted V planes do have some weaknesses high where the outlook can become obscured once more. Oil reservoirs, engine compartment venting, etc. often placed above or forward enough in the engine bay that hits may eventually result in obscuring the outlook (through the windscreen)...and though I can not be positive as to the cowling design, it has been hinted at that planes such as the BF109 did not seal their compartments as well as the Ki-61 due to the engine support design...So it is more likely that after enough insult err rounds probe about through the sheet metal, it will oil up though not as likely as other planes.

The Ki-61 has none of the weaknesses of the above from not only engine orientation. yet cowling/fuselage, and oil reservoir and line placement design.

Thanks for the bumps... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

joeap
03-06-2006, 10:21 AM
Anyway LEBillfish, I second your request and hope it is rectified in the next patch.

Love your examples though...got track? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

LEBillfish
03-06-2006, 12:18 PM
Note how quickly the Radial engined planes outlook has been so quickly obscured it falling out of action......Though struggling, the Upright Inline obviously blinded as well long ago......Note also the Inverted V with inferior design is also now stumbling about blinded unable to address the topic.......

If they were Ki-61's they should still have clear sight of the going ons, and could respond to the truly important matter at hand effectively....

Thanks guys for helping through your little skit to demonstrate why.........Ki-61 windscreen oiling should be removed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Targ
03-06-2006, 01:55 PM
Hmmm, where to begin?
This has to rate as the best thread hijack of all time, lol.
Billfish, you are very patient and I applaud you for your restraint.
Stigler, were you not just banned for stuff like this ?
Two weeks be sure.
Tagert, you nice? Maybe after cooling your feet for a week you will.
Hitcher, you do a disservice to your squad acting like this. Have you never used the PM function? In the future please use PM's rather than hijack threads and beat your chest.
One week, no soup for you!
Billfish, would you like me to clean this mess up and get this thread back on track? Let me know please.

T_O_A_D
03-06-2006, 04:12 PM
I would clean it up Targ. Finders keepers you know http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Even though I got alot of giggles reading Billfish's retorts on the comparison of these tools, to the engine types. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Good Job Bill http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Scen
03-06-2006, 04:20 PM
Sorry to see the thread get de-railed by some of the comments but then again given the source it's not a suprise.

Enthor1
03-06-2006, 05:28 PM
I think LEBillfish did an admirable job of getting the topic back on track and the Cavalry did an excellent cleanup.

Now, Oleg, we all know how you busy are but if you happen to get this far into this thread please consider LEBillfish's request.

Cossack13
03-06-2006, 06:50 PM
Considering Billfish's typically excellent research and presentation of the facts about the aircraft in question, I believe a "clean-up on Aisle four" would be most appropriate.

crazyivan1970
03-06-2006, 07:30 PM
Cleaning completed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LEBillfish
03-06-2006, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
If an inverted-Vee engine is hit and has a chunk smashed out of the top of the crankcase, i.e. above the crankshaft you will definitely lose oil. Yes, gravity will let much of the oil fed to the crank drop down- but a lot will also be slung around by the crank and end up leaving through the "artificial crankcase ventilation". Even crankshafts of low-speed two-stroke marine diesels running at less than 100 r.p.m. throw huge amounts of oil around from their main and big-end bearings, never mind an aero engine running at 2,500 r.p.m. or so.
While the oil loss from an inverted-Vee engine might not be as great as that from a normal Vee engine, you WILL lose oil. Where that oil ends up depends on various factors- size of the hole, location, attitude of the aeroplane, engine revs, cowling damage etc. etc. etc.


Yes Gerrit, you will lose oil though it would in all actuality if the hit is high (for an inverted V only) lose enough to make a difference in a combat period....Bear with me though to hear why.

Crank will sling out oil through the hole...Yes, unfortunately a bazillion possibilities as to resulting case damage are not fesible to model. So lets break it up into a few catagories for inline engines...and only talking oil loss not engine damage and due to a hole in the engine.

Best:
1. High hit Inverted V...Crank slings oil off of counterbalances the one in line with that hole out it goes for say 15 degree's of its rotation. So in reality just to throw a number out 20% of the oil goes to the crank, 5 counterbalances divide 20% to 4%, 1/24th of the 4% oil is lost meaning .16% oil lost.

2. Mid hit Inverted or upright inline...Crank slings oil off of counterbalances the one in line with that hole out it goes for say 15 degree's of its rotation & drain down so 25% of rotation. 20% of the oil goes to the crank, 5 counterbalances divide 20% to 4%, 1/4th of the 4% oil is lost meaning 1.0% oil lost.

3. Low engine hit Upright V, 20% of oil goes to crank, all that oil finds the hole and drains out so 20%.

4. High engine hit Upright V, 30% goes to each bank of cylinders where it is also collected like #3, so 30% lost.

5. Low engine hit Inverted V assuming both head and crank pick ups damaged 20%+30% = 50% lost.

Now that is all real generic, most engines have vast differences etc.....and does not mean that is the only oil lost as eventually it all either runs out or is no longer delivered. What it is meant to show is a generic explination as to the time before failure due to loss of oil.......

However back to the issue at hand "WIndscreen oiling"....It boils down to much more like how well fit are the cowling covers, where are "pressurized" lines, resevoirs, etc.. Lastly, how is engine compartment heat expelled, and naturally windscreen design.

Without going into great details posted elsewhere *which I may beed to do again*...The Ki-61 be it either by design or dumb luck is simply built in such a way it would be incredibly difficult to oil up the windscreen if at all. Yet in the sim, it seems to take engine hits right off and constantly...More so, the windscreen oils up totally obscuring vision from the first hit....

It's Incorrect, unbalanced, unfair....As a Radial would most likely first, other V's second, Ha-40 Ki-61 (as remember it is more then engine in all cases) last.



The logic posted by the model builder in another thread?......That the crank case was 3/4 filled with oil like a large tank and the plane also had its resevoirs infront of the windscreen....Both points wrong and the aspect of using a crank case as a resevoir silly at best.

p.s. Gerrit, I'm still waiting on feedback from those that have actually worked with Ha-40's to alter the fact myth thread based on your hard worked for to supply info.....All that has been relayed onto me up to this point was that the T.I.A.U. Ki-61s were NEVER pressed to their limits due to bearing issues (hence the poor numbers as to performance from T.I.A.U.) and they had bearing failure after the third run for each.

However, T.I.A.U. planes were all abandoned planes due to bearing failure....So being rebuilt says little.

joeap
03-07-2006, 04:23 AM
Thanks to the mods for getting thing focused on the task.

LEBillfish
03-07-2006, 07:12 AM
Yes thanks all you mods...(wow that was quite a swarm)....although in all honesty such antics by the two most disruptive there IMLTHO will eventually ban themselves from the community in that most will just shun them.

Perhaps, perhaps not.....only time will tell but thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
05-08-2006, 07:25 AM
Bump.......

Please either remove this feature from the Ki-61......OR......Add the feature to all other planes making them worse as outlined above.

As a side note I have concerns as to the "hitbox" size for the engine.....HOWEVER..... obviously not ever having seen the model cannot comment intelligently on it. Could it please be looked at.

Thank you.

K2

Bearcat99
05-09-2006, 04:06 PM
whooo looks like I missed the party.... slightly OT.. but I hope that when BoB comes out things like oil spatters will no longer be static... that would be one effect from the phsx chip that would be a big plus to sims... can you imagine having the oil spreading outward on the screen after a hit.... instead of just staying there like a bag of toner.

faelas
05-10-2006, 12:08 AM
Billfish,

I've never commented directly to you before that I can recall, so let me first say that I highly admire your enthusiasm and aparent level of knowledge on the subjects you post about. It's truly inspiring to see someone who knows so much talking about it.

However, of all the wants/gripes/pleas out there, this really is not that critical of an issue overall, in the big picture. Being what it is, I'm just really happy there are any Ki-61s in the game at all. Not saying you should just suck it up and be happy with what you've got, I hate when people say that, but if someone with your level of finesse (surely I spelled that wrong :P) put her effort to the more pressing critical issues, more benefit would result. I guess I'm trying to say "I wish someone as excellent as you are was as gung-ho about the other things that IMO are more important."

Carry on. And good luck. My personal feelings aside, I truly mean that. Good luck Billy. I'll cheer with you if you get your way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Adler
aka Faelas

LEBillfish
05-10-2006, 06:55 AM
No offense intended but;


Originally posted by faelas:
...."are was as gung-ho about the other things that IMO are more important"....

To me the Ki-61, and many of the Japanese aircraft are important along with all related to the "New Guinea" theatre.......

There are also a couple other points you need to remember. First off, folks make the greatest effort to that which interests them. So wherein I may make a sound effort for the Ki-61, I can tell you without trying I have no interest in doing anything with the P51 so would make hardly any effort at all....Just natural, not ideal, yet I'm "semi-human" too.

Secondly, "A" may be much more desperately needed then "B", yet if 1c refuses to spend time to work on it, then any effort on my part only goes toward practicing my typing......

So, I work on that that interests "me" insuring I'll make the best effort I can leaving that which interests others for them to explore and do better then I could.......and....."press for change" other then posting to educate that which Oleg has said they would work on....

Winshield oiling, fuel tank and engine fire extinguishers in the Ki-61-Hei, and other little assorted issues that simply take removing a bit of code, or switching the checklist from no to yes.

Thanks for your kind words however......

faelas
05-10-2006, 08:16 PM
All points well taken.

Just so you know, the main reason I looked in this thread to begin with is because online I fly Japanese almost exclusively, and I feel the pain.

LEBillfish
05-30-2006, 11:03 AM
bump