PDA

View Full Version : IL2:1946 High Altitude Performance



six_50s
12-18-2009, 12:33 PM
I have enjoyed this sim for quite awhile but only at low altitutde, below 10,000 feet. No matter what I have the settings set to ( complex engine management or not) and whatever fighter plane, I cannot fly faster than 200 mph. I have set the super charger and mixture controls to a hot key and I cannot get the supercharger or mixture control to respond. Any Ideas?. Do I need a patch? Any help will be appreciated. I am running the standard version, no patches.

Thanx, Mark IX

crucislancer
12-18-2009, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by six_50s:
I have enjoyed this sim for quite awhile but only at low altitutde, below 10,000 feet. No matter what I have the settings set to ( complex engine management or not) and whatever fighter plane, I cannot fly faster than 200 mph. I have set the super charger and mixture controls to a hot key and I cannot get the supercharger or mixture control to respond. Any Ideas?. Do I need a patch? Any help will be appreciated. I am running the standard version, no patches.

Thanx, Mark IX

What plane are you flying? Every type has different altitude and speed limits, for instance if you are flying a P-39 above 10,000 feet you aren't going to go very fast. A P-51 on the other hand will fly quite fast above 20,000 feet. Also, some planes don't have manual mixture and supercharger, they change automanually with altitude, for instance the P-51.

Also, there is a difference between "indicated air speed" (what you see on the speedometer) and "true air speed". The higher you fly, the bigger the difference in these two figures, with "true air speed" being higher then "indicated air speed".

AndyJWest
12-18-2009, 12:52 PM
How are you measuring speeds? Both the instrument panel indicator and the 'speed bar' will show indicated airspeed, which gets progressively slower than true airspeed with altitude at about 7% per Km:
http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae65/ajv00987k/IasTasChart.jpg
If you want to see true airspeed, it is shown in 'wonder woman' view (Ctrl-F1 by default, I think)

You should be getting a lot more then 200 mph indicated at low level, though, in a decent fighter. I'd start by setting 'complex engine management' off in the difficulty settings, so you don't need to worry about mixture etc. If you can't, I think most likely it is a problem with your throttle. Does it indicate 100% onscreen (or more - some go up to 110%) when fuly open?

six_50s
12-18-2009, 01:20 PM
I usually fly the P-51, P-47, and the Spitfire Mk IX. I understand the relationship between IAS and true air speed. Let's put it this way, their performance seems to be very slugish, the AI a/c are flying higher and faster. I don't have any problems with these a/c at low altitudes. Yes the throttle indicates 100% on screen.

na85
12-18-2009, 01:28 PM
Keep in mind the AI cheats.

Also I believe those aircraft you mention have automatic supercharger and mixture controls.

general_kalle
12-18-2009, 01:29 PM
remember to retract your gear and flaps http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Romanator21
12-18-2009, 01:31 PM
Trim

Ba5tard5word
12-18-2009, 01:58 PM
I rarely fly higher than about 2000m because it can be a bit boring to get up that high (especially when you get shot down 2 seconds after climbing for 10 minutes, lol), but I'd like to try it out, plus the times I've fought at 4000-6000m up it was pretty thrilling having that much room to move around.

But once I wanted to try the MiG-3 at high altitude, since it's supposed to be a real screamer up there and built for high-altitude stuff. I spawned myself I think at around 20,000 feet up...and it was like I was flying in molasses. I had CEM off (I think it was way before I'd learned how to do CEM). I guess the air is so thin up there that you don't have any cushion, but it was like flailing around compared to flying near sea level, I hardly had any control. Again it was a while ago and I should try it again with other planes though.

julian265
12-18-2009, 04:10 PM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
Trim

Has absolutely no effect on top speeds, logically, and tested in IL2.

Keeping the rudder ball centered is another matter, which does make a difference, but you don't need trim to do it (though of course it's easier to use it...)


Originally posted by six_50s
I usually fly the P-51, P-47, and the Spitfire Mk IX. I understand the relationship between IAS and true air speed. Let's put it this way, their performance seems to be very slugish, the AI a/c are flying higher and faster. I don't have any problems with these a/c at low altitudes. Yes the throttle indicates 100% on screen.

How are you judging sluggish? The thinner air means there's not as much lift, and it's much easier to cause a snap stall.

Of course the airspeed indicator moves slower at higher altitudes, because each mph is actually more than 1 mph.

Lastly, once you pass a certain height, which is often between 6 and 8 km, all IL2 aircraft's top speeds start to reduce, due to the inability for the turbo or superchargers to provide enough air intake for maximum power.

Stiletto-
12-18-2009, 05:05 PM
Please record and post a track of your slowness for better understanding, thanks.

BillSwagger
12-18-2009, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by six_50s:
I usually fly the P-51, P-47, and the Spitfire Mk IX. I understand the relationship between IAS and true air speed. Let's put it this way, their performance seems to be very slugish, the AI a/c are flying higher and faster. I don't have any problems with these a/c at low altitudes. Yes the throttle indicates 100% on screen.

I share the oinion that the P-47 is sluggish but probably for different reason.

This might seem obvious, so don't take this the wrong way, but are you using WEP or boost?
On the P-51 and P-47 you have to throttle over 100% up to 110%, and i think the Spit 9 goes to 110 as well.

I made a habit of climbing higher because i got sick of getting bounced by players who dove from 10k ft above me. Now i fight them up high which offers another aspect of the game in addition to tangling with fighters down low.


Bill

Kettenhunde
12-18-2009, 05:43 PM
Has absolutely no effect on top speeds, logically, and tested in IL2.

You trim for an angle of attack which is the same as speed in an airplane.

Romanator21
12-18-2009, 06:35 PM
Has absolutely no effect on top speeds, logically, and tested in IL2.

You will go faster if you are not having to jerk the elevator up and down. Porpoising through the air would slow you down a bit. Trim it, and you don't have to touch the stick much to remain level. And as Kettenhunde mentioned, pitch, not power, determines speed.

Rudder trim is a definite must, but sadly, not available on all aircraft.

Choctaw111
12-18-2009, 07:29 PM
The indicated airspeed messes a lot of people up.
They look at their airspeed indicator and see only 250kph, BUT they are at 6,000 meters altitude (just an example). Big difference between true and indicated airspeed at that height.

JtD
12-18-2009, 10:59 PM
You will go faster if you are not having to jerk the elevator up and down. Porpoising through the air would slow you down a bit. Trim it, and you don't have to touch the stick much to remain level.

I've tested speeds in game untrimmed, trimmed and with the autopilot and it made no difference. If you suffer from serious hamfistedness, you may need trim, if you don't, then you don't. It's fairly easy to keep a plane straight and level.


Rudder trim is a definite must, but sadly, not available on all aircraft.

In fact, some of the best planes in game do not have rudder trim. It therefore isn't a must have.

----

I'd also like to see a track where you're not going any faster than 200.

Romanator21
12-19-2009, 01:14 AM
In fact, some of the best planes in game do not have rudder trim. It therefore isn't a must have.

Most planes have rudder pedals. The planes in this game use "Z" and "X". Rudder trim is a clearly necessity in these situations if you care about having a faster and more efficient cruise. I don't like to see that ball on the Bf-109 way off and not be able to do anything about it without kicking my plane around.


If you suffer from serious hamfistedness, you may need trim, if you don't, then you don't. It's fairly easy to keep a plane straight and level.

Behold! My fist of ham! (delicious)

JtD
12-19-2009, 01:21 AM
You can always apply just a little bit of rudder instead of trimming it.

Have you ever bothered to check how much speed you lose between trim and manual correction of wrong trim?

Romanator21
12-19-2009, 03:38 AM
My rudder deflects to the stops when I use Z and X, causing massive fishtailing.

I've not done any hard testing, but just from personal experience, trim helps me a great deal. Maybe you have a better stick, but my joy is a little quirky as it sometimes gives random spikes unless I don't touch it. These don't do much, but every little bit counts. At least for me it's better to trim rather than to keep the stick forward the whole time you are cruising. It's my habit to allow the plane to fly itself, and keep my hands off the stick as much as possible, and keep input as small as possible. Call me anal, but that's how I fly.

To each their own. But proper trim certainly can't hurt.

JtD
12-19-2009, 04:12 AM
I bought a new stick when mine started acting like yours. No, actually a year or two after it started acting like that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I, too, trim the aircraft for the condition of flight. It makes sense and everything much more comfortable. I'm not disagreeing on the general use of trim and the way you and I use it.
But I can reach the same plane performance via stick input and also consider rudder trim a "very nice to" instead of a "must" have feature, so that's what I'm disagreeing with.

Kettenhunde
12-19-2009, 10:36 AM
I've tested speeds in game untrimmed, trimmed and with the autopilot and it made no difference.


While that is probably true, lets not confuse that with how airplanes work.

I don't think home computers can accurate recreate this very well.

Of course if you ever fly an airplane yourself, you will notice when it is not in trim and you have to fight the airplane.


You will go faster if you are not having to jerk the elevator up and down. Porpoising through the air would slow you down a bit.

Yes, it creates a moment the pilot must constantly compensate for until the aircraft moves to its trimmed condition. For short periods this is not a big deal but over a 3-4 minute period to reach Vmax, it is unlikely this will not effect it.

You can see this very phenomenon in several flight test reports.

VW-IceFire
12-19-2009, 10:50 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by six_50s:
I usually fly the P-51, P-47, and the Spitfire Mk IX. I understand the relationship between IAS and true air speed. Let's put it this way, their performance seems to be very slugish, the AI a/c are flying higher and faster. I don't have any problems with these a/c at low altitudes. Yes the throttle indicates 100% on screen.

I share the oinion that the P-47 is sluggish but probably for different reason.

This might seem obvious, so don't take this the wrong way, but are you using WEP or boost?
On the P-51 and P-47 you have to throttle over 100% up to 110%, and i think the Spit 9 goes to 110 as well.

I made a habit of climbing higher because i got sick of getting bounced by players who dove from 10k ft above me. Now i fight them up high which offers another aspect of the game in addition to tangling with fighters down low.


Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I must be the only person who feels that the P-47 is like a rocket (not literally) at very high altitudes in game. My opponents seemed to be standing still compared to me when flying up there. I get a similar feeling with the Ta-152H which really blasts long...

High altitude fighting requires a totally different game plan. No yanking and banking... it's much more like a chess game where energy and angles are played out over a wider area (and a longer period of time) jostling for position until someone has it and the other guy really has only one option: dive.

TS_Sancho
12-19-2009, 12:19 PM
I fly the P47 at high altitude whenever I can.

Unless I make a mistake, at alt and speed the Jug is close to untouchable.

For me, the P51 is screaming fast up there as well. If you get in trouble just put the nose down a few degrees and away you go.

For the OP, can you post a screenshot?

BillSwagger
12-19-2009, 10:40 PM
The Jug is like a rocket in the zoom, i guess I'm referring to the Razorback more so, in that it is sluggish in a shallow dive where i would think its weight would get it up to speed more so than what is achievable with out nosing over more.

The history behind the jug is interesting because it was used a variety of different ways. It was one of the few planes of the era that utilized a turbo exhaust system where it could still shell out 2000hp above 30k. Many planes were suckin wind up that high including the FW190 and Zero. In a way i think the performance of some planes are a bit optimistic from an altitude standpoint, in that they still get pretty decent horsepower where the air begins to thin out.

I learned you can also surge an engine using turbo, which can cause damage, however if anticipated, dropping the pitch can keep the engine from over speeding and much of the excess energy is transferred into torque. This is probably also where the P-47 got its significant zoom climb ability. Turbo functions aren't currently modeled in game, so this isn't something you can try.

High altitude is fun and i think it puts more planes in there proper elements, and introduces a few more challenges.
I like the escort/intercept maps, and i've been building coops/campaigns around that premise. I also find that 1943 makes a good base year for most planes. The firepower and performance seems to be evenly matched and if its not you can also sway the advantage by adding a 44 variant. good times.

Bill

julian265
12-20-2009, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Has absolutely no effect on top speeds, logically, and tested in IL2.

You will go faster if you are not having to jerk the elevator up and down. Porpoising through the air would slow you down a bit. Trim it, and you don't have to touch the stick much to remain level. And as Kettenhunde mentioned, pitch, not power, determines speed.

Rudder trim is a definite must, but sadly, not available on all aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force. As JtD said, hamfistedness is another issue. (I also porpoise, but not enough to affect top speed noticeably)

Of course, Crumpp, my comments unless otherwise noted are relevant to IL2, the subject of this forum. Though the above statement holds true in reality anyway, unless you introduce variables outside the scope of my statement. In IL2, I trim when I don't like the position of my pedals or stick.

BillSwagger
12-20-2009, 02:21 AM
The degree and angle of a turn, aka angle of attack + bank, also effects speed.
When i wing up, sometimes i'll take the inside of the turn to watch the number one plane make a tighter turn in pursuit, in which case i'll let him cross in front of me and lag on the outside of his turn. This mean my radius is not as tight. When the bandit has straightened out I'll have more energy to continue the pursuit if number one lost too much energy in the tighter turn.

I think some people fail to see these concepts in action while playing which can lead to a lot of confusing remarks. Its really just energy management which the altitude game is big part of, but really its something you should be aware of at any altitude particularly when the fights are moving fast and planes are at their top speeds.



Bill

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 03:33 AM
Though the above statement holds true in reality anyway,

I think you are confusing balance with trim. Balance is the forces the pilot feels on the controls. When the aircraft is trimmed, the pilot does not need to exert any force on the controls to maintain the trimmed condition of flight. Balance does not effect the flight of the aircraft, only what the pilot feels.

Trim is the adjustment to the aircraft angle of attack it achieves equilibrium.

The airplane will return to it is last condition of trim.

In perfect conditions with a positively stable design, the airplane will oscillate without control input as the power available to power required seeks equilibrium. If the airplane is trimmed for an angle of attack at a lower airspeed than it is flying, the airplane will climb to reduce speed. When it overshoots that airspeed it will then dive to regain airspeed seeking the trimmed airspeed. With positive stability, it will eventually return to the trimmed airspeed by design as the moments are reduced with each oscillation.

Without equilibrium control input is required. The pilot is using the control surface ability to alter the lift and drag picture of the aircraft to exert force to dampen or eliminate these oscillations seeking that trimmed angle of attack. The pilots input is altering that lift/drag picture which in turn alters our airspeed for that trimmed angle of attack and our equilibrium point for Vmax.


Trim for airspeed at 1 G.
Airspeed depends on trim.

http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html#sec-trim-aoa

julian265
12-20-2009, 06:01 AM
I'm not confusing anything. It's been posted many times around here, that you need to be trimmed to get the maximum speed out of a plane. It's also been posted that using trim instead of joystick input conserves energy. I'm attempting to fix this misconception.

It's odd that you almost always (without exaggeration) misinterpret my posts, and then post some 'correction'.

Anyway, third post down:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...271018687#2271018687 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5001097587?r=2271018687#2271018687)

For those who actually have IL2, see the second last post for test results, aka proof.

I'm also a fan of high altitude P47 performance.

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 07:02 AM
It's odd that you almost always (without exaggeration) misinterpret my posts, and then post some 'correction'.

There is nothing odd about it.

This is very clear...


Julian says:
It's been posted many times around here, that you need to be trimmed to get the maximum speed out of a plane.

This is not clear at all and it is very reasonable to interpret it as defending what JtD says as applying to real airplanes.


Julain says:
The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force. As JtD said, hamfistedness is another issue. (I also porpoise, but not enough to affect top speed noticeably)

Of course, Crumpp, my comments unless otherwise noted are relevant to IL2, the subject of this forum. Though the above statement holds true in reality anyway, unless you introduce variables outside the scope of my statement. In IL2, I trim when I don't like the position of my pedals or stick.


There is no mystery as to why you were misunderstood.

Back to the trim, this is not something that any home computer based flight game gets right, AFAIK.

julian265
12-20-2009, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by JtD:
I've tested speeds in game untrimmed, trimmed and with the autopilot and it made no difference. If you suffer from serious hamfistedness, you may need trim, if you don't, then you don't. It's fairly easy to keep a plane straight and level.

In fact, some of the best planes in game do not have rudder trim. It therefore isn't a must have.

----

I'd also like to see a track where you're not going any faster than 200.


This is not clear at all and it is very reasonable to interpret it as defending what JtD says as applying to real airplanes.

JtD says "in game" twice. You are being a troll. Apologies to the OP for this derailment, but Crumpp has made a habit of "correcting" posts of mine by addressing points that were never made, or purposefully misunderstanding them and going off on a tangent. I have no patience for it.

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 04:43 PM
JtD says "in game" twice.


I know that....You just did not read my very first post!

================================================

Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">JtD says:
I've tested speeds in game untrimmed, trimmed and with the autopilot and it made no difference.


While that is probably true, lets not confuse that with how airplanes work.

I don't think home computers can accurate recreate this very well.

Of course if you ever fly an airplane yourself, you will notice when it is not in trim and you have to fight the airplane.


You will go faster if you are not having to jerk the elevator up and down. Porpoising through the air would slow you down a bit.

Yes, it creates a moment the pilot must constantly compensate for until the aircraft moves to its trimmed condition. For short periods this is not a big deal but over a 3-4 minute period to reach Vmax, it is unlikely this will not effect it.

You can see this very phenomenon in several flight test reports. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...721090718#7721090718 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4481038618?r=7721090718#7721090718)

================================================


Julian says:
You are being a troll.


No, you just did not read my first post and proceeded to act on that misunderstanding.

I quote JtD and clearly acknowledge his claim about the games behavior are true.


Julain says:
Apologies to the OP for this derailment, but Crumpp has made a habit of "correcting" posts of mine by addressing points that were never made, or purposefully misunderstanding them and going off on a tangent. I have no patience for it.

Well don't post wrong and misleading information and you won't have to apologize for de-railing the thread.

If you had clearly said....


Julian says:
It's been posted many times around here, that you need to be trimmed to get the maximum speed out of a plane.

Instead of some garbled half truth buried in an enigma it would have never been an issue.

How can there be some conspiracy to countermand anything you post?

I don't normally even bother to respond to your posting's. In fact you are not a blip on my radar screen in any fashion as I don't know you at all.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...931054008#3931054008 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/8221071008?r=3931054008#3931054008)


All the best,

Crumpp

julian265
12-20-2009, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">JtD says "in game" twice.

I know that....You just did not read my very first post!
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I never responded to your first post, so that is irrelevant.


Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
No, you just did not read my first post and proceeded to act on that misunderstanding.
Again, I never responded to your first post.


Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
Instead of some garbled half truth buried in an enigma it would have never been an issue.
What is the "garbled half truth" that I have posted?

The point which you took issue with was "The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force."

What is wrong with that statement?

If you don't have an issue with that statement, then QUOTE my statement with which you have an issue.

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 06:02 PM
Julian says:
What is the "garbled half truth" that I have posted?



Julain says:
The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force. As JtD said, hamfistedness is another issue. (I also porpoise, but not enough to affect top speed noticeably)

Of course, Crumpp, my comments unless otherwise noted are relevant to IL2, the subject of this forum. Though the above statement holds true in reality anyway....

Your statement made above does not hold in reality.

In reality, you must trim an airplane to reach Vmax.


The point which you took issue with was "The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force."

For your game, I never had an issue with that statement. I wrote that in my very first reply which you either did not read or you read it but the meaning did not register in your mind.

Reality is a different story as real airplanes do not act that way. You keep confusing trim with balance. By definition, trim requires no input from the pilot.

If that clears up all your questions, I do not have anything else to put out on the subject.

I wish you the best in your journey.

Crumpp




Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Though the above statement holds true in reality anyway,

I think you are confusing balance with trim. Balance is the forces the pilot feels on the controls. When the aircraft is trimmed, the pilot does not need to exert any force on the controls to maintain the trimmed condition of flight. Balance does not effect the flight of the aircraft, only what the pilot feels.

Trim is the adjustment to the aircraft angle of attack it achieves equilibrium.

The airplane will return to it is last condition of trim.

In perfect conditions with a positively stable design, the airplane will oscillate without control input as the power available to power required seeks equilibrium. If the airplane is trimmed for an angle of attack at a lower airspeed than it is flying, the airplane will climb to reduce speed. When it overshoots that airspeed it will then dive to regain airspeed seeking the trimmed airspeed. With positive stability, it will eventually return to the trimmed airspeed by design as the moments are reduced with each oscillation.

Without equilibrium control input is required. The pilot is using the control surface ability to alter the lift and drag picture of the aircraft to exert force to dampen or eliminate these oscillations seeking that trimmed angle of attack. The pilots input is altering that lift/drag picture which in turn alters our airspeed for that trimmed angle of attack and our equilibrium point for Vmax.


Trim for airspeed at 1 G.
Airspeed depends on trim.

http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html#sec-trim-aoa </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

julian265
12-20-2009, 07:03 PM
Oh FFS, read the bold part.

"The fact remains, top speed is identical whether you hold your attitude with trim or stick force"

Two planes, same attitude or AoA, one held by pilot input forces, one held with zero pilot input force (ie trimmed). Same max speed. That is all I have said.

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 07:41 PM
I was going to edit my post to make it easier for you to understand. You posted before I could do so...


Julians says:
Two planes, same attitude or AoA, one held by pilot input forces, one held with zero pilot input force (ie trimmed). Same max speed. That is all I have said.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that this is not accurate? Why are you defending it so hard?

It is not an accurate statement because it does not reflect the reality in the air. It is that simple. Go fly an airplane and try it!

This is some internet educated sound bite someone has fed you as reality. Flying an untrimmed aircraft can be a handful and in many cases, downright dangerous.

Failure of the trim system is generally an in flight emergency or at a minimum necessitates setting the aircraft down for repairs.

http://www.aeroelectric.com/ar..._System_Failures.pdf (http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Trim_System_Failures.pdf)


Vmax is not achieved instantly, maybe in a game but certainly not in an airplane. It takes an airplane several minutes to accelerate to Vmax, Julian. Most flight testing during WWII listed 3 minutes or longer before recording Vmax.

From my very first post on the subject:


Crumpp says:

Yes, it creates a moment the pilot must constantly compensate for until the aircraft moves to its trimmed condition. For short periods this is not a big deal but over a 3-4 minute period to reach Vmax, it is unlikely this will not effect it.

You can see this very phenomenon in several flight test reports.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...721090718#7721090718 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4481038618?r=7721090718#7721090718)


http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/8350/trim.jpg (http://img97.imageshack.us/i/trim.jpg/)

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/407/testflighttrimming.jpg (http://img682.imageshack.us/i/testflighttrimming.jpg/)

BillSwagger
12-20-2009, 08:08 PM
anyways....


In game (cough) i think trim is very important to maintaining velocity. Its really about keeping the slip ball centered which can be done with stick force or trim, but its easier to do with trim.

I also found that trimming tail heavy can help some planes in the turns, getting more elevator response. I'm not sure if it effects stall charateristics or not, but there are some who would argue that using trim to turn along with the elevator allows for faster more efficient turns in Il2.



Before we get to far off track, this was a high altitude performance thread.



Bill

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 08:23 PM
In game (cough) i think trim is very important to maintaining velocity.


Anybody have any youtube videos showing this?

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

julian265
12-20-2009, 08:50 PM
Watch the tracks in this thread in IL2:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...271018687#2271018687 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5001097587?r=2271018687#2271018687)

Equal max speed, different trim.

Crumpp, you are not considering the statement within it's boundaries, but as usual bringing in a bunch of variables.

My statement was regarding two planes that COULD be held at the same AoA, one using trim, the other stick forces.

The statement was intended to address people who think that trim creates some alignment of controls which reduces drag, thus increasing top speed, which is false, but also a common view on this forum.

I am fully aware of the time vehicles take to reach their top speeds. All of my IL2 speed tests took 3-5 minutes, which you'd know if you had IL2 and had watched my speed test recordings from my previous link. I am also aware that the untrimmed control forces can become unmanageable.

This will be my final bickering post on this sub-topic.

Kettenhunde
12-20-2009, 09:36 PM
but as usual bringing in a bunch of variables.

What are you talking about?

The facts were outlined in my very first post on the subject and have not changed. It is not hard to read them.


While that is probably true, lets not confuse that with how airplanes work.

I don't think home computers can accurate recreate this very well.

Of course if you ever fly an airplane yourself, you will notice when it is not in trim and you have to fight the airplane.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...721090718#7721090718 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4481038618?r=7721090718#7721090718)

Ba5tard5word
12-21-2009, 03:17 PM
Well a couple days ago I decided to try again with the MiG-3. Spawned at 10,000m with the QMB. It really is like flying underwater, I had very little control and had to trim up a lot to keep my nose from constantly dropping. I couldn't really get much more than 300 to 400kph at max throttle. What speed gauge should I be looking at? I tried the KIAS thing and it seemed pretty low too. What are speeds in things like Hardball's Aircraft Viewer based on? It says the MiG-3 goes well over 600kph at 7000+m up.

Also I took a Mustang Mk.III up, it had more control and could go faster but still the speed seemed low but I'm not sure what to look at to gauge how fast I can go and how fast I'm going at those altitudes.

Took both planes back to like 5000m and they started flying more normally again.

Kettenhunde
12-21-2009, 03:23 PM
Well a couple days ago I decided to try again with the MiG-3. Spawned at 10,000m with the QMB. It really is like flying underwater, I had very little control and had to trim up a lot to keep my nose from constantly dropping. I couldn't really get much more than 300 to 400kph at max throttle. What speed gauge should I be looking at? I tried the KIAS thing and it seemed pretty low too. What are speeds in things like Hardball's Aircraft Viewer based on? It says the MiG-3 goes well over 600kph at 7000+m up.

Also I took a Mustang Mk.III up, it had more control and could go faster but still the speed seemed low but I'm not sure what to look at to gauge how fast I can go and how fast I'm going at those altitudes.

Took both planes back to like 5000m and they started flying more normally again.

You have to convert your indicated to True Airspeed. If someone does not come along and tell you how to do it, I will this evening.

All the best,

Crumpp

Romanator21
12-21-2009, 04:37 PM
On all aircraft is something called a pitot tube which feeds data to your airspeed indicator. IAS is indicated on the gauge. For stall speed, best climb speed, and never exceed speed, IAS is what counts. True airspeed is airspeed which is corrected for density altitude and is the true speed that the airplane is going through the air. Factor in winds and you get ground speed. At higher altitudes, the air is thinner, and less is rammed into the pitot tube opening, making the value on the gauge appear smaller.

To correct, add 2% to kts per 1000 feet, or 7% to km/h per 1000 meters.

Wurkeri
12-21-2009, 10:15 PM
The easiest way to see TAS in game: Ctrl + F1

Another way to see TAS and pretty much anything else in real time is to use devicelink and UdpGraph.

six_50s
12-22-2009, 02:25 PM
Thanx for all your responses. So it looks like there isn't a patch or any software issues related to to my hi altitude performance. It must be..............pilot error!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif I have since tried again and paid more attention to the a/c trim and have had better results, main taining 250 - 280 mph.

Thanx, Six_50s

Romanator21
12-22-2009, 11:12 PM
It must be..............pilot error!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

Don't be so hard on yourself. The published speeds were rarely reached in a combat situation, and were reached by qualified test pilots that had years and years of training to get the most out of their machine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif IL-2 speeds aren't perfect and are apparently off by +- 5%. However, the actual numbers gleaned from tests could be off by about this much as well. So, there is no perfect sim http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

na85
12-22-2009, 11:20 PM
PEBKAC error: Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair.

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