Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

570 kph in a Yak-1 at Sea Level?

Recommended Posts

Perhaps it would be better to compare the Yak-3 there are many still flying, and as I understand they retain the same system from the Yak-1 , while in principle the Yak-52 has the same pneumatic system type, I don't think it advances any argument to compare a basic training aircraft built and operated for a different purpose, to the Yak-1 as proof of anything.

 

Whether the flaps are made of plywood or not?, the point is that they fold in flush/are retracted, at least this is how it is modelled in game, as speed increases they are not subjected to a 700kmh force they are already 'stowed' there is no 'mechanical stop/mechanism' keeping them out, Mosquito's seem to have good speed/strength qualities although made of plywood...I think the material maybe a bit of a red herring, it is only if the force keeping the flaps out is greater than the 'airflow force' that damage would happen. there has to be some sort of pressure relief in the pneumatic system because it is from an engine driven pump

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited by Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Yak flaps for as long as they are in the down position are not stowed at any speed. In game. They are just less deployed at high speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again...any comments from Devs about right/wrong modeling YakUFOflaps at low/high speed? And again...why talking about flaps in this thread??? Kwaitek's thread ready for this debate Long time ago...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understan the pneumatic system does allow for some sort of automatic regulation of flap extention. It's probably not meant to be used the way we use it in game but the fact flaps fold if airspeed exceeds some limit explains the behaviour. So ok I get it's a mechanism that has its safety valve in case the pilot doesn't retract the flaps in time. So far so good. But wouldn't such system be subject of oscilations if exposed to airspeed exceeding its construction limits? Would both flaps really fold exactly symmetrically? Woudn't any assymetry or oscilations make flying very difficult? Do partially folded flaps provide the aeroplane with great lift/drag ratio? Woudn't ever changing flap extention make it difficult to control the aeroplane? These are the questions that in my eyes we shall ask the devs. Ok there is an system that allows for some pilot error. But there are probably consequences if flaps are used above their airspeed limit. And because of extent of in game abuse I'd like to see these consequences to be somehow implemented. I guess no real pilot would dare to operate his/her AC outside its performance envelope so it may be impossible to get real world pilot reports on extending flaps at 500km/h. Which makes this problem prone to be left untouched.

I for one do not consider this a game breaking issue. I usually do not fly the Bf 109 in a way Yak flaps would bother me. But it leaves the impression there are game balancing distortions and dev silence doesn't help at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again...any comments from Devs about right/wrong modeling YakUFOflaps at low/high speed? And again...why talking about flaps in this thread??? Kwaitek's thread ready for this debate Long time ago...

 

And that's it the most saddening finally...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree, but if it had, why is it no problem going 700km/h IAS in game with the Yak-1 flaps extended, where the Yak-52 flaps have a limit of 170km/h IAS in real life?

Because the pressure in the system is enough to release the flaps. The fundamental thing, I repeat it again, no one would do it in a real flight.

 

In fact, why do you need to use flaps at 700km/h? :) I sometimes use flaps in combat but only if the speed is below 300km/h.

One more thing, Yak-1 flaps are not made of plywood.

Edited by Maxyman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that in 1.102 the flaps are modelled correctly. The problem has been fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May be, but the fact that the Yak does not degrade its energy while using her flaps not...

Edited by C6_Claymore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May be, but the fact that the Yak does not degrade its energy while using her flaps not...

I haven't done any calculations but the speed drops if I release flaps. So Yak-1 loses energy. Its flaps are basically air brakes.

Edited by Maxyman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, why do you need to use flaps at 700km/h? :)

 

To become a Zero, maybe ? And it works...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To become a Zero, maybe ? And it works...

FLAPS button (key) for Yak is same for enable thrust vectoring ...  :biggrin:  :biggrin:  :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m going to start this off with a big caveat because my observation is purely anecdotal.  I’ve only played this sim for a limited number of hours and being a dedicated FW pilot for many years I suspect the Yak is performing much better than expected. 

 

Even with entering a fight with a good 2000M Alt advantage and diving on a Yak they are able to pull off some impressive maneuvers.   Last week I entered the fight with a solid positional advantage and because of his turning ability even with this height and speed advantage he was able to complete a 180 climbing turn and close to shoot at me even in my 700+ KPH dive.    Even while extending I ended up in a prolonged overheated condition within the first few minutes of the encounter.   I understand we have the A3 FW but it seems our differences in speed combined with the Yaks amazing turning ability with little loss in E gives most advantages to the Yak.  Certainly BnZ is the main tactic for the FW but it’s quite difficult prosecute unless your opponent doesn’t see you coming.

 

Again my opinion but the Yak seems a little too fast and it doesn’t bleed much speed in their over the top maneuvers. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In which game have you been experienced Fw pilot? In modded old Sturm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In which game have you been experienced Fw pilot? In modded old Sturm?

Yes both the regular flavor of IL2 and the modded versions.  The latest incarnations were a bit odd.  HSFX and UP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am definitely not an expert on soviet planes at all, but from the sources I could gather online, especially on the russian airwar.ru website,

the maximum speed at sea level should be 472km/h or so (maybe refered to M-105P?)

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/yak1.html

 

Did the Series 69 have the 105PF instead of the normal 105P/PA?

 

Even considering an increase of speed giving the cold weather conditions, 570 km/h at sea level seems really too high.
Or considering that there should be an increase of about 50 km/h for all aircraft, so its real speed was 520 km/h?

The C.202 had a maximum speed at sea level of 500 km/h, so in theory it should reach 550 km/h also in game, but it manages about 526 km/h.

Could someone shed a light on it?
Was the Yak-1 Series 69 really that fast IRL?


 

Edited by Ioshic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am definitely not an expert on soviet planes at all, but from the sources I could gather online, especially on the russian airwar.ru website,

the maximum speed at sea level should be 472km/h or so.

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/yak1.html

 

 

Did the Series 69 have the 105PF instead of the normal 105P?

 

Even considering an increase of speed giving the cold weather conditions, 570 km/h at sea level seems really too high.

Or considering that there should be an increase of about 50 km/h for all aircraft, so its real speed was 520 km/h?

 

The C.202 had a maximum speed at sea level of 500 km/h, so in theory it should reach 550 km/h also in game, but it manages about 526 km/h.

 

Could someone shed a light on it?

Was the Yak-1 Series 69 really that fast IRL?

 

http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/yak1-105pf.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a +60km/h boost would make the heinkel fly at 410km/h at sea level fully loaded on climbing power (2400rpm).

 

I have a dream...  :happy:

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok, thank you Hairy, so we have a 105PF in the game.

I did a small test in the game today, a day off the office :) 
I tried to obtain maximum speeds with fixed water and oil temperatures (about 90° for both), in order to asses a continuous operating speed, and then also full speed with rads 100% or 0% for all difference throttle settings.

These are the test settings:

  • Altitude = 400 meters
  • Weather = clear, no wind, no turbolence
  • No unlocks - no additional armor/weapons
  • 100% fuel
  • Manual oil and water rads.
  • Auto. prop pitch
  • Same map, same direction
  • Speed is read through the HUD (can or cannot be accurate, don't know)

 

Macchi C.202 (with boost on)
Continuous Power (throttle at about 69%) fixed temperatures – 510 km/h – water 39% / oil 25%
               ° Continous power (throttle at about 69%) 100% rads – 498 km/h
               ° Continous power (throttle at about 69%)0% rads – 516 km/h

Combat Power – (throttle at 89% - max 5 minutes) fixed temperatures - 528 km/h – water 50% / oil 22 %
               ° Combat Power – (throttle at 89% - max 5 minutes) – 100% rads – 516 km/h
               ° Combat Power – (throttle at 89% - max 5 minutes) – 0% rads – 535 km/h

Emergency Power (full throttle - max 1 min) – fixed temperatures - 534 km/h – water 55% / oil 30% -
               ° Emergency Power (full throttle – max 1 min) – 100% rads – 523 km/h
               ° Emergency Power (full throttle – max 1 min) – 0% rads – 543 km/h – MAX SPEED
(Engine is easily destroyed after about 1 minute)

 

 

 

Bf.109 F-4
Continuous mode (throttle at 64%) – fixed temperatures - 532 km/h – water 3%.
               ° Continous mode – 100% rads – 480 km/h
               ° Continuous mode – 0% rads – 540 km/h

Combat Power (throttle at 84%) – fixed temperatures - 564 km/h - water 6%
               ° Combat Power (throttle at 84%) – 100% rads – 514 km/h
               ° Combat Power (throttle at 84%) – 0% rads – 573 km/h

Emergency Power (max throttle)fixed temperatures - 587 km/h – water 10%
               ° Emergency Power (max throttle) – 100% rads – 533 km/h
               ° Emergency Power (max throttle) – 0% rads – 593 km/hMAX SPEED
(engine quite fragile, as in the C.202)
 

 

 

Bf.109 G-2
Continuous mode (throttle at 92%) – fixed temperatures - 527 km/h - water 2%
               ° Continuous mode (throttle at 92%) – 100% rads – 477 km/h
               ° Continuous mode (throttle at 92%) – 0% rads – 531 km/h

Combat Power (full throttle) – fixed temperatures - 555 km/h – water 6%
               ° Combat Power (full throttle) – 100% rads – 508 km/h
               ° Combat Power (full throttle) – 0% rads – 561 km/h – MAX SPEED
Engine doesn’t get damaged at all and can continue like this at 100% throttle for a very long time

 

 

 

 

LaGG 3
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.) – fixed temperatures - 526 km/h – 67% water and 67% oil rads
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.) – 100% rads – 519 km/h
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.) – 0% rads – 540 km/h – MAX SPEED

Engine can run at 100% for a very long time, but it gets hot very fast at 0% rads.

 

 

 

 

Yak 1
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.)– fixed temperatures – 546 km/h – water 49% - oil 36%
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.) - 100% rads - 531 km/h
Max power (there are no combat/emergency power set.) – 0% rads - 558 km/h – MAX SPEED

Engine can run at 100% for a very long time, cooling seems a bit better compared to the LaGG.

Edited by Ioshic
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compared to real-life speeds, we have

Macchi C.202
In game max speed at sl = 543 km/h
Real life max speed at sl = 499-505 km/h (R.A. docs)
Difference = 44-38 km/h 

 

Bf 109 F-4
In game max speed at sl = 593 km/h
Real life max speed at sl = 537 km/h  (Kurfust data)
Difference = 56 km/h 

 

Bf.109 G2

In game max speed at sl = 561 km/h
Real life max speed at sl = 525 km/h  (Kurfust data)
Difference = 36 km/h

 

LaGG 3 S.29

In game max speed at sl = 540 km/h
Real life max speed at sl = 499 km/h (russian wiki for series 29)
Difference = 41 km/h 

 

Yak-1 S.69

In game max speed at sl =  558 km/h
Real life max speed at sl = 510 km/h (airwar.ru)
Difference = 48 km/h 

 

p.s. thanks GrapeJam for F-4 ATA speed sett.

Edited by Ioshic
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would love to see data for 190, if it still has almost no increase in winter compared to other planes, especially at the 2nd supercharger stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was kurfurst's data for the F4 at 1.3 ata or 1.42 ata?

Luftwaffe tests only show max speeds for combat power at max. War and emergency power speeds were calculated at best but not tested.

 

Also the tester probably has not tested thise planes in ICAO standard atmosphere thus the overall big performance gap. The only planes I know off being too fast at SL are the Bf 109 F-4 and Yak-1 (if tested under standard atmosphere setting).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't think about the ICAO standard atmosphere; it makes indeed total sense and that in turn makes the comparison hardly realistic in comparing the real-world data with what we have in the game. Of course, flying in a winter environment...

I think it does at least give a sense of different speed characteristics for each specific aircraft in the game, given the same conditions where they have been tested.

I found the following data for the 1,42 ata DB601E on Kurfust's website ( http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109F4_Datenblatts/109F4_dblatt_calculated.html)

 

Flight measurements performed in E-Stelle Rechlin with a Bf 109F-4 with DB 601 E using the full power (Start- u. Notleistung, 1,42 ata 2700 rpm, for 1350 PS at Sea Level), reported by a GL/A-Rü IA datesheet dated 1 June 1942, note the following level speed performance :

537 km/h at Sea Level,
670 km/h at 6200 m,
625 km/h at 10 000 m.

 

Should 1,42 ata, 2700 rpm, 1350PS be considered emergency power for the DB 601 E?
I am not an expert, so cannot say for sure.

 

From the differences seen I think the developers really did a great job in modeling our virtual birds, as they all have similiar differences (in a "boosted" way, from +36 km/h to +56 km/h) compared to their real-life counterparts, and I can't see any "russian bias" in those numbers.

Edited by Ioshic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Also the tester probably has not tested thise planes in ICAO standard atmosphere thus the overall big performance gap.

 

All planes have this "speed boost" from the cold atmosphere and its known for a quite while now, but something tells me when the summer/autumn maps arrive we wont see a difference. Which is sad, because my most flown and favorite plane is the 190... Oh well, guess the german players will have to fight ufo yaks a little (more like a lot) longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't think about the ICAO standard atmosphere; it makes indeed total sense and that in turn makes the comparison hardly realistic in comparing the real-world data with what we have in the game.

I think it does at least give a sense of different speed characteristics for each specific aircraft in the game, given the same conditions where they have been tested.

 

I found the following data for the 1,42 ata DB601E on Kurfust's website ( http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109F4_Datenblatts/109F4_dblatt_calculated.html)

 

Flight measurements performed in E-Stelle Rechlin with a Bf 109F-4 with DB 601 E using the full power (Start- u. Notleistung, 1,42 ata 2700 rpm, for 1350 PS at Sea Level), reported by a GL/A-Rü IA datesheet dated 1 June 1942, note the following level speed performance :

 

537 km/h at Sea Level,

670 km/h at 6200 m,

625 km/h at 10 000 m.

 

Should 1,42 ata, 2700 rpm, 1350PS be considered emergency power for the DB 601 E?

I am not an expert, so cannot say for sure.

 

From the differences seen I think the developers really did a great job in modeling our virtual birds, as they all have similiar differences (in a "boosted" way, from +36 km/h to +56 km/h) compared to their real-life counterparts.

Yea, "Start und Notleistung" = max power. Strange as it is the first "test" I've heared about having data on it. If true the Bf109 F-4 might be well more overperforming than I though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't think about the ICAO standard atmosphere; it makes indeed total sense and that in turn makes the comparison hardly realistic in comparing the real-world data with what we have in the game. Of course, flying in a winter environment...

 

Did you run your tests in quick mission mode? If so, the temperature could've been different in each single test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Temperature is always -15 °C in the QMB. Time of day and weather type also doesn't change that.

 

 

 

 

All planes have this "speed boost" from the cold atmosphere and its known for a quite while now, but something tells me when the summer/autumn maps arrive we wont see a difference. Which is sad, because my most flown and favorite plane is the 190...

Why shouldn't we see a difference? The Fw 190 gets less of a speed boost at cold weather (for some unexplained reason), which in turn means, that at higher temperatures, the speed "loss" of all other planes will be bigger compared to the Fw 190 and to top that off, the Fw 190 doesn't have to worry about engine temperature and opening the radiators shutters further than during winter.

 

That's also already possible to test using custom missions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

which in turn means, that at higher temperatures, the speed "loss" of all other planes will be bigger compared to the Fw 190 and to top that off, the Fw 190 doesn't have to worry about engine temperature and opening the radiators shutters further than during winter

 

At least it SHOULD be like that.

I wouldnt wonder if the speedloss of the FW 190 in summerconditions is comparable to the speedloss of all other planes, ultimately AGAIN leaving the FW190 an underperforming brick...

 

But thats just my pessimistic point of view and worst case scenario.

But as a virtual pilot that flies russian sims for years i am used to count on the worst case scenario:)

Id love to be proven wrong thou:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Temperature is always -15 °C in the QMB. Time of day and weather type also doesn't change that.

True, I apologize. It used to be random.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can set up a mission with ICAO settings in the mission editor though and test it there. I did so a while ago and from what I remember the 109 F-4 was a good bit too fast at GL (have no exact docs on the Fw190 and Yak so couldn't check both precisely). All planes in general were slower though, question remains if their relative performance differences remain the same or change with the atmosphere as well.

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some data on the G-2 in ICAO settings (to give a comparison).

 

Test performed with 65% fuel on flat terrain and 400m above MSL in ICAO standard atmosphere.

 

1. Max speed with fully closed radiator: 533 km/h (water temp was 110°C at that point)

 

2. Max speed with constant water temperature (90°): 521 km/h (cowling flap state was 20%)

 

Compared to your data the G-2 has an approximate speed boost of 30km/h in winter atmosphere. Some planes in BoS have bigger though which has been debated in other topics already, especially talkign about high altitude performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just tested the G-2 and i have to say that i'm surprised...

 

It does not even reaches 570km/h with radiators closed, at sea level, in winter conditions.

 

So while the others planes get a cold boost of +45/50km/h, the 109G-2 gets a bonus of ~30km/h only.  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So while the others planes get a cold boost of +45/50km/h, the 109G-2 gets a bonus of ~30km/h only.

 

Seems only ~20km/h increase for tests with a semi-retractable tailwheel rather than the fixed tailwheel?

Or were the Finnish the only ones to achieve this?

 

http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_MttDblatt42may/109_May42dblatt_EN.html

Edited by Tripwire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was compared in game between summer and winter conditions, not real life summer vs. in game winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually most planes get a ~30 km/h speed boost, if you use the same radiator settings (like radiators closed) during both tests. The higher speed difference is  possible, if you keep the same engine temperature and thus keep the radiator more closed during winter compared to summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Temperature is always -15 °C in the QMB. Time of day and weather type also doesn't change that."

 

So the thermodynamic Model of snow in the Sim is porked !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...