PDA

View Full Version : Prop Pitch and 1.21



XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 12:49 PM
Has the prop pitch been reversed in 1.21? It seems like the plane goes faster at cruise with 100% now. As I understand prop pitch, it's like shifting gears. You want a coarser (i.e. lower setting) for higher "gears" to get more speed at less rpm because the blades are biting more air. If you climb, go for a higher setting and if you dive go lower to keep the rpms below overspeed. 100%, at least before 1.21 was like first gear, used for acceleration. I routinely went down to 60% for cruising, with a definate increase in speed with lower engine rpms. Now it seems backwards. I don't know how it works on real airplanes (I work on F-16's... no props, unfortunately), but thought I'd had it figured out in FB. Any help, especially slow talking-to-a-dummy help would be appreciated!

Tim
-Code Red Mountain Dew and
Almond Snickers-

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 12:49 PM
Has the prop pitch been reversed in 1.21? It seems like the plane goes faster at cruise with 100% now. As I understand prop pitch, it's like shifting gears. You want a coarser (i.e. lower setting) for higher "gears" to get more speed at less rpm because the blades are biting more air. If you climb, go for a higher setting and if you dive go lower to keep the rpms below overspeed. 100%, at least before 1.21 was like first gear, used for acceleration. I routinely went down to 60% for cruising, with a definate increase in speed with lower engine rpms. Now it seems backwards. I don't know how it works on real airplanes (I work on F-16's... no props, unfortunately), but thought I'd had it figured out in FB. Any help, especially slow talking-to-a-dummy help would be appreciated!

Tim
-Code Red Mountain Dew and
Almond Snickers-

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 01:14 PM
I think that you have a good understanding of how it works. Just remember that you will not get good results in a car if you shift from first gear to fourth gear all of a sudden. Also take into consideration the horsepower of the engine. Some planes do better at cruise with 85% prop pitch, some at 90, and like you mentioned, some powerplants are able to really bite the air.


Tsisqua

http://www.uploadit.org/files/010903-nedChristie.jpg

Tsalagi Asgaya Equa!

michapma
12-13-2003, 03:58 PM
I would stay away fom the car-gear analogy. It's true that changes in the prop-pitch angle loads the engine. The most unfortunate thing about the prop system in FB is that it says "prop pitch" in the HUD, whereas what you are actually controlling is the rpm.

<font size=+1>In most of the planes, when you manipulate the so-called "prop pitch" control, it corresponds to changing the setting on the rpm governer.</font>

This is true for almost all Russian, UK and US planes, which quite generally use constant-speed propellers. The German planes use a different system, which works similarly.

So please forget about setting "prop pitch," at least directly. Think of setting rpm.


This thread reminded me that I need to finish the CEM guide. The first few sections have been done since August, but it's too incomplete to put up at the moment.

Mike

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10"><tr valign="middle" bgcolor="#3e463b"><td height="40" colspan="3" align="center">The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide project (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/)</a></td></tr><tr bgcolor="#515e2f"><td width="40%">FB engine management:
Manifold Pressure sucks (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182081-1.html)
Those Marvelous Props (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html)
Mixture Magic (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182084-1.html)
Putting It All Together (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182085-1.html)
Those Fire-Breathing Turbos (Part 1 of 6) (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182102-1.html)</td><td align="center">

=69.GIAP=Chap

69.GIAP (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/giap/)</p></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top">Hardware:
Flight Simulation Performance Analyzed (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_062a.html)
Building a home-made throttle quadrant step by step (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=zkavv)
Sound Can Be Hazardous for Games (http://www6.tomshardware.com/game/20030405/index.html)</td></tr></table>

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 04:56 PM
Michapma comes thru again with the knowledge base. However, now you've gotten me even more confused. So are you saying we're changing the PROPs rpm, or the engine rpm? Does prop pitch in the game not change the angle of the blades at all? If the blades are almost perpendicular to the airframe, that is 100%, right? And lowering the percentage means the trailing edge of the blades move closer to the engine, thereby increasing the amount of air they're pushing? Or does it work the other way around? The article in your sig (the propeller one) is great, Michapma, but it doesn't tell us what the setting is in FB. Wow... I think I just blew a vein in my head with this post.

Tim
-Code Red Mountain Dew and
Almond Snickers-

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 04:59 PM
This really neeeds clearing up cos do it wrong and you can bugger up the engine.



"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.
(Spitfire Whiner member).

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:00 PM
Mich,

I deeply respect your opinion, but I think the way you worded your above statement will confuse many people.
I am no expert at all, but I want to voice my opinion.

You say to think of PP only controlling engine RPM. Well of course the RPM will decrease when lowering the PP because it is putting a much heavier load on the engine.

If what you say is true, Then the plane would go much slower at level flight when PP is lowered because you would be lowering engine RPM. When in fact that it is just the opposite. You will gain speed at level flight in most planes because the prop is biting more air and putting a heavier load on the engine which is lowering the RPM.

Most people will also think that Lower PP = lower RPM = cooler engine. This is not really true either because of the load factor. Heavier load means the engine is straining and may actually cause overheat if stressed too much.

Just my 2 cents worth!



PF-Coastie

<p align="center">http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/images/419x100phantomfighters01.gif (http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/default.asp)

Coasties Place (http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/coastie0/)

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:05 PM
PF Coastie, you've got a great squad site!

I think we're on the same page regarding prop pitch. The way you stated your case is exactly how I understand it. The original question of this post is: did they reverse this in 1.21?

I wish someone would explain this whole prop pitch thing in FB in 50 words or less, kinda like a "Prop Pitch for Idiots" thing.

Tim
-Code Red Mountain Dew and
Almond Snickers-

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 05:13 PM
Aardvark, Thank you, I was just going to update some pics this weekend. Save it to your favs and check back.

I mostly fly VVS so I can only speak for those planes. As far as I can tell, It has not reversed. Some planes do react much better to PP than others though. The P47 for instance really takes off if you lower to about 85 - 90% while at level flight.

Some planes just dont have the ummph in their power plant to make it work well and actually work better with max RPM's. Kind of like a little 4 cylinder car can usually rev higher and get peak horsepower at higher RPM's. Where a big V8 reaches peak HP at a much lower RPM but has much higher torque.

Oh God my head hurts from this stuff.....LOL!



PF-Coastie

<p align="center">http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/images/419x100phantomfighters01.gif (http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/default.asp)

Coasties Place (http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/coastie0/)

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 08:39 PM
PF_Coastie wrote:
- Mich,
-
- I deeply respect your opinion, but I think the way
- you worded your above statement will confuse many
- people.
-
- I am no expert at all, but I want to voice my
- opinion.

Coastie, Mich is quite right. On the allied planes the control is actually a 'propeller speed control.' Prop & engine speed are directly related by the reduction gear ratio, so it controls both in effect.
-
-
- You say to think of PP only controlling engine RPM.
- Well of course the RPM will decrease when lowering
- the PP because it is putting a much heavier load on
- the engine.
-
-
- If what you say is true, Then the plane would go
- much slower at level flight when PP is lowered
- because you would be lowering engine RPM.

You should go slower and I'm sure you do in FB.

- When in
- fact that it is just the opposite. You will gain
- speed at level flight in most planes because the
- prop is biting more air and putting a heavier load
- on the engine which is lowering the RPM.

That just shouldn't be the case and I don't think it is. Putting the prop speed control fully forward will give the rpm for max power - it is arranged to be that way. Any other setting gives less rpm and less power.

-
-
- Most people will also think that Lower PP = lower
- RPM = cooler engine. This is not really true either
- because of the load factor. Heavier load means the
- engine is straining and may actually cause overheat
- if stressed too much.

Cruising at lower rpm ought to produce less heat, because rpm, power, load are all reduced. It also gives better fuel economy and reduces engine wear.

'Prop pitch' needs to be set to 100% for high performance.


Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:05 PM
Sorry Aardvark, when I made my original post I read to the end of the thread before replying, so forgot to answer the initial question /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


Aardvark892 wrote:

- So are you saying we're changing the PROPs rpm, or
- the engine rpm?

Both, as they are directly related by the reduction gearing (eg .42:1 on the Merlin in the Hurri or P-51)

- Does prop pitch in the game not
- change the angle of the blades at all?

Yes, that is how the CSU maintains the rpm which you have set with the propeller speed control. Precisely what angle it comes up with is not really of any concern to the pilot.

- If the
- blades are almost perpendicular to the airframe,
- that is 100%, right?

Possibly, if at very high speed, but 100% will give any angle if that results in max rpm (which is what you've actually asked for - not a blade angle). Although as these props can't feather, there will be some limit beyond which the angle can not go: the high pitch stop. There will also be a low pitch stop at the fine end of the blade angle spectrum.

- And lowering the percentage
- means the trailing edge of the blades move closer to
- the engine, thereby increasing the amount of air
- they're pushing?

Lowering the percentage asks for a lower rpm - that's all. At your current speed that will mean the blade angle coarsens initially in order to slow the engine down.

You have a CSU which controls the blade angle. The blade angle it settles on is the one which gives the rpm demanded of it by the propeller speed control. More rpm means more power, but also more wear, heat and fuel consumption, which is why in RL lower settings are sometimes used for cruising, routine climbs etc. In FB you can probably get away with leaving 100% in most situations - at least in d/fs. There is no 'black art' to this - or there shouldn't be if it's modelled correctly, and I believe it's pretty good now.

Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:40 PM
Kernow right with this.


But you guys have to realize that with some planes like the German ones, the prop pitch control works differantly.

Where is the alied planes are fully automatic. To have better idea of how it works for the Germans planes, then take BF109 up and just use manuel prop pitch.

P-51 100% prop pitch is a setting for Max combat RPM. = 3200. Meaning, the governor will automaticaly ajust prop pitch to give you combat RPM(about 3200).

75% is about 2500RPM or cruze. If you set the prop pitch to 75% the governor will ajust the blades to give you 2500RPM.

There is no real manual prop pitch for the Alied planes.



Only for most of the German planes can you truly use manualy prop pitch. Which is a good idea becaues youl lern how works; manual wize lol.

BF-109 100% prop pich(manual) is not the same 100% prop pitch of an alied plane.

at 100% the blades cut through the air faster, the faster you go the higher the RPM. this is where youl need to wach the RPM and ajust prop pich to keep the RPM at your disired setting. If your not carful you will blow your engine before you even leave the ground.



1st Lut. 361stMapleTiger.


Proud member of FBAA. and i have issues.

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 09:43 PM
Well, I am not saying you are wrong. It just makes no sense to have it adjustable then. Why not just back off on your throttle? I guess I could see it for a very long flight, But I don't do that anyway. I try to avoid coops and such that take more than 20 min to target.

So, I guess I will just get in and fly like I usually do and not worry about it. LOL

S!

PF-Coastie

<p align="center">http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/images/419x100phantomfighters01.gif (http://www.artjunky.com/phantomfighters/default.asp)

Coasties Place (http://www.angelfire.com/ultra/coastie0/)

XyZspineZyX
12-13-2003, 10:58 PM
PF_Coastie wrote:
- Well, I am not saying you are wrong. It just makes
- no sense to have it adjustable then. Why not just
- back off on your throttle?

You could just pull the throttle back a bit, but why rev the engine at max rpm when you don't want much power? Generally prop speed control and throttle were moved together (look in cockpit and you'll see they are almost always mounted together). In fact some planes (P-47?) could lock the 2 together so you only had to move one thing.

- I guess I could see it
- for a very long flight, But I don't do that anyway.
- I try to avoid coops and such that take more than 20
- min to target.

But in RL you can't avoid it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif That's why they have it.

-
- So, I guess I will just get in and fly like I
- usually do and not worry about it. LOL
-

That's right, you don't need to worry about it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 12:40 AM
This topic will for sure surface for many many many years to come.

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 11:37 AM
Twice in the past 2-3 days in fact /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Sure wish they'd make one 'prop pitch' thread sticky...

Kernow
249 IAP

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 12:47 PM
I found a great article online that helps explain it in terms applicable to FB, and it also covers fuel mixture:

http://www.bradt.com/j3/flying/pages/complex.htm

It's written for modern private airplanes, but like I said, it's pretty good for us FBers!

Tim
-Code Red Mountain Dew and
Almond Snickers-

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 05:05 PM
so, basicaly its for crusing?
i gave up on doing manual in a 109/190
tended to pop my engine /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


whineingu /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 09:10 PM
http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html


Above is another good source of information on Propellers.



Tim wrote:

"I routinely went down to 60% for cruising, with a definate increase in speed with lower engine rpms. Now it seems backwards."


Please confirm the above statement.

A drop in altitdue did not contribute to the increase in speed.

How much did level speed increase when lowering the prop setting and which plane was this possible?



Tim wrote:

"I wish someone would explain this whole prop pitch thing in FB in 50 words or less, kinda like a "Prop Pitch for Idiots" thing."


I'd like to give that a try:

Prop pitch in FB:



No Prop Pitch Auto toggle change = CSP = 100% Pitch @110% throttle = fastest engine/prop speed possible

Auto 109s = CSP + conservative link to throttle = 100% pitch @110% throttle = not fastest

Auto off 109s = Manual Prop control = almost unlimited engine/prop speed = engine damage

Auto 190 = CSP conservative link to throttle

Auto off 190 = CSP linked to throttle plus CSP control = 100% pitch @110% throttle = Fastest





JG14_Josf

XyZspineZyX
12-14-2003, 09:30 PM
For the record, I concur with Kernow, as I believe that is historically correct, and also how it works (within reason) in FB.

For what its worth though, there MAY (no time to test this myself) be something to these guys such as Coastie who say higher speeds are attainable at lower 'prop pitch' (meaning RPM on Constant Speed Props such as Soviet and American aircraft) settings. These engines were designed (as all engines are) to have a peak horsepower output at a specific RPM, going above that RPM actually results in a lower power output. For example I believe the combat RPM for the P51 Merlin (and all Merlins) was 3000RPM, so if '100% Prop Pitch' is set at 3200, this could concieveably cause a slight increase in speed at say '90% Prop Pitch'. I feel this horsepower curve for engines hasn't been implemented in previous patches of Il2/FB, but it may be new to 1.21.

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 05:45 AM
If I am not mistaken in the original FB pitch was reversed... you got 100% results at 0 and vise versa...Oleg said this would be fixed. I guess it has. I listen to the engine when i use pitch totell me whats up.

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

michapma
12-15-2003, 10:34 AM
Thanks to Kernow and others, it seems the original concerns have been answered, so I guess I won't go to any great lengths to explain what I meant in more detail. Instead I'll write it into the CEM guide. My statement wasn't complete so it could be confusing, but this difference between prop pitch and rpm control is critical and I am taking up a great campaign to regain truth and justice. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-wink.gif

The CEM guide will be available online, and will also go into the FB version of the user's guide. Here is a content summary:

Introduction
Basics and components
Throttle and power
WEP
Prop pitch
Controlling RPM (including discussion of methods for propeller types)
Mixture
Instruments
Supercharger
Radiator and cowl flaps
Magnetos
Engine damage
Application
Command assignments
Multi-engine aircraft (I hope at least)
Further information (related links)

This guide is basic engine management, with a minimal of details discussing the mechanics behind the decisions a pilot must make.

I would like to point out one use of rpm control that (I think) has been overlooked in this thread. You can turn back the rpms to help cool your engine. This is especially useful if you have a significant energy advantage or already a distinct disadvantage, and the immediate priority is to cool your engine.

Josf, I still have to work out some of the details of German systems, but I think I might dare to write down the basic practical stuff. I'd like it if you would have a look at what I come up with, since I don't have much in-game experience with them.

Someone mentioned that the 109s have direct control for prop pitch, but that Allied planes don't. This isn't entirely true, some P-40 designs (in real life, not FB) for example can be set to override the governer and directly control prop pitch with an electric motor. This was only to be used for emergency situations.

Cheers,
Mike

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10"><tr valign="middle" bgcolor="#3e463b"><td height="40" colspan="3" align="center">The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide project (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/)</a></td></tr><tr bgcolor="#515e2f"><td width="40%">FB engine management:
Manifold Pressure sucks (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182081-1.html)
Those Marvelous Props (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html)
Mixture Magic (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182084-1.html)
Putting It All Together (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182085-1.html)
Those Fire-Breathing Turbos (Part 1 of 6) (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182102-1.html)</td><td align="center">

=69.GIAP=Chap

69.GIAP (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/giap/)</p></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top">Hardware:
Flight Simulation Performance Analyzed (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_062a.html)
Building a home-made throttle quadrant step by step (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=zkavv)
Sound Can Be Hazardous for Games (http://www6.tomshardware.com/game/20030405/index.html)</td></tr></table>

michapma
12-15-2003, 11:00 AM
Oh I forgot something about the original question. I don't recall after reading through whether somebody made it clear, so I'll just chime in again. There has been no reversal of the way "prop pitch" (rpm control) works for version 1.21 as compared to other versions. I don't know what all else might have been changed in engine system control modeling, but there was no reversal to the interpretation of the percentage scale.

For constant-speed prop systems, 100% still means full rpm, and 0% still means minimal rpm.

For German planes, auto is auto, and 100% means finest prop pitch (corresponding to dangerously high rpms at full throttle) and 0% means coarsest prop pitch (corresponding to lower rpms).

I got into a LaGG last night and tried to observe how changing prop pitch affects speed. I wasn't able to notice immediately (had limited time). This is a tricky experiment, because you have to keep the plane in level flight. You should know that the power output of an engine is directly dependent on the torque the engine produces (the force on the pistons times their distance from the center of rotation) and the rpm: power = torque x rpm. (Technically speaking, there is a constant that has to be multitplied in.) Reducing rpms reduces power, making the plane want to start to descend, the same as if you had backed off the throttle. Increasing rpms increases power, making the plane want to climb. This is the case both in theory/reality and in FB.

Here is how to make a controlled test. Set your throttle to whatever setting interests you most, say 100%. You will leave it there of course. Make sure the mixture and supercharger are at the appropriate settings if applicable. Use the "prop pitch" control to set the rpm to the first testing stage, for example "100%." You have to use the stick and trim to adjust angle of attack (related to the plane's pitch) to settle into level flight at one power setting (at the altitude you are testing for), make sure the plane is finished accelerating, and record the speed. Then you change the rpm setting again, and since this changes output power you must use the stick and trim to settle into level flight again, make sure the plane is finished accelerating/decelarating, and record the new speed. Compare it to the other speed.

If you just change the rpm/prop setting without controlling other factors, your results are not likely to tell you the truth.

It might be useful to use the no-cockpit view. It uses TAS (true airspeed) instead of IAS (indicated airspeed), which is irrelevant since we are interested in the difference in speeds instead of the absolute speed, but it should give you a more accurate reading than the cockpit gauge. (Does it measure down to the ones place, or only to the tens place, like the speed bar?)

It's my opinion, based only on my own ideas and not experience, that the flight model does not decelerate the planes quickly enough. There is a lot of drag on a plane going 400 or 500kph, and chopping the throttle should allow the drag to decelerate them quickly. That aside, I suspect that the model is accurate enough to cause the planes to not be able to fly as fast when power is reduced.

Cheers,
Mike

<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="10"><tr valign="middle" bgcolor="#3e463b"><td height="40" colspan="3" align="center">The ongoing IL-2 User's Guide project (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/)</a></td></tr><tr bgcolor="#515e2f"><td width="40%">FB engine management:
Manifold Pressure sucks (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182081-1.html)
Those Marvelous Props (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182082-1.html)
Mixture Magic (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182084-1.html)
Putting It All Together (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182085-1.html)
Those Fire-Breathing Turbos (Part 1 of 6) (http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182102-1.html)</td><td align="center">

=69.GIAP=Chap

69.GIAP (http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/giap/)</p></td><td width="40%" align="right" valign="top">Hardware:
Flight Simulation Performance Analyzed (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_062a.html)
Building a home-made throttle quadrant step by step (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_gd_temp&id=zkavv)
Sound Can Be Hazardous for Games (http://www6.tomshardware.com/game/20030405/index.html)</td></tr></table>

XyZspineZyX
12-15-2003, 06:42 PM
Mike,

It is my pleasure to help in any way with your work in creating the CEM guide.

My 50 words or less example of Prop systems in IL2/FB has an error.

I did some more testing and found that the FW190s do not have CPS prop control linked to the throttle with Auto prop on.

The FW190s are set at 50% Prop Pitch in Auto mode.

My tests indicate that in Auto mode the FW190s are always at 50% Prop Pitch.

In other words flying the FW190 in auto mode is like flying any of the Allied planes with the prop control stuck at 50% Prop Pitch.

The 109s have the CSP prop control linked to the throttle.

Try this:

Take any CSP plane at max speed and close the throttle.

What happens to the RPM?

Take a 109 on Auto at max speed and close the throttle.

The RPM will go almost to 0 rpm while the CSP planes will remain at high rpm.

In order to get the CSP planes to idle down they must have their prop levers pulled back with the throttle.

Take any CSP plane at max speed, close the throttle and set the prop pitch to zero.

What happens to the RPM now?

The 109s are like CSP planes (and the FWs with Auto turned off) except that the 109s have the Prop control linked to the throttle. 109s on Auto control both the manifold pressure and the Prop governor RPM setting with the one throttle lever.
The 109s have the prop lever and the throttle lever linked together.

It looks like the FW190s are no different than any other CSP plane when Prop. Pitch AUTO is turned off.

The only way to get 100 percent Prop Pitch (Highest RPM governor setting) for the FW190s is to turn the Prop. Pitch AUTO off.

Try this:

Fly an FW190 on Auto.

Then fly an FW190 with Auto off and set the Prop pitch to 50%.

Is there any difference in performance?





JG14_Josf

Aardvark892
12-18-2003, 12:11 PM
Okay so now even the posts are backwards! In reply to the question posed to me about what I meant about the performance increase thru prop pitch: I would climb to 3k at 100% PP in a MiG-3U. Once I levelled off, and attained what seemed to be the max speed, I would slowly (about 5% every two seconds or so) decrease "prop pitch" down to 65%. The speed would increase significantly, almost 40-50kph. This was pre 1.21. Now if I try the same thing, the speed is higher at 100%, and decreases as I lower prop pitch. I'm going to make a track showing what I mean, and when I find somewhere to post it, I'll link to it here.

michapma
12-19-2003, 03:01 AM
Hmm... my first post with the new forum. I must say I've had to be patient over the last few days. I wanted to announce the publishing of the CEM guide to celebrate the Centennial of Flight, but the forum didn't come up on time as promised. Last night I was too busy flying. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

So instead here's a little tip for anyone interested enough to read this thread. I've put the CEM guide "as is" on my site. There is no link to it from the rest of the pages in the site, so you have to know the address. When I get a few more of the pages done I will fully integrate it into the site by adding a link on the main menu. Here is where you can view it:

http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/cemguide/

Please please please provide me with feedback if you are interested in helping make this into a semi-definitive guide. My goal for the guide is to provide sufficiently deep detail to help people understand, while still making it understandable enough for the non-technically oriented who still want to understand. Understand? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Mike

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_chap.jpg (http://giap.webhop.info)

michapma
12-19-2003, 03:08 AM
Oops, the URL for the starting point is:

http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/il2guide/cemguide/intro.htm

Mike

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_chap.jpg (http://giap.webhop.info)