PDA

View Full Version : NEW CLIMB RATE TEST FOR SOME PLANES AEP 2.04 !!!



Kwiatos
10-07-2004, 01:26 PM
HI All!
I made some test about climb rates selected by my planes which we have in AEP 2.04. I hope these clear some things here !!!

Test method:
- Map Crimea, weather clear, 12:00 hour
- planes settings: 100% fuel with ammo, radiator open, the best climb speed from IL2 Compare, test made from 0km - 7km at sea
- See that climb was made from 0-7km and higher alt climb rates from graph are not accurate!!!

Here we are:

----Spitfire MKVb 1941 ---------------- Fw -190 A-4------
----Max----m/s---100%---m/s-----Max----m/s----100%---m/s
1. 1:04---15.6---1:22---12------0:59---17-----1:09---14.4
2. 2:04---16.6---2:37---15,3----2:01---16-----2:23---13,5
3. 3:00---17.8---3:43---15,1----3:10---14,4---3:43---12,5
4. 3:53---18.8---4:49---15,1----4:18---14,7---5:03---12,5
5. 4:50---17.5---5:54---15,3----5:24---15-----6:22---12,6
6. 6:00---14.2---7:03---14,4----6:36---13,8---7:44---12
7. 7:22---12-----8:24---12,3----7:58---12-----9:25---10

---RL Spitfire MK VB-----MK VC-----------Fw 190 A-3------
---Merlin 45 +9 Bost---+9----+16------1,35ata-----1.28ata-
---------m/s----------m/s----m/s-------m/s------------m/s-
1.------16,2----------13-----18,5-----16,5-----------14,7-
2.5-----16,2----------13-----18,5-----12,5-----------11,2-
3.------16,2----------13,2---17,8-----17,8-----------14,2-
4.------16,2----------13,2---15,2-----17,8-----------14,2-
5.------15------------12,5---14-------17,8-----------14,2-
6.------12,2----------9,9----11,4------?---------------?--
7.------9,7-----------9------9---------10----7.5km----10--

Notes:
- Spitfire MKVB 1941 no overhaet at all during climb
- Fw 190 A-4 overheat during climb at 110% power at 4.5km so i must to slighty decrase power to 103% power for some time to cool engine, then apply 110% power, when overheat again the same procedure

Here we are some graph:
Spitfire Compare - own test vs Il2Compare vs real test
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/SpitfireClimbRate.jpg

Fw190 Compare - own test vs IL2 Compare vs real test Fw190 A-3:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Fw190ClimbRate.jpg

RL Spitfire MKVB 1941 Merlin 45 vs FW 190 A-3
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/RLSpitVvsA3climb.jpg

Real documentc Fw190 A-3 vs Spitfire VB
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/fw190doc3.jpg

I made some test other planes: I made only max power (110% power) beacues of time :

-Bf109 F-4----G-2-----Lagg3 66 ser.-----Mig3 Am38
----------------------m/s------------------------
1.---17,2-----22,2--------20-------------22------
2.---17,5-----22,7--------18,8-----------21------
3.---17,5-----22,7--------15,6-----------20------
4.---17,5-----21,7--------16,3-----------16,4----
5.---17,5-----21,2--------13,3-----------14,2----
6.---14,7-----18,8--------11-------------11,7----
7.---12-------18,8--------9,3------------10------

Climb time:

3km--2:52-----2:13--------2:47-----------2:22----

5km--4:46-----3:46--------5:01-----------4:33----

6km--5:54-----4:39--------6:32-----------5:58----

Note:
- Lag3 66, Bf F-4, Bf G-2 overheat about 4-5 km, so i must to slighty decrase power to 103% power for some time to cool engine, then apply 110% power, when overheat again the same procedure
- Mig3 AM38 no overheat during climb

Some graph:

Bf 109 F4 - Il2compare vs own test:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/BfF-4-climb.jpg

Bf-109 G-2:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/bf109G2.jpg

Lag3 66:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Lag66.jpg

Mig 3 AM38:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Mig3AM38.jpg


Bf 190 F-4 vs Lagg 3 66:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/F-4v****66.jpg

All selected planes:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/select.jpg


I have no time today for conclusions. But plz check it and i wait for your all opinions.
Plz watch out that Il2Compare often show climb rate which isnt correct with own test.
Plz note that Il2 Compare is test of planes controled by AI not human!!!
As i test Il2 Compare is correct only in Maximum Speed and BEST CLIMB SPEED but iIS NOT correct with CLIMB RATE AND TURN RATE!!!!

Cheers

P.S
I will make some more climb test for future.

Kwiatos
10-07-2004, 01:26 PM
HI All!
I made some test about climb rates selected by my planes which we have in AEP 2.04. I hope these clear some things here !!!

Test method:
- Map Crimea, weather clear, 12:00 hour
- planes settings: 100% fuel with ammo, radiator open, the best climb speed from IL2 Compare, test made from 0km - 7km at sea
- See that climb was made from 0-7km and higher alt climb rates from graph are not accurate!!!

Here we are:

----Spitfire MKVb 1941 ---------------- Fw -190 A-4------
----Max----m/s---100%---m/s-----Max----m/s----100%---m/s
1. 1:04---15.6---1:22---12------0:59---17-----1:09---14.4
2. 2:04---16.6---2:37---15,3----2:01---16-----2:23---13,5
3. 3:00---17.8---3:43---15,1----3:10---14,4---3:43---12,5
4. 3:53---18.8---4:49---15,1----4:18---14,7---5:03---12,5
5. 4:50---17.5---5:54---15,3----5:24---15-----6:22---12,6
6. 6:00---14.2---7:03---14,4----6:36---13,8---7:44---12
7. 7:22---12-----8:24---12,3----7:58---12-----9:25---10

---RL Spitfire MK VB-----MK VC-----------Fw 190 A-3------
---Merlin 45 +9 Bost---+9----+16------1,35ata-----1.28ata-
---------m/s----------m/s----m/s-------m/s------------m/s-
1.------16,2----------13-----18,5-----16,5-----------14,7-
2.5-----16,2----------13-----18,5-----12,5-----------11,2-
3.------16,2----------13,2---17,8-----17,8-----------14,2-
4.------16,2----------13,2---15,2-----17,8-----------14,2-
5.------15------------12,5---14-------17,8-----------14,2-
6.------12,2----------9,9----11,4------?---------------?--
7.------9,7-----------9------9---------10----7.5km----10--

Notes:
- Spitfire MKVB 1941 no overhaet at all during climb
- Fw 190 A-4 overheat during climb at 110% power at 4.5km so i must to slighty decrase power to 103% power for some time to cool engine, then apply 110% power, when overheat again the same procedure

Here we are some graph:
Spitfire Compare - own test vs Il2Compare vs real test
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/SpitfireClimbRate.jpg

Fw190 Compare - own test vs IL2 Compare vs real test Fw190 A-3:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Fw190ClimbRate.jpg

RL Spitfire MKVB 1941 Merlin 45 vs FW 190 A-3
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/RLSpitVvsA3climb.jpg

Real documentc Fw190 A-3 vs Spitfire VB
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/fw190doc3.jpg

I made some test other planes: I made only max power (110% power) beacues of time :

-Bf109 F-4----G-2-----Lagg3 66 ser.-----Mig3 Am38
----------------------m/s------------------------
1.---17,2-----22,2--------20-------------22------
2.---17,5-----22,7--------18,8-----------21------
3.---17,5-----22,7--------15,6-----------20------
4.---17,5-----21,7--------16,3-----------16,4----
5.---17,5-----21,2--------13,3-----------14,2----
6.---14,7-----18,8--------11-------------11,7----
7.---12-------18,8--------9,3------------10------

Climb time:

3km--2:52-----2:13--------2:47-----------2:22----

5km--4:46-----3:46--------5:01-----------4:33----

6km--5:54-----4:39--------6:32-----------5:58----

Note:
- Lag3 66, Bf F-4, Bf G-2 overheat about 4-5 km, so i must to slighty decrase power to 103% power for some time to cool engine, then apply 110% power, when overheat again the same procedure
- Mig3 AM38 no overheat during climb

Some graph:

Bf 109 F4 - Il2compare vs own test:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/BfF-4-climb.jpg

Bf-109 G-2:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/bf109G2.jpg

Lag3 66:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Lag66.jpg

Mig 3 AM38:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/Mig3AM38.jpg


Bf 190 F-4 vs Lagg 3 66:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/F-4v****66.jpg

All selected planes:
http://centrum.gliwice.pl/~azm/dane/select.jpg


I have no time today for conclusions. But plz check it and i wait for your all opinions.
Plz watch out that Il2Compare often show climb rate which isnt correct with own test.
Plz note that Il2 Compare is test of planes controled by AI not human!!!
As i test Il2 Compare is correct only in Maximum Speed and BEST CLIMB SPEED but iIS NOT correct with CLIMB RATE AND TURN RATE!!!!

Cheers

P.S
I will make some more climb test for future.

faustnik
10-07-2004, 01:45 PM
Thanks Kwaitos. I had always thought that IL-2 compare was close to correct but, it looks like it is not even close.

Col.Kurtz
10-07-2004, 01:58 PM
Yes your conclusion is correct.
Il2 Compare is of no use other than speed data.
Climb and turn data from Il2Compare are wrong

100%Fuel, max Power, Radiator Open/auto,start from Ground and time count at liftoff at 220km/h IAS
Substained Climb at 280-260km/h IAS at max angel

Example:

La7

1k--42sec
2k--1:23
3k--2:14
4k--3:07
5k--3:59min
6k--4:57
7k--6:04

M/sec
0-1k=23,8
1-2k=24,4
2-3k=19,6
3-4k=18,9
4-5k=19,2
5-6k=17,2
6-7k=14,9
------------------
Fw190D9 44er

1k--48sec
2k--1:32min
3k--2:25min
4k--3:12min
5k--3:59min
6k--4:50min
7k--5:52min

Meter/sec
0-1k=20,8 m/sec
1-2k=22,7
2-3k=18,9
3-4k=21,3
4-5k=21,3
5-6k=19,6
6-7k=16,1 m/sec

Here we see that in real Test under same condition both planes reaches 5000m in the same time.
Below 3000m La7 has advantage and above D9.
But Il2 Compare shows superior Climb of FW190D9 with about ~5 m/sec

Nothing comes close to a real testing!

Here SpitV41 vs. FW190A4

Spit VB 41
3000m--3:07min
5000m--4:55min
7000m--7:37min

0-1k=14,7(16 bei Airstart)
1-2k=17,2
2-3k=18,5
3-4k=18,5
4-5k=17,5
5-6k=13,5
6-7k=11,5m/sec

-----------------
FW190A4 (100%Prop)
3000m--2:55min
5000m--4:55min
7000m--7:05min
8000m--8:32min

0-1k=16,4 m/sec
1-2k=17,8
2-3k=16,7
3-4k=16.7
4-5k=16,7
5-6k=17,54
6-7k=13,9 m/sec

At high climbspeed (400 IAS) A4 is superior in Climb.

And again this shows that Il2 Compare is completely useless!

clint-ruin
10-07-2004, 02:06 PM
Il2compare is actually fairly accurate - it will occasionally produce wild outlying results, but generally you aren't looking at much more than 5% difference for most of the figures it spits out. Speeds too.

If you touch the elevator at all or don't use 'radiator closed' you are going to get some interesting results to compare it with, too.

BBB_Hyperion
10-07-2004, 02:11 PM
Hmm looks like handnoted climbfigures that contain always a error margin. On the other hand how you archive to minimize the effect of initial climb ?. However il2compare doesnt show correct ingame data for several reasons cem , pitch posted that ages ago.

Here are some Datas from real tests.

climb and combat power all

the second are in second ie max 60)
A4: (w=3850 kg ie without mg ff)
2000: 2 min 10
4000: 4 min 50
6000: 7 min 48
8000: 12 min 00

A5 us test (w3871 kg ie without the mg ff)
2000: 2 min 12
4000: 4 min 48
6000: 7 min 05
8000: 11 min 10

A5 german (4050 kg with mg ff+90 rounds) march43.
2000: 2min 05
4000: 4min 45
6000: 7min 30
8000: 12 min 05

a6 (4150 kg)
2000: 2min 05
4000: 4min 45
6000: 7min 30
8000: 12 min 05

a6+gm1 tank (4300 kg)
2000: 2 min 45
4000: 5 min 50
6000: 9 min 00
8000: 13 min 45

a8 4.36 t with back seat tank(may 44)
2000: 2 min 30
4000: 5 min 10
6000: 8 min 45
8000: 13 min 24

a9: 4.2 t without the outer guns
2000: 2 min 05
4000: 4 min 30
6000: 7 min 15
8000: 10 min 42

Ugly_Kid
10-07-2004, 03:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
Il2compare is actually fairly accurate - it will occasionally produce wild outlying results, but generally you aren't looking at much more than 5% difference for most of the figures it spits out. Speeds too.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, Compare is nowhere near the performance of the human flown aircraft, defenately not inside 5%. If you get that error already in top speed, which you regularly do (and I don't mean that human flown aircraft get solemnly lower values) - you're talking about the easiest performance parameter, the rest reaching the climax with turn rates is exponentially wrong.

I am sorry but there is no substitute to actual testing and since devicelink that can be done quite in the real manner. Compare really doesn't mean much. It mostly reflects the intentions of the dev. team as it is based on directly reading the performance of AI aircraft. It means, thus, mostly how the dev. team would like to have the things, I think. This hints clearly more on a tabular AI FM which can be read directly from the code with some hacking. Whether the human flown FM with differential time integration reaches anything similar is quite another question. I don't think that guys like Youss with no knowledge whatsoever about aerodynamics and flight mechanics come out with predicting the correct solution for the equations because all that's in the code for human flown aircraft is just coefficients, dozens of them. By all means use it as a reference a good thing at that, much better than Object Viewer but it is not the way the aircraft flown by you is performing.

I don't know but it would be helpfull to hear the true state of the affairs from Oleg himself. Is IL2 Compare how they intend the performance to be, because it would help people immediately to see a) is aircraft A performing as intended (if not it's a bug) b) is the intended performance in par with the reality. You know lots of these discussions here are worthless because noone really seems to know or bother to find out whether human flown aircraft performance is as intended at all in the first place or that way by accident. It happens that sometimes it is not and the dev. team takes quite a rapid step correcting it even without much of this silly moaning around here.

Kwiatos
10-07-2004, 03:39 PM
Have someone climb rate (m/s) and climb time for different altitudes - expecially scan historically documents for these planes:
- Bf F-2, F-4 !!!
- La5, La5FN
- Lagg3 - expecially later series (66)
- Mig AM-38
- P-51 B/C & D
- P-39 N,Q
- P-40 E,M

- or others http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I need some help for other test http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
10-07-2004, 03:44 PM
can i make a suggestion?
use your webspace, for tables, make a page with the graphs and use html tables, i find the way u haveto do it here on ubi had to follow.
constructive help, not trying tobe mean or anything.

thanks for running the tests http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

BBB_Hyperion
10-07-2004, 03:50 PM
When you need technical help how to use devicelink data and make some charts with it private topic me. Have some older tests too if you need .)

clint-ruin
10-07-2004, 05:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ugly_Kid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
Il2compare is actually fairly accurate - it will occasionally produce wild outlying results, but generally you aren't looking at much more than 5% difference for most of the figures it spits out. Speeds too.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, Compare is nowhere near the performance of the human flown aircraft, defenately not inside 5%. If you get that error already in top speed, which you regularly do (and I don't mean that human flown aircraft get solemnly lower values) - you're talking about the easiest performance parameter, the rest reaching the climax with turn rates is exponentially wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Ugly_Kid,

Yes that's exactly what I mean though. Il2compare numbers are not supposed to represent the absolute balls to the wall performance that a human can wring out of an aircraft. It is reasonably accurate if you bear in mind what it is showing you.

5% is 1.1 seconds out of a 22 second turn time.

5% is 30 kmh off on a top speed of 600kmh.

5% can be a lot.

Kwiatos
10-08-2004, 03:09 AM
Hi!
Some my conclusions to my test:

1 Spitfire MK VB 1941 Merlin 45.

I tested climb rate and compare it to RL test of Spitfire MK VB Merlin 45 +9Bost and Spitfire MKVC Merlin 45 +16 Bost:

- If we have Spitfire with only +9Bost so we see that its climb rate is overmodelled expecially at medium to high altitude (from 2 - 7km tested)

- If we have Spitfire with +16 Bost (model from late 1942)we see that climb rate AEP SPit is to low at alt from 0-3km but is too high at medium to high altitude (from 3-7km). Probably if we would have Spitfire MKV with +16 BOST maximum speed expecialy at low to medium alt should be beeter than our Spitf from AEP.
- from test we can see that Spitfire MK VB from AEP have bad climb rate characteristic (too good at medium to high alt) which is not correct with climb rate characteristic of engine Merlin 45.

2. Fw 190 A-4
Because i haven't climb rate of FW 190 A-4 i compare it to Fw 190 A-3 Captured and tested by RAF which his similar to A-4.

- from test we see that Fw 190 A-4 is undermodelled in climb rate at alt from 3 to 5 km. A-3 had climb rate 17,8m/s (max power) at these alt and our Fw 190 A-4 have av. 14,7 m/s at these alt.

3. Bf 109 F-4
I couldn't find reald document until now about climb rate Bf F-4 but as i remebmer Bf F-4 had initial climb rate ab. 21m/s.

- we see from test that our F-4 have only 17,5 m/s climb rate. RL Bf 109 Emil had 17,8 m/s.

- No real document but worth a look:
"the Bf 109F-4 (..) initial climb rate of 4,300 ft (1.310 m) per minute (21,8 m/s), climb to 9,845 ft (3.000 m) in 2 minutes 36 seconds, and a service ceiling of 39,370 ft (12.000 m).
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/messbf109.html

4. Mig 3 AM-38
These plane in AEP have amazing like for Mig3 climb rate 22 m/s!!! From 0-3 km is equal to Bf 190 G-2. Besides amazing climb rate have no problem with overheat. During climb from 0-7km at 110% power no overheat at all. As i found:
"One of the engines seen fit for the MiG-3 was the Klimov Am-38, which had higher power output, but lower altitude capability.The fighter was lsightly heavier than the standard
MiG-3 weighing 7,330 lb (3.325 kg). Max level speed was 367 mph (592 km/h) at optimum altitude. With this engine the MiG-3 became the fastest of all contemporary fighters at low and medium altitudes, except for the Messerschmitt Bf 109F-2 and Bf 109F-4. Drawbacks of the new engine was the overheating. The MiG-3 had retained the same oil and water coolers, but the engines produced more heat. This meant that the fighter was unfit to be used for operational service, and subsequently the program was abandoned.
http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/mikomig3.html

- in web i found that Mig3 Am-38 had climb time to 5 km - 7:95 min. IN AEP Mig3 Am-38 climb to 5 km in 4,5 min (110%power)
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/mig-3.html

Col.Kurtz
10-08-2004, 11:20 AM
@Kwiatos
In your climb with A4 you lowered power at overheat!
See my data that i have posted.It´s with 100% Prop(more important with A4 than with A5) and open Radiator and ignoring overheat.
You can overheat Engine for about 4:30min so you have 4min(i take this as WEP time) time for full power climb till you must cool the engine!
In 30sec you can cool it down to normal and fly again for 4min at WEP
As you can see that our results are very simular you can trust my data.

Also in the english test of the A3 they had higher Climbrate in second gear than in first wich is impossible and is completely opossite to Luftwaffen Tests( see A5/A8 Dora9 Charts all with same Charger system)
The Climb performance of the FW190A4 in game are like i would expext from 1.42ata,its speed is modelled after 1.35ata.
Climb performance of A4 was rised in a patch short after SpitV was released.
Same can be seen with the K4 in game it has 2ata Climb performance but 1.8ata speed modelled

SpitV is overmodeled like you said at high alt but not as much as many other planes
It has climb to 7000m in
7:05min in <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">AEP 2.04</span> but had
7:45min in <span class="ev_code_GREEN">reallife</span>(9LB) so it climbs at about 40sec to fast
Climb should get lowered a little at alt and rised at low alt for 12LB performance.

But im sure Maddox games will do nothing here...
To much planes in PF/AEP for such fine tuning i think there will be much worser problems in FM with the new planes...