PDA

View Full Version : ME262 - you are partially right - but you do (the FM) a bit wrong



XyZspineZyX
08-17-2003, 04:54 PM
Hello Oleg,

I generally fly the ME262 and have some books with pictures from original Messerschmitt datasheets 1) of the ME262 A1. I compared it with your data list of

the ME262 in IL2/FB. I simulated the Messerschmitt test of the climbing rate with constant speed of vH=550km/h. The climbing rate of the ME262 in FB is

nearly perfect up to 7.000m altitude, congratulations, but then it tends very fast to zero - this is wrong. The original Messerschmitt diagramm shows a

climbing rate curve where after 19min 10.000m has reached. But in FB you can reach only a max. altitude of 8.400m - then the plane stalls. The historical

data, also in your FB data list, shows a maximum altitude of 11.500m! A third point is the horizontal speed. Your listed speed points (altitude 0m and

6.000m) of the FB data list are be located exactly in the speed-altitude curve of the Messerschmitt altitude diagramm. This shows your accuracy with

historical datas - but why the player reach in FB only about 800km/h on both altitudes. This is also wrong. You data list in FB is right but the ingame ME262

FM in this vital points is wrong. Your data are very good - why you don't put it in the FM of the ME262? I don‚¬īt understand this.

I hope you will fix it in the follow AddOn/Patch.


Regards MILOK


1) "ME262 - Entwicklung, Erprobung und Fertigung des ersten einsatzf√¬§higen D√ľsenj√¬§gers der Welt" von Radinger/Schick - Aviatic Verlag

XyZspineZyX
08-17-2003, 04:54 PM
Hello Oleg,

I generally fly the ME262 and have some books with pictures from original Messerschmitt datasheets 1) of the ME262 A1. I compared it with your data list of

the ME262 in IL2/FB. I simulated the Messerschmitt test of the climbing rate with constant speed of vH=550km/h. The climbing rate of the ME262 in FB is

nearly perfect up to 7.000m altitude, congratulations, but then it tends very fast to zero - this is wrong. The original Messerschmitt diagramm shows a

climbing rate curve where after 19min 10.000m has reached. But in FB you can reach only a max. altitude of 8.400m - then the plane stalls. The historical

data, also in your FB data list, shows a maximum altitude of 11.500m! A third point is the horizontal speed. Your listed speed points (altitude 0m and

6.000m) of the FB data list are be located exactly in the speed-altitude curve of the Messerschmitt altitude diagramm. This shows your accuracy with

historical datas - but why the player reach in FB only about 800km/h on both altitudes. This is also wrong. You data list in FB is right but the ingame ME262

FM in this vital points is wrong. Your data are very good - why you don't put it in the FM of the ME262? I don‚¬īt understand this.

I hope you will fix it in the follow AddOn/Patch.


Regards MILOK


1) "ME262 - Entwicklung, Erprobung und Fertigung des ersten einsatzf√¬§higen D√ľsenj√¬§gers der Welt" von Radinger/Schick - Aviatic Verlag

XyZspineZyX
08-17-2003, 05:39 PM
Thank You!! Thats what I have been saying all along. Many people think the 262 is now modelled correctly. I believe its still wrong, better, but wrong nevertheless.

http://www.stormbirds.com/warbirds/header.jpg


<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
08-17-2003, 08:39 PM
Thank you!
The 262 was a way better bird in real live than it s now, have a read on stormbirds.com you will find stories about the excellent speed and energy managing about the plane
I tried to loop the plane, start at 500kmh but when on top of loop, I ve bleed so much energy!!!! same for turns and in this respect I thing the fm is now more wrong than right

Watson whizzers squad page in stormbirds.com give you a good idea when the guy wanted to land but couldnt bleed speed even in tight turns to get the right target speed for ldg.

ZG77_Nagual
08-18-2003, 12:26 AM
I don't know guys - I have no complaints about this plane. I was just online and got a yak9u, 2 p39q series, 2 la7s and a yak3 in one flight. It does take alot of patience but she's a world-beater for sure. You just have to keep some air under you.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/p47janes.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 12:59 AM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- I don't know guys - I have no complaints about this
- plane. I was just online and got a yak9u, 2 p39q
- series, 2 la7s and a yak3 in one flight. It does
- take alot of patience but she's a world-beater for
- sure. You just have to keep some air under you.

Cut the crap Nag, it's not about getting kills, it's about accurate performance. The moment you loose speed with Me-262 without starting seriously to blackout then the speed loss is off. Me-262 could not bleed energy in turns lower than 5G.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 08/17/0307:00PM by Huckebein_FW

ZG77_Nagual
08-18-2003, 01:33 AM
Thanks Huck /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
What I have noticed is you don't want to stay in a turn with the slats deployed - as it it does great instantaneous turns for snap-shots. It does not keep it's speed well in a climb. I'm used to the pre-patch 190s so bnz is not a stretch for me. She seems to rule if you stay fast - but I'm not arguing stats - as you so tactfully pointed out /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

(I kinda like flying a plane everybody thinks is UNDER modeled - keeps those constant fm complaints to a minimum)

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/p47janes.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 01:38 AM
MILOK wrote:
- Hello Oleg,
-
- I generally fly the ME262 and have some books with
- pictures from original Messerschmitt datasheets 1)
- of the ME262 A1. I compared it with your data list
- of
-
- the ME262 in IL2/FB. I simulated the Messerschmitt
- test of the climbing rate with constant speed of
- vH=550km/h. The climbing rate of the ME262 in FB is
-
- nearly perfect up to 7.000m altitude,
- congratulations, but then it tends very fast to zero
- - this is wrong. The original Messerschmitt diagramm
- shows a
-
- climbing rate curve where after 19min 10.000m has
- reached. But in FB you can reach only a max.
- altitude of 8.400m - then the plane stalls. The
- historical
-
- data, also in your FB data list, shows a maximum
- altitude of 11.500m! A third point is the horizontal
- speed. Your listed speed points (altitude 0m and
-
- 6.000m) of the FB data list are be located exactly
- in the speed-altitude curve of the Messerschmitt
- altitude diagramm. This shows your accuracy with
-
- historical datas - but why the player reach in FB
- only about 800km/h on both altitudes. This is also
- wrong. You data list in FB is right but the ingame
- ME262
-
- FM in this vital points is wrong. Your data are very
- good - why you don't put it in the FM of the ME262?
- I don‚¬īt understand this.
-
- I hope you will fix it in the follow AddOn/Patch.
-
-
- Regards MILOK
-
-
- 1) "ME262 - Entwicklung, Erprobung und Fertigung des
- ersten einsatzf√¬§higen D√ľsenj√¬§gers der Welt" von
- Radinger/Schick - Aviatic Verlag
-
-

good post hopefully oleg will change it in next patch and get rid of saturn space rocket fm of bl1.....

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 02:08 AM
Yes the high altitude performance is puzzling. I am glad to see this distinction between Hi and Lo at the beginning of this thread.

I am Happy with the low altitude performance. Very brutal killer at low altitude as speed is kept up easily.

Just could not get 262 above 7km though.

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 02:39 AM
By any chance can you scan the Me262 documents? I would love to see them.

http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb06894.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb57471.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb11726.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb75733.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80477.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb64472.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb59442.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb80347.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb73057.gif http://www.smiliedb.de/s/sdb48642.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 08:06 AM
hi,
I dont know if 262's FM is historically accurate, but I wonder if one of you guys could share with me a tactic to get in the six of a 1944 propeller AC using the current patch. A tactic offering a small B&Z window would be acceptable.

Planes starting at the same level, same speed, like in QMB.

I tried to outmanoeuver them (without much hope), then I tried to outrun/outclimb/B&Z using my wonderfull engines, then come back to attack them. No luck! they alway manage to reach my altitude and stay on my six, or be on an impossible trajectory for my guns even after distancing enemy plane by 2km.
I cant gain enough altitude and speed to return in an attacking position although some frontal attacks were possible.

So far, my best result is obtained by reaching at least 600km, then start a brutal 90‚? vertical climb, hopping to be able to control the zero-speed stall at the top, then fall back on the bastard. I may be able to keep a 50/100 meters altitude advantage. Not very realistic, almost cheating since I doubt stall recoveries were so easy in 1944.


Either this was really an over-rated average fighter usuable only with a huge altitude/speed/surprise advantage ... or there is something wrong with its FM and other planes' FM ... or maybe is it QMB's AI which is too good for me.
I need to know :-)

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 08:26 AM
oroxair wrote:
- hi,
- I dont know if 262's FM is historically accurate,
- but I wonder if one of you guys could share with me
- a tactic to get in the six of a 1944 propeller AC
- using the current patch. A tactic offering a small
- B&Z window would be acceptable.
-
I don't think you'd want to get on you enemies' six. Even if you do, you're not going to stay there. The 262 is not for staying on any prop's six.
- I cant gain enough altitude and speed to return in
- an attacking position although some frontal attacks
- were possible.
-
- So far, my best result is obtained by reaching at
- least 600km, then start a brutal 90?vertical climb,
- hopping to be able to control the zero-speed stall
- at the top, then fall back on the bastard. I may be
- able to keep a 50/100 meters altitude advantage. Not
- very realistic, almost cheating since I doubt stall
- recoveries were so easy in 1944.
-
You just answered your own question. Frontal attack or zoom climb then drop down are effective with the 262, as it should be.

Stalls often aren't difficult to recover from, spins are. Also 1944 planes are often "stable" in a way that if you completely stop in mid-air, they drop nose and return to normal flight. Modern jets that are not "stable" require computers to fly.
-
- Either this was really an over-rated average fighter
- usuable only with a huge altitude/speed/surprise
- advantage ... or there is something wrong with its
- FM and other planes' FM ... or maybe is it QMB's AI
- which is too good for me.
- I need to know :-)
-
I think it's usable only with a huge speed advantage, yes. But the inherent advantage of the 262 is it easily gains/ maintains that huge speed advantage over all props.

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 08:51 AM
HomeboyWu wrote:
-
- I don't think you'd want to get on you enemies' six.
- Even if you do, you're not going to stay there. The
- 262 is not for staying on any prop's six.

With 4 Mk108, half of a second in the six of anything is enough :-)

- Stalls often aren't difficult to recover from, spins
- are. Also 1944 planes are often "stable" in a way
- that if you completely stop in mid-air, they drop
- nose and return to normal flight. Modern jets that
- are not "stable" require computers to fly.

I always thought WWII's fighters stability was only present in computer simulated games. I'm glad to learn that's not a legend ... I may accept to follow a confirmed pilot in a double seat cockpit now.


- I think it's usable only with a huge speed
- advantage, yes. But the inherent advantage of the
- 262 is it easily gains/ maintains that huge speed
- advantage over all props.

Well, like with all other planes in IL2/FB, one need to keep an altitude/speed/manoeuvring advantage unless to be gifted with incredible aiming skills and reflexes.
What I dont understand is what advantage gives two Jumos engines over a propeller starting at the same energy state.

This may be an unrealistic situation, but in 1vs1, the energy brought by the 2 jumos and the amazing 262's aerodynamic doesnt seem to give any advantage in matter of energy fighting over any 1944 propeller.
Even with great patience, I cant find the right ammount of extension needed so that the jumos and the 262's cellule show their superiority (if it ever existed a such superiority).

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 09:32 AM
I realize I am asking if the 262 is more than a fighter against targets of opportunity, or just that and a fast bomber.
Its way of bleeding energy in 1.1b seems to indicate the later.

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 09:34 AM
oroxair wrote:
- With 4 Mk108, half of a second in the six of
- anything is enough :-)
-
The point is not getting yourself on his six, but him in your sight. Six or no six is usually not an issue. I've nearly always got my bandit from the sides (tops, bottoms) in the 262.

- Well, like with all other planes in IL2/FB, one need
- to keep an altitude/speed/manoeuvring advantage
- unless to be gifted with incredible aiming skills
- and reflexes.
- What I dont understand is what advantage gives two
- Jumos engines over a propeller starting at the same
- energy state.
-
- This may be an unrealistic situation, but in 1vs1,
- the energy brought by the 2 jumos and the amazing
- 262's aerodynamic doesnt seem to give any advantage
- in matter of energy fighting over any 1944
- propeller.
First, jet engines deliver more and more power (hp) as speed increases, while pistons'/props' power remains fairly constant at any speed.

Second, cleaner aerodynamics give less drag, which is very beneficial in high speed flight. And think about it, at the 262's max level speed some props disentegrate instantly.

So a 262 is really to be flown at high speeds. It is truly an excellent energy fighter.
- Even with great patience, I cant find the right
- ammount of extension needed so that the jumos and
- the 262's cellule show their superiority (if it ever
- existed a such superiority).
-
It is speed that gives you advantages, it is speed you're looking for, not extension.

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 09:48 AM
HomeboyWu wrote:
- It is speed that gives you advantages, it is speed
- you're looking for, not extension.

Hum ... you may have answered my question. Untill now, I was probably managing to fight in the 262 like in a very fast propeller plane. ie, gaining speed AND altitude. That way I was loosing speed OR altitude (at least I didnt gain any energy over propeller planes).
I'll try to disregard the altitude advantage to aim only for speed. Different technology, different philosophy.


I hope you are right because if you are not, I'll be back with my annoying questions :-)

thx homeboywu

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 10:07 AM
Unless you have genuine technical data to back up your remarks then Oleg will change nothing.

Send Oleg the technical data you have got and where it was obtained otherwise you are wasting your time.

http://af-helos.freewebspace.com/BP_Ham%20Sig.gif



Per Ardua Ad Astra

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 05:09 PM
There are some issues which got fixed in 1.1b which brought up new issues.

1. Top speed at 6500 was over 1100. It got corrected, but so all the speeds around also were toned down. Below 6500, OK, above - not OK. There it's too slow.
2. Similar for climb. It was OK on the deck, but it increased more and more, which is wrong. The "curve" got corrected for up to 6500, but above it drops.
3. Turning was too good at low speeds. Now it's corrected, which brings more energy bleed. Result is that it also bleeds energy in very shallow turns now, especially at speed.
4. Accelleration was too good, is toned down now. Result is it's accellerating very poor in dives and it "can't hold speed at all" while zooming, whether it's steep (50-90‚?) or shallow (10-30‚?).

I think that's a perfect example for how things change there if you fix others here.


<hr>

<p align=center style="width:100%; filter:glow[color=#33CCFF, strength=2)">

<img src=http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/willey110.jpg border=0 alt="Hier geht's zur I/JG78"> (http://www.jg78.de)

</p><font color=59626B>

XyZspineZyX
08-18-2003, 05:24 PM
Willey wrote:
- There are some issues which got fixed in 1.1b which
- brought up new issues.
-

- 2. Similar for climb. It was OK on the deck, but it
- increased more and more, which is wrong. The "curve"
- got corrected for up to 6500, but above it drops.
-

From a Messerchmitt graph for the Me262A-1a climb

at SL > 19m/s with a linear decrease to 3.5m/s at 10km. (5km > 10.5m/s)

Willey, how does the preceeding compare?

http://www.stenbergaa.com/stenberg/crandall-stormclouds2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 10:19 AM
You guys are wondering how to handle fighters in a Me262. The answer is simple. Don't. Why worry about fighters when you can outrun them? Just carry enough speed to go straight through. Get the bombers and leave the escorts alone.

What, no bombers? Then what are you doing in the air in the first place? Fighters can do very little on their own.

Ordnance on Target. That is the air war. What goes on to make that happen, or prevent it from happening, is completely irrelevant.

If you take a Me262 up only to score kills against a swarm of fighters, you are not using the aircraft for its intended purpose.

The way things are done in the online DF servers is very far removed from real life.

/Fred

No sig as of now, as people apparently can't handle reality without creating too much trouble for the poor mods.

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 08:19 PM
bump

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:44 AM
HamishUK wrote:
- Unless you have genuine technical data to back up
- your remarks then Oleg will change nothing.
-
- Send Oleg the technical data you have got and where
- it was obtained otherwise you are wasting your time.


Me 262 service ceiling (from numerous sources) ~ 12,200 m.

Me 262 service ceiling in FB 1.1b ~ 7,500 m.

The difference is so great that I think it's got to be a bug. The max speed also drops off with increasing height above ~ 5,000 m, which is odd for a jet.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:46 AM
effte wrote:
- You guys are wondering how to handle fighters in a
- Me262. The answer is simple. Don't. Why worry about
- fighters when you can outrun them?

Try fighting P-51s at 7,500m in a 1.1b version Me 262.

I think you will change your mind.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
08-25-2003, 08:29 PM
I just made a few experiments in QMB:


11xMe262 1944 at average skill level, then veteran, then ace. Altitude: 5000 then 3000 meters. Map Moscow.

Vs

11xLa7 1944 (average, then veteran, then ace)
or
11xYak3 1944
or
11xP39 1944
or
11xYak1 1941
or
11xMig3 1940
or
11xI16 1939

That's scary because the 262s are anihilated even by 1939 planes. They only keep an edge against 1939 huricanes.

This plane just cant turn without losing so much speed that it returns into the flight enveloppe ( <450kmh ) of any early propeler plane. And once in this enveloppe it's rare the 262 can out-accelerate or outclimb these planes.

3 ways to explain this experiment:
* the AI cant fly that plane
* it is undermodelled in acceleration or speed conservation
* Oleg is right and this plane has never been a fighter ! A bomber interceptor at the best.

XyZspineZyX
08-25-2003, 08:47 PM
Why didnt you complain about the me262?

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

MicroSoft Most Wanted
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/the-aztek-eagles/oleg.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-25-2003, 08:57 PM
I dont understand your remark. Check the last part of my post especially the undermodelled thing.

"3 ways to explain this experiment:
* the AI cant fly that plane
* it is undermodelled in acceleration or speed conservation
* Oleg is right and this plane has never been a fighter ! A bomber interceptor at the best."

Maybe should I have added "or" between the 3 possible explanations.

XyZspineZyX
08-25-2003, 11:33 PM
I don't have "genuine technical data" but I do have data from the IL-2 Sturmovik web site http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.il2sturmovik.com/games_elts/fb_aircraft.php

I copied/pasted this from the Me-262A-1 Schwalbe description:
Speed:
Sea level: 835 km/h;
At 6,000m: 872 km/h.

Climb to 6,000m: 6.8 min.
Service ceiling: 11,500m
Range: 1,050 km.

If Oleg doesn't want to model the Schwalbe to perform to his own specs, I would like him to explain why http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


HamishUK wrote:
- Unless you have genuine technical data to back up
- your remarks then Oleg will change nothing.
-
- Send Oleg the technical data you have got and where
- it was obtained otherwise you are wasting your time.
-
-
-
<img
- src="http://af-helos.freewebspace.com/BP_Ham%20Sig
- .gif">
-
-
-
- Per Ardua Ad Astra
-




...............................
...______________....
..............|..............
...........[]O[]...........
..........(.......)..........
...........HHH..........
.........>/.....\<.........
...............................
When you've beed captured, you'll be wishing for one of these:

http://www.germanvtol.com/flettnerfolder/fl282y.jpg