Engine management not nessesary...

[NobbyNobbs]

So unless you can come up with some actual references from the book, to prove what you say, it just becomes wishful thinking on your part doesn't it Joch.

Some months ago (actually almost year ago) on russian forum Viks posted this chart from report about testing Yak-1 s 69

 

 

And the same chart with some my comments for englishspeakers.

 

So you have a possibilty to make some tests and if something will wrong you can make the bug report or something like that. 

 

ps. I don't know if 10 deg C was the temperature on the altitude or on the ground-level, but I think that on the altitude.

[Wulf]

 

Some months ago (actually almost year ago) on russian forum Viks posted this chart from report about testing Yak-1 s 69

 

 

And the same chart with some my comments for englishspeakers.

post-13-0-95056800-1424087597.jpg

 

So you have a possibilty to make some tests and if something will wrong you can make the bug report or something like that. 

 

ps. I don't know if 10 deg C was the temperature on the altitude or on the ground-level, but I think that on the altitude.

 

 

 

I'm not really sure what you expect me to say about your 'graph'.  Um... it looks pretty.  I don't read 'the Russian' but if I did, would it tell me that Gordon and Khaz. make stuff up?

 

I was going to send a post that said  "Luftwhiner says whiiiine" .  But then I decided not too.

 

 

Were you really.  Okay.  Umm .. is there an argument in there somewhere or do you just like to post stuff?

Edited January 2, 2016 by Wulf

[Sgt_Joch]

Where do Gordon and Khazanov say the overheating issues with the Yak 1 were resolved?  I'll help you out there, they don't.  There's nothing in the text that I have read to suggest that solutions were found and then subsequently incorporated into later series production Yak 1s.  That, presumably, is why they describe the overheating problems as being "incurable" rather than just one of the many teething problems identified in the  prototype.  To suggest otherwise is absurd.

 

So unless you can come up with some actual references from the book, to prove what you say, it just becomes wishful thinking on your part doesn't it Joch.

 

I have the same book, I agree it is the best English language source on WW2 Soviet planes.

 

Now, back to your question, after the quote on the 1940 prototype, there is a lot of discussion on the evolution of the Yak 1 from 1940 to 1942, including mentions of many remaining defects of the airplane from tests and pilot comments, however you will note oil/water overheating is not mentioned once as being a performance issue/defect until you get to the second quote about the development of the 105 PF engine.

 

If the oil overheating problem was "incurable", why is it never mentioned as being an issue or defect? Could it be because it was not a real problem?

[DD_Arthur]

I loved that bloody car.  It wasn't all that fast, (maybe it did 165 k/ph or so on a straight)

 

Over a ton out of a Mini not fast?!!

 

I had BMW 2002.  My mate had a Mini Cooper.  He'd always beat me to the pub in his car made by semi-skilled sub-humans in the West Midlands but my fine piece of German engineering was warm and dry with just enough room to help a willing young lady get her knickers off.

 

Is there an analogy here?

[BlitzPig_EL]

Let me put this entire thread into historical perspective.

 

Since I started flying online in 2001, and haunting the forums, posts like this one have been a staple.   Player flys German plane poorly, gets shot down by Russian plane, then blames the developers for nerfing the Germans and buffing the Russians, instead of taking an introspective approach and trying to understand what he did wrong.

 

Note: you will never see the best German virtual pilots in these types of threads, because they know they are in the best mounts, and their kill tally proves this.

 

The mythology about all things German being superior is just that, mythology.  In reality technological advances, either in small arms, armor, or in the air, went back and forth during the course of the war, especially in aircraft design.

No one nation had a lock on technological advancement, or it would seem the ability to propagandize decades after the fact.

 

Wulf, you very much remind me of someone I used to fly with.   He could never overcome his personal bias against the Soviets and view things with an open mind.

 

It's a trap that no thinking man should ever fall into.

 

Just sayin'.

[Wulf]

Over a ton out of a Mini not fast?!!

 

I had BMW 2002.  My mate had a Mini Cooper.  He'd always beat me to the pub in his car made by semi-skilled sub-humans in the West Midlands but my fine piece of German engineering was warm and dry with just enough room to help a willing young lady get her knickers off.

 

Is there an analogy here?

 

 

"Get her knickers off"????  Mate, I never bothered with the finer points.  Straight in, knickers 'n all, 2 minutes later I was back out and half a km up the High street. ... good times.  

[Hoots]

You see, if you could just stop being huuuuuuuuge air plane geeks you'd all get on fine

[Wulf]

I have the same book, I agree it is the best English language source on WW2 Soviet planes.

 

Now, back to your question, after the quote on the 1940 prototype, there is a lot of discussion on the evolution of the Yak 1 from 1940 to 1942, including mentions of many remaining defects of the airplane from tests and pilot comments, however you will note oil/water overheating is not mentioned once as being a performance issue/defect until you get to the second quote about the development of the 105 PF engine.

 

If the oil overheating problem was "incurable", why is it never mentioned as being an issue or defect? Could it be because it was not a real problem?

 

 

So... what you're saying is, there was an initial problem with overheating (which G&K describe as incurable, for some reason that defies explanation) which then went away but then re-appeared again when they boosted the M-105.

 

Is that about right?  

 

So... how does that help with your argument exactly???

[Hoots]

Back to geeks..... *sighs*

[Wulf]

Let me put this entire thread into historical perspective.

 

Since I started flying online in 2001, and haunting the forums, posts like this one have been a staple.   Player flys German plane poorly, gets shot down by Russian plane, then blames the developers for nerfing the Germans and buffing the Russians, instead of taking an introspective approach and trying to understand what he did wrong.

 

Note: you will never see the best German virtual pilots in these types of threads, because they know they are in the best mounts, and their kill tally proves this.

 

The mythology about all things German being superior is just that, mythology.  In reality technological advances, either in small arms, armor, or in the air, went back and forth during the course of the war, especially in aircraft design.

No one nation had a lock on technological advancement, or it would seem the ability to propagandize decades after the fact.

 

Wulf, you very much remind me of someone I used to fly with.   He could never overcome his personal bias against the Soviets and view things with an open mind.

 

It's a trap that no thinking man should ever fall into.

 

Just sayin'.

 

 

Okay well I guess that explains it.  Thanks for the insight.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Russian pilots were known to push the RPM lever all the way forward and leave it there. This is confirmed in interviews with several veterans.

Yes, but anecdotes about flight/combat experiences can't be a one-way street.

[JG5_Schuck]

Well as I see it there are two different problems here,

Engine management and engine damage models.

Ive said this a hundred times but ill say it again, I don't believe the VVS aircraft are any better than Luftwaffe or visa a versa,

But its the way the game allows people to fly them. Namely the techno chat.

The automated engine management and cooling system should, and would have given the Luftwaffe pilots a massive advantage in that they would have had to have spent less time managing the engine,

and more time scanning the skies. Thus giving them a better situational awareness.

But as it stands this advantage is nullified by the techno chat, in a VVS plane you just have to set the throttle at continuous or combat power, and off you go.

Where as in real life you would have had to manage the mixture, throttle, prop pitch, oil rads, coolant rads, trim pitch adjustments, supercharger settings and monitor temps, manifold pressure, RPM, prop pitch.

Whilst also looking for the enemy.

You'd also have to do all of this in the heat of battle, whilst the Luftwaffe pilots, for the most part had to monitor the ATA pressure and revs and the plane looked after the rest!

Seriously, if we all want to play this game in a more realistic less arcadey manner there has to be a server option to turn off engine management and engine damage icons/techno chat.

Or just get rid of it all together.

 

Which brings me on to the second point, engine damage models.

Quite clearly there is an issue here, no liquid cooled engine, be it VVS or Luftwaffe would be able to run very long at 120-130 degrees for any extended period of time, even if the engine didn't fail mechanically, im pretty sure an ancillary would, ie radiator, or hose, or gasket, water pump etc.

The same would go for oil temps as well. Over heated oil causes the oil to break down and the lubrication properties to be reduced.

Not to mention running an engine at max revs would significantly increase the chance of mechanical failure due to internal stresses.

I mean who jumps into a car and drives around at max revs in first gear, that's why we have gears and planes have variable prop pitch, to reduce engine revs and increase engine life.

The Luftwaffe pilots had an advantage here too as the engine management helped to rule out human error and allowed the engines to run at optimum settings (not always the quickest settings) thus helping with the engine life and durability.

In order to remedy this, all the engines in game should fail at the same time under the same conditions, something that isn't happening at the moment.

 

So.........

      techno chat/icons = unrealistic arcade game.

No techno chat/icons = realistic flight simulator.

 

 

 

PS kendo hit the nail on the head, without techno chat/icons he used to blow engines, with it he doesn't!

      I rest my case, the techno chat allows us to get the max theoretical performance out of a plane, that other wise wouldn't be possible without them!

 

It would take an average pilot to get a good performance out of a Luftwaffe plane, it would take a great pilot to get the best out of a VVS one.

 

 

 

Amended, no offence meant Bearcat!

Edited January 3, 2016 by JG5_Schuck

[NobbyNobbs]

 

 

I'm not really sure what you expect me to say about your 'graph'.

 

I expect nothing. You asked for proof, I gave you proof. But now I see that you don't need any proofs, you want typing about soviet planes on steroids.

[Askania]

12 Juli 1943

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the Yak-7B No. 821023, engine M-105PF, prop VISH-61P, the plane was built in april 1943.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

9 August 1943

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the LaGG-3 No. 6311, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in May 1943.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

December 1943

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the Yak-7B No. 54110, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in November 1943.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

December 1943

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the Yak-9T No. 13036, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in December 1943.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

March 1944

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the Yak-9 No. 17006, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in February 1944.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

March 1944

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the Yak-1 No. 36176, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in February 1944.

 

overheating of oil and water

 

 

 

March 1944

 

results of performance tests run at the manufacturer's plant  on the LaGG-3 No. 7166, engine M-105PF,  the plane was built in February 1944.

 

overheating of oil and water

[216th_Peterla]

I just run a quick test ingame.

IL2 with custom expert settings(only external view).

I take off with the aircarft in the summer map at 12:30 pm and set a cruise altitude of 500 meters. Once let stabilize the aircraft for a while with relaxed settings I increase the RPM to maximum, mixture to full and throttle to max 100%(That means Booster mode on). The aircraft sustained critical engine damage shortly after the booster mode expiration time(10 min). I was on the ground a minute later.

I'm a poor/average player but with this test you can confirm that(in the game) if you set everything to maximum with the Mikulin engine(in the IL2) it won't last forever, only 10 minutes.

 

 

I don't know anything about any source guys, you have better knowledge/informed than I, just wanna mention to the OP that the soviet engines broke as much as the german ones when limits are exceeded. Other issue is if those limits are properly settled ingame.

@Thanks Ioshic for the correction.

Edited January 2, 2016 by peterla

[Sokol1]

 

So.........

      techno chat/icons = unrealistic arcade game.

 

 

Welcome to "2015 Flight Games". 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/7-questions-developers/page-40?do=findComment&comment=320131

[Sgt_Joch]

june 1943 test of the Yak-1M equipped with a M-105PF engine which was boosted even higher and produced more power and heat:
 
 
 

"...boost augmentation... had no noticeable effect on water and oil temperatures"
 
"..the Yak-1M, like the Spitfire, is a model for any fighter either domestic or foreign." Insignificant deficiencies typical of Yak fighters, such as oil overheating at the optimum climb rate...did not mar the overall impression.
 
Gordon, Khazanov, p. 162

 

Any engine will overheat given the right settings, the only issue is whether overheating in the Yak-1 engine in game is properly modeled.

[Falco_Peregrinus]

I just run a quick test ingame.

IL2 with custom expert settings(only external view).

I take off with the aircarft in the summer map at 12:30 pm and set a cruise altitude of 500 meters. Once let stabilize the aircraft for a while with relaxed settings I increase the RPM to maximum, mixture to full and throttle to max 100%(That means Booster mode on). The aircraft sustained critical engine damage shortly after the booster mode expiration time(10 min). I was on the ground a minute later. 

I'm a poor/average player but with this test you can confirm that(in the game) if you set everything to maximum with the M105 engine(in the IL2) it won't last forever, only 10 minutes.

 

I don't know anything about any source guys, you have better knowledge/informed than I, just wanna mention to the OP that the soviet engines broke as much as the german ones when limits are exceeded. Other issue is if those limits are properly settled ingame.

 

thanks for the test peterla. I rarely fly the il2

Just a quick correction; IL2s had Mikulin engines, not Klimov 105s; 

Edited January 2, 2016 by Ioshic

[Bearcat]

ENOUGH with the Soviet nonsense. The Soviet Union no longer exists. ENOUGH with the Russian this that or the other nonsense. If you cannot discuss FMs or issues with this sim without reverting to that kind of rhetoric then do not post at all.

[sc0ch]

I find myself managing the radiators quite a bit in a fight to gain an edge with the Yak.  Keep the engine cool (75% radiators, 100% rich mixture) until a boost is necessary, take the whole rig to redline by closing the radiators.  Great fun, better hope you're in a good place when you begin overheating.  Then cut throttle and run radiators wide open.

[Xenunjeon88]

Russian pilots were known to push the RPM lever all the way forward and leave it there. This is confirmed in interviews with several veterans.

Didn't intend to start a flame war, but if Soviet pilots did in fact state that this is what they did, it settles it for me at least.

 

I wish there was a training campaign, as a fan of study sims like DCS, it feels missing from both titles a complete and thorough training "class" that helps understand how (at the very least) real pilots flew their respective crates.

the engines in game should fail at the same time under the same conditions, something that isn't happening at the moment.

 

So.........

      techno chat/icons = unrealistic arcade game.

No techno chat/icons = realistic flight simulator.

 

 

 

PS kendo hit the nail on the head, without techno chat/icons he used to blow engines, with it he doesn't!

      I rest my case, the techno chat allows us to get the max theoretical performance out of a plane, that other wise wouldn't be possible without them!

 

It would take an average pilot to get a good performance out of a Luftwaffe plane, it would take a great pilot to get the best out of a VVS one.

 

 

I have to admit, I would prefer the OPTION to disable MY techno-chat rather than completely require it abolished from everyone else's perspective. I would be okay with no techo chat while others have it on during the same multiplayer game. I prefer no hand-holding, but if others prefer it that way, i don't see a problem.

[Dakpilot]

 

 

I have to admit, I would prefer the OPTION to disable MY techno-chat rather than completely require it abolished from everyone else's perspective. I would be okay with no techo chat while others have it on during the same multiplayer game. I prefer no hand-holding, but if others prefer it that way, i don't see a problem.

 

That option is available if you choose

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/20372-how-do-i-turn-ai-chat-boxes-game/?p=321031

 

post# 7

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited January 4, 2016 by Dakpilot

[JtD]

Some months ago (actually almost year ago) on russian forum Viks posted this chart from report about testing Yak-1 s 69

...

And the same chart with some my comments for englishspeakers.

...

 

So you have a possibilty to make some tests and if something will wrong you can make the bug report or something like that. 

 

ps. I don't know if 10 deg C was the temperature on the altitude or on the ground-level, but I think that on the altitude.

Thanks for posting (and comments translation), very interesting.