PDA

View Full Version : To make a good game better



zugfuhrer
02-16-2004, 03:18 AM
First
The inline engines should have a damagemodel for the radiators.
As far as the books i have read, only german and anglo/us writers, the the radiators where wery exposed to fire and where often a cause to kills. The glycol was wery flamable. The Me109 could shut of one of the radiators because of this common damage.

Second
The P40 must have a faulty airmodel
Look at this figures

I have made some tests of some airplanes.
I started at 2000 m at 270km/h and turned the engine of, corrected the yaw and tried to hold course and to keep the speed at 200km/h.
Time of flight is how long the plane stayed airborne.
Prop pitch automatic no flaps, no gear 75% fuel.
The planes altmeter stood at 50 m when the planes ditched.

Plane time of flight
FW190 A5 (43) 3.50
P39 (42) 4.40
Lagg3 (43) 4.50
La7 (44) 4.00
I-16 (39) 3.07
Me109F2 3.50
Yak9 (42) 4.01
P40E 6.14

200 km/h is 3,333.. km/minute
For the P40 it gives 6,14x3,3333 gives 20.46666 km which means that the P40 gives 10 m distance for every meter it looses in hight.

zugfuhrer
02-16-2004, 03:18 AM
First
The inline engines should have a damagemodel for the radiators.
As far as the books i have read, only german and anglo/us writers, the the radiators where wery exposed to fire and where often a cause to kills. The glycol was wery flamable. The Me109 could shut of one of the radiators because of this common damage.

Second
The P40 must have a faulty airmodel
Look at this figures

I have made some tests of some airplanes.
I started at 2000 m at 270km/h and turned the engine of, corrected the yaw and tried to hold course and to keep the speed at 200km/h.
Time of flight is how long the plane stayed airborne.
Prop pitch automatic no flaps, no gear 75% fuel.
The planes altmeter stood at 50 m when the planes ditched.

Plane time of flight
FW190 A5 (43) 3.50
P39 (42) 4.40
Lagg3 (43) 4.50
La7 (44) 4.00
I-16 (39) 3.07
Me109F2 3.50
Yak9 (42) 4.01
P40E 6.14

200 km/h is 3,333.. km/minute
For the P40 it gives 6,14x3,3333 gives 20.46666 km which means that the P40 gives 10 m distance for every meter it looses in hight.

Magister__Ludi
02-16-2004, 09:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
Second
The P40 must have a faulty airmodel
Look at this figures

I have made some tests of some airplanes.
I started at 2000 m at 270km/h and turned the engine of, corrected the yaw and tried to hold course and to keep the speed at 200km/h.
Time of flight is how long the plane stayed airborne.
Prop pitch automatic no flaps, no gear 75% fuel.
The planes altmeter stood at 50 m when the planes ditched.

Plane time of flight
FW190 A5 (43) 3.50
P39 (42) 4.40
Lagg3 (43) 4.50
La7 (44) 4.00
I-16 (39) 3.07
Me109F2 3.50
Yak9 (42) 4.01
P40E 6.14

200 km/h is 3,333.. km/minute
For the P40 it gives 6,14x3,3333 gives 20.46666 km which means that the P40 gives 10 m distance for every meter it looses in hight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


You don't have to be mad on P-40, it might be the only plane with proper glide ratio from those you have tested. A standard ww2 fighter should have the glide ratio between 12-14, that means for each meter lost in altitude it glides 12-14m. Each plane has its own speed at which this best glide ratio is reached, this is the speed at which the total drag is minimal. A rule of thumb to determine this speed is to use best climb speed (from speedbar - you're interested in IAS) and deduct 10 to 15km/h. For example P-40 should be tested at 240km/h, Bf-109G at 260km/h and so on.

Good luck with your testing!

zugfuhrer
02-16-2004, 02:06 PM
Interesting so the P40 is the only plane with the correct settings. I thought that it was the average that was the right one.
Than I suggest that Maddox should take a look at all the other planes.
Where have you got theese figures from? I am most interested.
What about the lack of damage on radiators?

Magister__Ludi
02-16-2004, 02:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zugfuhrer:
Interesting so the P40 is the only plane with the correct settings. I thought that it was the average that was the right one.
Than I suggest that Maddox should take a look at all the other planes.
Where have you got theese figures from? I am most interested.
What about the lack of damage on radiators?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can see some L/D ratios (glide ratios) here:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-468/app-a2.htm

P-51 is quite average in this respect, all late war planes had a L/D ratio around 14. You can see there that Hellcat has a 12 L/D ratio - this is caused by its wings with low aspect ratio (wings are too short compared to wing area).

BfHeFwMe
02-16-2004, 02:29 PM
Glycol flammable, really? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

zugfuhrer
02-17-2004, 12:01 AM
Very interesting. So most of the fighter have wrong glideratio.
The maddoxteam have a lot to do.

Glycol flammable
Yes very. I velded my car and the antirust coating cought fire.
I tried to put out a fire with what I thought was water, but was water/glycol.
It was like putting oil on the fire.
You can see it on guncameras when the radiator is hit often torches.

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Mon February 16 2004 at 11:12 PM.]

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Mon February 16 2004 at 11:15 PM.]

[This message was edited by zugfuhrer on Mon February 16 2004 at 11:16 PM.]

mr_Decent
02-18-2004, 07:18 AM
I don´t know any figures or anything, but I´ve read the P-40 was (in some texts even hopelesly) obsulete during the war.

Even so, ingame my allied plane of choise 1942 is deffinetly the P-40.
I find it VERY good in the game, I´d guess its too good... don´t know

zugfuhrer
02-23-2004, 01:58 PM
Yes I think so to it is wery nice to fly. Dont draw any conclusions about how it was during the war with the a/c profiles in this game