PDA

View Full Version : Shote Note to Oleg....PLEASE fix this



XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 12:42 AM
As a Yak/LA flyer and one who enjoys your IL-2/IL-2FB software very much, there's a gross bug that I'd like to bring to your attention which has to do with engine power. Specifically, when power is reduced, it doesn't happen for about 7-10 seconds.

This is a HUGE disadvantage in close-in engagements and one that simply should not be present. This situation seemed to be introduced in the last patch. It did not exist in either the original IL-2 game or the patches previous to IL-2 FB 1.11.

Furthermore, this issue almost always requires that the engine be shut down completely for landings.

Accuracy in an aircraft's flight characteristics is always important but this one is one that should be very easily rectifiable and requires no alteration in the respective aircraft's flight models.

Anyway, have a look and see what you think. Thanks. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 12:42 AM
As a Yak/LA flyer and one who enjoys your IL-2/IL-2FB software very much, there's a gross bug that I'd like to bring to your attention which has to do with engine power. Specifically, when power is reduced, it doesn't happen for about 7-10 seconds.

This is a HUGE disadvantage in close-in engagements and one that simply should not be present. This situation seemed to be introduced in the last patch. It did not exist in either the original IL-2 game or the patches previous to IL-2 FB 1.11.

Furthermore, this issue almost always requires that the engine be shut down completely for landings.

Accuracy in an aircraft's flight characteristics is always important but this one is one that should be very easily rectifiable and requires no alteration in the respective aircraft's flight models.

Anyway, have a look and see what you think. Thanks. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 12:58 AM
Lower your prop pitch on landing as VVS planes have a constant speed prop and that is why it behaves this way



"Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman. It was my view that no kill was worth the life of a wingman. . . . Pilots in my unit who lost wingmen on this basis were prohibited from leading a [section]. They were made to fly as wingman, instead."
Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann "Karaya One"

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 01:08 AM
Reducing power is not enough for speed down if you are in acceleration attitude like descend or dive.

You must reduce prop pitch together to actually power it down. Then throttle down and rpm down? No. rpm down first and throttle down second. It's that important.

If it's not, german had no reason to develop auto prop pitch/RPM governor.

<br/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif ================================

<font size = 1/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif 815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 06:34 AM
. well i guess that about sums it up then ......

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 06:43 AM
That's correct. Cutting the throttle won't slow you down terribly quickly, because of the constant speed props which, clearly try to keep speed constant. However, lowering just prop pitch won't do much of anything at first, as for a good amount of time, the props will compensate by going faster.

In a dogfight situation however, lowering prop pitch will bring about more of an affect than lowering engine power.




Also: wrong forum, take it to ORR

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:46 AM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:
- That's correct. Cutting the throttle won't slow you
- down terribly quickly, because of the constant speed
- props which, clearly try to keep speed constant.

That's not correct at all. We're talking about power here, not RPM. I care what the power is and this is controlled by the throttle. When I advance the throttle I want power, not RPM.

There are NO aircraft (propellor-driven) that maintain power when the throttle is pulled back...none....ever. It's a modeling bug, pure and simple. Here's an easy test. Let the aircraft idle and then change the prop pitch...nothing happens. At idle there's no power being generated. Move the throttle up and it's a different story.

- However, lowering just prop pitch won't do much of
- anything at first, as for a good amount of time, the
- props will compensate by going faster.
-
- In a dogfight situation however, lowering prop pitch
- will bring about more of an affect than lowering
- engine power.

Throttle response and prop pitch are almost separate issues. It's about power.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:52 AM
Granted that i was off as far as engine idling goes, lowering pitch is going to make a more effective difference in a fight than lowering throttle... as it is modeled in FB. As far as the glitch goes, I think the issue has been debated many times with respect to the P-47, mainly.

eskimo-FHmod
10-27-2003, 07:54 AM
-When I advance the throttle I want power, not RPM.


well what do you think happens when you increase throttle ? the engine will produce more RPM. i dont see what is wrong with that. that is what engines do.


www.vaaf.com (http://www.strikemepink.com)

Message Edited on 10/27/0306:56AM by eskimo-FHmod

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 08:11 AM
eskimo-FHmod wrote:
--When I advance the throttle I want power, not RPM.
-
-
- well what do you think happens when you increase
- throttle ? the engine will produce more RPM. i dont
- see what is wrong with that. that is what engines
- do.

I think you have a little misunderstanding of what I'm asking. With a CONSTANT-SPEED prop you can add and subtract throttle movement in normal power circumstances and RPM will NOT increase or decrease. It stays the same but POWER will change quite a bit.

This is why when power is wanted to be lessened in aircraft with constant-speed props, the throttle comes back FIRST and the prop rpm is adjusted AFTER that. If you did it in reverse, you could overboost your engine...and wreck it. Conversely, if you wanted to INCREASE power, you would adjust the prop RPM first and then increase the throttle. This is done for exactly the same reason...to avoid overboosting the engine which would ruin it.

The situation that you're describing above with your question refers to aircraft with engines having FIXED pitch props (ie. they aren't adjustable). Regardless and in both cases, when you pull the throttle back, power is withdrawn...and it happens immediately.

The issue that I was trying to raise was that power is maintained for several seconds even though the throttle was pulled back. It's simply a modeling bug but one that has a large effect on close-in engagements.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 08:21 AM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:
- Granted that i was off as far as engine idling goes,
- lowering pitch is going to make a more effective
- difference in a fight than lowering throttle... as
- it is modeled in FB.

Which is exactly what my post said. The Yak/LA aircraft's throttle response is modeled incorrectly.

- As far as the glitch goes, I think the issue has
- been debated many times with respect to the P-47, mainly.

This particular issue isn't one that needs debating. It's a simple programming fix to make it right and I was asking that Oleg take a look when time permitted.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:13 AM
I think that you'll find that the forthcoming patch and perhaps the paid-for addon in January will be the last of the support for Forgotten Battles from 1C. They've got to devote resources to their new project.

/m



<font face="verdana, arial, helvetica" size="2" >__________________

It's enough to make you want to hide in the wardrobe of darkness.
http://www.raf-cott.demon.co.uk/images/GR7%20top%20Dinas%20Mawddwy.jpg


<font size="1">Pentium 4 3Ghz 800Mhz FSB Hyperthreading | Abit IC7 Max 3 | 256Mb Radeon 9800 Pro |
2 x WD Raptor 10,000rpm S-ATA's (RAID 0) | 1Gb OCZ PC4000 Dual Channel Gold Series DDR |
Coolermaster 'Black Widow' | Zalman 7000-CPU Cooler | Track-IR | 3.5Ghz overclock | 950Mhz FSB |
Sound Blaster Audigy Platinum EX | Microsoft FF2 Joystick | 3DMark2003:6234 | 3DMark2001SE:20368 | AquamarkScore: 48275</font></font></p></p>


</p>

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 12:33 PM
I think its the worst change in the game and the removal of many mix controls and has brought the new exploit of the prop stop bat turn.

<center>http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.txt
Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 04:05 PM
I may be wrong, but it seems like speed-down is modelled in reverse.

If you are at 100% pitch and cut throttle, the prop should act like a big fat brick wall to the on-coming air.



<font face="Courier New">

_____ | _____
_\__(o)__/_
./ \.

</font>

Cpt.LoneRanger
10-27-2003, 05:43 PM
BaldieJr wrote:
- I may be wrong, but it seems like speed-down is
- modelled in reverse.
-
- If you are at 100% pitch and cut throttle, the prop
- should act like a big fat brick wall to the
- on-coming air.


Think so, too.

I'm not an engineer, but as I understand it, on 100% it means, that the prop is as flat as possible, thus maximizing rpm. With 0% it should be like driving in 5th gear.

Dunno which way it is modelled, but to my understanding the prop should have a bigger resistance at 100 under those circumstances, though the rpm should be reduced at 0%.
But since rpm doesn't equal speed, so it feels wrong IMHO.

greets
Cpt.LoneRanger


http://www.cptloneranger.privat.t-online.de/SIG2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 05:54 PM
I have noticed flying the He111 and bf109E (neither of which I fly much) that when the engine(s) gets hit I lose all throttle and pitch control and the only way to land is to shut the engine off. Last time it was in a 109E and moving the throttle had no effect, and I was unable to take the prop pitch off of auto.

I remember in 1.0 manifold pressure was tied to RPM rather than throttle, now that seems to be corrected (at least in the planes I fly), but now some planes have power output tied to RPM rather than to throttle.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 06:01 PM
Pipper wrote

"Accuracy in an aircraft's flight characteristics is always important but this one is one that should be very easily rectifiable and requires no alteration in the respective aircraft's flight models."

Yes, I can see why you would want this changed without any alteration to the plane's flight model.

The 3 cannon La7 performs so unrealitically that its advantages far outweigh any deficiencies that this minor issue might create. You can't serioulsly call this a HUGE bug while ignoring the La7's sustained turnrate of 16 seconds and average boosted climbrate of 24m/s+ to 5500m.



Message Edited on 10/27/0312:24PM by Chadburn

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 06:40 PM
Chadburn wrote:

- Yes, I can see why you would want this changed
- without any alteration to the plane's flight model.
-
-
-
- The 3 cannon La7 performs so unrealitically that its
- advantages far outweigh any deficiencies that this
- minor issue might create. You can't serioulsly call
- this a HUGE bug while ignoring the La7's sustained
- turnrate of 16 seconds and average boosted climbrate
- of 24m/s+ to 5500m.
-
-
-

I think your point is moot chad. I know for a fact that Pipper usually flies the Yak 3 (yes even after the last patch /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) It doesn't sound like he's asking for anything that shouldn't be there already. Not asking for better climb, more speed, faster dive, extra ammo or anything else that would bring the Yak 3 back to prominence. Merely having the POWER output relative to throttle setting.


http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:05 PM
What!!?? Someone is complaining about the FM of Yaks and Las !!??

Yaks and La ( especially La7s ) can do anything better than any other plane. The can out climb 109s, out dive p-47, out accelerate 190, even tough they're made of wood they take more damage.

When I'm flying a lesser plane like a 190 and come across another lesser plane, like a P-47, there is some tactic or advantage that I can use over the other plane. If I came across a La7 or Yak3, I know no matter what I'm flying ( short of a 262 ) there is nothing my plane can do better than these Uberplanes.

Personally I flew Yaks and Las for a while ( and still do occasianally ) but they were so good that it started to get boring. And people still complain!!!???

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:15 PM
MZ6..

You're missing out. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-very-happy.gif


<br/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif ================================

<font size = 1/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif 815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:54 PM
MZ6 wrote:
- What!!?? Someone is complaining about the FM of Yaks
- and Las !!??
-
- Yaks and La ( especially La7s ) can do anything
- better than any other plane. The can out climb 109s,
- out dive p-47, out accelerate 190, even tough
- they're made of wood they take more damage.

- When I'm flying a lesser plane like a 190 and come
- across another lesser plane, like a P-47, there is
- some tactic or advantage that I can use over the
- other plane. If I came across a La7 or Yak3, I know
- no matter what I'm flying ( short of a 262 ) there
- is nothing my plane can do better than these
- Uberplanes.
-
- Personally I flew Yaks and Las for a while ( and
- still do occasianally ) but they were so good that
- it started to get boring. And people still
- complain!!!???

Respectfully, no one is complaining about the FLIGHT models whatsoever. As Thunderbolt56 clearly states above, all I'm asking for is that the ENGINE THROTTLE response be modeled correctly. When the throttle is pulled, the response should be immediate...not 7-10 seconds later. That's ALL I'm asking Oleg and his team look at. I can't make it any clearer than that.


GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 07:57 PM
Thunderbolt56 wrote:
-
- Chadburn wrote:
-
-- Yes, I can see why you would want this changed
-- without any alteration to the plane's flight model.
--
--
--
-- The 3 cannon La7 performs so unrealitically that its
-- advantages far outweigh any deficiencies that this
-- minor issue might create. You can't serioulsly call
-- this a HUGE bug while ignoring the La7's sustained
-- turnrate of 16 seconds and average boosted climbrate
-- of 24m/s+ to 5500m.
--
--
--
-
- I think your point is moot chad. I know for a fact
- that Pipper usually flies the Yak 3 (yes even after
- the last patch /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) It doesn't sound like he's
- asking for anything that shouldn't be there already.
- Not asking for better climb, more speed, faster
- dive, extra ammo or anything else that would bring
- the Yak 3 back to prominence. Merely having the
- POWER output relative to throttle setting.

Yes T-bolt, this is EXACTLY what I was asking.

GR142-Pipper

Cpt.LoneRanger
10-27-2003, 10:20 PM
What I'd really like to see (but probably ever won't), is reliability modelled in a sim. Refering to the La's, the weak tail of the a/c and the untreated wooden structure caused a whole squadron to be grounded, that was sent to a more humid area.

But that is also a fact with the P39, since the M4 Canon was jamming a lot....

But let's don't turn this into a whiner's-thread /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

greets
Cpt.LoneRanger


http://www.cptloneranger.privat.t-online.de/SIG2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:31 PM
BaldieJr wrote:
- I may be wrong, but it seems like speed-down is
- modelled in reverse.
-
- If you are at 100% pitch and cut throttle, the prop
- should act like a big fat brick wall to the
- on-coming air.

Were the pitch completely perpendicular to the direction of travel that might be the case. But even in fine pitch there is some pitch. And the angle of that pitch is such that it is taking smaller (easier to chew /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif ) bites out of the air. If left to spin say in a dive it will just keep spinning faster and faster making up in rotational speed what it gains in forward motion. This is why in RL and in game the prop over-revs the engine (even if the power is not up on the engine). I suppose it ultimately reaches some rotational terminal velocity but by the time it gets to that your plane is plummeting at wing-ripping-off speed anyway. That's when you really start to go fast! It's just so unfortunate that that pesky ground gets in the way.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:42 PM
Respectfully, the point I made is not moot because the 1.11 patch changed the CEM on many planes, not just the Yak3 and La7. Yet these two planes still enjoy a generous flight envolpe post 1.11.

Pre 1.11, in 109 planes,for example, it was possible to throttle down and use the screw as an air brake when in manual, but that has been removed. Throttling down now will and employing the airscrew as a brake will simply result in the engine over-reving and a burn-out in a matter of seconds. You must now throttle down AND decrease prop pitch.

Throttling down in the 190 does not produce dramatic drops in speed either, even in manual, although the engine won't over-rev and seize. In this regard it is similar to the Yak3.

I agree that if some aspect of a plane's performance is broken it should be fixed, but I certainly disagree that this is a huge bug that hobbles these planes' performances especially when compared to others in the game.

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

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:46 PM
GR142-Pipper wrote:
- Respectfully, no one is complaining about the FLIGHT
- models whatsoever.

WHATEVER! Its still part of the FM and it would still make a plane that outperforms anything outperform anything even more.

My point is that Las and Yaks are too good as they are, besides the throttle response is no better in other planes.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 10:56 PM
LilHorse wrote:
-
- BaldieJr wrote:
-- I may be wrong, but it seems like speed-down is
-- modelled in reverse.
--
-- If you are at 100% pitch and cut throttle, the prop
-- should act like a big fat brick wall to the
-- on-coming air.
-
- Were the pitch completely perpendicular to the
- direction of travel that might be the case. But
- even in fine pitch there is some pitch. And the
- angle of that pitch is such that it is taking
- smaller (easier to chew /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif ) bites out of the air.
- If left to spin say in a dive it will just keep
- spinning faster and faster making up in rotational
- speed what it gains in forward motion. This is why
- in RL and in game the prop over-revs the engine
- (even if the power is not up on the engine). I
- suppose it ultimately reaches some rotational
- terminal velocity but by the time it gets to that
- your plane is plummeting at wing-ripping-off speed
- anyway. That's when you really start to go fast!
- It's just so unfortunate that that pesky ground gets
- in the way.
-
-
-

Think in terms of a feathered prop and you'll understand where i'm coming from.

If the engine is cut back to idle, and prop pitch is at 100%, you should have maximum resistance to airflow, therefore slowing down the plane. 0% prop pitch should be minimal resistance to airflow (similar to feathering the prop) and would allow the ship to maintain speed for a lot longer.

I'm not pilot, but this just makes sense to me.


<font face="Courier New">

_____ | _____
_\__(o)__/_
./ \.

</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:11 PM
BaldieJr wrote:

- Think in terms of a feathered prop and you'll
- understand where i'm coming from.
-
- If the engine is cut back to idle, and prop pitch is
- at 100%, you should have maximum resistance to
- airflow, therefore slowing down the plane. 0% prop
- pitch should be minimal resistance to airflow
- (similar to feathering the prop) and would allow the
- ship to maintain speed for a lot longer.
-
- I'm not pilot, but this just makes sense to me.


But what I said in my post above is that it won't present maximum resistance to airflow because it is still slicing into the air in such a way as to be "getting out of the way" of the flow of air. If I recall correctly, the worst situation for a bomber to be in if it were unable to feather a dead engine would be for that prop to be in some pitch between fine and feathered because the resistance would cause terrible yawing and turbulence. If you couldn't feather all the way then the next best thing was for it to be in full fine because it presented less resistance to the oncoming air since it would just windmill along.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:17 PM
MZ6 wrote:
-
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-- Respectfully, no one is complaining about the FLIGHT
-- models whatsoever.
-
- WHATEVER!

Respectfully, not whatever.

_ Its still part of the FM and it would
- still make a plane that outperforms anything
- outperform anything even more.

While this may be the case regarding the LA-7, it's certainly not the case regarding the Yaks. Furthermore, if the aircraft actually WAS better, then it should be modeled to perform better, no? Otherwise, just have one aircraft type and let everyone fly just that one.

- My point is that Las and Yaks are too good as they
- are, besides the throttle response is no better in
- other planes.

Honestly, that's just not true. Do the throttle test for yourself (for example, pull power in a BF-109G-2 and then do it in a Yak an LA). In a close-in engagement, the power response issue can make all the difference in the world. As presently modeled in FB 1.11, the BF-109G2 is competitive with a Yak-3 in a low altitude close-in fight. In the real world, the Yak would eat it for lunch. Why? Because it was built specifically built to fight in this arena.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:20 PM
MZ6 wrote:

- Yaks and La ( especially La7s ) can do anything
- better than any other plane. The can out climb 109s,
- out dive p-47, out accelerate 190, even tough
- they're made of wood they take more damage.
-
- When I'm flying a lesser plane like a 190 and come
- across another lesser plane, like a P-47, there is
- some tactic or advantage that I can use over the
- other plane. If I came across a La7 or Yak3, I know
- no matter what I'm flying ( short of a 262 ) there
- is nothing my plane can do better than these
- Uberplanes.


With all due respect... You couldn't be more wrong. If you find an LA as a threat to you in a P-47 (for example), you are 99.9% likely to not be flying it right.

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:21 PM
BaldieJr wrote:
-
- If the engine is cut back to idle, and prop pitch is
- at 100%, you should have maximum resistance to
- airflow, therefore slowing down the plane. 0% prop
- pitch should be minimal resistance to airflow
- (similar to feathering the prop) and would allow the
- ship to maintain speed for a lot longer.
-
- I'm not pilot, but this just makes sense to me.

...and you happen to be right.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:34 PM
MZ6 wrote:
-
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-- Respectfully, no one is complaining about the FLIGHT
-- models whatsoever.
-
- WHATEVER! Its still part of the FM and it would
- still make a plane that outperforms anything
- outperform anything even more.
-
- My point is that Las and Yaks are too good as they
- are, besides the throttle response is no better in
- other planes.


You are aware that the Yak3 was arguably the most effective and deadly turnfighter in europe, during the ENTIRITY of WWII... right?

These planes are good at what they do... just as they were in reality. Yaks have been porked a lot in the first place. If you want to kill pilots in these planes, either secure your E advantage, or dogfight with one of them (the LA's or the Yaks that is).

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:35 PM
the thing with constant speed props is that you didnt get immediate slow-down instantly

the guy who thought Yaks & LAs werebetter at everything was sooo terribly wrong its not funny

all planes in FB now have less slowdown effect when lowering the throttle

i have FB v1.0 & FB v1.11 on the same computer , i know

LAs are even at a bigger disadvantage than the Yak 3 is

try another plane ( like a Bf 109 ) & youll see

even better .... see the prop torque effect on take-off in the ME 262 lmao

XyZspineZyX
10-27-2003, 11:40 PM
GR142-Pipper wrote:
-
- BaldieJr wrote:
--
-- If the engine is cut back to idle, and prop pitch is
-- at 100%, you should have maximum resistance to
-- airflow, therefore slowing down the plane. 0% prop
-- pitch should be minimal resistance to airflow
-- (similar to feathering the prop) and would allow the
-- ship to maintain speed for a lot longer.
--
-- I'm not pilot, but this just makes sense to me.
-
- ...and you happen to be right.
-
- GR142-Pipper
-
-

nope, he is all wrong... You mistake the prop pitch with the constant speed prop setting... What you are calling prop pitch of 100% when you fly your yak is in fact a max prop speed setting. If you want to have it the way you describe, you'll have to disable the constant speed prop.

<center><img src=http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg></center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 12:09 AM
Hoarmurath wrote:
-
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
--
-- BaldieJr wrote:
---
--- If the engine is cut back to idle, and prop pitch is
--- at 100%, you should have maximum resistance to
--- airflow, therefore slowing down the plane. 0% prop
--- pitch should be minimal resistance to airflow
--- (similar to feathering the prop) and would allow the
--- ship to maintain speed for a lot longer.
---
--- I'm not pilot, but this just makes sense to me.
--
-- ...and you happen to be right.
--
-- GR142-Pipper
--
--
-
- nope, he is all wrong... You mistake the prop pitch
- with the constant speed prop setting... What you are
- calling prop pitch of 100% when you fly your yak is
- in fact a max prop speed setting. If you want to
- have it the way you describe, you'll have to disable
- the constant speed prop.

He's not wrong. If you're at 100% prop pitch (which corresponds to a particular RPM), then it's true that you would have maximum resistance (i.e. the prop would be the furthest away from being feathered). We're simply acknolowging the fact that *100%* corresponds to an engine RPM, each being different for the type of engine being used. This was inferred but not said.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 12:57 AM
GR142-Pipper wrote:

- While this may be the case regarding the LA-7, it's
- certainly not the case regarding the Yaks.

I have no problem with the Yaks

- Furthermore, if the aircraft actually WAS better,
- then it should be modeled to perform better, no?

Sure, but should the preform better than in real life? Like the well know example of a Yak3 and, lets say, a P-47 flying full throttle at each other. After they pass, the P-47 continues straight at full throttle, the Yak turns around and closes in on the P-47 in seconds.

- Honestly, that's just not true. Do the throttle test
- for yourself (for example, pull power in a BF-109G-2
- and then do it in a Yak an LA).

The 109G2 is littered with drag inducing lumps and bumbs, so it seems appropriate. So what your asking for is in one situation is that Las and Yaks should be very aerodynamically clean, but not in other situations?? La7s already seem to be able to change their mass depending on the situation!

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 01:58 AM
you seem to have problems understanding the way a constant speed prop is working.

The problem is that the term "prop pitch" is not appropriate in this case...

When you are at 100% setting, you're not at 100% pitch... You are not setting your pitch, what you are setting is your prop speed.

i suggest you to document yourself with actual constant speed props functionning, and then you'll see why the comportment you see in planes such equipped is normal.

To try to get it clear : you don't adjust your prop pitch in a constant speed propeller, what you adjust is you propeller speed. You have no control about your prop pitch, you can only set the speed, that's all...

So, in order to slow down, you have to lower your speed setting (that you currently call prop pitch) at the same time you lower your engine throttle.

this is why Oleg said it is normal... because it is, really.

<center><img src=http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg></center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:37 AM
I think he knows the difference that a constant speed prop makes, the point he is trying to make is that with certain planes the engine is not losing power when you back off the throttle. If your CSP is set for maximum RPM and you close the throttle the engine will lose power, the prop pitch will automatically adjust to try to maintain RPM, but it will not generate thrust. true it may not make much drag, but the impression I think he has (and that I have had on occasion) is that the engine is still generating full power and the prop is still generating thrust (i.e. the CSP did not need to change its pitch to maintain RPM because the engine is still making power).

Pipper made a post in ORR, and Oleg responded that there was no bug, but gave no explanation.

After thinking about it it occured to me that perhaps some planes have a low throttle stop linked to the prop RPM governor control to prevent the throttle from closing when the governor is set for high RPM, to prevent a high RPM/closed throttle condition (not sure why, perhaps spark plug fouling) similar to a car's carburetor's choke which is linked to a throttle stop cam to prevent the throttle from closing to the curb idle stop when the choke is closed.

Or maybe we are just delusional in thinking that the engine is still making power and the prop generating thrust when throttle is set down w/o changing prop governor setting.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:40 AM
Simplifying.

You DON'T control propeller pitch in VVS/USAF fighters.

It's Constant Speed Prop and pilot don't care about prop blade angle.

You set desired rpm and MACHINE DO CONTROL (by SPRING or something like that) proper blade angle for that RPM setting.

Again, pilot just set RPM by rpm lever and MACHINE automatically tries to keep up to that rpm (by adjusting blade angle)

It's RPM governor, NOT PITCH OR ANGLE CONTROLLER!

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

Read from 'Constant Speed Props' section if you need.

<br/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif ================================

<font size = 1/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif 815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:45 AM
GR142-Pipper wrote:
- This particular issue isn't one that needs debating.
- It's a simple programming fix to make it right and I
- was asking that Oleg take a look when time
- permitted.
-
- GR142-Pipper

If it's a bug that has a detrimental affect on VVS ... he WILL be on it ASAP. If for OKL ... nice try /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

<center>http://www.medals.org.uk/united-kingdom/images/uk654.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:17 AM
100% RPM still slows the plane more when the engine is at low throttle.

Now here's is the deal.

At a high RPM setting, the propeller is spinning faster than at a low RPM setting. I know I am restating the obvious. I'll get to the less obvious parts in a little bit.

Now, when an engine is running at maximum power, it is also spinning its crankshaft very quickly. This, in turn, drives the prop very quickly.

Now turn it around. The engine is currently unpowered, and the prop is spinning.

If the prop is spinning quickly, then the engine crankshaft is also spinning quickly.

If the prop is spinning slowly, then the engine crankshaft is spinning slowly.

Spinning a crankshaft quickly requires energy. Where is this engery coming from? Well, when the engine is off, it is coming from the propeller, and the ammount of energy that the propeller is putting into the engine is directly proportional to how fast the propeller is spinning*.

This energy has to come from somewhere, and in this case, it comes from induced drag on the propeller. So, when the engine is at low power, and the propeller is spinning quickly, the propeller is actually sapping more power, than if the propeller was spinning slowly.

So, Full Fine pitch is actually drag expensive. However, it allows the engine to take smaller chunks out of the air, which prevents the engine from overworking itself at certain airspeeds. And actually, at very high speeds, a constant speed prop will go into full coarse pitch, to keep the engine from over revving.

When a propeller is feathered, it is turned fully parallel to the direction of travel, so the prop stops rotating entirely. Interestingly enough, props on multi engined aircrat are supposed to feather if their pitch governor goes out, while props on single engined aircraft are supposed to go to full fine. The idea is if the engine cuts out on the twin, the asymetric thrust from a runaway prop would be more dangerous than simply having an engine feather, while on a singe engine aircraft, if something goes wrong with the prop, you had better still be able to get something useful out of it.

Harry Voyager

(*Remember, on aircraft, the propeller spins at a fixed ratio to the rate at which the engine spins. Changin gthe RPM is intended to put the engine into a better RMP range, for a given hoursepower.)

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:34 AM
MZ6 wrote:
- Sure, but should the preform better than in real
- life? Like the well know example of a Yak3 and, lets
- say, a P-47 flying full throttle at each other.
- After they pass, the P-47 continues straight at full
- throttle, the Yak turns around and closes in on the
- P-47 in seconds.

Your opinion on the matter is officially void, as you have no idea what you are talking about.

- the Yak turns around and closes in on the
- P-47 in seconds.

Yeah... that's definitely wrong.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:41 AM
I'm so confused!!!!

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:39 AM
MZ6 wrote:
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-
-
-- While this may be the case regarding the LA-7, it's
-- certainly not the case regarding the Yaks.
-
- I have no problem with the Yaks
-
-- Furthermore, if the aircraft actually WAS better,
-- then it should be modeled to perform better, no?
-
- Sure, but should the preform better than in real life?

No, but not less than either.

- Like the well know example of a Yak3 and, lets
- say, a P-47 flying full throttle at each other.
- After they pass, the P-47 continues straight at full
- throttle, the Yak turns around and closes in on the
- P-47 in seconds.

Baloney. I've flown against enough P-47 pilots to know that this is patently false. As a Yak driver, I wish it were true but it isn't.

-- Honestly, that's just not true. Do the throttle test
-- for yourself (for example, pull power in a BF-109G-2
-- and then do it in a Yak an LA).
-
- The 109G2 is littered with drag inducing lumps and
- bumbs, so it seems appropriate.

Which has NOTHING to do with the subject being discussed.

_ So what your asking
- for is in one situation is that Las and Yaks should
- be very aerodynamically clean, but not in other
- situations?? La7s already seem to be able to change
- their mass depending on the situation!

No, that's not what I'm asking (GEEZ). Respectfully, you're reading WAY too much into my post the what you're seeing just isn't there. ALL I'm asking is that the engine model be done so correctly. That's IT. Pull the throttle back...engine slows down *immediately*...not in 7-10 seconds. Is it getting clearer now? If it isn't adter all this then I simply give up. You just don't quite get what being discussed. So be it.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:49 AM
h009291 wrote:
-
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-- This particular issue isn't one that needs debating.
-- It's a simple programming fix to make it right and I
-- was asking that Oleg take a look when time
-- permitted.
--
-- GR142-Pipper
-
- If it's a bug that has a detrimental affect on VVS
- ... he WILL be on it ASAP. If for OKL ... nice try

The issue I'm raising is a generic one that applies to all aircraft. If others experience it in the aircraft that they're familiar with, then it should be brought forward too. I used the Yak/LA example because these are the ones that I'm familiar with. Sure enough, the thread gets twisted into a Axis vs. Allied spat when this matter has nothing to do with that. All anyone has to do is simply read what I was asking in my original post. It's clear as day as the words speak for themselves.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:03 AM
Hoarmurath wrote:
- you seem to have problems understanding the way a
- constant speed prop is working.

Not at all. I know how they work quite well.

- The problem is that the term "prop pitch" is not
- appropriate in this case...
-
- When you are at 100% setting, you're not at 100%
- pitch... You are not setting your pitch, what you
- are setting is your prop speed.

Yes, I do understand that. But (yet again) this is a POWER issue and NOT an RPM issue. When power is withdrawn, it should occur immediately. It doesn't matter if it's a fixed pitch, manual variable-pitch or constant-speed propellor. Again, it's a POWER issue and not a propellor issue.

- i suggest you to document yourself with actual
- constant speed props functionning, and then you'll
- see why the comportment you see in planes such
- equipped is normal.

I know how it works and it's not normal to have a delay in power reduction when the throttle is withdrawn.

- To try to get it clear : you don't adjust your prop
- pitch in a constant speed propeller, what you adjust
- is you propeller speed. You have no control about
- your prop pitch, you can only set the speed, that's
- all...

Yes, I do understand that. This isn't the issue being discussed. We're talking about POWER.

- So, in order to slow down, you have to lower your
- speed setting (that you currently call prop pitch)
- at the same time you lower your engine throttle.

No, you don't. You can simply pull the throttle back and you'll slow down. Believe it. I've personally flown T-34, T-28 and other piston engined aircraft and if you pull the throttle, the power comes off and the aircraft slows...right now.

The purest example of this is with turboprop aircraft. The RPMs stay constant while the power is regulated by moving the throttle. The principle is the same here too.

- this is why Oleg said it is normal... because it is,
- really.

Respectfully, it's not. Perhaps we'll have to agree to disagree on this one but my experience is first-hand.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:05 AM
Fillmore wrote:
- I think he knows the difference that a constant
- speed prop makes, the point he is trying to make is
- that with certain planes the engine is not losing
- power when you back off the throttle.

YAY! Yes, this is very simple point that I was trying to make...no more, no less.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:00 AM
Oleg's experience is first hand as well, and IMO is much greater than yours (and mine for that matter)...

So if he said this wasn't a bug, it is that it was intended to work this way... And i'll keep thinking this is the right way the throttle should work on these warbirds...

<center><img src=http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg></center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:14 AM
Hoarmurath wrote:
- Oleg's experience is first hand as well, and IMO is
- much greater than yours (and mine for that
- matter)...
-
- So if he said this wasn't a bug, it is that it was
- intended to work this way... And i'll keep thinking
- this is the right way the throttle should work on
- these warbirds...

Fair enough. You're free to think whatever you like. I have no understanding what Oleg's actual real life flight experience is on this but mine directly contradicts the present "throttle" model with every piston-engined aircraft I've ever flown, civilian or military. So, we'll have to agree to disagree on this matter.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:18 AM
me-thinks this is all related to being able to slow in a turn quick

an advantageous thing in a turn fight

constant speed props should drop rpms slower than fixed speed props

ALL planes have a slower drop in RPM/Prop speed when you lift off the gas now in v1.11

the LA series are even WORSE effected for slowing in a turn than Yaks are

i think other planes need to be given advantages B4 the Yak / LA family are ...... they already have big advantages

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:31 AM
It also allows an aircraft to hold speed when the engine it chopped back for quick cooling.

Addendum: With the way I fly now, I hardly ever change my throttle in combat, so I hadn't really noticed it, however I have noticed an increased difficulty in bleeding off airspeed for landing when compaired to pre-patch.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

Message Edited on 10/28/0301:33AM by HarryVoyager

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:44 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- 100% RPM still slows the plane more when the engine
- is at low throttle.
-
- Now here's is the deal.
-
- At a high RPM setting, the propeller is spinning
- faster than at a low RPM setting. I know I am
- restating the obvious. I'll get to the less obvious
- parts in a little bit.
-
- Now, when an engine is running at maximum power, it
- is also spinning its crankshaft very quickly. This,
- in turn, drives the prop very quickly.
-
- Now turn it around. The engine is currently
- unpowered, and the prop is spinning.
-
- If the prop is spinning quickly, then the engine
- crankshaft is also spinning quickly.
-
- If the prop is spinning slowly, then the engine
- crankshaft is spinning slowly.
-
- Spinning a crankshaft quickly requires energy.
- Where is this engery coming from? Well, when the
- engine is off, it is coming from the propeller, and
- the ammount of energy that the propeller is putting
- into the engine is directly proportional to how fast
- the propeller is spinning*.
-
- This energy has to come from somewhere, and in this
- case, it comes from induced drag on the propeller.
- So, when the engine is at low power, and the
- propeller is spinning quickly, the propeller is
- actually sapping more power, than if the propeller
- was spinning slowly.
-
- So, Full Fine pitch is actually drag expensive.
- However, it allows the engine to take smaller chunks
- out of the air, which prevents the engine from
- overworking itself at certain airspeeds. And
- actually, at very high speeds, a constant speed prop
- will go into full coarse pitch, to keep the engine
- from over revving.
-
- When a propeller is feathered, it is turned fully
- parallel to the direction of travel, so the prop
- stops rotating entirely. Interestingly enough,
- props on multi engined aircrat are supposed to
- feather if their pitch governor goes out, while
- props on single engined aircraft are supposed to go
- to full fine. The idea is if the engine cuts out on
- the twin, the asymetric thrust from a runaway prop
- would be more dangerous than simply having an engine
- feather, while on a singe engine aircraft, if
- something goes wrong with the prop, you had better
- still be able to get something useful out of it.
-
- Harry Voyager
-
- (*Remember, on aircraft, the propeller spins at a
- fixed ratio to the rate at which the engine spins.
- Changin gthe RPM is intended to put the engine into
- a better RMP range, for a given hoursepower.)


You are 100% correct Harry now try and explain it to Oleg

Anouther way to understand how it works is to go for a drive in your car and try to slow down with the gearbox top gear (no brakes /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) then try to do the same by going down one cog to increase the revs ( allowing the engine to absorb the cars energy ) the later will slow you down much better.


No1RAAF_Pourshot
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~andycarroll68/CA-15%20Kangaroo.jpg

No1_RAAF

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:46 AM
RPM on a CSP is controlled automatically by the propeller governor which adjusts the aerodynamic force on the propeller (by changing pitch) to help maintain a constant propeller speed throughout a range of throttle settings.

For example:

Increasing throttle with CSP - If the propeller is currently spinning at 2800 RPM at a throtttle setting below maximum,, then you move the throttle to the firewall, the prop governer forces the prop pitch to increase (more coarse) in order to maintain 2800 RPM, because the aerodynamic forces are greater at a higher pitch and keep the prop from speeding up when the throttle position is increased..

Decreasing throttle with CSP - Conversely if you let off on the throttle, the prop governer will make the prop pitch decrease (more fine) to try to keep the prop from going below 2800 RPM, because aerodynamic forces are less with a lower pitch prop position and this allows the prop to spin at 2800 RPM with a lower throttle setting.


But these prop governer controls have limits due to the limited prop pitch range.

When you throw the throttle to idle and lets say you have the prop speed orginally set for 2800 RPM for example, the prop governer will attempt to go fully fine to keep the prop spinning at that speed, but if your not diving, you will almost immediately find that the prop governer cannot prevent the prop from spinning slower than 2800 RPM at which point the propeller slows down and presents a very high drag to the aircraft.

Bottom line on most CSP props that I have heard of , cutting the throttle at fine pitch slows you down fast and the RPM slows down a very short time later, if not immediately. The RPM slow down does not seem to be the case for at least some planes in IL2 FB which seems wrong

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:16 AM
WUAF_Badsight wrote:
- me-thinks this is all related to being able to slow
- in a turn quick
-
- an advantageous thing in a turn fight
-
- constant speed props should drop rpms slower than
- fixed speed props

...and power should come off immediately, but doesn't. Prop RPMs are unimportant here. This is all about engine power.

- ALL planes have a slower drop in RPM/Prop speed when
- you lift off the gas now in v1.11
-
- the LA series are even WORSE effected for slowing in
- a turn than Yaks are

Keep in mind that all I'm referring to are ENGINE throttling characteristics.

- i think other planes need to be given advantages B4
- the Yak / LA family are ...... they already have
- big advantages

Respectfully, no aircraft should be "given" anything. The Yaks/LAs have advantages over many of the aircraft because these advantages were present in the real aircraft and should be in the modeling as well.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:49 AM
Not to rain on anyone's parade here, but the horse has been beaten into the dirt here. As i now realise what you are stating is true Pipper, and that i'm personally affected by this error, as i'm a Jug pilot... I regret to say this, but when Oleg says something is "fine" or "you're wrong"... what matters is his opinion, and that alone.

Trying to get him to change issue with power in the LA / Yaks / American planes, will be about as effective as asking him to make the P-47 D-27's roll rate accurate.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 10:15 AM
GR142-Pipper wrote:
- As a Yak/LA flyer and one who enjoys your
- IL-2/IL-2FB software very much, there's a gross bug
- that I'd like to bring to your attention which has
- to do with engine power. Specifically, when power is
- reduced, it doesn't happen for about 7-10 seconds.

Pipper, I'm also a very big Yak fan. I think their only big defect is that they lack the artificial horizon, which is quite a pain in the *** when flying full-real.
However (please take no offense!), I'm sorry to say that, reading your post(s), it looks like we're using two different sims.
First of all, on "my" Yaks, when I cut throttle power (not RPMs) decreases immediately, as well as torque. As a consequence, speed starts to drop. It drops slightly, of course, since there are no brakes on those a/c! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . Regarding how "prop pitch" works, what it is, and how to handle it, read Toocool34 and Hoarmurat posts, which are both correct and very explainative.

- Furthermore, this issue almost always requires that
- the engine be shut down completely for landings.

Again, you must be flying another sim or another a/c.
With Yaks, I approach the stripe at around 200 km/h, flaps full open and 35-40% throttle (and about 50-60% pitch). Then I start to cut progressively the throttle to 10-20% to decrease speed to <150 km/h and I cut to 0% only when I'm about to touch-down.

Finally, for those thinking that Yaks and Las are overmodelled:
1) It is historically accurate that those a/c were very maneauvrable, expecially Yak-3 (read Normandie-Niemen story) and La-7. They were lighter and with a smaller wing load than their LW opponents.
2) Compared to 20 mm LW guns, those ShVAKs mounted on Yaks and Las seem to be less effective. Moreover, with Yaks you've about 11 sec of fire with the ShVAK, compared to the almost 20 sec of FW190A and D. Not to mention the MGs, where the situation is even worst, and the MK108, that has no equivalent in FB.
3) About a/c toughness, Yaks are not much tougher than a Bf109. Their only advantage is that they haven't those radiators under the wings. Regarding Las, they're much less tough than FW190s, which seem to be made of stone, expecially FW190As.

All this looks quite correct to me. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

A little O.T.
You know what? One of the toughest a/c is the MC202. It's unbelievable the damage that it can take before going down. Moreover, I've seen it several times making home with holes on both wings, one stabilizer gone and no rudder!!!



<center>http://www.uploadit.org/files/170903-G55_Firma.jpg </center>

fluke39
10-28-2003, 10:22 AM
Cippacometa wrote:
- GR142-Pipper wrote:

- A little O.T.
- You know what? One of the toughest a/c is the MC202.
- It's unbelievable the damage that it can take before
- going down. Moreover, I've seen it several times
- making home with holes on both wings, one stabilizer
- gone and no rudder!!!
-


yep - i remember putting some in a QMB, because of their light armament i thought they'd be easy meat - but i had a really really hard time downgin them (if i downed them at all!!) - i was in a hurri IIB but even so i had unlimited ammo on - and those suckers just soaked up my bullets to hardly any effect !!

<center><img src=http://mysite.freeserve.com/Angel_one_five/flukelogo.jpg>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 10:47 AM
fluke39 wrote:
- yep - i remember putting some in a QMB, because of
- their light armament i thought they'd be easy meat -
- but i had a really really hard time downgin them (if
- i downed them at all!!) - i was in a hurri IIB but
- even so i had unlimited ammo on - and those suckers
- just soaked up my bullets to hardly any effect !!
-

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Can't wait to fly those concrete birds!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif




<center>http://www.uploadit.org/files/170903-G55_Firma.jpg </center>

Tully__
10-28-2003, 11:16 AM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:
- MZ6 wrote:
-- Sure, but should the preform better than in real
-- life? Like the well know example of a Yak3 and, lets
-- say, a P-47 flying full throttle at each other.
-- After they pass, the P-47 continues straight at full
-- throttle, the Yak turns around and closes in on the
-- P-47 in seconds.
-
- Your opinion on the matter is officially void, as
- you have no idea what you are talking about.
-
-- the Yak turns around and closes in on the
-- P-47 in seconds.
-
- Yeah... that's definitely wrong.
-
-


Looks like a case of confusion between AI yak flight model and human flown yak flight model. They're quite different...

<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>

<center> <img src=http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/Corsair.jpg> </center>

<center> Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm) </center>
<center> Sig size limits (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzrgs)</center>
<center><font size="-2" color="#88aadd">IL2 Forums Moderator</font></center>


Salut
Tully

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:10 PM
Cippacometa wrote:

- Finally, for those thinking that Yaks and Las are
- overmodelled:
- 1) It is historically accurate that those a/c were
- very maneauvrable, expecially Yak-3 (read
- Normandie-Niemen story) and La-7. They were lighter
- and with a smaller wing load than their LW
- opponents.
- 2) Compared to 20 mm LW guns, those ShVAKs mounted
- on Yaks and Las seem to be less effective. Moreover,
- with Yaks you've about 11 sec of fire with the
- ShVAK, compared to the almost 20 sec of FW190A and
- D. Not to mention the MGs, where the situation is
- even worst, and the MK108, that has no equivalent in
- FB.
- 3) About a/c toughness, Yaks are not much tougher
- than a Bf109. Their only advantage is that they
- haven't those radiators under the wings. Regarding
- Las, they're much less tough than FW190s, which seem
- to be made of stone, expecially FW190As.
-
- All this looks quite correct to me

I always think it's interesting how we all fly the same sim but can draw such different conclusions depending on our perspectives.

I agree that the La7 and Yak3 were excellent aircraft in RL, but I disagree that the La7 is not over-modelled in FB. The 3 cannon model's turn and climb rates are over-modelled compared to its RL counterpart. Of course in FB, what matters is its performance relative to how other aircraft have been modelled.

I would also disagree that the LW 20mm is more effective than the SHvAKS. The SHvAKS have been modelled with a higher muzzle velocity and higher ROF (which is historically accurate) and are more effective from longer range that the LW 20mm. Of course, in the 190 there are four of them which concentrates a lot of firepower at convergence range. But the three 20mm in the La7 have a similar effect.

As for the toughness of the Yak vs the 109. The 109's control cables are extremely vulnerable to mg fire. It is not unusual to be hit from long ranges (over 400m, sometimes longer) by a short burst of mg and lose complete control of either aileron, rudder or elevator controls. From there, you're pretty much a sitting duck as the enemy closes for the kill. It's made spray n pray a rewarding activity when hunting the 109 ever since FB came out.

I do agree that the 190's are extremely tough, moreso than the La's. The odd thing about the FW's DM though, is that while it's tough to knock a wing off using 20mm fire, again small caliblre mg fire can really damage handling. A burst into a wing can make the plane virtually unflyable for combat purposes, although you can usually escape and land.




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


Message Edited on 10/28/0310:11AM by Chadburn

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:39 PM
Cippacometa wrote:
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-- As a Yak/LA flyer and one who enjoys your
-- IL-2/IL-2FB software very much, there's a gross bug
-- that I'd like to bring to your attention which has
-- to do with engine power. Specifically, when power is
-- reduced, it doesn't happen for about 7-10 seconds.
-
- Pipper, I'm also a very big Yak fan. I think their
- only big defect is that they lack the artificial
- horizon, which is quite a pain in the *** when
- flying full-real.
- However (please take no offense!), I'm sorry to say
- that, reading your post(s), it looks like we're
- using two different sims.
- First of all, on "my" Yaks, when I cut throttle
- power (not RPMs) decreases immediately, as well as
- torque. As a consequence, speed starts to drop. It
- drops slightly, of course, since there are no brakes
- on those a/c! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . Regarding how "prop pitch"
- works, what it is, and how to handle it, read
- Toocool34 and Hoarmurat posts, which are both
- correct and very explainative.
-
-- Furthermore, this issue almost always requires that
-- the engine be shut down completely for landings.
-
- Again, you must be flying another sim or another
- a/c.

Oh, that's it. I must be flying another sim or aircraft. Amazing.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:10 PM
To get back to the original topic-

I have a question: Is the following a correct statement?

In a constant SPEED propeller: (assume level flight) if you decrease power two things happen- 1- the engine slows down immediately (the engine noise should reduce immediately and so should thrust: the cylinders have less fuel/air mix on immediate reduction of thro) and 2- the propellor will become increasingly fine (take smaller bites- less resistance for same rpm with less power) but remain at the same rpm (and not add any thrust, causing instead a slight and increasing drag as the .

If it is- and I believe so- then what is wrong with Pipper's claim that the time delay in power applications (for the constant props) is incorrect?

If it isn't, I clearly haven't understood a thing /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:59 PM
Cold_Gambler,

You win teh prize!

That is exactly what he/we are saying. When you chop throttle at 100% pitch the craft should slow down damned fast. If you chop throttle while at 0% pitch, it should take forever to slow down (but the engine SOUND and RPM should decrease rapidly because of the load that 0% pitch puts on the engine).



<font face="Courier New">

_____ | _____
_\__(o)__/_
./ \.

</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:13 PM
BaldieJr wrote:
- Cold_Gambler,
-
- You win teh prize!
-
- That is exactly what he/we are saying. When you chop
- throttle at 100% pitch the craft should slow down
- damned fast. If you chop throttle while at 0% pitch,
- it should take forever to slow down (but the engine
- SOUND and RPM should decrease rapidly because of the
- load that 0% pitch puts on the engine).
-
-
-

Again, There's NO PITCH in VVS/US fighters.
If you reduce throttle in 100% RPM state, (again, not pitch!)
prop blade(THE PITCH) will be automatically changed by MACHINE to keep that RPM.

You think resistance increase dramatically but it doesn't.
Because MACHINE change the pitch (prop blade angle) from fine to coarse at its own.(NOT PILOT) Why? /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif To keep that RPM! /i/smilies/16x16_robot-very-happy.gif

Yes, Thrust will be weakened due to reduced throttle. But resistance will not increase much as you think especially in accelerating attitude.




<br/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif ================================

<font size = 1/i/smilies/16x16_robot-mad.gif 815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 12:48 AM
GR142-Pipper wrote:

- Oh, that's it. I must be flying another sim or
- aircraft. Amazing.


Hah.. indeed.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 12:49 AM
Tully__ wrote:
- Looks like a case of confusion between AI yak flight
- model and human flown yak flight model. They're
- quite different...

This must be the case, as the day that i see a human Yak fighter turn and catch my six after i pass him (likely at excess of 800kmph) will be the day i die.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 03:28 AM
TooCooL34 wrote:
- BaldieJr wrote:
-- Cold_Gambler,
--
-- You win teh prize!
--
-- That is exactly what he/we are saying. When you chop
-- throttle at 100% pitch the craft should slow down
-- damned fast. If you chop throttle while at 0% pitch,
-- it should take forever to slow down (but the engine
-- SOUND and RPM should decrease rapidly because of the
-- load that 0% pitch puts on the engine).
--
--
--
-
- Again, There's NO PITCH in VVS/US fighters.
- If you reduce throttle in 100% RPM state, (again,
- not pitch!)
- prop blade(THE PITCH) will be automatically changed
- by MACHINE to keep that RPM.
-
- You think resistance increase dramatically but it
- doesn't.
- Because MACHINE change the pitch (prop blade angle)
- from fine to coarse at its own.(NOT PILOT) Why? /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif To keep that RPM! /i/smilies/16x16_robot-very-happy.gif
-
- Yes, Thrust will be weakened due to reduced
- throttle. But resistance will not increase much as
- you think especially in accelerating attitude.

Again, the significant aspect of this is the POWER reduction (forget about RPM). When the throttle is pulled back the power reduction (and aircraft deceleration) should be felt immediately...but it's not. That's a bug if there ever was one. In addition, it's a bug that was introduced INTO the game with version 1.11. It's false and should not be there.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 05:02 AM
I fly the mig3u. And I notice no immediate drop in airspeed in straight and level flight when the throttle is chopped. It feels and acts somewhat like a glider regardless of prop pitch (as defined in the control setup) setting. I can rapidly change pitch at zero throttle and not get a notable impact on airspeed.

And more notably for me, what I initially thought was engine sound appears to be prop sound. If flying with 100% prop pitch and the throttle is chopped the sound will fluctuate. First decreasing and slowing then increasing and speeding up to the level maintained prior to throttle chopping as the propeller control tries to maintain the pitch as selected. Only when decreasing prop pitch does the sound reduce and and slow.

Additionally,I do not hear the engine whining when I have 0 pitch and full throttle. It is disorienting to say the least as I'm sure many of us use our ears as well as our eyes to get a feeling of what our engine is doing.

There is merit in what pipper is saying IMHO.

WV.



<center>
http://www.rcaf-squadron.org/willyvic/images/mig3u.jpg

WV

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 05:18 AM
Pipper's correct. The power reduction should be felt immediately upon throttle reduction, regardless of the prop setting. The prop governor will only hold the RPM's to a certain power setting, at which the RPM's will drop. At that point the prop is acting like a fixed pitch propellor because it is against the governor stops. There is no gradual slow down in the power (and the aircraft) as is felt in FB. It bugs me that the sim does this. (This is based on my experience flying constant speed props since 1972, including the one in my hangar.)

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:06 AM
Ok, based on my limited experience flying the planes in question (and the times in He111, bf109, and I think once with a Brewster, that I had a similar problem) I see a few possibilities.

- cutting throttle not affecting power output is the result of damage to the plane.

- cutting throttle not affecting power output is a bug that happens occasionally and is hard to reproduce.

I did some QMB testing with Yak3, LA5FN, LA7, and FW190A5. Get around 800m and set prop pitch 100 radiators closed, let speed get to 580 TAS, cut the throttle and see what your speed is after 15 seconds.

When I tested the planes they all slowed down immediately when the throttle was reduced. The Yak3 actually slowed down the quickest, from 580 to 480 in 15 seconds (FW190 went from 580 to 500), but all were fairly close and I didn't test with a very great deal of precision.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:18 AM
pe-2 engine durability

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 10:53 AM
WUAF_Mj_Hero wrote:

- Your opinion on the matter is officially void,

LOL, that's too funny. Wait Let me read that again "Your opinion on the matter is officially void", Ok Mr. Authority, you win, officially at least...

But seriously, I maybe pushed a few buttons, with hilarious results no less. However, I originally posted beacuse I found it so suprizing to find Yaks or Las being described as having a disadvantage in combat. I took an La7 out since I last posted and I couldn't find any meaningful disadvantage. Even enaging other planes "on their terms" didn't reveal many disavantages, regardless of what the 'facts' may be.

Message Edited on 10/29/0310:35AM by MZ6

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 11:11 AM
Fillmore wrote:
- Ok, based on my limited experience flying the planes
- in question (and the times in He111, bf109, and I
- think once with a Brewster, that I had a similar
- problem) I see a few possibilities.
-
-- cutting throttle not affecting power output is the result of damage to the plane.
-
-- cutting throttle not affecting power output is a bug that happens occasionally and is hard to reproduce.
-
- I did some QMB testing with Yak3, LA5FN, LA7, and
- FW190A5. Get around 800m and set prop pitch 100
- radiators closed, let speed get to 580 TAS, cut the
- throttle and see what your speed is after 15
- seconds.
-
- When I tested the planes they all slowed down
- immediately when the throttle was reduced. The Yak3
- actually slowed down the quickest, from 580 to 480
- in 15 seconds (FW190 went from 580 to 500), but all
- were fairly close and I didn't test with a very
- great deal of precision.

Here is a more meaningful set of test situations to consider. Start the tests in situations 1, 2, and 4 with the aircraft being roughly equal in airspeed/energy:

1. Get into a horizontal scissors with a 109G-2. See what happens when your opponent cuts power and you can't.

2. Get into a rolling scissors with a 109G-2 and watch him cut power over the top while you can't.

3. Zoom climb up behind an aircraft that is also climbing in front of you and then pull power to remain behind it. Watch your plane continue past the opponent and you find yourself defensive.

4. Try one maintain a 5 or 7 o'clock position behind a 109G-2 in a spiraling dive when he cuts power and you can't.

5. Simply fly a normal landing pattern approach with and without cutting your engine. Notice the big difference in approach lengths and distances.

You'll find that in situations 1, 2, and 4 that you either can't or will have extreme difficulty maintaining a positional advantage. In situation 3, you'll either have to accept the overshoot or pull off the target aircraft. In situation 5 you'll find that the approach distances are much longer than normal and that the rollout can take you right off the end of the runway.

Anyway, give it a shot and let me know how you do.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 12:52 PM
I think pipper is right about his point, when I fly the CSU prop a/c in real life and cutting the throttle in say downwind leg to reduce speed to reach VFE, the speed is immediately reduced.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"Flying is not dangerous, crashing is"http://www.airmodel.com/airmodel/Images/stuka_fly_md_clr.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:07 PM
Ok, so now I did a test comparing Yak3 to 109G2. I used level stabilizer and got to 520kph TAS then cut throttle to zero and took speed readings at 10 second intervals.

109G2

520 460 410 380 350 330 315

Yak3

520 460 410 370 335 310 290

Due the the 109G2 not being the most aerodynamically clean plane I was sort of expecting it to decelerate quicker that Yak3, but it doesn't.

your points 1,2, and 4 seem purely subjective. If you are going faster then of course you will overshoot. If you both cut power and you are going faster you will overshoot. There are factors which affect speed other than throttle settings.

Perhaps the 109 pilots you are fighting are using flaps and/or opening radiator (I always open radiator on 190 when on landing approach, and if I am going to attempt to spit someone out I open the radiator before anything else).

You seem to think that the 109G2 has a greater ability to decelerate by cutting power VS the Yak3, but my tests indicate the opposite is true. I know yanking the stick in a 109 will lose more speed than doing so in a Yak3, perhaps what you are asking for is greater E bleed for the Yak when pulling Gs?

Point 3 happens to me all the time, it is what happens when you are faster than the guy in front of you. You may not decelerate as much as you want, but all my testing shows that the planes decelerate.

For point 5 I did another test. As before, but shut off engine rather than throttle to zero.

109G2

520 315 270 250

Yak3

520 340 285 260

I stopped after 30 seconds because by then the plane was decending. Here we have what I expected, the smooth lines of the Yak3 make it decelerate less quickly that 109G2.

The difference between turning engine off and setting throttle to zero is huge. I think the real question may be what does 0% throttle represent, and is it an accurate representation of the planes. Perhaps WWII warplanes had fairly high idle settings, such that their engines produced significant power at idle?

In any case my tests show that all planes I tested are affected, the 109G2 has no greater ability to decelerate by cutting throttle to zero than Yak3 (in fact it is less able). If 109G2s are decelerating so much more quickly than your Yak3 then I would say it is from something other than just them throttling back.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:29 PM
Do you really think air is modeled in the game?

The Yak-3 is almost 1,000 kg lighter than the G2. The G2 should maintain momentum longer, and your test proves this.

But so what?

520 to 315 in 1 full minute of zero throttle and 100% pitch seems off.

I am in the middle of moving and haven't unpacked my computer, so I can't test it, but try the same tests but also drop pitch to 0% and see what the results are.

Thats what we want to know. Does 100% prop pitch (zero throttle) cause faster than deceleration than 0% prop pitch (zero throttle). It SEEMS like the latter gives best deceleration, which shouldn't be (to the best of my knowledge).



<font face="Courier New">

_____ | _____
_\__(o)__/_
./ \.

</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:45 PM
Fillmore wrote:
- Ok, so now I did a test comparing Yak3 to 109G2. I
- used level stabilizer and got to 520kph TAS then cut
- throttle to zero and took speed readings at 10
- second intervals.

-
- 109G2
-
- 520 460 410 380 350 330 315
-
- Yak3
-
- 520 460 410 370 335 310 290
-
- Due the the 109G2 not being the most aerodynamically
- clean plane I was sort of expecting it to decelerate
- quicker that Yak3, but it doesn't.

Like I said in my previous post, do the maneuvering tests that I described above.

- your points 1,2, and 4 seem purely subjective.

It's not subjective whatsoever. If it were, others wouldn't experience this but they do. You get in Yak or an LA and have another competent pilot get in a 109G-2 and conduct the horizontal and vertical scissors exercises. I've done this many times. I've flown the 109G-2 quite a bit lately and I can either escape easily or turn a disadvantaged situation into an offensive one...and power manipulation is key to this. The Yaks/LAs don't have the ability to pull power while I do in the 109G-2. It's that simple and it makes all the difference.

- If
- you are going faster then of course you will
- overshoot. If you both cut power and you are going
- faster you will overshoot. There are factors which
- affect speed other than throttle settings.

Pull in behind the target aircraft (use a 109G-2 as the target) even at co-speed and then have that aircraft pull power. You'll sail on by.

- Perhaps the 109 pilots you are fighting are using
- flaps and/or opening radiator (I always open
- radiator on 190 when on landing approach, and if I
- am going to attempt to spit someone out I open the
- radiator before anything else).

Heck yes they use flaps just as I do.

- You seem to think that the 109G2 has a greater
- ability to decelerate by cutting power VS the Yak3,

Yes, because it does.

- but my tests indicate the opposite is true.

Again, do the maneuvering testing. You'll find out differently.

I know
- yanking the stick in a 109 will lose more speed than
- doing so in a Yak3, perhaps what you are asking for
- is greater E bleed for the Yak when pulling Gs?

All I'm asking for is for power to be reduced when I pull the throttle back.

- Point 3 happens to me all the time, it is what
- happens when you are faster than the guy in front of
- you. You may not decelerate as much as you want,
- but all my testing shows that the planes decelerate.

It's not whether they decelerate. It's the rate of deceleration that's the issue.

-
- For point 5 I did another test. As before, but shut
- off engine rather than throttle to zero.

Try the test that I described.

- 109G2
-
- 520 315 270 250
-
- Yak3
-
- 520 340 285 260
-
- I stopped after 30 seconds because by then the plane
- was decending. Here we have what I expected, the
- smooth lines of the Yak3 make it decelerate less
- quickly that 109G2.
-
- The difference between turning engine off and
- setting throttle to zero is huge. I think the real
- question may be what does 0% throttle represent, and
- is it an accurate representation of the planes.

It should represent engine idle....no power.

- Perhaps WWII warplanes had fairly high idle
- settings, such that their engines produced
- significant power at idle?

They didn't.

- In any case my tests show that all planes I tested
- are affected, the 109G2 has no greater ability to
- decelerate by cutting throttle to zero than Yak3 (in
- fact it is less able).

You did one straight line test. Try the tests that I suggested which represent more practical environments.

- If 109G2s are decelerating
- so much more quickly than your Yak3 then I would say
- it is from something other than just them throttling
- back.

It's not. If it were I wouldn't waste everyone's time by pressing this point.

GR142-Pipper

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 01:55 AM
BaldieJr wrote:
- Do you really think air is modeled in the game?
-
- The Yak-3 is almost 1,000 kg lighter than the G2.
- The G2 should maintain momentum longer, and your
- test proves this.
-
- But so what?
-
- 520 to 315 in 1 full minute of zero throttle and
- 100% pitch seems off.
-
- I am in the middle of moving and haven't unpacked my
- computer, so I can't test it, but try the same tests
- but also drop pitch to 0% and see what the results
- are.
-
- Thats what we want to know. Does 100% prop pitch
- (zero throttle) cause faster than deceleration than
- 0% prop pitch (zero throttle). It SEEMS like the
- latter gives best deceleration, which shouldn't be
- (to the best of my knowledge).
-
Baldie...I don't know how many times or in what manner it needs to be explained, but you are not directly controlling the prop pitch with a constant speed set up.



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

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 02:50 AM
GR142-Pipper wrote:
- That's a bug if there ever was one. In
- addition, it's a bug that was introduced INTO the
- game with version 1.11.



d00d all planeswere afffected like that

i have v1.0 & v1.11 on the same computer

all planes now slow less when you throttle back

not just your Yak3

the BFs you hunt are also affected

the LAs are affected even WORSE

the motor is no longer you all wonderous brake

you want to be able to slow quicker in a turn , thats what this is all about

saying its the power or the prop .... BAH

this is about being able to slow in a turn faster than you can now

all planes slow up more slowly now , not just the Yak-3

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 03:01 AM
He will never stop. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-very-happy.gif I'm outta here. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif

WUAF_Badsight wrote:
- GR142-Pipper wrote:
-- That's a bug if there ever was one. In
-- addition, it's a bug that was introduced INTO the
-- game with version 1.11.
-
-
-
- d00d all planeswere afffected like that
-
- i have v1.0 & v1.11 on the same computer
-
- all planes now slow less when you throttle back
-
- not just your Yak3
-
- the BFs you hunt are also affected
-
- the LAs are affected even WORSE
-
- the motor is no longer you all wonderous brake
-
- you want to be able to slow quicker in a turn ,
- thats what this is all about
-
- saying its the power or the prop .... BAH
-
- this is about being able to slow in a turn faster
- than you can now
-
- all planes slow up more slowly now , not just the
- Yak-3
-
-






-------------------------------------------------------------
<font size = 1>
=815=Squadron in South Korea
http://cafe.daum.net/il2sturmovik
</font>

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 04:11 AM
"You did one straight line test. Try the tests that I suggested which represent more practical environments."

There is a severe problem with your suggested tests, which is that they do not isolate throttle setting as the sole contibutor to deceleration. My back is sore and I don't feel like digging for the link, but there is a fellow who did extensive E bleed testing with mathcad with a 109K4 and an LA7, at any given G loading the 109 will bleed way more E (almost twice as much) than an LA. In a scissors the G2 can decelerate better than a Yak because pulling a 4g turn slows it down way more than does a 4g turn with a Yak. Afaik the G2 accelerates better, so it will be able to yoyo its speed more effectively than a Yak. Its ability to do this has nothing to do with a difference in how their throttles affect thrust.

Try your scissors tests with the caveat that neither plane is permitted to change its prop pitch, throttle, radiator or flaps. Perhaps you will find that the difference isnt in the throttle.

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 08:01 AM
The basic comment is still being ignored by some of you. Leave out prop pitch, flaps, initial attack speed, etc.

Chop your power and LISTEN to the engine. It continues to rev at a high speed with no throttle input. Doesn't anyone wonder you have to kill the ignition to get a reasonable approch to landing pattern?

Try this: On landing rollout, power 0% and say 180kph, kill the engine and watch how fast you slow down. Up to the point you kill the ignition, the engine still pulls along for awhile, regardless of power setting.



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

Tully__
10-30-2003, 10:34 AM
GR142_Astro wrote:
- The basic comment is still being ignored by some of
- you. Leave out prop pitch, flaps, initial attack
- speed, etc.
-
- Chop your power and LISTEN to the engine. It
- continues to rev at a high speed with no throttle
- input.

As it should with a constant speed propellor.


- ....Doesn't anyone wonder you have to kill the
- ignition to get a reasonable approch to landing
- pattern?
-
- Try this: On landing rollout, power 0% and say
- 180kph, kill the engine and watch how fast you slow
- down. Up to the point you kill the ignition, the
- engine still pulls along for awhile, regardless of
- power setting.
-


Even at idle with (effecively) no power, the engine ticking over greatly reduces the drag of the propellor disc at low airspeeds and high propellor rpm settings. The difference between engine off/on shouldn't be as great at high speed or at low rpm settings.

<center> ================================================== ========================= </center>

<center> <img src=http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/Corsair.jpg> </center>

<center> Forum Terms of Use (http://www.ubi.com/US/Info/TermsOfUse.htm) </center>
<center> Sig size limits (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzrgs)</center>
<center><font size="-2" color="#88aadd">IL2 Forums Moderator</font></center>


Salut
Tully