P40 engine managment

[SCG_motoadve]

Is there a guide for the P40 engine managment?

 

Engine is easy to blow up.

 

Also Im not touching radiators or cowl flaps, dont know if radiator for oil water ? leave open, close when? for how long?

 

RPMs control manifold pressure too.

[BlitzPig_EL]

The only control for P 40 radiator and oil cooler is the outlet cowling flaps.  That is all you need for the P 40, as far as cooling goes.

 

As for the rest of it, I have given up on the P40, even though it is my favorite real life aircraft, as currently modeled, it is a complete waste of time.

[SCG_motoadve]

I have fun with it and online (I only played once) shot down a Stuka and a 109.

In single player its useless though.

[andyw248]

Is there a guide for the P40 engine management?

 

Yes, it can be derived from the P-40 specs at: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25993-aircraft-flight-and-technical-specifications-and-operational/?p=406720.

 

Generally, you can't go full throttle, full RPM without blowing up the engine. If you watch the wartime instructional video or read the wartime manual, you will find very clear instructions as to the power settings and RPM to use upon takeoff and climb.

 

Here's what I do, based on P-40 manuals:

• Takeoff: Prop - max RPM, Throttle - 42 inches
• After liftoff: RPM to 2,600, Throttle to 35 inches
• Normal cruise: RPM to 2,280, Throttle to 27.9 inches

All of these are with mixture set to Auto Rich.

 

If you want, or need, to cruise faster you can use 2,600 RPM and 37.2 inches. Wartime pilots would rarely do this because they had to conserve fuel.

[Crump]

Yes, it can be derived from the P-40 specs at: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25993-aircraft-flight-and-technical-specifications-and-operational/?p=406720.

 

Generally, you can't go full throttle, full RPM without blowing up the engine. If you watch the wartime instructional video or read the wartime manual, you will find very clear instructions as to the power settings and RPM to use upon takeoff and climb.

 

Here's what I do, based on P-40 manuals:

• Takeoff: Prop - max RPM, Throttle - 42 inches
• After liftoff: RPM to 2,600, Throttle to 35 inches
• Normal cruise: RPM to 2,280, Throttle to 27.9 inches

All of these are with mixture set to Auto Rich.

 

If you want, or need, to cruise faster you can use 2,600 RPM and 37.2 inches. Wartime pilots would rarely do this because they had to conserve fuel.

 

 

That is the thing about a closed manifold pressure system and hard linked controls....

 

You got to watch the round dials and keep it in specs.

 

 

The only control for P 40 radiator and oil cooler is the outlet cowling flaps.  That is all you need for the P 40, as far as cooling goes.   As for the rest of it, I have given up on the P40, even though it is my favorite real life aircraft, as currently modeled, it is a complete waste of time.

 

 

Exactly,

 

The radiator/cowl flaps were only used in taxi, take off, and climbing operations.  There is a warning light in the cockpit that POH specifies for the pilot to open the cowl flaps.  The pilot does not have to watch a temperature gauge nor will the engine explode.  The light is designed to come on and then the pilot adjusts the flaps.

 

The radiator shutters cannot even be opened at speeds in excess of 175 mph.  It is a limitation of the design and obviously the cowl flaps are not required to be opened at speeds above 175mph.

 

The Operating Instructions and Limitations for the P-40D and E series:

 

P-40D & E.pdf

[Crump]

Here is the aerodynamic information on the Curtiss Electric Propeller used on the P-40E.  It has the info required to do a good analysis.

 

P40%20Prop%20Specs.pdf

[Crump]

The P-40E also had a rather unusual spin recovery technique.

 

No spins below 10,000 feet and none are to attempted with bombs, drop tanks, or external stores of any kind.  The CG must be at or forward of 29% MAC.  (Not the unusual part)

 

1.  Recovery MUST be initiated before two turns of the spin are complete.  (Not good....the airplane likes to achieve a stable unrecoverable spin)

 

2.  Rudder input opposite of the direction of Spin

 

3.  Do not move the stick until the Rudder input has been made and THEN move the stick laterally and longitudinally centered.  (This is the unusual part...the stick does not go forward with ailerons neutral...it only goes to center and is held)

 

3.  Initiate recovery from the dive after 180 mph IAS airspeed is achieved. 

[Venturi]

I don't fly it because it is completely outclassed by every other fighter plane in the sim.

Edited November 20, 2016 by Venturi

[SYN_Skydance]

Yes, but it is a beautiful plane.

 

My squad mates and I will often fly this plane and we have accomplished many successful sorties in it.

 

On take off;

 

Mixture full rich

 

Prop pitch 100%

 

Throttle up (But not full throttle)

 

Keep an eye on your "Manifold" reading and don't let it go above 45 (you will need to monitor your throttle as the plane picks up speed)

 

After "wheels up" retract gear and reduce your throttle to 37.5 (look for the green marker) on your Manfold gauge.

 

Reduce your prop pitch to 26 on the "RPM" gauge (you will need to increase the throttle to bring the manifold reading back up to the green marker)

 

You should be climbing at about 260 km/h

 

Reduce your mixture to "Auto Rich" (look for the lever to your left with "M" on it. Move it one stage back from fully forward)

 

You can keep the radiator cowling closed. The temperature should be kept between the two green markers on the "Temp" gauge.

 

Have fun flying her around. Just remember to keep the "Manifold" reading between the two green markers and don't let the "RPM"go above the red marker.

 

I know the above is not quite to the manual but I've tried to make it simple for beginners. If you fly it like this you won't cook the engine and you can enjoy what a beatiful plane the P40 is.

[Crump]

 

 

Just remember to keep the "Manifold" reading between the two green markers and don't let the "RPM"go above the red marker.

 

Sounds pretty normal.  The biggest issue I see is instrument scan skills and actually using the gauge information.  I some are reliant upon looking at a big percentage on the side of the screen.

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

You will virtually never need more than 50% Cowl Shutters. In normal Cruise Flight you can completely close them. In Combat Power (42" at 3000rpm) you'll sometimes need 5-15% opening, depending on Speed.

I killed a number of engines due to freezing, so remember to keep the Shutters closed.

[69th_chuter]

The whole "you got to follow the manual thing" is rather out of control for the Allison, sadly.  It's a good general rule for aircraft, however (lol).

[Crump]

 

 

The whole "you got to follow the manual thing" is rather out of control for the Allison, sadly.  It's a good general rule for aircraft, however (lol).

 

I think the issue lies somewhere else.  The engine should not instantly melt down if you exceed a limit but neither should exceeding the limits be the norm either. 

 

Some folks are helping me to examine the FM and see if we cannot help the DEV's and the community to zero in on the issue to make the aircraft more fun to fly and align it with its historical reputation.

IF there is even an issue....

[69th_chuter]

More to the point, how did the Russians actually use the Allison?  Did they adhere to the published numbers*, operate more freely to the 52" pressure control system limit or did they simply remove the pressure control system like the British?  (One RAF Mustang pilot outran an Fw190 on the deck by pulling 72" for 20 minutes.)

 

 

*From what I've read they seem to not have paid too much attention to what anyone told them and "wrote" their own manuals based on their own experience.

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

More to the point, how did the Russians actually use the Allison?  Did they adhere to the published numbers*, operate more freely to the 52" pressure control system limit or did they simply remove the pressure control system like the British?  (One RAF Mustang pilot outran an Fw190 on the deck by pulling 72" for 20 minutes.)

 

 

*From what I've read they seem to not have paid too much attention to what anyone told them and "wrote" their own manuals based on their own experience.

Nooooo, what have you done? You have just lead this thread to be slaughtered.

[BlitzPig_EL]

I think the issue lies somewhere else.  The engine should not instantly melt down if you exceed a limit but neither should exceeding the limits be the norm either. 

 

Some folks are helping me to examine the FM and see if we cannot help the DEV's and the community to zero in on the issue to make the aircraft more fun to fly and align it with its historical reputation.

IF there is even an issue....

 

Keep us/me informed on this would you please?

 

I really dearly love the Curtiss Hawks, when you consider the year of the initial design (1934) and the results obtained with both the 75s and 81/87 over the six odd years of the conflict, it's hard to square that reputation with what we have in game now.

 

I know some of this is because of the "compressed" and unreal nature of air combat in computer gaming, and accept that is not ever going to change, but still, I find the current state of the P 40 in the sim to be really off.

 

All the best...

 

EL

[Hr_Rossi]

you have the specifications in the game. When you start a Mission go to the map by pressing "o" and there you find it on the right top Corner. press the specification button and you will find every Information needed to fly this plane without wracking your engine.

By the way, forgett what People say here. Shes realy a beast and fun to fly. The strongest weapon plattform in this game. with her 6x50 kaliber she shoot everything in pieces, even tanks! i shoot down Bombers easily . Try to use a 300m gun Konvergenz. Works best for me, no Need to close up, shoot from distance is enough.

Get used to her and you will have a blast.

Salute!

Edited November 20, 2016 by Absolut

[Y-29.Silky]

More to the point, how did the Russians actually use the Allison?  Did they adhere to the published numbers*, operate more freely to the 52" pressure control system limit or did they simply remove the pressure control system like the British?  (One RAF Mustang pilot outran an Fw190 on the deck by pulling 72" for 20 minutes.)

 

 

*From what I've read they seem to not have paid too much attention to what anyone told them and "wrote" their own manuals based on their own experience.

Yes, it can be derived from the P-40 specs at: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25993-aircraft-flight-and-technical-specifications-and-operational/?p=406720.

 

Generally, you can't go full throttle, full RPM without blowing up the engine. If you watch the wartime instructional video or read the wartime manual, you will find very clear instructions as to the power settings and RPM to use upon takeoff and climb.

The Russians beat the shit out of them.

 

From General-Major Nikolay Gerasimovich Golodnikov who flew a P-40..

 

"The first and second was the result of the lack of power. What we did was simple. First drawback we removed by holding higher RPM. We always flew it with increased RPM."

..

"Truth to be told, engines were "burning away" from our unusual settings. They would last up to 50 hours, often shorter. They would usually clock up to 35 hours and then be replaced."

..

"Have we flown them how Americans wrote it in the manual, we would all got shot down."

 

Sadly, right now the only way to fly it is how the Americans wrote it in the manual and 35-50 hours translates to 5-10 minutes in this game.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Y-29.Silky

[Yakdriver]

Nowif you could give me a link to that source... i like what he said, how he said it... and would love to listen to a few other things he said

[Dakpilot]

The whole  (large) article/interview needs to be read in its entirety, considering its context carefully, (remembering it is a translation) rather than pick two sentences

 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/golodnikov/index.htm

 

 

There is a lot of very good info in there, but careful analysis in needed

 

of note is 

 

N.G. What have we been talking about? You must understand that you have been making the same mistake as do all people who have no connection with combat aviation. You are confusing two concepts: maximum speed and combat speed. Maximum speed is attained under ideal conditions: horizontal flight, strict maintenance of altitude, calculated engine revolutions, and so on.
Combat speed is a range of maximum possible speeds that an aircraft can develop for the conduct of active maneuver aerial battle, and at which all forms of maneuver attendant to that battle can be executed.
When I speak to you about speed, I have in mind namely the combat speed at which I conducted battle. To me maximum speed is neither here nor there.

 

Read all of part 4 for the full version

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited November 22, 2016 by Dakpilot

[konate]

 

Read all of part 4 for the full version

 

 

Fascinating read, btw.

[konate]

Yeah, I see what everyone's talking about.

 

I picked it up today, and I just don't see how anyone could've been very effective at anything other than ground striking with this thing. It was painful to fight fighters with. It couldn't do anything it needed to; and the engine always seemed to be at 50% when in fact it was at 82%.

 

I know nothing about how any planes really flew, but I still kept asking myself, "how can this be right?", anyway.

[Hr_Rossi]

I fly the P40 most of the time and of Course she is not a 109, but that does not say its impossible to fight a Messerschmitt. I have a lot of fun with her and i dogfight every plane, doesnt matter FW190 or Bf 109.

 

here i loaded up a video of a dogfight against a 109F4. And i have more like this on my harddisk. Sure you Need to get used to the P40E and shes is a havy weight airplane. But we like the challenge or dont we?

 

Edited November 24, 2016 by Absolut

[fjacobsen]

Have anyone considered the fact that in Soviet operation they used lower Octane fuel with the subsequent reduction in power ?

 

Normally the P-40 used 100 Octane, but as far as I know, the Soviets used 82 Octane.

So using the common available data on the P-40 should not fit what we should see in the sim if replicated correctly.

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

I fly the P40 most of the time and of Course she is not a 109, but that does not say its impossible to fight a Messerschmitt. I have a lot of fun with her and i dogfight every plane, doesnt matter FW190 or Bf 109.

 

here i loaded up a video of a dogfight against a 109F4. And i have more like this on my harddisk. Sure you Need to get used to the P40E and shes is a havy weight airplane. But we like the challenge or dont we?

 

 

 

 

 

OP-40.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Have anyone considered the fact that in Soviet operation they used lower Octane fuel with the subsequent reduction in power ?

 

Normally the P-40 used 100 Octane, but as far as I know, the Soviets used 82 Octane.

So using the common available data on the P-40 should not fit what we should see in the sim if replicated correctly.

 

Soviets got supplied via Lend Lease fuel and oil to use in the lend lease vehicles (and their high performance local ones). Low octane locally produced fuel was mostly used for older fighters like the I-15 and I-16 (if wrong feel free to correct)

Edited November 24, 2016 by SuperEtendard

[Venturi]

The Soviets got a lot of lend-lease high octane fuel and high quality lubricants, spare parts, spare engines, etc along with the airframes. It wasn't just a "here's some planes" deal.

 

Historically, it should outmaneuver an Me109E7 in the horizontal with better rolling and turning, underperform it in climbing and level acceleration, should far surpass it in diving acceleration and diving top speed, should be about equivalent in level top speed at 3km, and be far more maneuverable in any dimension than the Messer at any speed over 400kph. 

The Japanese considered the early P40s as their most worthy opponents in the early war. The P40B-E series was the main American land based fighter in the Pacific until arrival of P38s in late 1942 and P47s in mid 1943, and they still continued to serve after this. Later models remained in American service until the end of the war in almost every theater...

 

Here is a good video for those interested:

 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Venturi

[FuriousMeow]

You want the Allison to run wide open with no detriment? It goes both ways, the Germans get to do it too. You'll still be outclassed in the P40.

[SCG_motoadve]

Great video

[Venturi]

You want the Allison to run wide open with no detriment? It goes both ways, the Germans get to do it too. You'll still be outclassed in the P40.

 

Stop putting words in my mouth.

 

It should be roughly equivalent to a Me109E7.

 

I await the Pacific theater.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Venturi

[Venturi]

 

The airplane then proceeded to enter a flat spin which was unrecoverable.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Venturi

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

You are aware that you should never use Ailerons to control bank while Stalling? Only ever use rudder. Especially on Aircraft with large Wingspans you should be aware of this.

 

Anyways, no matter how careful I am, the P-40 is very difficult to slip. It's waiting to get fixed.

It's not unflyable though, but I hope it gets changed soon.

Edited November 26, 2016 by CuteKitten94

[Venturi]

200mph is not stalling speed, pay attention.

[Crump]

 

 

200mph is not stalling speed, pay attention.

 

It is if you exceed the angle of attack limit (CLmax).....

 

An airplane can stall at any speed and CuteKitten94 is absolutely right about the ailerons. 

[Venturi]

Uh huh, and the point is that the plane will do a unrecoverable spin with 60% rudder deflection at 200mph.

 

Go ahead and try it.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Venturi

[Venturi]

So much for your strawman. 

 

 

[Crump]

 

It is pretty easy to compare reality to BoS to see if there is good agreement.  Venturi please drop the false defensive baloney.  There is no strawman and without conditions, the assertion the behavior is wrong is meaningless.

 

The rudder on the P-40E was incorrectly sized and as a consequence it was very possible to have a rudder induced stall/spin in the type.

[Venturi]

What a bunch of malarky. Typical. 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25323-p-40-turn-rate/?p=413707

...

Maybe the fact the rudder is modelled TOO LARGE has something to do with this aberrant aircraft behavior?

Edited November 26, 2016 by Venturi

[-WILD-AlbinoHA5E]

What a bunch of malarky. Typical. 

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25323-p-40-turn-rate/?p=413707

...

Maybe the fact the rudder is modelled TOO LARGE has something to do with this aberrant aircraft behavior?

Just tried these Points:

I take it that the 200l Rear Drum Tank was not used in these tests, since it was basically added as a Service Afterthought, so I only took 350 liters, which are the standard Onboard Tanks.

 

1. Point: Aircraft is absolutely stable if you give small control inputs (1 second input max. 1/3): True

2. Stable turn down to L: 97mph, R: 100mph: Spot on and True. Barely had to touch the Stick.

3. Stable Gliding Turn: 100mph to the Left: Stable; To the Right there is a gentle Stall but no Spin, 

 

If I use Full Rudder inputs in either Direction at 200mph there is no Spin, she will make a 360° Roll, Oscillate a bit and then continue straight or exit in a 45° Dive at about 150mph.

 

She will "Helicopter" and approaches stability levels of a Bf110 at High AoA.

[Venturi]

So, you're saying 350L or 92US gal is the "normal" fuel capacity of the aircraft, when in fact it was 148gal as stated in the video? Service afterthought? Are you kidding?

 

I have to say your stated in game findings are totally different than mine. Every time I do this, and especially to the left, she will enter a spin, usually it is inverted. Please show a video. 

 

If the bird was this deadly at 210mph to use rudder on, I doubt that the Japanese would have considered it a lethal foe.

 

Let's see what pops up now...