Please re-think engine time limits.

[Ace_Pilto]

Adapt and overcome little buddy, adapt and overcome.

[303_Kwiatek]

VK105PF had 100h resurs set by manufacturer.25h less then previous M105PA with lower MP (950mmHg).During stand trials in April 1942,PF engine (1050mmHg) was able to run 203h untill breakdown.

As long as you can keep the coolants within limits,you can fly at 2550rpm at 1st and 2700rpm at 2nd supercharger stage untill your fuel tanks are empty.

 

Are you sure?  Yak-1 got huge problem with overheating engines during 1941-1942

 

 

This afforded a simple means of improving the performance of all Yak-Is in service. Onlyminor changes to the M-I05PA were requiredto increase the boost, and these could made under field conditions, without the need to take the aircraft off operations. The servicedebut of the augmented engines brought some unpleasant surprises. In hot weather, flight with the radiator intake fully closed for maximum speed could be maintained for only two minutes, after which time the water and oil temperatures exceeded the permitted limits. A boosted climb was also impossible because it was necessary to return to level flight to restore normal engine operating temperatures. Water and oil overheating was exacerbated by the radiator honeycomb cells becoming clogged with oil leaking through the breather and joints. At the behest of the WS Commandant, two of the seven modified Yak-l s were transferred to the NIl for tests. The trials revealed that increasing the boost at nominal rpm resulted in an increase in maximum level speed of some 12.4 to 15.5mph (20 to 25km/h) at altitudes up to 11 ,500ft (3,500m), a one minute reduction in the time to climb to 16,400ft (5,000m), and a one second reduction in the time required to complete a 360 0 turn at 3,300ft (I,OOOm). Take-off performance also appeared to be improved. At the same time the augmented engine suffered from water and oil overheating. To keep the temperatures within permitted limits the nominal rpm had to be reduced from 2,700 to 2,400-2,500, which negated all the advantages of boost augmentation. In the light of these findings it was decided to revise the cooling system and take measures to prevent oil leakage from the breather and engine seals.(..)    In June 1942 M-I05PF-powered Yak-l No.1569 with an enlarged oil radiator underwent flight trials at the NIl WS. The trials revealed that the temperature regime was still critical.

Edited December 18, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[Reflected]

Please re-think the enigine time limits

 

*Translated*

 

Please correct my shit flying.

 

If that's all you can contribute to the topic, I stand up and applaud you. Yes, my flying is probably [Edited]shit, but that doesn't make it less necessary for a sim to be accurate. This is why I opened the thread. Now some people say the limit was 1 min, some have seen engine trials that state 5 min. I'd be grateful if you guys could post some of these sources to have them in one place.

Edited December 19, 2015 by Bearcat

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Please re-think the enigine time limits

 

*Translated*

 

Please correct my shit flying.

 

Said the guy who needs to be at 7000m or more, to be able to "fight" russian fighters in his 109.

 

Said the guy who thinks that low altitude dogfighting is limited to "turnfight".

 

I'm ready to swear that Reflected will beats you in a 1v1 scenario.

[Ace_Pilto]

If that's all you can contribute to the topic, I stand up and applaud you. Yes, my flying is probably [Edited]shit, but that doesn't make it less necessary for a sim to be accurate. This is why I opened the thread. Now some people say the limit was 1 min, some have seen engine trials that state 5 min. I'd be grateful if you guys could post some of these sources to have them in one place.

 

Well, 60 seconds is a pretty arbitrary limit, I'll pay that but over-boosting is dangerous and is meant to be avoided for good reason.

 

For our purposes a source has been chosen and that is what we have to work with. At least it is predictable so that makes life easier. How much leeway do you realistically expect? Why in hell are you over-boosting anyway? There's no real need for it, you don't get that much of an edge from wringing the engine's neck that can't be achieved with cleaner flying.

 

 

Said the guy who needs to be at 7000m or more, to be able to "fight" russian fighters in his 109.

 

Said the guy who thinks that low altitude dogfighting is limited to "turnfight".

 

I'm ready to swear that Reflected will beats you in a 1v1 scenario.

 

Here's a list of people who care what you think:

 

1) Ze_Hairy

[Dr_Molenbeek]

It works the other way too, bobby.

[L3Pl4K]

F4 DB601e time limit for Notleistung

Handbook Page 20: There are no strict PRESCRIBED information for temporal limitation of the power stages. Only the engine rpm is strict limited to 2700+2%

Handbook Page 73:  Bei Notleistung wird der Motor stark beansprucht, deshalb ist die Dauer dieser Leistungshebelstellung möglichst kurz zu begrenzen.

With emergency power , the motor is heavily used , therefore the duration of this power lever position is as short as possible to limit .

[Brano]

Kwiatek,not necessary to copy-paste walls of text.If you read my post with a bit more of focus,you would see,that I wrote "as long as you can keep coolants within limits" Coolant is either water or oil.

[303_Kwiatek]

Kwiatek,not necessary to copy-paste walls of text.If you read my post with a bit more of focus,you would see,that I wrote "as long as you can keep coolants within limits" Coolant is either water or oil.

 

As you see Yak-1s  ( M-105 P (A) and PF)  during 1941-1942 got huge problem with keep coolant limits.   Pilots cant used nominal power ( at full RPMs)  without overheating problems  even during level maxium speed flight not mention about climb.  Thats why Yak-1 pilots need to fly with open radiators and reduced RPMs ( 2500 instead 2700) expecially at summer conditons.

 

Other hand 109 G-2 got norminal power 1.3 Ata which was 1/2 hour limit and there were not reported cooling problems at these power settings.

 

Truly speaking what i read in other books also Yaks got similar overheating problems  even during 1943 ( late Yak versions)

Edited December 20, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[Brano]

Please,don't quote me when you try to write the same all over again.Im well aware of development of klimov engines,problems with cooling system and solutions found to treat it.If you don't understand what "as long as" means,try to use some English textbook to help you out.

[303_Kwiatek]

You know if you stay at temperature limits many planes could fly at nominal power until fuel gone. The point is that yaks and other russian planes from these peroid got huge problems with overheating at nominal power and their performance in speed and climb was reduced cause pilot need fly mostly with open radiators expecially in summer conditions. Its mean that flying at full power in russian planes was seriusly restricted at these time expecially during climbs. These should be noticable in bos expecially in summer maps

Edited December 20, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[Dakpilot]

Unless the Yak-1 66 series is the one with cooling problems that were never fixed for example, your point is a generalization, but everything I have read also suggests fixing of issues and further development as these issues were encountered, much the same as manufacturers from other countries dealt with reliability issues.

 

I understood that some Russian aircraft do suffer from heating in climb etc. in game on summer map

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LukeFF]

 

 

These should be noticeable in bos especially in summer maps

 

And it is, so I don't know why you feel the need to dwell on this point. 

[Sgt_Joch]

Are you sure? Yak-1 got huge problem with overheating engines during 1941-1942

 

 

This afforded a simple means of improving the performance of all Yak-Is in service. Onlyminor changes to the M-I05PA were requiredto increase the boost, and these could made under field conditions, without the need to take the aircraft off operations. The servicedebut of the augmented engines brought some unpleasant surprises. In hot weather, flight with the radiator intake fully closed for maximum speed could be maintained for only two minutes, after which time the water and oil temperatures exceeded the permitted limits. A boosted climb was also impossible because it was necessary to return to level flight to restore normal engine operating temperatures. Water and oil overheating was exacerbated by the radiator honeycomb cells becoming clogged with oil leaking through the breather and joints. At the behest of the WS Commandant, two of the seven modified Yak-l s were transferred to the NIl for tests. The trials revealed that increasing the boost at nominal rpm resulted in an increase in maximum level speed of some 12.4 to 15.5mph (20 to 25km/h) at altitudes up to 11 ,500ft (3,500m), a one minute reduction in the time to climb to 16,400ft (5,000m), and a one second reduction in the time required to complete a 360 0 turn at 3,300ft (I,OOOm). Take-off performance also appeared to be improved. At the same time the augmented engine suffered from water and oil overheating. To keep the temperatures within permitted limits the nominal rpm had to be reduced from 2,700 to 2,400-2,500, which negated all the advantages of boost augmentation. In the light of these findings it was decided to revise the cooling system and take measures to prevent oil leakage from the breather and engine seals.(..) In June 1942 M-I05PF-powered Yak-l No.1569 with an enlarged oil radiator underwent flight trials at the NIl WS. The trials revealed that the temperature regime was still critical.

that quote is not about production Yaks, it is about a field mod to the early 42 Yak with the regular 105 engine. Production Yaks like the one in game and later models had improved oil radiators which improved cooling.

 

QMB, summer map, close the water/oil radiators and you get a overheat warning in the Yak-1 in one minute.

Edited December 23, 2015 by Sgt_Joch

[303_Kwiatek]

that quote is not about production Yaks, it is about a field mod to the early 42 Yak with the regular 105 engine. Production Yaks like the one in game and later models had improved oil radiators which improved cooling.

 

QMB, summer map, close the water/oil radiators and you get a overheat warning in the Yak-1 in one minute.

 

The fact is that in summer Yak-1 got problems with overheating expecially in climbs even with open radiators. And these was also for planes with bigger radiator type. Such problems with overheating got even later Yak models e.x. Yak-9.

 

We got funny africa radiator fix for 109 i wonder when we got realistic overheating fix for russian planes?

Edited December 27, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[Reflected]

The fact is that in summer Yak-1 got problems with overheating expecially in climbs even with open radiators. And these was also for planes with bigger radiator type. Such problems with overheating got even later Yak models e.x. Yak-9.

 

We got funny africa radiator fix for 109 i wonder when we got realistic overheating fix for russian planes?

 

I tested the 109 rads at different openings and compared to a real life report I found. The 109's rads' cooling efficiency is far too low. The devs said they would look at it when the responsible guy is back from holiday, sometime in January.

 

I don't feel anything would be wrong with the Yak's cooling efficiency, but I'm happy to change my opinion if a test will show otherwise.

 

Back on topic, the 1 minute "limit" in the 109 manual is merely an advice to pilots to prolong engine life. I would appreciate more ground runups and tests that state a longer period of use of 1.42 ATA.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Reflected

[303_Kwiatek]

Definitly something hot.

 

F-4 climb test, 1.3 Ata 2500 RPMs ( combat 1/2 hour power settings) radiator auto -  after 3 minutes climb  ( ab. 3.5 km height) engine overheat in autumn map.

Edited December 27, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[SR-F_Winger]

Definitly something hot.

 

F-4 climb test, 1.3 Ata 2500 RPMs ( combat 1/2 hour power settings) radiator auto -  after 3 minutes climb  ( ab. 3.5 km height) engine overheat in autumn map.

This even happens in winter. Maybe half a minute later but it happens there also.

Steep climb 300 km/h - overheat guaranteed!

[Matt]

And, did anybody suffer engine damage due to overheating?

 

Performance (both climb and speed) of the F-4 and G-2 is very accurate, with automatic radiators it's actually a bit on the optimistic side (for the F-4 atleast). Who cares if the overheat message pops up, as long as it doesn't cause any issues.

[Sgt_Joch]

The fact is that in summer Yak-1 got problems with overheating expecially in climbs even with open radiators. And these was also for planes with bigger radiator type. Such problems with overheating got even later Yak models e.x. Yak-9.

 

 

fact? so I am guessing you have a source?

 

The only Yak-9s where overheating was a serious problem were the Yak-9U/UV equipped with the VK-107 engine and the Yak-9PD equipped with the M-105PD engine, not the M-105PF we have in game.

 

After the later Yak-1s received improved oil coolers, you see no further mention of overheating being a performance issue for the M-105PF engine. The only other comment I have seen is on the Yak-1M prototype equipped with the M-105PF2 engine which was the M-105PF boosted even higher. The official test reports lists " oil overheating at the optimum climb rate " as an "insignificant deficiency" which had no effect on performance.

[Willy__]

Performance (both climb and speed) of the F-4 and G-2 is very accurate, with automatic radiators it's actually a bit on the optimistic side (for the F-4 atleast). Who cares if the overheat message pops up, as long as it doesn't cause any issues.

 

I read that when the overheat message pop up your coolant start to evaporate, so even though it doesnt damage the engine instantly, it will lower the coolant efficiency (since it will be less and less coolant), and eventually when theres no coolant left, the engine will take damage and seize. 

 

Dont know if its true, though.

Edited December 27, 2015 by istruba

[Ace_Pilto]

This even happens in winter. Maybe half a minute later but it happens there also.

Steep climb 300 km/h - overheat guaranteed!

 

You're climbing too slow. 340kph is recommended from memory. 

[III/JG2Gustav05]

You're climbing too slow. 340kph is recommended from memory. 

official recommended optimized climb speed is 270-280kph.

[Ace_Pilto]

official recommended optimized climb speed is 270-280kph.

 

That's to get the best vertical speed, maybe not to get the best continuous climb.

[III/JG2Gustav05]

That's to get the best vertical speed, maybe not to get the best continuous climb.

Why Lichin did not use such speed (340kph)for climb to altitude test but use 280kph instead if your comment is true?

And, did anybody suffer engine damage due to overheating?

 

Performance (both climb and speed) of the F-4 and G-2 is very accurate, with automatic radiators it's actually a bit on the optimistic side (for the F-4 atleast). Who cares if the overheat message pops up, as long as it doesn't cause any issues

what is the climb performance data 777 used for modeling F4 and G2?

[Ace_Pilto]

Why Lichin did not use such speed (340kph)for climb to altitude test but use 280kph instead if your comment is true?

 

I have no idea what Lichin is or what it was trying to test. All I know is that fast planes run cooler because radiators work better with more air.

[Matt]

 

 

what is the climb performance data 777 used for modeling F4 and G2?

 

I'm assuming you can find that on Kurfürst website. Atleast that's what i compared the climb rate of the F-4 and G-2 to and found them to match his sources.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

And, did anybody suffer engine damage due to overheating?

 

Performance (both climb and speed) of the F-4 and G-2 is very accurate, with automatic radiators it's actually a bit on the optimistic side (for the F-4 atleast). Who cares if the overheat message pops up, as long as it doesn't cause any issues.

Nothing accurate with the G2. Should easily outperform the F4 in climb.

[III/JG2Gustav05]

I have no idea what Lichin is or what it was trying to test. All I know is that fast planes run cooler because radiators work better with more air.

That implies there is no overheat when climbing with 280kph at Kampfleistung, otherwise such test in Rechlin is totally meaningless. BTW, sorry for my typo in my previous post.

Edited December 28, 2015 by III/JG2Gustav05

[Ace_Pilto]

That implies there is no overheat when climbing with 280kph at Kampfleistung, otherwise such test in Rechlin is totally meaningless. BTW, sorry for my typo in my previous post.

 

Thanks, I understand now. Is this climbing test done at 1.3 ata (Kampfleistung = war power?)? I always thought that 280kph was for maximum climb rate and would lead to overheating if you hold that speed for too long at high manifold pressure. This is why I fly 340 when climbing in all F-G-K series 109s, (and because it is safer in combat). 

Edited December 28, 2015 by JimmyBlonde

[Matt]

Nothing accurate with the G2. Should easily outperform the F4 in climb.

Yes, by 25 seconds up to 6000 meters.

 

But you're right, the climb rate is not as accurate as i expected. Did a test from 1000-8000 meters (0-1000 meters should take less than a minute, feel free to add that):

 

F-4 = 7:28 min (about 45 seconds too good)

G-2 = 7:12 min (about 30 seconds too good)

 

I was climbing with 280 km/h IAS. Got an "engine overheat" message popping up from time to time, which caused no damage and obviously no decrease in climb rate whatsoever. 

Edited December 28, 2015 by Matt

[Lusekofte]

I really wish for a input from one of the coders in the dev team on this and many more questions. To me it seems like a huge undertaking changing anything in this game. Do not get me wrong, I am very grateful for the improvements done , and what this game has evolved into.

But they never really tells us why they do things they do, I start thinking that many things we take for granted in other sims , is not really that easy to do in this. 

It might not be so easy to set parameters to random in FM´s . Like I cannot understand why they cannot put more controls to axis control . They got the interface , I am sure we are constantly bumping our heads into limitations in game engine. And these discussions really never conclude anything.

Would it not be better that we was informed about these limitations, I do really not mind, I can understand limitations within the Game engine/ software. 

Or might it be a manpower thing, time and budget ? 

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Yes, by 25 seconds up to 6000 meters.

 

But you're right, the climb rate is not as accurate as i expected. Did a test from 1000-8000 meters (0-1000 meters should take less than a minute, feel free to add that):

 

F-4 = 7:28 min (about 45 seconds too good)

G-2 = 7:12 min (about 30 seconds too good)

 

I was climbing with 280 km/h IAS. Got an "engine overheat" message popping up from time to time, which caused no damage and obviously no decrease in climb rate whatsoever. 

G2 time with retrectable tailwheel from 1000 to 8000 was 6:48. So it's 24 seconds to slow

[Matt]

Got a source to back that up?

 

I'm using this one btw.

http://www.kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_MttDblatt42may/109_May42dblatt.html

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Got a source to back that up?

 

I'm using this one btw.

http://www.kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_MttDblatt42may/109_May42dblatt.html

http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_MT215/109G2_MT215.html

[Saurer]

http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_MT215/109G2_MT215.html

 

sorry but I think that one says 7:60, it would not make much sense to give a time to climb to 0m

Edited December 28, 2015 by Saurer

[II./JG77_Manu*]

sorry but I think that one says 7:60, it would not make much sense to give a time to climb to 0m

he made a test from 1k, so you have to subtract 48 seconds. And it doesn't say 7:60 btw

[Matt]

That plane had a non-retractable tail wheel though. And i didn't climb with fully closed radiators (which won't improve climb rate by 40% anyway) or with 300 km/h IAS.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Matt

[II./JG77_Manu*]

That plane had a non-retractable tail wheel though. And i didn't climb with fully closed radiators (which won't improve climb rate by 40% anyway).

Apparently that doesn't hamper the climb rate. What's more significant is how this climb was done..more speed, and less radiators.

The sheet you presented was only a calculation, with 50% rads open. I would rather go for an actual test, and with rads on auto or manual pretty close. If you want you can choose another German test as well, this one -->http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_Rechlinkennblatt/rechlin_G1_blatt.html speed lower (280), climb rate not quite as good as the finnish, but still way better then in the game

[Matt]

That one is 13 seconds better from 1000-8000 m than my first and only test (which probably wasn't perfect) and doesn't say the radiator setting. I've no doubt that you can easily reach that time when you manually close the radiators in BoS for even a short period of time.

 

So i don't see how that's way better than what we currently have in BoS.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Matt