PDA

View Full Version : About the YP-80



Platypus_1.JaVA
02-27-2004, 02:50 PM
Did you see it in the updates? IT HAD AFTERBURNER!!! I bet the real P-80 didn't have it. Really... I thought they where just expirimenting with afterburner systems but, I think that the P-80 didn't have one. (At least noet the T-33 I've worked on)

http://www.il2sturmovik.com/forgotten_battles/devupdate/0220/YP-80_action1.jpg

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/JaVAPlatypus-1java.JPG (http://www.1java.org)

Platypus_1.JaVA
02-27-2004, 02:50 PM
Did you see it in the updates? IT HAD AFTERBURNER!!! I bet the real P-80 didn't have it. Really... I thought they where just expirimenting with afterburner systems but, I think that the P-80 didn't have one. (At least noet the T-33 I've worked on)

http://www.il2sturmovik.com/forgotten_battles/devupdate/0220/YP-80_action1.jpg

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/JaVAPlatypus-1java.JPG (http://www.1java.org)

Chuck_Older
02-27-2004, 02:53 PM
I'm confused. Is there a statement to the fact that the YP-80 will have afterburning, or is it that it appears to in the pic?

*****************************
Did anyone prophesize these people? Only Travis. Come in Travis! ~ Clash

Platypus_1.JaVA
02-27-2004, 02:54 PM
Maybe it was hit by the He-162 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge,
ye shall be judged: and with what
measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/JaVAPlatypus-1java.JPG (http://www.1java.org)

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 03:06 PM
NO afterburners on the P-80. The Me-262, Go-229, and He-162 also have flames out the back (blue) and you dont see anyone saying "The me-262 has afterburners!" do you? I dont think the flames should be in the P-80 because the combustion chamber is so far from the back, there is no way a flame would reach that far back! Its just visual FX.

Gib

necrobaron
02-27-2004, 03:08 PM
So shouldn't this be fixed?

"Not all who wander are lost."

ASH at S-MART
02-27-2004, 03:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by necrobaron:
So shouldn't this be fixed?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>YES!! CALL THE FX POLICE!! Dont bother mentioning that NO ONE said anything about this when the Me262 came out.. Just say it now.. Now that a US jet is simulated! LOL!

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Chuck_Older
02-27-2004, 03:14 PM
Let's not start calling "fix it" until the final version in the expansion looks bad to some folks.

*****************************
Did anyone prophesize these people? Only Travis. Come in Travis! ~ Clash

necrobaron
02-27-2004, 03:21 PM
Relax fellas. I always assumed this was correct for the 262 and so on. Heck,I thought it was correct for the P-80 until Gib said it wasn't. I don't claim to be knowledgable about jets. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"Not all who wander are lost."

ASH at S-MART
02-27-2004, 03:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
I dont think the flames should be in the P-80 because the combustion chamber is so far from the back, there is no way a flame would reach that far back! Its just visual FX.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah.. Gib.. check out this web page, it has a pic of the P80 near the bottom of the page with a bunch o yellow stuff comming out the rear! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nagle/P51arch.html

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

JR_Greenhorn
02-27-2004, 03:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by necrobaron:
So shouldn't this be fixed?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>YES!! CALL THE FX POLICE!! Dont bother mentioning that NO ONE said anything about this when the Me262 came out.. Just say it now.. Now that a US jet is simulated! LOL!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>With all due respect, Mr. Williams, don't you agree that the exhaust on the Me 262 et al. are at least convincing?
While I haven't seen any of these planes in flight in person, the blue/violet flames of the Luftwaffe jets are a nice effect, while this yellow/orange does look a little reminicent of afterburners--or at least muzzle flashes. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I thought "what the heck?" when I saw these screens too, bearing in mind the engine placement and tailpipe length on the P-80. I think its safe to say Gibbage is tired of seeing negative comments regarding the P-80, be them constructive or malicious in intent.

LEXX_Luthor
02-27-2004, 04:01 PM
P~80 has cannon in the tail? Awsum! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Love that muzzle flash.

MandMs
02-27-2004, 04:03 PM
The only "after burning" in that pic is the jet exhaust.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Who remebers their oxy-acetilene welding lessons? A blue flame is hotter and has better combustion than a yellow-red flame, which indicates incomplete combustion. Who knows what the exhaust gas temperature should be for the Jumos?


the Me163

"a yellow/green almost transparent colour until the steam condensed into a dense vapour trail in the air"

Hope this is modelled correctly.



I eat the red ones last.

ucanfly
02-27-2004, 04:05 PM
I saw on wings or other channel documentary footage of flames coming out the back of a 262 while on the ground, so at least this appears to be correct for the 262.

Not sure what causes flames (fuel too rich?).

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 04:06 PM
Well thats on startup after a LOT of fuel was pumped into the combustion chamber. Once the turbine gets upto RPM, the flames should be restricted to the combustion chamger (hence, the name). I have seen F-18's and F-16's take off MANY MANY times, and there combustion chamber is a LOT closer to the exaust and you NEVER see a flame unless the AB was enguaged. Watch a jet take off from an airport. They are at 100% throttle typically. Unless the pilot is showing off with his AB's, you wont see nything. Not even at night. Go to an airshow, and those guys always have there AB's on to get the "wow" out of the croud.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
I dont think the flames should be in the P-80 because the combustion chamber is so far from the back, there is no way a flame would reach that far back! Its just visual FX.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ah.. Gib.. check out this web page, it has a pic of the P80 near the bottom of the page with a bunch o yellow stuff comming out the rear! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nagle/P51arch.html

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ASH at S-MART
02-27-2004, 04:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Well thats on startup after a LOT of fuel was pumped into the combustion chamber. Once the turbine gets upto RPM, the flames should be restricted to the combustion chamger (hence, the name). I have seen F-18's and F-16's take off MANY MANY times, and there combustion chamber is a LOT closer to the exaust and you NEVER see a flame unless the AB was enguaged. Watch a jet take off from an airport. They are at 100% throttle typically. Unless the pilot is showing off with his AB's, you wont see nything. Not even at night. Go to an airshow, and those guys always have there AB's on to get the "wow" out of the croud.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>As with the Me262 at startup.. alot of unburned fule gets tossed out.. Seen some BW movies of the Me262 start up.. big ol belch of fule pops out and lands on the ground and continues to burn on the ground! Just wanted to point out there are TIMES when a flame will appear at the end of a P80 tail pipe! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 04:11 PM
Its not safe at all!! HAHA!! No. This is a technical discussion about a graphic error. Not a graphic discussion about a technical error. I think.... But Oleg controles things like this. Not me. Most people out there who dont know how jets work expect to see flames out the back, and Oleg plays to that. Just like big fireballs when a bomb goes off. Its all Hollywood! If you watch WWII footage of a 500lb bomb going off, its just a shockwave and disturbed dust unless it hits a fuel tank. But people WANT the big fireball because its more impressive. Dont you think the flames in the exaust is more impressive then having nothing?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JR_Greenhorn:
placement and tailpipe length on the P-80. I think its safe to say Gibbage is tired of seeing negative comments regarding the P-80, be them constructive or malicious in intent.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 04:13 PM
Yes, but not in-flight when compression and fuel misture and burn is optimal. If your in a jet belching flames without the AB, you better punch out quick!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
As with the Me262 at startup.. alot of unburned fule gets tossed out.. Seen some BW movies of the Me262 start up.. big ol belch of fule pops out and lands on the ground and continues to burn on the ground! Just wanted to point out there are TIMES when a flame will appear at the end of a P80 tail pipe! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ASH at S-MART
02-27-2004, 04:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Yes, but not in-flight when compression and fuel misture and burn is optimal.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True Dat! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
If your in a jet belching flames without the AB, you better punch out quick!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>True Dat Too! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ASH at S-MART
http://www.thecobrasnose.com/images4/brucecampbellSMart.jpg

JR_Greenhorn
02-27-2004, 04:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ASH_SMART:
...check out this web page...

http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nagle/P51arch.html<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I really like the looks of this a/c, I'm looking forward to the day when we get CBI over the FB:
http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nagle/p51a.jpeg
"A P-51A of the 1st ACG over Burma"



This shot could pass for a lightly Photoshopped FB screenie:
http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~nagle/contrails.jpeg
"As the bombers plod towards their targets, their escorting Mustangs fly lazy S curves overhead. With this formidable protection, it became suicide for a Luftwaffe pilot to attack an American bomber formation"

JR_Greenhorn
02-27-2004, 04:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
This is a technical discussion about a graphic error. Not a graphic discussion about a technical error.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
I keep forgetting there's a difference between the two on these forums!
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
Oleg controles things like this. Not me. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I think most here know that, but you never can be sure. Be sure.

VW-IceFire
02-27-2004, 04:54 PM
The other jets do this...I'll bet whatever it is, its done across the board. It looks cool anyways http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 04:55 PM
You would be suprised! I get asked to "fix" a lot of things. Like the FW-190's gunsight and the lakc of firepower on the P-47. Lol.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JR_Greenhorn:
I think most here know that, but you never can be sure. Be sure.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

JR_Greenhorn
02-27-2004, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gibbage1:
You would be suprised! I get asked to "fix" a lot of things. Like the FW-190's gunsight and the lakc of firepower on the P-47. Lol. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I always wondered why you made them like that, Gibbage. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
P-47s are supposed to eat Tiger tanks, you know. Be sure.

JG77Hawk_9
02-27-2004, 06:35 PM
Would I prefere hollywood effects over what should be seen? Hell no!

Give me reality anyday. I get sick of special effects done by clueless gits who go for the wow factor. That's why movies that tone down the effects always have my vote. Look at The Bourne Identity for an example, substitute special effects with good stuntwork and effective camera work and it left me wanting more. I also relished the scenes Polanski did for "The Pianist" where he make Warsaw's desintegration look very authentic after studying tones of real WW2 footage. It was mesmerising and btw a very good film even if the Jewish Holocaust has been flogged like a dead horse (his version was very touching, pity the sh1t had to take place in the first place).

These jets don't have afterburners so the effect should reflect that same with muzzle flashes but I'm not going to beat that horse again, it's already been flogged to death and still falling on deaf ears.

Anyway, can't wait for the expansion (-:

Gibbage1
02-27-2004, 07:02 PM
The people here represent 5% of the people who buy the game. The "hard core". The other 95% want hollywood. Who will you cater too when it comes to something like FX of bombs and stuff like that?

Franzen
02-27-2004, 07:53 PM
Please excuse my ignorance but did the YP-80 see combat in WWII? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gifI was quite surprised to see it in this weeks update.

Fritz

HarryVoyager
02-27-2004, 08:19 PM
Keep in mind that we are talking about WWII era jet engines here. Modern jet engines are lightyears ahead of what was used back then, and are considerably cleaner and more effecient than anything any military of that time fielded.

Axial flow jets, such as the ones used on the 262, had significant problems with compustables leaving the chamber unburnt even well until the late sixties and early seventies.

By contrast, centrifual flow jets were very thorough combustors, even early on. In that type of engine, most of the effeciency loss came from flow problems, rather than incomplete combustion.

So, in summary, it is reasonable for the Jumo's on the 262 to have combustion zones behind the actual engine at very high power settings. However, as the P-80 used centripital flow engines, that aircraft most likely did not have a combustion zone behind the engine proper, even on high power settings.

Harry Voyager

necrobaron
02-27-2004, 10:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franzen:
Please excuse my ignorance but did the YP-80 see combat in WWII? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gifI was quite surprised to see it in this weeks update.

Fritz<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, it didn't see combat in WWII. A couple were stationed in Italy,however, before the war ended. Gib said some were sent to intercept a recon 262 but they couldn't find it.

"Not all who wander are lost."

BaldieJr
02-27-2004, 11:30 PM
First, you gotta hit CTRL+F1. When you're done flying, come back here and complain about realistic visual effects.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">
______ _____
(, / ) /) /) , (, /
/---( _ // _(/ _ / __ ,""""]
+----/ ____)(_(_(/_(_(__(__(/____/__/ (__--------,' /---+
| / ( / ,' NR / |
|(_/ ..-""``"'-._ (_/ __,' 42 _/ |
+-.-"" "-..,____________/7,.--"" __]-----+

</pre>

BlackHawkLeader
02-27-2004, 11:50 PM
Well it did see action in Korea, and helped to win Air superiority over Korea, at least to begin with.
1 million Chinese troops over running the entire United Nations lines, cancelled out any air superiority advantage, over night.

Yet throw in a couple of Mustangs and a few late WW2 VVS fighters and you could build a realistic early Korean War Scenario.

Cheers

Franzen
02-27-2004, 11:53 PM
Just for curiousity sake, not complaining, but why are we getting this plane if it didn't see action in WW2. Sorry, just a little confused here http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

Fritz

MandMs
02-28-2004, 05:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franzen:
Just for curiousity sake, not complaining, but why are we getting this plane if it didn't see action in WW2. Sorry, just a little confused here http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

Fritz<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Same reason we got the Bi-1, a 3rd party modelled it. Also Oleg said, a/c up to the end of 1947, iirc, can be modelled for inclusion in the plane set.



I eat the red ones last.

OberstWileyII
02-28-2004, 02:07 PM
I've read that the first First Afterburner was in the 1950 timeframe on the Mig17F...

http://imagehost.auctionwatch.com/preview/wi/wileycoyote2/IwoJimatiny2.gif (http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/flightsims/oberstguncam/Movies/SandsOne.WMV)
<A HREF="http://people.ee.ethz.ch/~chapman/flightsims/oberstguncam/Frameset/" TARGET=_blank>Click on Flag-Raising to view full length 4Mb version
...Or, click HERE to Visit Wiley's WWII GunCam World</A>

Franzen
02-28-2004, 02:14 PM
Ok, I see. Will we get anything other than testflight missions? Maybe some "what if?" missions? Could be interesting.

Fritz

necrobaron
02-28-2004, 02:22 PM
I'm sure the Mission Builders will make believable "what-if" scenarios. That's why I like these "wunder" planes. It gives the Builders a much better opporunity to use their imaginations. I ain't whining. If you don't like em,then don't fly them. I don't see why you would purposely limit yourself,though.

"Not all who wander are lost."

p1ngu666
02-28-2004, 02:30 PM
nah, brit jet engine had afterburner, it was the first. mind it would have done 1000mph
also theres a vid of engine trial, guy lobs brick behind engine, and it goes quickly into a sloping wall then up high http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg