PDA

View Full Version : 4.05 TEMPEST Prop Pitch Analysis



AKA_TAGERT
10-10-2006, 09:19 PM
Hey Guys

I received some track files via email at naca_testing@yahoo.com, I also read that some folks wanted to see the altitude plots. So, I came up with a standard template for these tests. I added a few extra plots that plot IAS with Prop Pitch and Altitude. I only post some of the plots here, if you want to see all of them check out the corresponding *.mdi file link.

As you read this analysis keep the following issues in mind

1) There is a BUG in the TAS (via Wonder Woman) vs. IAS (via Speed Bar) at sea level. TAS at sea level is ~20+ mph higher than the IAS. Which should not be the case, in that as you know TAS = IAS at sea level, per the following rule-of-thumb equation, i.e. TAS = IASx(1+0.02x[ALT/1000]). Note in this equation that when ALT = 0ft, TAS = IAS. As stated, this is the rule-of-thumb equation, there are more complex/accurate equations that factor in the deviation in temp from the std temp. But it would take a very large deviation to account for a ~20+ mph difference. That is to say you would have to be at the NORTH POLE or flying inside a VOLCANO to generate a ~20+ mph difference! I dont know which one is correct, if either, all I do know is that the IAS guage in the cockpit and the IAS display in the speed bar match, and they match the values collected via DeviceLink. That is 3 vs. 1, so my bet is the IAS cockpit, IAS speed bar, and IAS DeviceLink data is correct and the TAS in the Wonder Woman veiw is in error. The problem is a long time ago, Oleg said the TAS in the WW view is the one to use.. but this wouldnt be the first time Oleg had a bug in his software. There is just no good reason for TAS and IAS to be off by 20mph at sea level.

2) Everyone except PGIFFIN started off wrong! A top speed sea level test starts at sea level and proceeds from a lower speed to the max speed. That is what PGRIFFIN did where as everyone else started from a higher altitude and dove down to sea level! Doing that converts a lot of alt energy into speed and momentum. For some of the tests it did not mater much, in that it took them a few seconds to set up for level flight after the dive from the heavens to the deck. Thus they bleed off the energy before they started, but in a few cases they proceeded right into the speed test with a good head of steam from the dive. You can see this in the graphs that have the altitude plotted along with the IAS.


PINKER15 TEST 1/1:
The first analysis I did was to re-do the one from the other day. Originally I did not know who did the track file, but later I found the old thread and found that it was Pinker15. So I re-plotted the data from the other day to match the new format. Also remember that Pinker16's test was NOT done on the Crima map! So, there could be some error due to that! He also provided a *.trk file not a *.ntrk file. A *.trk file can play back differntly on different machines, where as a *.ntrk file will not. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Pinker15's test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

As you can see from the graph Pinker15 reached the max speed after he dove from ~118ft down to ~60ft. So, the max speed of 386 mph is a little unrealistically high due to the dive. Looking at the altitude level portion between 1.5 sec an 2.0 sec we see he had a max speed of about 385 mph, with an average of about 382 mph.

Here are the links to the rest of Pinker15's analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI..._PINKER15_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...R15_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...KER15_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_SUMMARY.mdi)


BRIAN32 TEST 1/2:
The next test was sent in by Brian32. As he pointed out in this thread, his first test was a little "jumpy" in altitude. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Brian32's 1st test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

I clipped off the beggining of this test where he dove down to sea level, but he tood so long before starting the level fight that it did not mater much. What did mater is he did not maintain a very "level" flight path. Note that just prior to reaching the max speed of 391mph he dove from 100ft down to about 50ft, which followed an even larger dive. In a nut shell he is converting energy back and forth and in doing so hitting peaks in the speed. These peaks would not occur if a level flight was maintained. Looking at this graph it is hard to even guess at what the real speed is in that there is no portion of the altitude that maintained any level flight for any period of time.

Here are the links to the rest of Brian32's 1st test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...T_BRIAN32_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...N32_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IAN32_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_SUMMARY.mdi)


BRIAN32 TEST 2/2:
The next test was also sent in by Brian32. Note in this thread Brian said he did a better job of maintain level fight in this test, that is left to be seen, but note in this test he made the mistake of diving down from the heavens to the deck. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Brian32's 2nd test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

As you can see, I didnt clip off the begging this time. I wanted to show how high he started his dive from. It was so high that it is hard to see what altitude is doing during the level fight test. So, in the next graph I changed the scale on the graph to ignore the first part of the test (the dive down part) here is that graph

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_ALT2.JPG
As you can see, even though Brian2 "felt" he did a better job in maintain level flight he really did not. Note the variations in the altitude go from 80ft down to 10ft, that is a variation of about 70ft! Therefore the good head of steam from the dive followed by the roller costar surly factored into the max speed of 394mph obtain by Brian32 in this test.

Here are the links to the rest of Brian32's 2nd test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...T_BRIAN32_02_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...N32_02_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IAN32_02_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_SUMMARY.mdi)

PGRIFFIN TEST 1/1:
As noted, P Griffin did not dive down from the heavens, but he also had the same problem maintaining level flight as the rest. He was also flying a little higher than the others where (i.e. not as low as he could have been, thus not really sea level) and he also did not do as good of a job at manipulating the Prop Pitch. From what I could tell, he did not toggle it fast enough to get the full benefit of it. Thus his top speed value of only 369mph was lower than it could have been. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from P Griffin's 1st test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG
Note that his top speed of 369mph was obtained after diving down from around 1200ft to 900ft

Here are the links to the rest of P Griffin's 1st test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI..._PGRIFFIN_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...FIN_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IFFIN_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_SUMMARY.mdi)

SUMMARY
IAS 386mph Pinker15 <-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 391mph Brian32 <-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 394mph Brian32 <-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 369mph Griffin <-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level

So, all in all I have yet to see a good top speed test done at sea level. Which totally explains some of the heated responces I have seen around here, like Von_Rat responce to me. Von_Rat may "feel" like there is a problem when in fact it could simply be that he is making a mistake too.. But we will never know in that when I asked him for his track file he said he did not have one. Typically really, in that the one's that seem to make the most noise have the least to back it up.. but I digress. Im positive that if he had the analysis would have shown he made errors too. Note, I am not saying there is not a problem, only that there has not been a good test to prove it. Up to now the high speeds could be due to inproper flying.. ie diving down and not maintaing a steady altitude.

So, to put this to rest we need a good sea level top speed test. To get that it looks like I will have to generate a flight box at sea level like I did back when Billfish claimed the Ki61 could not obtain it's top speed. Here is a link to what the box looks like from the cockpit

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/TOP_SPE..._TAS_AT_15kft_00.jpg (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/TOP_SPEED/402/KI61/ME/MY_KI61_TAS_AT_15kft_00.jpg)

The red lights are hard to see in the jpg, but in game they are very easy to see. To stay level all you have to do is keep your gun sight centered on the vanishing point of the box.. That is to say if you can aim, you can do this! It really helps to have the box in the sky to fly through! In that not only was I able to maintain a level fight, but in doing so I was able to get the rated speed out of the Ki61 that everyone said was imposable to do. Maybe this weekend Ill have some time to make the map with the flight box on it, at which point I will upload a link here so others can give it a go. Heck, maybe I will even try it myself! In that I love debunking myths!

AKA_TAGERT
10-10-2006, 09:19 PM
Hey Guys

I received some track files via email at naca_testing@yahoo.com, I also read that some folks wanted to see the altitude plots. So, I came up with a standard template for these tests. I added a few extra plots that plot IAS with Prop Pitch and Altitude. I only post some of the plots here, if you want to see all of them check out the corresponding *.mdi file link.

As you read this analysis keep the following issues in mind

1) There is a BUG in the TAS (via Wonder Woman) vs. IAS (via Speed Bar) at sea level. TAS at sea level is ~20+ mph higher than the IAS. Which should not be the case, in that as you know TAS = IAS at sea level, per the following rule-of-thumb equation, i.e. TAS = IASx(1+0.02x[ALT/1000]). Note in this equation that when ALT = 0ft, TAS = IAS. As stated, this is the rule-of-thumb equation, there are more complex/accurate equations that factor in the deviation in temp from the std temp. But it would take a very large deviation to account for a ~20+ mph difference. That is to say you would have to be at the NORTH POLE or flying inside a VOLCANO to generate a ~20+ mph difference! I dont know which one is correct, if either, all I do know is that the IAS guage in the cockpit and the IAS display in the speed bar match, and they match the values collected via DeviceLink. That is 3 vs. 1, so my bet is the IAS cockpit, IAS speed bar, and IAS DeviceLink data is correct and the TAS in the Wonder Woman veiw is in error. The problem is a long time ago, Oleg said the TAS in the WW view is the one to use.. but this wouldnt be the first time Oleg had a bug in his software. There is just no good reason for TAS and IAS to be off by 20mph at sea level.

2) Everyone except PGIFFIN started off wrong! A top speed sea level test starts at sea level and proceeds from a lower speed to the max speed. That is what PGRIFFIN did where as everyone else started from a higher altitude and dove down to sea level! Doing that converts a lot of alt energy into speed and momentum. For some of the tests it did not mater much, in that it took them a few seconds to set up for level flight after the dive from the heavens to the deck. Thus they bleed off the energy before they started, but in a few cases they proceeded right into the speed test with a good head of steam from the dive. You can see this in the graphs that have the altitude plotted along with the IAS.


PINKER15 TEST 1/1:
The first analysis I did was to re-do the one from the other day. Originally I did not know who did the track file, but later I found the old thread and found that it was Pinker15. So I re-plotted the data from the other day to match the new format. Also remember that Pinker16's test was NOT done on the Crima map! So, there could be some error due to that! He also provided a *.trk file not a *.ntrk file. A *.trk file can play back differntly on different machines, where as a *.ntrk file will not. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Pinker15's test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

As you can see from the graph Pinker15 reached the max speed after he dove from ~118ft down to ~60ft. So, the max speed of 386 mph is a little unrealistically high due to the dive. Looking at the altitude level portion between 1.5 sec an 2.0 sec we see he had a max speed of about 385 mph, with an average of about 382 mph.

Here are the links to the rest of Pinker15's analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI..._PINKER15_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...R15_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...KER15_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PINKER15_01/TEMPEST_PINKER15_01_SUMMARY.mdi)


BRIAN32 TEST 1/2:
The next test was sent in by Brian32. As he pointed out in this thread, his first test was a little "jumpy" in altitude. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Brian32's 1st test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

I clipped off the beggining of this test where he dove down to sea level, but he tood so long before starting the level fight that it did not mater much. What did mater is he did not maintain a very "level" flight path. Note that just prior to reaching the max speed of 391mph he dove from 100ft down to about 50ft, which followed an even larger dive. In a nut shell he is converting energy back and forth and in doing so hitting peaks in the speed. These peaks would not occur if a level flight was maintained. Looking at this graph it is hard to even guess at what the real speed is in that there is no portion of the altitude that maintained any level flight for any period of time.

Here are the links to the rest of Brian32's 1st test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...T_BRIAN32_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...N32_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IAN32_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_01/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_01_SUMMARY.mdi)


BRIAN32 TEST 2/2:
The next test was also sent in by Brian32. Note in this thread Brian said he did a better job of maintain level fight in this test, that is left to be seen, but note in this test he made the mistake of diving down from the heavens to the deck. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from Brian32's 2nd test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG

As you can see, I didnt clip off the begging this time. I wanted to show how high he started his dive from. It was so high that it is hard to see what altitude is doing during the level fight test. So, in the next graph I changed the scale on the graph to ignore the first part of the test (the dive down part) here is that graph

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_ALT2.JPG
As you can see, even though Brian2 "felt" he did a better job in maintain level flight he really did not. Note the variations in the altitude go from 80ft down to 10ft, that is a variation of about 70ft! Therefore the good head of steam from the dive followed by the roller costar surly factored into the max speed of 394mph obtain by Brian32 in this test.

Here are the links to the rest of Brian32's 2nd test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...T_BRIAN32_02_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...N32_02_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IAN32_02_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/BRIAN32_02/TEMPEST_BRIAN32_02_SUMMARY.mdi)

PGRIFFIN TEST 1/1:
As noted, P Griffin did not dive down from the heavens, but he also had the same problem maintaining level flight as the rest. He was also flying a little higher than the others where (i.e. not as low as he could have been, thus not really sea level) and he also did not do as good of a job at manipulating the Prop Pitch. From what I could tell, he did not toggle it fast enough to get the full benefit of it. Thus his top speed value of only 369mph was lower than it could have been. Here is the IAS vs ALT plot from P Griffin's 1st test.
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS_AN_ALT.JPG
Note that his top speed of 369mph was obtained after diving down from around 1200ft to 900ft

Here are the links to the rest of P Griffin's 1st test analysis
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI..._PGRIFFIN_01_IAS.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...FIN_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_IAS_AN_PP.JPG)
http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSI...IFFIN_01_SUMMARY.mdi (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_TESTING/ANALYSIS/TEST_TYPE/TOP_SPEED/405/TEMPEST/PGRIFFIN_01/TEMPEST_PGRIFFIN_01_SUMMARY.mdi)

SUMMARY
IAS 386mph Pinker15 &lt;-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 391mph Brian32 &lt;-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 394mph Brian32 &lt;-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level
IAS 369mph Griffin &lt;-max not steady, peak due to converting alt to speed, ie not flying level

So, all in all I have yet to see a good top speed test done at sea level. Which totally explains some of the heated responces I have seen around here, like Von_Rat responce to me. Von_Rat may "feel" like there is a problem when in fact it could simply be that he is making a mistake too.. But we will never know in that when I asked him for his track file he said he did not have one. Typically really, in that the one's that seem to make the most noise have the least to back it up.. but I digress. Im positive that if he had the analysis would have shown he made errors too. Note, I am not saying there is not a problem, only that there has not been a good test to prove it. Up to now the high speeds could be due to inproper flying.. ie diving down and not maintaing a steady altitude.

So, to put this to rest we need a good sea level top speed test. To get that it looks like I will have to generate a flight box at sea level like I did back when Billfish claimed the Ki61 could not obtain it's top speed. Here is a link to what the box looks like from the cockpit

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/TOP_SPE..._TAS_AT_15kft_00.jpg (http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/NACA_RESULTS/TOP_SPEED/402/KI61/ME/MY_KI61_TAS_AT_15kft_00.jpg)

The red lights are hard to see in the jpg, but in game they are very easy to see. To stay level all you have to do is keep your gun sight centered on the vanishing point of the box.. That is to say if you can aim, you can do this! It really helps to have the box in the sky to fly through! In that not only was I able to maintain a level fight, but in doing so I was able to get the rated speed out of the Ki61 that everyone said was imposable to do. Maybe this weekend Ill have some time to make the map with the flight box on it, at which point I will upload a link here so others can give it a go. Heck, maybe I will even try it myself! In that I love debunking myths!

VW-IceFire
10-10-2006, 09:33 PM
Thanks for the analysis Tagert. I find graphs seem to lay things out very nicely when we have these debates.

As for what I see....I don't see a huge speed boost. Am I missing something? Or is the exploit more heat related and the ability to use the engine at high power/high speed for longer than should normally be allowed.

I've tried to ignore the prop pitch thing as best as possible. I tend to use WEP and 70% prop pitch as a cruise setting in combat with occasional use of 90%. But I never go back and forth...which I guess is how this works. Frankly kind of silly to me...but as always people will exploit whenever they can.

At least we have hard data.

Cheers!

AKA_TAGERT
10-10-2006, 09:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Thanks for the analysis Tagert. I find graphs seem to lay things out very nicely when we have these debates. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Your Welcome!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
As for what I see....I don't see a huge speed boost. Am I missing something? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
All depends on your defintion of huge! For some, 1mph is huge, for others 10 is, for others 50 is, and so on. Personally an error of +/-5mph is ok by me, but beyond that I would consider a +/-10mph error as huge! And from looking at the graph, we can see that once he stars using the PP method the speed goes from around ~362mph to a max of about ~386mph. That is a good ~24mph increase.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Or is the exploit more heat related and the ability to use the engine at high power/high speed for longer than should normally be allowed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not sure, in the link at the bottom I plot the water and oil heat. I dont recall them decreasing or leveling off once he started using the PP method.. but I just glanced at them too. Might be worth taking a closer look at

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I've tried to ignore the prop pitch thing as best as possible. I tend to use WEP and 70% prop pitch as a cruise setting in combat with occasional use of 90%. But I never go back and forth...which I guess is how this works. Frankly kind of silly to me...but as always people will exploit whenever they can. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Agreed.. but if what some have said is true, even using the PP method does NOT allow the TEMPEST to go as fast as it should.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
At least we have hard data.

Cheers! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Roger, hard is good! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BBB_Hyperion
10-11-2006, 12:41 AM
What about the IAS TAS conversion ? Different map different temperature other density other basic 0 level. Easiest way would be just to review the track at the time top speed is reached and check in ww hud for ingame tas conversion.

Brain32
10-11-2006, 05:08 AM
TAGERT if you want I can send you the track I attached in my March bug report to 1C. It's done on Crimea map with different tehnique http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Anyway, max speed I got was 648kmh TAS(readout via WW view) and max speed I can attain in normal conditions is 608kmh, that's 40kmh difference, quite a boost if you ask me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AKA_TAGERT
10-11-2006, 06:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
What about the IAS TAS conversion ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Allready did it in the link I provided at the bottom. Note in the past there has been some cases where TAS display in the WW view and IAS in the cockpit view do not match up at sea level.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Different map different temperature other density other basic 0 level. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which is why this track is a little suspect, in that he ignored Oleg and did NOT do it on the Crima map.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Easiest way would be just to review the track at the time top speed is reached and check in ww hud for ingame tas conversion. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What is easy for some is hard for others, but I digress. I find that ploting the data not only shows the top spped reached, but how it was reached.

AKA_TAGERT
10-11-2006, 06:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
TAGERT if you want I can send you the track I attached in my March bug report to 1C. It's done on Crimea map with different tehnique http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Anyway, max speed I got was 648kmh TAS(readout via WW view) and max speed I can attain in normal conditions is 608kmh, that's 40kmh difference, quite a boost if you ask me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sure send it to naca_testing@yahoo.com and Ill process it tonight when I get home.

stathem
10-11-2006, 08:21 AM
Many thanks for the testing Tagert.

If it's not too much trouble, could I request that you add in a graph of altitude when analysing Brain's track?

Thanks.

arrow80
10-11-2006, 08:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Thanks for the analysis Tagert. I find graphs seem to lay things out very nicely when we have these debates.

As for what I see....I don't see a huge speed boost. Am I missing something? Or is the exploit more heat related and the ability to use the engine at high power/high speed for longer than should normally be allowed.

I've tried to ignore the prop pitch thing as best as possible. I tend to use WEP and 70% prop pitch as a cruise setting in combat with occasional use of 90%. But I never go back and forth...which I guess is how this works. Frankly kind of silly to me...but as always people will exploit whenever they can.

At least we have hard data.

Cheers! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Icefire: has anything been done yet about getting a proper +11 lbs Tempest? I watched in the hawker forum, but the initiative somehow crashed...

Brain32
10-11-2006, 09:36 AM
Unfortunetly we hit the big brick wall regarding official documents, that's the reason of crashing initiative. All of us spent numerous hours to find some usefull documents, no luck there unfortunetly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
My hopes of our Tempest is revision of overheat modell and possibly some changes in the viewpoint, because not only is the rear view fubar but also central dot on the gunsight is barely visible at any but full zoomed view...

Regarding PP, in the track I sent to TAGERT there is quite some alt variation(20-30m even) I had a nasty elevator axis spike at the time.
However I did new track few mins ago, I kept the plane pretty much level and attained max of 652Kmh TAS. If the sent track will be regarded as having too much alt variation I have a spare one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
EDIT: Actually I'll sent it right now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
10-11-2006, 04:13 PM
As Brain mentions....we can't find any solid data on performance of the +11lb boost. That involves having charts and graphs for +11lb boost Sabre IIB Tempests with top speeds and climb rates at all altitudes using both supercharger stages (and I think we need charts for full and WEP). Either the documents were never made, are not public, or just haven't been dug out of an archive somewhere.

@Tagert: I didn't see it before...but yes...a 24mph speed boost I would say is pretty significant. Thankfully not completely out of the range of the aircraft...so as exploits go...its just a really bad Sabre IIB or IIC equipped aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AKA_TAGERT
10-11-2006, 09:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Many thanks for the testing Tagert.

If it's not too much trouble, could I request that you add in a graph of altitude when analysing Brain's track?

Thanks. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Done.. see the 1st post again, I edited it with all the new data.