PDA

View Full Version : What does Oleg mean about Japanese performance?



ElAurens
11-12-2004, 03:31 PM
I'm not quite sure I understand what Oleg is saying about boost and Japanese performance numbers.

Is it that the maximum speeds we all have come to know about IJN/IJAAF aircraft are not with boost or full throttle applied?

Ivan help!!!!!

crazyivan1970
11-12-2004, 03:34 PM
From what i know, they programmed not entirely correct values into several japanese aricraft. Which will be corrected with the patch.. I will try to get more info on monday.

EL get on MSN, i gotta ask you something.

VMF-214_HaVoK
11-12-2004, 04:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'm not quite sure I understand what Oleg is saying about boost and Japanese performance numbers.

Is it that the maximum speeds we all have come to know about IJN/IJAAF aircraft are _not_ with boost or full throttle applied?

Ivan help!!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must be. Zeros should be faster then both P-40s and Wildcats in level flight. It would seem in the game they are not. P-40s and Wildcats should only have a boom and zoom advantage. I can stay on a Zero rather easily while flying a P-40. Ki-43 is another story.

=S=

chris455
11-12-2004, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'm not quite sure I understand what Oleg is saying about boost and Japanese performance numbers.

Is it that the maximum speeds we all have come to know about IJN/IJAAF aircraft are _not_ with boost or full throttle applied?

Ivan help!!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must be. Zeros should be faster then both P-40s and Wildcats in level flight. It would seem in the game they are not. P-40s and Wildcats should only have a boom and zoom advantage. I can stay on a Zero rather easily while flying a P-40. Ki-43 is another story.

=S= <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is not true. The P-40 was on average faster than contemporary Zeros. Not by much, but faster.

sapre
11-12-2004, 04:59 PM
Does this mean we are getting Ki-84 with max speed of 624kmh rather than 684kmh?

A.K.Davis
11-12-2004, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
I'm not quite sure I understand what Oleg is saying about boost and Japanese performance numbers.

Is it that the maximum speeds we all have come to know about IJN/IJAAF aircraft are _not_ with boost or full throttle applied?

Ivan help!!!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must be. Zeros should be faster then both P-40s and Wildcats in level flight. It would seem in the game they are not. P-40s and Wildcats should only have a boom and zoom advantage. I can stay on a Zero rather easily while flying a P-40. Ki-43 is another story.

=S= <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is not true. The P-40 was on average faster than contemporary Zeros. Not by much, but faster. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Altitude dependent. Zeros were faster at altitude.

Chuck_Older
11-12-2004, 07:06 PM
So does this mean you got PF to work, El? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

horseback
11-12-2004, 07:13 PM
What altitude?

Top speed for Type 21 A6M2 Zero is listed as 331.4 mph at 14,760ft (288kts@ 4,500m). The Type 52 A6M5 reached a max speed of 351 mph at 19,690 ft when it showed up in the summer of 1943.

P-40C top speed was 345mph @ 15,000 ft, and P-40E topped out at 362 mph @ 15,000 ft. Later models of the Kittyhawk were somewhat faster, with the lightweight P-40N-1 doing 378mph @ 15,000 ft. By this time, however, the P-40 had largely been eclipsed by the P-38, P-47, Corsair and Hellcat in the order of battle.

At no time in its combat career did the P-40 lack some performance advantages over its primary opponents in the Pacific. Unless badly outnumbered, Warhawk pilots who fought smart came away no worse than even through most of the war.

cheers

horseback

killer2359
11-12-2004, 08:57 PM
I took what was said to mean that at least some of the zeros WITHOUT water/meth are modeled with performance of aircraft that have it.

There are a few Zero issues IMO:

Zero should not be able to dive as fast as either P-40 or Wildcat (the weight difference had a very telling effect and Zero's wing spars were not strong enough in any case).

P-40 and Wildcat should not only be able to significantly better out dive Zero but they should be able to outrun them decently too.

Also, if pushed into a fast fight the Zero should suffer from quite significant loss of maneoverability (controls become very heavy above about 280mph).

Also, I gather it's quite difficult determining exactly which Zero's had water/meth injection - in fact some later models had different engines in different planes according to what was physically available to complete contruction of the specific aircraft in the factory.

BlitzPig_DDT
11-12-2004, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killer2359:
Also, if pushed into a fast fight the Zero should suffer from quite significant loss of maneoverability (controls become very heavy above about 280mph). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I really haven't seen this. Either in them, or against them.

Others say it's there, and I'm not calling them out, it's just that I personally have not noticed it at all.

LEXX_Luthor
11-12-2004, 09:44 PM
Yes, Zero roll and turn drop off at higher speeds. Maybe your stick settings, but they all say that, so la la

lbhskier37
11-12-2004, 09:49 PM
Zeros definitly lose maneuverability at high speeds now. I was flying my Hellcat online the other day and one got a good jump on my buddy. He decided to stay on my buddy as he dove and picked up a lot of speed. Needless to say he wasn't going to shake me at the 400+kph we were doing.

killer2359
11-12-2004, 09:51 PM
"I really haven't seen this. Either in them, or against them."

BlitzPig_DDT - if you mean you fly/flown Zero in real life then I stand corrected - if you mean in the game then that's my point.

BlitzPig_DDT
11-12-2004, 10:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killer2359:
"I really haven't seen this. Either in them, or against them."

BlitzPig_DDT - if you mean you fly/flown Zero in real life then I stand corrected - if you mean in the game then that's my point. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the game. When flying them fast, they feel fine. Then flying fast against them, they don't seem to get sluggish at all.

:::shrug:::

TimTam27
11-12-2004, 11:19 PM
Hi El-Aurens perhaps I can address your original question. This thread seems to have become a bit side tracked.

I think what Oleg was saying is that the performance figures quoted for some Japanese aircraft are for continous max. power not overboost as is usually quoted for aircraft from other nations. So I guess we can expect som of the Japanese planes to be a bit faster than we might have expected.
This has been discussed a bit over at J-aircraft.com and is pretty old news by now. It does however apply to only some aircraft not all of them.
There was recently an interesting discussion at J-aircraft.com about the disparity in performance between the Japanese figures for the Ki-84 (398 m.p.h) and the US figures achived by the captured version (427 m.p.h). The extra speed has often been ascribed to higher octane fuel and better spark plugs but a recent post at J-aircraft.com had a different explanation. The poster suggested that the difference was more likely due to the fact that the performance figures quoted by the Japanese were for the pre-production Ki-84 with a lower rated engine and earlier type of exhaust pipe which did not provide the extra thrust afforded by the multiple jet exhausts of the production version. Add to this the difference between max and overboost and with the help of some equations (thrust v drag etc.)the figure of 427 m.p.h was reached without the help of special U.S fuel and equipment.

CV8_Dudeness
11-13-2004, 05:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killer2359:
Zero should not be able to dive as fast as either P-40 or Wildcat (the weight difference had a very telling effect and Zero's wing spars were not strong enough in any case). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
this is in PF

P-40s can gain seperation from Zeros . . .. dont expect it to be mind blowing , P-40s are faster & gain speed faster in PF

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killer2359:
P-40 and Wildcat should not only be able to significantly better out dive Zero but they should be able to outrun them decently too.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
decently ?

their advantage wasnt in accelleration , . . . . . . top speed only

its the last 20 - 50 Kmh that the P-40s had an advantage over Zeros , untill you hit that last bit of speed you didnt have a advantage

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killer2359:
Also, if pushed into a fast fight the Zero should suffer from quite significant loss of maneoverability (controls become very heavy above about 280mph).. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
this is in PF

im starting to think you dont fly Zeros

they get heavier controls noticably at speeds over 300

much of this kind of complaint comes from short distance DF's , we play on small maps & people expect to be able to pull out huge gaps really quick so thay can come around

i see next to ZERO people online flying with the proper discipline required to make the P-40s advantages stick

the Zeke has actual disadvantages against the Wildcat & P-40 . . . . as it has advantages

fly the strengths & fly with enough discipline to make the advantages stick

k5054
11-13-2004, 05:18 AM
It's not so much about the Zero, which if it did 330 was pretty good for a 1000hp radial of no special high-speed features, but the George, Jack and Frank, all listed as below 400mph with 2000hp-class engines. Most of those are listed as faster in allied documents than in Japanese sources, leading one to suppose they had a difference in testing methods. But AFAIK none of those birds actually were thoroughly tested by the allies at any time. The 427mph Frank test is legendary, but no-one over at j-aircraft has found a real copy of any such test, just the estimates by TAIC. I'm sure George (N1K1) and Jack (J2M) would be good for 400mph, not the 360 quoted in Japanese tests. But we need a good documented test and none have been found. A 10% speed increase implies a 30% power increase, wihch is not explained by a bit of water-meth. That's why if Oleg has this kind of data it would be very nice for those of us who care about these things to see what there is, from a historical point of view, not just PF's FM.

CV8_Dudeness
11-13-2004, 05:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TimTam27:
the figure of 427 m.p.h was reached without the help of special U.S fuel and equipment. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
fuel on its own doesnt make your moter produce more power

a higher octane can improve running . . . . . but to get more power from a higher octane you need changes in the motor to take advantage of the higher octane

.
.
TOP SPEED

top speed is more the thrust to drag equation

adding weight doesnt necessarily hurt your top speed too much , what hurts/helps top speed the most is lowering / increasing the Aerodynamic drag on your machine

ElAurens
11-13-2004, 06:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
So does this mean you got PF to work, El? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, working fine now...

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chuck_Older
11-13-2004, 07:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
So does this mean you got PF to work, El? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, working fine now...

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Coool. I got something for you, then. I need to go shovel the f#@%ing snow right now, but I'll PM you later on

DuxCorvan
11-13-2004, 07:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
So does this mean you got PF to work, El? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup, working fine now...

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Coool. I got something for you, then. I need to go shovel the f#@%ing snow right now, but I'll PM you later on <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oooooh, snow! Where are you, Chuck? I haven't seen snow in my hometown since 1987, and in the town I live now, most people have NEVER seen the snow. It does not snow since 1915 or so... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Send me a little bit... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Chuck_Older
11-13-2004, 07:44 AM
I'm in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, Dux.

You can have all the bloody snow. I'll trade you for... the comfy chair!

DuxCorvan
11-13-2004, 07:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I'm in Boston, Massachusetts, USA, Dux.

You can have all the bloody snow. I'll trade you for... _the comfy chair!_ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good morning, Chuck. Here, 15:50 in Cádiz, Spain. And, actually, my chair is comfy no more... I just broke the seat yesterday... What is it trying to tell me? That I'm too thin and my pointy a$$ is passing thru the chair bottom? More snacks! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif