PDA

View Full Version : OMG UPDATE!!!! BEAUFIGHTER PIT!!!!!!!!!!



Arm_slinger
10-08-2004, 09:17 AM
http://www.pacific-fighters.com/fr/screenshots.php

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

madsarmy
10-08-2004, 09:21 AM
I'm looking forward to this:http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

WOLFMondo
10-08-2004, 09:46 AM
wow...nice cockpit!

MEGILE
10-08-2004, 10:11 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

RedDeth
10-08-2004, 11:19 AM
beaufighter. i gotta say this from the bottom of my heart. seriously.



BIG WOOP :P

BSS_Vidar
10-08-2004, 02:53 PM
Note the Hellcat screenie... That's an Essex class carrier. Thank the makers! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

sithgod66
10-08-2004, 05:56 PM
I love the Beau's myself. Only thing is will Pacific fighters work out the twin engine problem. I read that in FB both props spin in the same direction which makes planes like the bf 110 and P-38 lightning more tricky to fly.

HamishUK
10-08-2004, 07:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sithgod66:
I love the Beau's myself. Only thing is will Pacific fighters work out the twin engine problem. I read that in FB both props spin in the same direction which makes planes like the bf 110 and P-38 lightning more tricky to fly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually the P38 used contra-rotating props, so negated any torque.

BSS_Vidar
10-08-2004, 09:06 PM
It's more than just the torque involved when it comes to multi-engine aircraft. P-factor is involved as well, but the most "criticle" issue is having a criticle engine. Most twins are set up with a criticle engine, which is when both rotate in the same direction (clock-wise). When you have an aircraft like the P-38, there is no criticle engine issue due to counter rotation. This gives the advantage of having the higher thrust of both prop disc closer to the centerline due to more bite on the diclining side of rotation. This is generated by having a higher angle-of-attack on that side with the prop with the nose of the aircraft in nose up attitudes. The Beaufighter does have the criticle engine set-up.

The biggest dis-advantace of having a aircraft that does have a criticle engine set up is not the torque or the P-factor - even though they do contribute to the over-all problem. It's the high risk of getting into what is called Vmc [Vmc = The loss of directional control with full deflection of rudder with an operational criticle engine (i.e. the left engine.)]

It will be interesting to see if they've modeled this into the sim correctly. FS2002/04 have. If so, lets hope that axis will be available for multi-engine ops and the feather fuction actually works correctly - which it does NOT in IL-2/FB/AEP.

VW-IceFire
10-08-2004, 09:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sithgod66:
I love the Beau's myself. Only thing is will Pacific fighters work out the twin engine problem. I read that in FB both props spin in the same direction which makes planes like the bf 110 and P-38 lightning more tricky to fly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I doubt this would be changed. The P-38 was given development time and its simply not in the engine to have two contra-rotating props.

In the game, the two props do rotate in opposite directions...but the torque I think still exists. Its minor but there. I've learned to live with it and use the excellent trim ability of the P-38 (ailerontrim is a great thing) to even it out.

Blottogg
10-09-2004, 03:28 AM
BSS_Vidar, the Lightning actually had TWO critical engines. Both rotated out (left CCW, right CW from behind.) There was some discussion a while ago about why Kelly Johnson did this, with the eventual answer being that this configuration gave the least amount of buffet, and resulted in a much more stable gun platform than the safer method of using the reverse rotation. Apparently there was enough rudder and/or aileron authority to compensate for a dead engine (Vmc was ~125 mph IIRC.) Tony LeVeir apparently put on quite a single-engined aerobatics display to boost USAAF pilot confidence in the P-38.

It's a moot point for now, since P-factor isn't modeled with this sim engine, though torque is. Something to look forward to for BoB perhaps.

VVS-Manuc
10-09-2004, 04:39 AM
Nice cockpit...I really like this dark grey plates for fish (left side) and chips (right side)

jensenpark
10-09-2004, 09:41 AM
amazing job on the Beau cockpit.

Someone posted an actual pic of the cockpit and it is dead on.

Apart from the Wildcat, this is number one I want to fly in PF. So happy it's a flyable!

BSS_Vidar
10-09-2004, 10:00 AM
Wow! Blotto,
Thnx for the post. I hadn't researched the engine set-up on the 38 enough, and assumed a standard counter-rotate set-up. Thnx for the info.

S!

Fliger747
10-10-2004, 03:44 AM
My references don't show any of the P-38 models with same direction engines (left and right engines have different model numbers). Given the experience level of wartime trained pilots this was a big help in the handeling of what was though of as a 'hot' bird.

One of the big factors in the real plane (not likely to be a factor in the GAME) was the VMCA (min control speed in the air on one engine) which was about 130 mph. On takeoff at full power failure of one engine would necessitate cutting both engines and crashing straight ahead if this speed was not reached. Failure to do this would merely result in a crash upsidedown.

On a single engine approach, a slower speed can be maintained if the runway is assured as little yaw effect is present when power is reduced. Single engine go-around is another matter.

With dear old CFS2 I used to do single engine approaches to the 'boat' in the 1% P61 for practice. A very stable approach is required!

Vidar is as I recall a veteran of several single engine approaches to the boat in real life!

BSS_Vidar
10-10-2004, 09:03 AM
Just two and that was enough. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif But I did have a third during a low-level training hop in the Smokey Mountains. Terrain hopping at 400 knts at 150 ft... Not a good time to loose an engine when "Down amungst'em".
At the boat...
Loss of the number two engine in the carrier brake, lost #2 hydrolics to retract the speed brakes braking to downwind and had to do a "Blow-back". Uneventfull, no biggie.
The other was a catosrophic turbine failure. The engine exploded and blew half the stators and vanes out the exhaust pipe. The by-pass fan was undamaged so it wasn't a FOD issue. "It just blew!" NASTY and a bit of a "pucker factor" that day.