I found very interesting Russian documents.

[Original_Uwe]

Opening a thread about what exactly ?

Your study of the 190s anemic climb rate.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Your study of the 190s anemic climb rate.

 

No need.

 

I did my tests, and i came to the conclusion that every fighters in BoS have a cold air boost that adds about +4-4,5m/s to the climb rate.

 

The Fw 190A-3 has these +4m/s, but only at full power (1.42 ata 2700RPM), not at combat power (1.32 ata 2400RPM), where it lacks ~1m/s.

[JtD]

I've posted this ages ago, so no reason to post it again.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=10687

[Maxyman]

The whole game, and I say game not simulation is balanced in such a manner, I guess I won't spend anymore money for it. I also have plenty of planes in RoF, but I think it's enough for me, it's not what I'm looking for. To ignore all the obvious things, flaps abuse of the  Yak, bad view in Fw190, too short emergency power of Bf109, too fast dive speed of Yak, etc. etc. Nobody can tell me this happens by accident, it happens on purpose. Do whatever you want, I'm better off waiting for a real simulation like DCS. I will take a look how long my post will last until it's deleted - truth is hard to take...

F4 is the best in game performer. One on one Yak-1 has no chance to beat me109. Would you mind to provide the documents supporting your claims?

[StG2_Manfred]

F4 is the best in game performer. One on one Yak-1 has no chance to beat me109. Would you mind to provide the documents supporting your claims?

The F4 was one of the best planes during second world war in this time period, so I don't understand your statement. You wrote 'in game' and expects a balanced situation, that's exactly the problem.

[Maxyman]

The F4 was one of the best planes during second world war in this time period, so I don't understand your statement. You wrote 'in game' and expects a balanced situation, that's exactly the problem.

I didn't use the word 'balanced' in my message. This is a fact. Separate your perception from facts.

 

If you think, F4 was one of the best planes and it can outperform any Soviet plane in this game, where do you see the signs of balancing?

 

You're stating "flaps abuse of the  Yak, bad view in Fw190, too short emergency power of Bf109, too fast dive speed of Yak" as obvious things.

Could you confirm at least one of those 'obvious' things with your test results and actual documents? Should devs correct the flight model based on your opinion?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I think do not exceed 650 km/h in dive were in official papers regards Yak1 use.

[RydnDirty]

The yak1 can run at full power all day. The german engines break after a couple of minutes. It is obvious attempt to balance the game. 

[=LD=Penshoon]

The yak1 can run at full power all day. The german engines break after a couple of minutes. It is obvious attempt to balance the game. 

Isn't this only due to the cold weather in BOS maps? When the summer maps comes I trust full throttle in the Yak won't be viable for any extended time even with 100% rads. 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

You can test it under summer climate already. Just setup a custom mission and give it summertime temperatures + air pressure.

[Maxyman]

The yak1 can run at full power all day. The german engines break after a couple of minutes. It is obvious attempt to balance the game.

 

How would you explain the attached documents then? Bear in mind that M105PF didn't have such limitation.

[Agilepig]

How would you explain the attached documents then? Bear in mind that M105PF didn't have such limitation.

 

You have to see first thread. M-105PF have 2 minute limitation with full throttle in soviet documents. Actually, full throttle of it have less thrust to weight ratio than Bf109's kampfleistung(30min).

[Maxyman]

You have to see first thread. M-105PF have 2 minute limitation with full throttle in soviet documents. Actually, full throttle of it have less thrust to weight ratio than Bf109's kampfleistung(30min).

 

The flight manual doesn't mention that.

[Maxyman]

You have to see first thread. M-105PF have 2 minute limitation with full throttle in soviet documents. Actually, full throttle of it have less thrust to weight ratio than Bf109's kampfleistung(30min).

Another document - the Yak-1 with M-105PF endurance test. 48min at 2700rpm.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Maxyman

[JtD]

The flight manual doesn't mention that.

Neither does the flight manual of the Bf109F-4.

 

Another document - the Yak-1 with M-105PF endurance test. 48min at 2700rpm.

Nice to see such thing. Does it mention boost somewhere? However, such tests were also made with DB60x.

[Agilepig]

Another document - the Yak-1 with M-105PF endurance test. 48min at 2700rpm.

 

I cannot read that documents clearly cuz its resolution, but it does not looks like engine endurance part. It looks aircrafts endurance test(fuel consumption).

And the documents of first thread from TsAMO. It is Soviet official documents.

Edited July 23, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[Maxyman]

Neither does the flight manual of the Bf109F-4.

 

Nice to see such thing. Does it mention boost somewhere? However, such tests were also made with DB60x.

The DB601E handbuch does.

 

Sorry guys, the endurance table proves nothing, it's combined test and calculated data.

[Maxyman]

You have to see first thread. M-105PF have 2 minute limitation with full throttle in soviet documents. Actually, full throttle of it have less thrust to weight ratio than Bf109's kampfleistung(30min).

That's because of overheating, isn't it? The air temperature was 18-23ºC. That is different to what we have in the game as =LD=Penshoon noticed above.

 

Personally I find F4, Ju-87, La-5 takeoff/boost limitations reasonable. These things can be confirmed by the documents.

[Agilepig]

Yes. it's air temperature was 18-23dgree. If Yak-1 can use full throttle because battle field of BoS is winter, Bf109F-4 can either. Cuz there is no phrase DB601E was checked in winter. However DB601E cannot maintain its full throttle more than two minute in BoS. That means unlimited full throttle of VK-105PF is cleary wrong. and Actually, outside temperature cannot make engine cool forever. In cold weather, aircraft can use it's maximum power just little more.

 

Bf109F-4, Ju87, La-5 is reasonable. Yak-1, LaGG-3? Hell no. VK-105PF have to be fixed.

Edited July 23, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[Maxyman]

Yes. it's air temperature was 18-23dgree. If Yak-1 can use full throttle because battle field of BoS is winter, Bf109F-4 can either. Cuz there is no phrase DB601E was checked in winter. However DB601E cannot maintain its full throttle more than two minute in BoS. That means unlimited full throttle of VK-105PF is cleary wrong. and Actually, outside temperature cannot make engine cool forever. In cold weather, aircraft can use it's maximum power just little more.

 

Bf109F-4, Ju87, La-5 is reasonable. Yak-1, LaGG-3? Hell no. VK-105PF have to be fixed.

DB601A-B manual: 1.40ata - 1 minute maximum.

DB601E manual: 1.40ata - as short a time as possible. It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.

 

M-105PF can't sustain full throttle because DB601 can't, what kind of logic is that? These are different engines

I’m not saying that M105PF doesn’t have limitations but your argument is invalid.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Maxyman

[Agilepig]

DB601A-B manual: 1.40ata - 1 minute maximum.

DB601E manual: 1.40ata - as short a time as possible. It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.

 

 

I really want to find reference of this sentence.

'DB601E manual: 1.40ata - as short a time as possible. It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.'

Where can I find that?

 

 

This is Me 210A-1(it use DB601E) handbuch. 1.42ata/2700rpm for 1 minute.

 

Engine limitation on handbook means, it guarantee 1.42ata/2700rpm for 1 minute is safe in any situation. It is handbook for pilots.

 

 

M-105PF can't sustain full throttle because DB601 can't, what kind of logic is that? These are different engines

 

Yes. These are different engines. However, both engine have similar limitaion, but only one engine overcome it's limitation in winter situation? What kinds of magic is this?

 

 

I’m not saying that M105PF doesn’t have limitations but your argument is invalid.

 

 

And last one. that's weird. I read this sentences from your post.

 

Bear in mind that M105PF didn't have such limitation.

the Yak-1 with M-105PF endurance test. 48min at 2700rpm.

[Maxyman]

I really want to find reference of this sentence.

'DB601E manual: 1.40ata - as short a time as possible. It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.'

Where can I find that?

 

See my post #51 in this thread.

 

[Agilepig]

 

See my post #51 in this thread.

 

 

 

I am sorry, I have to narrow it down. I means this part. 'It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.'

[Maxyman]

I am sorry, I have to narrow it down. I means this part. 'It's an unconditional restriction, regardless the temperature.'

There's no temperature condition in that paragraph. "möglichst kurz" and that's it.

[Dakpilot]

Very simple fact is, at maximum boost  the 105 engine is only producing 1.21 ATA

 

1,050 hp (782 kW) at 2,700 RPM at 13,123 ft (4,000 m), boost rated at 1.21 Atm

 

So comparing the two engines now with the same parameters the DB601 can also run with no time restriction.

 

The fact that the DB601 is restricted to one minute at 1.42 overboost is understandable and not simply an issue of temperature.

 

To base an argument of what can be deciphered from pilot manuals and disregarding engineering principles will always lead to confusion, to then conclude that the game is flawed and biased in a certain way is a rather strange leap.

 

It is very simple...they are different engines with different designs...and have different operating restrictions.

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Agilepig]

There's no temperature condition in that paragraph. "möglichst kurz" and that's it.

 

 

'as soon as passible' means 'unconditional restriction, regradless the temperature?'... OK. If you really believe that.

 

However as you see, in pilot handbook DB601E guarantee 1 minute Start und notleistung same as DB601A.

[Agilepig]

Very simple fact is, at maximum boost  the 105 engine is only producing 1.21 ATA

 

1,050 hp (782 kW) at 2,700 RPM at 13,123 ft (4,000 m), boost rated at 1.21 Atm

 

So comparing the two engines now with the same parameters the DB601 can also run with no time restriction.

 

The fact that the DB601 is restricted to one minute at 1.42 overboost is understandable and not simply an issue of temperature.

 

To base an argument of what can be deciphered from pilot manuals and disregarding engineering principles will always lead to confusion, to then conclude that the game is flawed and biased in a certain way is a rather strange leap.

 

It is very simple...they are different engines with different designs...and have different operating restrictions.

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

hummm... I think you talking about M-105PA. M-105PF maximum manifold pressure is 1,100mmhg/2700rpm-1180PS and it is 1.44atm/2700rpm-1163HP.

TsAMO reported M-105PF can maintain its maximum boost only 2 minutes.

Edited July 23, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[Dakpilot]

"But the OKB held the opinion that the fighter's improvement potential had not yet been exhausted. At A. S. Yakovlev's insistence additional tests were conducted to determine the changes in the basic performance characteristics after the boost pressure of the M-105PF engine had been increased from 1,050 to 1,100 mm Hg.

Initially V. Ya. Klimov, Chief Designer of the engine, gave his consent to increasing the boost pressure only at the first supercharger speed. Additional tests showed that augmenting the engine's power by increasing the boost pressure produced a 6 to 7 km/h (3.7 to 4.35 mph) gain in maximum speed at low altitude, reducing the time to 5,000 m (16,400 ft) by 0.1 minutes and affording an extra 50 m (164 ft) in altitude gain during a combat turn. It also led to a marginal improvement of field performance and entailed virtually no change in the engine's water and oil temperature.

Later theoretical calculations showed the possibility of boosting the engine also at medium altitude. The boost pressure was also increased at the supercharger's second speed. While the M-105PF engine developed (without regard to the dynamic pressure) 1,180 hp at 2,700 m (8.856 ft), after boosting its output rose to 1,244 hp at 2,100 m (6,888 ft). With the boost pressure increased to 1,100 mm Hg the engine was designated M-105PF-2, and from the spring of 1944 onwards it bore the designation VK-105PF-2."

 

You are correct M-105PA, however consider the info about PF above, I still believe that your premise that because one engine type has a restriction, another also must, Later versions of Yak (1M)  (M-105PF) with slightly improved radiator ducting were able to maintain full power unrestricted by temp limits in level flight and climb  in standard summer conditions

 

A lot of aircraft engines are restricted in 'overboost' not simply for temperature limitations but many other factors

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Agilepig]

First of all, I already read airpage and it is not Yak-1. It is Yak-1M. It is the prototype of Yak-3 and it's flight test was tried at feb 1943. It only two aircraft built and never operated in battlefield. The link below is the original source of that article.

http://www.rkka.es/aviones/yakovlev/02_Stepanets/502.htm

If you watch that page, you can find this parts.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Los puntos débiles del Yak-1M eran los siguientes:

 

- sistema de aceite que no garantizaba mantener las temperaturas del aceite entre los márgenes permitidos durante el ascenso a velocidad ascensional óptima y en vuelo horizontal a la velocidad máxima;

 

 

 

 

The weak points of the Yak - 1M were as follows:

 

-oil system that did not guarantee to maintain the temperature of the oil between the margins allowed during the ascent to optimum ascensional speed in horizontal flight at maximum speed;

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Yak-3 overcome its engine overheat limitation, but any other Yaks couldn't. The link I wrote in first post is official Soviet documents and it was adjusted after war. If there was Yak-1 variation overcome engine overheat, it have to written there. However there is no Yak-1 like that.

Edited July 23, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[JtD]

The DB601E handbuch does.

So does the M-105PA/PF manual. 5 minute limit. Much more specific than the DB601E manual, not present in game. Edited July 23, 2015 by JtD

[Dakpilot]

 

"First of all, I already read airpage and it is not Yak-1. It is Yak-1M. It is the prototype of Yak-3 and it's flight test was tried at feb 1943. It only two aircraft built and never operated in battlefield"

 

 My reference was to the engine development up-rating to 1100mg, you cannot have it both ways, now you are saying the Yak in BoS has the 1050mm boost limit engine? or that the statement that the upgraded 1100mg boost had no significant effect on temps is untrue?

 

Anyway I am out of this ,  my only point was that you cannot generalise between two totally different engine designs like DB and M-105

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Maxyman]

So does the M-105PA/PF manual. 5 minute limit. Much more specific than the DB601E manual, not present in game.

Negative, that is incorrect. The 5 minute boost limit is only applicable to PA/RA engines. According to the manual, 1050mm/2700rpm is the continuous mode for PF/RF. M-105PF doesn’t have boost.

Edited July 24, 2015 by Maxyman

[Agilepig]

 

 

"First of all, I already read airpage and it is not Yak-1. It is Yak-1M. It is the prototype of Yak-3 and it's flight test was tried at feb 1943. It only two aircraft built and never operated in battlefield"

 

 My reference was to the engine development up-rating to 1100mg, you cannot have it both ways, now you are saying the Yak in BoS has the 1050mm boost limit engine? or that the statement that the upgraded 1100mg boost had no significant effect on temps is untrue?

 

Anyway I am out of this ,  my only point was that you cannot generalise between two totally different engine designs like DB and M-105

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

 

My official soviet referense means 'Yak-1 with M-105PF(same aircraft of BoS) has 1,100mg engine and it have 2 minute maximum boost limitation.'

Engines of Yak-1 and Yak-1M is same thing. Yak-1M used bigger radiator and it make overcome engine limitation.

 

Two engine have similar limitation but one of them overcome in cold weather, the other totally couldn't? It is not generalise.

Edited July 24, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[Maxyman]

My official soviet referense means 'Yak-1 with M-105PF(same aircraft of BoS) has 1,100mg engine and it have 2 minute maximum boost limitation.'

Engines of Yak-1 and Yak-1M is same thing. Yak-1M used bigger radiator and it make overcome engine limitation.

 

Two engine have similar limitation but one of them overcome in cold weather, the other totally couldn't? It is not generalise.

May I challenge your reference btw? It's not official, it's a web page in Spanish, it doesn't even have scans of the original document. Can it be trusted?

[JtD]

Negative, that is incorrect. The 5 minute boost limit is only applicable to PA/RA engines. According to the manual, 1050mm/2700rpm is the continuous mode for PF/RF. M-105PF doesn’t have boost.

Referenced as both, take off and continuous mode. Take off rpm are different.

The technical differences between the PA and PF are a couple of regulator holes of different sizes. It's great what increasing boost and fuel flow can do for engine endurance.

[Maxyman]

Referenced as both, take off and continuous mode. Take off rpm are different.

The technical differences between the PA and PF are a couple of regulator holes of different sizes. It's great what increasing boost and fuel flow can do for engine endurance.

Does that mean we’ve reached a consensus? My point is that for the PF variant take-off and continuous modes are the same. And again, PF has no boost.

 

I've attached two pages:

• The first one is from the M105 manual. As you can see the take-off and continuous (or nominal) RPM and pressure are equal.
• The second is from the Yak-1 manual saying that the boost limit is 5 minutes and the boost pressure is 975mm – that is irrelevant to PF.

[JtD]

No, we don't have 100% of a consensus. Because this discussion is about formalities. The take off rpm of 2600 have not been changed between the PA&PF upgrade. So the 5 minute limit of 1050/2600 is still there. If we weren't discussing formalities, I wouldn't say that.

 

Not discussing formalities, I'd instead wonder for instance why one air force with a reputation for having low life expectancy for men and material on the front line type tests an engine for 1050/2700 and clears the setting as continuous, where another air force essentially runs the same type test with better results at 1.3/2500 and clears the setting as combat/climb...

Edited July 24, 2015 by JtD

[Maxyman]

No, we don't have 100% of a consensus. Because this discussion is about formalities. The take off rpm of 2600 have not been changed between the PA&PF upgrade. So the 5 minute limit of 1050/2600 is still there. If we weren't discussing formalities, I wouldn't say that.

 

Not discussing formalities, I'd instead wonder for instance why one air force with a reputation for having low life expectancy for men and material on the front line type tests an engine for 1050/2700 and clears the setting as continuous, where another air force essentially runs the same type test with better results at 1.3/2500 and clears the setting as combat/climb...

Well, then we agree to disagree

[Agilepig]

May I challenge your reference btw? It's not official, it's a web page in Spanish, it doesn't even have scans of the original document. Can it be trusted?

 

TsAMO(ЦАМО) means 'Central Archive of the Russian Ministry of Defence'. rkka.es translated some documents from Central Archive of the Russian Ministry of Defence to spanish. And that translated documents have documents numbers. If it is fake documents, that numbers never written, because it is too easy to reveal the truth.

 

I cannot read cyrillic. So I cannot find original scaned file. However, If you do not trust the documents with origin and number, you also cannot believe the scanned one. Because no one can confirm it is forged one.

Edited July 24, 2015 by =Bout1=Gomwolf_K_

[MarcAnton]

from: Yakovlev's Piston-Engined Fighters - Yefim Gordon and Dmitriy Khazanov

 

 

The production version of the boosted

engine was assigned the designation M105PF.

Its readjustment, as compared to the

M-105PA, entailed not only an increase of

power but also a decrease of altitude performance.

Thus, the output at the first rated altitude

became 1,260 hp at 700 m (2,296 ft)

instead of 1,100 hp at 2,000 m (6,560 ft), without

taking into account the dynamic pressure,

and at the second rated altitude the power

rose from 1,050 hp at 4,000 m (13,120 ft) to

1,180 hp at 2700 m (8,856 ft). At altitudes in

excess of 4,000 m (13,120 ft) the characteristics

of boosted and unboosted engines

proved to be identical.

In June 1942 a Yak-1 (c/n 15-69) with a

boosted M-105PF engine and increased oil

cooler area passed tests at Nil VVS. Despite

the modified oil cooler, the temperature condition

of the powerplant deteriorated. At a

take-off weight of 2,917 kg (typical for a Yak1

without a radio), the fighter attained 510

kmlh (317 mph) at sea level and 571 kmlh

(355 mph) at the second rated altitude of

3,650 m (11,972 ft); it needed 6.4 minutes to

climb to 5,000 m (16,400 ft), performed a fullcircle

turn at low altitude in 19 to 20 seconds

and gained 980 m when climbing in a combat

turn. However, to ensure normal operation of

the aircraft the engine revs at low altitude had

to be limited to 2,550 rpm.

It proved possible to reduce the Bf 109F's

ascendancy at low altitude, as demonstrated

by mock combat between the Yak-1 M-105PF

and the Bf 109F, conducted at Nil WS for

training and test purposes. At 1,000 m (3,280 ft)

the Bf 109F had a marginal advantage in

vertical and horizontal manoeuvrability. The

German fighter succeeded in getting on the

tail of its 'adversary', but only after four or

five turns. At the altitude of 3,000 m (9,840 ft)

both fighters fought on equal terms; in effect,

aerial combat became restricted to headon

attacks. It was to the Yak's advantage

if its 'adversary' could be lured to higher

altitudes. Already at 5,000 m (16,400 ft) the

Yak-1 came to possess greater manoeuvrability

and its pilot could impose his will on the

enemy.

It must be taken into account, though, that

when the Bf 109F was evaluated at Nil WS

the supercharger system of the Daimler-Benz

DB 601 N engine did not ensure the maintenance

of a constant degree of supercharging.

On the other hand, when the German engines

functioned normally, the Messerschmittfighter,

possessing better engine performance at

high altitude, was not inferior, but, on the

contrary, considerably superior to the Yak-1

M-105PF at 5,000 m (16,400 ft) and higher.

Besides, Nil WS had tested the Bf 109F-2,

while, as noted earlier, it was the Bf 109F-4

with the more powerful DB 601 E engine that

had become Germany's main fighter type by

the summer of 1942. The Yak-1 M-1 05PF was

markedly inferior to it on many counts.