PDA

View Full Version : Oleg concern about dive accelaration.



LeadSpitter_
07-21-2004, 12:29 AM
I dont know if its just rumors but people been saying next patch will be the final patch for fb.aep.

Im wondering if you plane on working on that for the next patch which is very important " not just max breakup speed."

I dont know if its a limitation of the game engine or not. Im just wondering if you plane on working on it and for FB/AEP and of course PF.

I know this has been brought up on a number occasions by many users robban75 and many other and has never been answered by you. Its really a basic important aspect of a realistic flight simulation to me and know its certainly easier said then actually done.

If you have the time I would like to hear your thoughts. S

I dont know if its an issue with with cem and how 100 pitch will bleed down your speed in dives compaired to say 25-75 pitch which makes the aircrafts dive alot faster opposed to 100 pitch and more trottle. Also the 0-25 pitch seems to maintain the speeds above the aircrafts max level flight speed alot longer then using full trottle and 100 pitch

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

LeadSpitter_
07-21-2004, 12:29 AM
I dont know if its just rumors but people been saying next patch will be the final patch for fb.aep.

Im wondering if you plane on working on that for the next patch which is very important " not just max breakup speed."

I dont know if its a limitation of the game engine or not. Im just wondering if you plane on working on it and for FB/AEP and of course PF.

I know this has been brought up on a number occasions by many users robban75 and many other and has never been answered by you. Its really a basic important aspect of a realistic flight simulation to me and know its certainly easier said then actually done.

If you have the time I would like to hear your thoughts. S

I dont know if its an issue with with cem and how 100 pitch will bleed down your speed in dives compaired to say 25-75 pitch which makes the aircrafts dive alot faster opposed to 100 pitch and more trottle. Also the 0-25 pitch seems to maintain the speeds above the aircrafts max level flight speed alot longer then using full trottle and 100 pitch

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

Aaron_GT
07-21-2004, 01:14 AM
I've tried with 70% pitch and 60% throttle (i.e. set for steady 400 IAS flight) and the 190 and P4727, at least, dive with the same speed profile in a 45 degree dive.

alarmer
07-21-2004, 02:48 AM
Long wished and waited feature for sure.

I think its a engine limitation otherwise we would have seen it allrdy. Waiting for BoB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WWMaxGunz
07-21-2004, 04:31 AM
Aaron, not saying there isn't a problem or at least don't seem to be but that much pitch with
that little throttle will act as a brake at high speeds although not as much as 90-100 pitch.
Try lowering pitch but not changing throttle as speed increases in the dive. I dunno if it
will make the planes dive differently but you'll probably end up with higher speeds over a
good run.
Best pitch is as dependant on speed as it is on throttle, or I should say those combined since
best pitch at 400kph and 60% throttle won't be the same for 70% throttle, or 80%. I do find
that for cruise, having throttle and pitch the same seems to work out best at least for 70%
throttle and less. At 90% throttle and more I find myself cutting pitch at 400kph or less
and gaining speed at least in the more powerful CSP planes.


Neal

JG5_JaRa
07-21-2004, 04:46 AM
Dive acceleration is a result of the general physics model of a simulation, it is not something modeled separately. All aspects of dive performance are closely related to the same variables that determine climb, horizontal acceleration and top speed. Unless the model is highly unphysical, there can be no way to change dive acceleration without affecting sustained climb rates, same goes for horizontal acceleration: one is directly related to the other in the real world. And once you change these variables, you'll of course also get different sustained turn characteristics. The only thing that could make a difference between them would be engine management effectiveness. Say a plane with slow prop pitch adjustment could technically get a good sustained climb since in that maneuver, prop pitch doesn't have to be adjusted much whereas in a dive, where speed changes quickly and quick changes in prop pitch are necessary to translate the engine power to thrust, it may lose thrust due to an uneffective pitch adjustment.
So changing dive acceleration would require an overhaul of quite a lot (whatever "quite a lot" means depends on the actual model) of performance variables of all planes and I don't think that this will happen in any following AEP patch.

WWMaxGunz
07-21-2004, 05:03 AM
I never see in dive tests or pilot stories all the things they do with engine, prop,
and controls management. With a prop on the front, that must be critical.

Past certain speeds, dependant on power, I'm more concerned with the prop acting as
a brake than getting more thrust! But you are very right JaRa that adjusting pitch
should get that extra pull at least a good ways through. Even 50% power with an
engine making over 1000hp is a lot of torque on the prop!

Problem for me is before when I did quick looks, I did lower pitch and did not see
a lot of difference but I was dumb/lazy and didn't save tracks for close compares.


Neal

Aaron_GT
07-21-2004, 08:34 AM
Neal,
Based on the report that 190 v P47 dive from 10000ft was with constant throttle and that it was entered at 250mph IAS I made the assumption that it would not be done at 100% rpm. 70% was a guess and having no information on whether it was changed in the dive I left it constant. I then selected engine power for what gave the plane 400kph IAS cruise.

I'll take on board what you said and try some different tests as well.

Hunde_3.JG51
07-21-2004, 09:42 PM
Like I just said in another post, I've requested changes to dive, dive acceleration, zoom climb numerous times. IMO that is what patches should address because this is a very important aspect for certain aircraft. Having a Spitfire V dive the same as FW-190A (online) is a pretty blatent error IMO. Maybe it is simply a game engine limitation, if that is the case I hope BoB will be much improved in this area.

And Leadspitter, a recent e-mail from Oleg that my squadmate recieved was pretty clear that the next patch will be the last. Also, Oleg mentioned that he was trying to have it so that there are 2 types of installs for Pacific Fighters, one for stand-alone and one that would integrate into FB. Let's hope he can lobby/convince/pull-off the latter.

Also I would recommend e-mailing Oleg as if your concern was a bug report, I have recieved several responses this way as long as I posed concerns in a mature, polite manner. I don't think he sees these boards anymore.

http://www.brooksart.com/Ontheprowl.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

Ugly_Kid
07-21-2004, 11:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG5_JaRa:
So changing dive acceleration would require an overhaul of quite a lot (whatever "quite a lot" means depends on the actual model) of performance variables of all planes and I don't think that this will happen in any following AEP patch.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quite correct, IMO. For example the LaGG-3 according to Finnish tests could not perform more than 85? dives without overrevving - never mind what you did. Even entering the dive had to be done from bank because of the danger to overrev - simply pushing over was not possible. Same stuff was actually occuring with Pe-2, AFAIK. This means that past 85? even pulling the throttle fully back and adjusting the prop minimum rpm would still not keep the engine from overrevving. P-40 manual, for example, notes that pilot should monitor the revs during the dive, which would hint that the rpm has to be maintained with some means (firewalled throttle was not probably not possible)...etc. etc. - now what planes could dive with what throttle position? Let's say you don't know it for all planes and program this only for those that you know. You might end up having Hurricane making full throttle dives blasting past the P-40 that's having a headache maintaining revs http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif - I give further development in this area snowballs change in hell. The props and engines have been discussed often enough with Oleg. (Allthough the last patch might have opened someone's eyes to the unlimited possibilities of the Whine.)

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg

WWMaxGunz
07-21-2004, 11:30 PM
What I can find about adjustable props of all kinds has the most coarse pitch
(the most into the direction of travel, fine being a 109 at 100%) as nowhere
close to feather. Some props that can/could feather had to go past a mechanical
stop, some don't. They still have an operating range from fine to coarse when
the prop is turning for thrust.
In the sim it appears that the CSP props (possibly the VPP's as well) can adjust
from near flat fine to almost feather over a very wide pitch angle where one
modern source gives me that:

Most props will be at about 15 to 20 degrees at "Low Pitch", and about 30 degrees
at "High Pitch".

Regardless of numbers, between manuals, accounts and what old pilots have to say
there should be more caution needed than the sim has and... is limiting the pitch
range so hard to do in FB?? I can attest that the prop can already drive the engine
at least if the power is set low and the pitch high for the speed you are, you will
slow down and if you hold it level the rpms will drop regardless of what pitch you
set, if the power is low enough. once you stall and drop though, rpms will pick up.
Engines in the sim will blow up on overrev, or at least the 109's certainly will!

So a reality fix would need only pitch limits and all engines can blow from overrevs.

And that should do much to take care of the dive situation regarding limits, maybe?
Maybe not, maybe it only makes players more aware of CEM.


Neal

Ugly_Kid
07-22-2004, 12:13 AM
If my brain is working this early 30? means that with 700 km/h (194 m/s) the blade has to travel already 340 m/s in order to get a stream within 30?. Since the prop does not have prop going supersonic anyways the mid span blade speed is only 170 m/s (50?) - so there is no change that the prop with 30? stops could take a flight with 700 km/h without seriously doing something. (but it's early - I might have tipped something wrong)

http://people.freenet.de/hausberg/oksennus_1.jpg