PDA

View Full Version : Tempest overheat, is it supposed to be like this?



FA_Whisky
03-23-2006, 10:11 AM
Should the tempest really overheat as fast as it does now? Just a question, don't flame me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif

horseback
03-23-2006, 10:21 AM
Anecdotal references make me think that the Napier Sabre engine was very finicky and required careful management, but probably not to this degree, if the forgiving overheats of other aircraft in-game are used as a standard.

cheers

horseback

TX-Zen
03-23-2006, 10:35 AM
I personally doubt it also, but the overheat in this game has always been dubious at best.

VW-IceFire
03-23-2006, 10:48 AM
Its probably a bit overdone...but that said...the Sabre II was a picky engine and it was definately in need of proper management.

Use prop pitch settings to keep your RPM's under control. That should help with the overheat. Its not an easy aircraft to manage, nor should it be.

Airmail109
03-23-2006, 01:21 PM
The P47 is possibly the worst for oveheating in this game, it heats up fast then just wont bloody cool down.

VW-IceFire
03-23-2006, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Aimail101:
The P47 is possibly the worst for oveheating in this game, it heats up fast then just wont bloody cool down.
On the other hand...you can run with the overheat on in a P-47 for quite a long time if I'm not mistaken. The efficiency of the engine does go down...but no serious damage for a few minutes.

With the Tempest...overheat is a 2 minute long thing. Then the engine starts chewing metal.

Monty_Thrud
03-23-2006, 02:23 PM
Can't we use a better grade of oil? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

jds1978
03-23-2006, 03:12 PM
Open...Rads...Decrease... Prop..Pitch

pourshot
03-23-2006, 11:20 PM
The only way to keep it cool is to reduce engine performance, I like the Tempest but it kills alot of engines if you use anything close to full power.

Xiolablu3
03-23-2006, 11:37 PM
I think its is likely that the Tempest is more correct than the other planes that can run for 10-15 minutes with MW50/WEP with no overaheating.

I would htink its the other planes that are wrong and the tempest is nearer correct.

Badsight.
03-24-2006, 12:41 AM
& then we have the complete opposite - the 25lb Spit with its supercruise ability

near max performance at only 90% throttle , this game sure can be odd :0

WOLFMondo
03-24-2006, 01:19 AM
Ironic as the Tempest did have a very high cruise capability and Tempest pilots used to joke there landing speed was the cruising speed of a Spitfire.

JG52Uther
03-24-2006, 02:40 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I think its is likely that the Tempest is more correct than the other planes that can run for 10-15 minutes with MW50/WEP with no overaheating.

I would htink its the other planes that are wrong and the tempest is nearer correct.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Brain32
03-24-2006, 03:48 AM
Well with so much engine problems(boost and overheat) sometimes I feel like flying high speed dive resistant and much cooler looking Hurricane MkIIc http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

WOLFMondo
03-24-2006, 03:52 AM
The Tempest was noted for its overheat but in the same respect the Sabre VA powered Tempest (similar to the IIA/B/C but with allot more power) with the same cooling system was selected for far east service.

Remember also the 5 minute limit, certainly RAF planes was because of excessive engine wear. The RAF and ministries which governed logistics of the armed forces didn't want there engines to last a few hours but 150 or more. The Tempest could however run on 3700rpm for an hour, which was within accepted and approved limits. Running this Tempest at 3700 will burn the engine out within a few minutes.

bazzaah2
03-24-2006, 04:06 AM
also, iirc Closterman (RIP) refers to cruising along at 300mph TAS on something like 30% power.

Certainly can't do that with our one.

bazzaah2
03-24-2006, 04:30 AM
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Tempest was subject to overheating problems. It's just not consistent in the game, but I think it's OK for the Tempest.

the problem I think is that the Tempest should be delivering more oomph than it does at lower revs. I'll do some testing/research this weekend.

HellToupee
03-24-2006, 04:42 AM
Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Ironic as the Tempest did have a very high cruise capability and Tempest pilots used to joke there landing speed was the cruising speed of a Spitfire.

crusing was flying at a fuel economy setting not flying at the fastest possible without overheating, and they had no overheating issues with the spitfire 25lb theres even tests of tempture around. Dont confuse flying at high throttle with crusing, in real life they had issues like range to think about.

Brain32
03-24-2006, 04:47 AM
The thing is you can run it very well with lower PP but also with very reduced throtthle setting, for example you can run 80%PP and 90%throtthle with boost and rads closed, but speed is nothing special with those setting(470kmh IAS barely) most Spit's do better than that with ease. Also in order to cool the engine down drastic measures are needed, while planes like P51 and FW190 only need a slight throtthle reduction and overheat message dissapears in a few seconds, Tempest needs fully open rads and heavily reduced PP/throtthle setting for the same result, but the speed penalty is ofcourse bigger.
IMO 11lbs is a must have...

WOLFMondo
03-24-2006, 04:48 AM
The thing that made the Sabre stand out was at lower power settings it was still revving very high which gave it the high cruise speeds. The problem is in this sim to maintain high revs to cruise your always bordering on cooking the engine and have to have the radiator open during the cruise which wasn't the case IRL. The only times you needed to have the radiator open was take off, landing and a climb at maximum power or after 5 minutes at maximum revs/boost.

Megile_
03-24-2006, 04:49 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Ironic as the Tempest did have a very high cruise capability and Tempest pilots used to joke there landing speed was the cruising speed of a Spitfire.

crusing was flying at a fuel economy setting not flying at the fastest possible without overheating, and they had no overheating issues with the spitfire 25lb theres even tests of tempture around. Dont confuse flying at high throttle with crusing, in real life they had issues like range to think about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mondo knows this, but the Tempest's high speed cruise ability is nulled by other plane's ability to fly at WEP for long periods of time.

WOLFMondo
03-24-2006, 04:51 AM
Originally posted by HellToupee:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Ironic as the Tempest did have a very high cruise capability and Tempest pilots used to joke there landing speed was the cruising speed of a Spitfire.

crusing was flying at a fuel economy setting not flying at the fastest possible without overheating, and they had no overheating issues with the spitfire 25lb theres even tests of tempture around. Dont confuse flying at high throttle with crusing, in real life they had issues like range to think about. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree however the Tempest was noted for a very high cruise speed because of the Sabres high revs. If you try to cruise in the Tempest in accordance to with pilot accounts you are pushing the engine to the edge of overheating.

Manuel29
03-24-2006, 05:41 AM
Originally posted by Megile_:
Mondo knows this, but the Tempest's high speed cruise ability is nulled by other plane's ability to fly at WEP for long periods of time.

Excuse me, but which are these planes?

FA_Whisky
03-24-2006, 02:46 PM
Tempest:
http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/images/tempest_ground_mid.jpg

Spitfire:
http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/uk/supermarine/spitfireI-III/spitfire.jpg

Crashed P51d:

VW-IceFire
03-24-2006, 03:11 PM
Originally posted by Manuel29:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Megile_:
Mondo knows this, but the Tempest's high speed cruise ability is nulled by other plane's ability to fly at WEP for long periods of time.

Excuse me, but which are these planes? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
He basically means all other types. Lavochkins, Messers, Focke Wulfs, etc.

The only types that seem to overheat as quickly are the F6F and the F4U in my opinion. Now it may be said that these are more recent additions and their modeling of the subject is far better than the other older types.

The Tempest does overheat quickly...I manage the radiator like a fiend to keep it cool and I use the radiator to control prop pitch. This seems to work for me...I seem to be as fast as the fastest fighters available in places like the AFJ dogfight server which is pretty much a late war fighterfest (no problems with that by me). As long as you have a little altitude and are willing to trade that slight bit of altitude for speed and energy the Tempest is fast as or faster than those willing to think of pursuit.

This includes being involved in protracted chases. The key is using prop pitch to control the RPM's. This is maybe a work around...it goes to show that the situation is not untenable...it may not be consistent but its not impossible to work with like some other bugs that we've experienced.

My question is if the game engine is appropriately setup to handle a complex engine with such power as the Sabre II. If its not, maybe a concession or two needs to be made to model it acceptably. No idea...just speculating.

TX-Zen
03-24-2006, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Manuel29:
Excuse me, but which are these planes?

The 190's overheat is easy to manage in a long fight and the engine cools fairly rapidly compared to many other planes (like the P47 for example). I have no problems in a 190 with overheat during protracted engagements, but the tempest is at a serious disdavantage in anything longer than a 4-5 minute contest.

pourshot
03-25-2006, 02:00 AM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Tempest was subject to overheating problems. It's just not consistent in the game, but I think it's OK for the Tempest.


Have a source for that anecdote?

I know the Sabre had more than it€s fair share of problems but as with all planes in this game manufacturing defects are not modeled.

Also please don€t look too those pre production models for proof of over heating or unreliability, as nobody would accept such reports for any other plane I don€t think we should for the Tempest.

bazzaah2
03-25-2006, 02:46 AM
In 'The Big Show' Clostermann refers to his Tempest overheating and as far as I remember he implies that it was something that happened frequently. Pretty vague I know. Will track what he said down a bit later.

Clostermann also refers to a cruising speed, with tanks, of 310 mph at 30% power at 3,000 feet and 350mph IAS without tanks at 50% power.
We certainly don't have that.

Does anyone know if there are any test data other than those at spitfireperformance.com?

pourshot
03-25-2006, 03:35 AM
Does anyone know if there are any test data other than those at spitfireperformance.com?


I have been looking but no luck so far.

skabbe
03-25-2006, 03:51 AM
i just tested a bit, and 85% propeller pitch with 100% power with wep boost, it can run for ever with no overheating. and the speed is 550 kmh insted of 580 kmh.

bazzaah2
03-25-2006, 05:10 AM
something's up with the Tempest for sure. I thought earlier that it might be OK but I was wrong.

While max speeds seem about right, cruising speeds can only be obtained at near max. settings. This doesn't seem right and I am going to find out what we should be able to expect.

You can't climb as indicated in tests without the engine overheating after a minute or two. Max. rates of climb were gained at 3.700 rpm which you can only reach with WEP engaged. The pilot's handbook indicates that you should be able to climb at 3,500 rpm for one hour at 6lb boost, with oil temp at 90C.

Can't do that with our Tempest.

I'm going to try and work this out and will post a separate thread over at ORR.

DIRTY-MAC
03-25-2006, 06:19 AM
you should collect all this data and send to Oleg, so it get fixed

bazzaah2
03-25-2006, 06:40 AM
that's what I will attempt to do. It's nerfed in some ways for sure.

FA_Whisky
03-25-2006, 01:01 PM
Clostermann also refers to a cruising speed, with tanks, of 310 mph at 30% power at 3,000 feet and 350mph IAS without tanks at 50% power.


This is interesting..........

bazzaah2
03-25-2006, 04:30 PM
that's kind of my point. The speed and climb rate seem off relative to teh tests at spitfireperformance, and Robban has tested the plane relative to thoise tests over at CWOS. The overheating issue is vague - evidence either way is short it seems - as far as the IIa is concerned. I found out today that Clostermann had a +13lb boost model so maybe that explains his figures.

Nonetheless, I'm still not sure that we should have to fly at 85% of power to get a half way decent cruising speed. So maybe the issue is with the way power is delivered at lower revs/throttle settings.

To get rated boost and revs you have to keep WEP on all the time and manage your prop pitch. Seems an odd way of doing it to me. Not even sure that the IIa Tempest had WEP.

p1ngu666
03-25-2006, 05:34 PM
indeed it cooks up real fast, i think the mossie is similer in this regard also http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

from what ive read of the sabre, it was a pain to start, mind bending for the mechanics who would have probably not seen a sleave valve engine, but if the monster started you should be ok.

the position of the rad is good too, air would be forced into it by the prop, its higher drag than further back like hurri/yak/p51.

incidently that radiator setup was used because it worked well, the ultra low drag mossie style had a few issues and took away fuel space. further back position gave buffeting on the tiffy.

i think the VI for use abroad had a extra oil cooler

Glen44
03-25-2006, 11:42 PM
I met its overheat problem before, but now it has disapeared.The reasons are below:

1) this 9lbs tempest in 4.04 patch is 1944 early production which should not be regarded as the opponent of 190d9 la7 etc. His opponent is 109g6 190a5a6 la5fn. So to quote the statement of 11lbs/13lbs pilot is misleading.

2) open the radiator while do not decrease the prop. I use 100% prop. when climbing, fighting and diving except cruising, no overheat issue because the radiator is open. Furthermore you can use 100power 100% prop. with radiator open FOR A LONG TIME.

usually i use 100% prop and 110 power with wep and radiator open to climb, when reaching 3600m high, overheat comes. then decrease power to 99%, engine will be normal. in some cases, I let it overheat for 2 minutes, then i reduce power heavily in spite of whether enemy can get me or not. that's the limit of 9lbs tempest, we need 11lbs one.

3) you can cool down the engine quickly by turn off the wep or 50% power.

So,don't decrease prop because this can reduce performance, and don't expect 9lbs tempest can outrun the later blue a/cs, that is 11lbs' job.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

bazzaah2
03-26-2006, 02:37 AM
another thing; the pilot's manual says that oil temp should be in the range of 80-95c depending on settings used. Ours jumps up to 120c asap. Maybe that's the problem.

WOLFMondo
03-26-2006, 02:43 AM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:


To get rated boost and revs you have to keep WEP on all the time and manage your prop pitch. Seems an odd way of doing it to me. Not even sure that the IIa Tempest had WEP.

This shouldn't be the case to get the RPM's to cruise. The WEP was for 100% emergency only.

bazzaah2
03-26-2006, 03:36 AM
you'd think so.

What I was getting at is this; the pilot's manual indicates that settings for economic climbing were +3lb boost and 3150 revs. Those settings approximate to 100% power at 100% prop pitch without WEP engaged. Seems odd for an economic climb.

The Tempest was also capaple of climbing at 3500 rpm and at 6lb boost, which you can only get by using WEP and playing around with prop pitch/throttle.

Seems a bit odd to me to have some rated settings available only at WEP, which as you say is for emergencies.

The oil temp seems to run way too hot as well which explains the overheating issue. The pilot's manual makes no reference to overheating problems, just that max settings should be used for a max. of 5 minutes.

FA_Whisky
03-26-2006, 07:41 AM
Ok, lets collect some info here and when we have enough we can send it to Oleg.
I think the radiator modeling on all planes is a bit faulty.

Speed does not effect the effectiveness of the radiator enough. More speed=better cooling thus more power can be used without overheat.
If you use full power while in combat(turning, looping) the engine should overheat quite fast but cool again with more speed.
When using WEP and 110% power I think all planes should overheat al maximum speed after some time, but cool fast when power is reduced.

skabbe
03-26-2006, 01:40 PM
a silly litle question for my tempest testring. is SPD really TAS? that digital gamedisplay for speed you know... :S

ImpStarDuece
03-26-2006, 02:00 PM
No, its IAS.

skabbe
03-26-2006, 02:26 PM
hahaha damn. and its always 1013.25?

Stackhouse25th
03-26-2006, 02:42 PM
Use prop control....and proper radiator settings and power settings and you will be fine. I can fly it perfectly fine as is.

pourshot
03-27-2006, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by Stackhouse25th:
Use prop control....and proper radiator settings and power settings and you will be fine. I can fly it perfectly fine as is.

But dont you think it would be better if we could use full power in combat for at least 5 min. Even if I keep the heat under control before a fight as soon as combat is joined and I go full power/revs I get overheat, not much fun when you need to extend.

WOLFMondo
03-27-2006, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by Stackhouse25th:
Use prop control....and proper radiator settings and power settings and you will be fine. I can fly it perfectly fine as is.

You miss the point. You can't actually make the engine do what its supposed too. You don't turn or and turn of the boost, the level is dictated by the throttle but in this sim its either on or off and then you can only dictate that level of boost on the RPM's by reducing the PP which is not how the engine worked. The oil temp under normal flight conditions in this sim is much to high accoring to the pilots notes and you can't climb and cruise as per the pilots notes.

Anyone can fly it without the engine overheating, but fly it in accordance to the pilots notes (Sabre IIA notes, not one of the later engine models) and the engine will cook itself.

FA_Whisky
03-27-2006, 04:04 AM
Same thing with the P51; oil temp is much to high for normal cruise settings.

It might be so with other planes with inline or V-type engines.

OldMan____
03-27-2006, 04:28 AM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:
another thing; the pilot's manual says that oil temp should be in the range of 80-95c depending on settings used. Ours jumps up to 120c asap. Maybe that's the problem.

Don't give too much attention to these type of data represented in cockpit. Most aplanes have this type of data completely messed up. For example FW190 with a far from hot engine have the temp gauge long passed max temperature. So the in cockpit gauges clearly do not represent the real temperature. Also the map temperature affects engine overheat time, but do not affect the gauges...

bazzaah2
03-27-2006, 04:57 AM
yep, but still the engine overheats pretty much once the indicated oil temp exceeds 120c. Most engine settings will get you to 119c. So as soon as you go the max settings you will overheat in 2 minutes or so. As we don't have access to the underlying code, then we can only look at the information that is displayed.

p1ngu666
03-27-2006, 07:09 AM
a 13lb tempest would have around 30-40% extra heat output.

pingu calc = 100\13 x 9 = 69%

the extra 10% id factor in would be from effeciency loss, extra friction, higher rpms also

OldMan____
03-27-2006, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
a 13lb tempest would have around 30-40% extra heat output.

pingu calc = 100\13 x 9 = 69%

the extra 10% id factor in would be from effeciency loss, extra friction, higher rpms also

Unfortunately this calculation is not so easy to make. But for sure it would have greater thermal output.

WOLFMondo
03-27-2006, 07:33 AM
Should probably stick to a Sabre IIA/9lbs since thats the one we have and mostof the documentation thats easily available is for.

The 11lbs and 13lbs Sabre IIB's on the majority of Tempest used the same cooling system however IV's had an extra leading edge cooling system, but the Sabre VA put out a bit more power than a 13lbs Sabre IIB and was selected for use in the middle east.

FA_Whisky
03-27-2006, 07:54 AM
Don't give too much attention to these type of data represented in cockpit. Most aplanes have this type of data completely messed up. For example FW190 with a far from hot engine have the temp gauge long passed max temperature. So the in cockpit gauges clearly do not represent the real temperature. Also the map temperature affects engine overheat time, but do not affect the gauges...


Correct, don't use the gauges. Use deficelink!

bazzaah2
03-30-2006, 03:10 AM
didn't want this thread to fall away so just bumping, in hope of having some more time a bit later.....

FA_Whisky
04-02-2006, 07:13 AM
At the moment i am moving and starting my new job. To much work to play PF righ now, but i want to test a great deal of the planes. I thing there are some real flaws in the overheat/engine modeling that are not hard to fix. Will start some testing next week i hope.

I was thingking to do it like this:
Set up a mission with a carrier(you can make a carrier move at 500kph right?) Put a plane on it and test it for overheat and engine damage at this speed. I think this will give good results for all late war planes.

p1ngu666
04-02-2006, 08:41 AM
it varies with altitude aswell http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

FA_Whisky
04-04-2006, 01:03 PM
Can someone build be a mission with a carrier like that?

Grey_Mouser67
04-04-2006, 06:36 PM
I find most information in general about overheat to be sketchy at best....but I view the current modelling to be another "Olegism" and not necessarily connected to the real world.

What information I've read indicates that most aircraft, with cooling systems in good operating condition, and controlled in automatic can run at full power and even full boost without overheating.

I have read specific evidence of P&W's running this way and Mustangs as well. Early model Lightnings had problems at high altitude...say 27,000 ft and above and most aircraft could suffer issues in prolonged climbs where high RPM's were coupled with low airflow. The MkV Spit had issues with oil cooling but I believe the Mk IX is actually more accurate than most other planes in the game.

The P&W engines in the game have a cowl flaps and they do open and slow you down, but they don't cool. This is a well documented bug that has been sent to 1C long ago but has not been addressed....guess there are more important things to do.

I don't have much information on Russian or German planes, but the ingame modelling of overheat is anything but accurate. The Tempest is a victim of "poor subjective" modelling...much like the Fw view, the turn rate of the Mustang and the compressibility of the Lightning.

Just because something is modelled in the game a certain way doesn't mean it is accurate...in fact, it is more likely inaccurate...just a matter of degrees.

Treetop64
04-04-2006, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Monty_Thrud:
Can't we use a better grade of oil? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Yep. It's running on Pennzoil alright. Be sure...

FA_Whisky
04-10-2006, 03:16 AM
Made a mission with a high speed carrier. The new modeleling of the grear makes that a carrier cannot go faster that 400kph without damaging the planes. (it will be ripperd of its gear). To bad. though this could make some low error overheat testing at different speeds.

bazzaah2
04-10-2006, 07:44 AM
we must get on with this. I'm away from home for a few days housesitting but will run some tests when I get home. I must say from a few initial speed tests I did it seems well modelled, just something screwy about the settings at which power is delivered and most likely about the overheating issue as well.

I might try the Imperial War Musuem if I have a mo to get some definitive statements on it. If data is in short supply then I wonder what sources Oleg is using.

FA_Whisky
12-14-2006, 12:11 PM
Did 4.07 change anything in this respect?
I get run over by +25lbs spitfires on level runs because of the fast overheat. You cannot use more than 95% throttle with closes radiators while that is possible in other planes like the La and P51. So there is no high cruse speed for the tempest and that is something it should have.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.planet.nl/~roelo085/Pics/dannyboy%20copy.jpg

-= Why do all n00bs fly a Spit in the game? Try a P51 for a change!!!!=-
-= Official +25 boost P51d whiner. Wheeee, i've got a high boost P51c now!!!! =-

Brain32
12-14-2006, 12:28 PM
IT'S FIXED!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif
I asked my squaddie who has the '46 to test it and he said:

"It does not overheat at the following settings:

Power 100%+WEP / PP 90% / RPM 3500 / rads 2 / Speed 580 TAS
Power 90%+WEP / PP 90% / RPM 3500 / rads closed / Speed almost 600 TAS"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

This is my sig http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WOLFMondo
12-14-2006, 01:14 PM
What map was that on though Brain, and at what height? Or who was it, i'll ask them myself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Capt Eric Brown says: "I found in general the default joystick settings tended to be oversensitive. With my recommended settings it will give people a real feeling of how they actually flew."