Jump to content
Gavrick

Developer Diary, Part 140 - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Politics and hurt feelings, it is the achilles heal of any combat flight sim, in special IL 2 brand. It will never go away. Always been there. 

 

Even a statement like this will fuel such a discussion

 

 

Let it go
 

 

Ignore is the best thing

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Jason & Roman!

 

1) Thumbs up to the Dev team for the great work.

 

2) Regarding Dev.Diary 138: AnPetrovich asked for some original research on German VDM-propellers. I found some old research-files from the "Aeronautische Versuchsanstalt Göttingen (AVA)". Links and notes under: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26384-re-dev-report-138-vdm-propeller-some-historical-files/

 

Hope that helps a bit.

 

Cheers,

Case

Edited by Case
  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delicious pictures, and wonderful news on the FM work. Yay ! Time to break out the Champaign !!

 

PS. I am a FW190 fanboy so the FM irked me. But overall I think this game is so fun to play and such a challenge. I never felt it was money poorly spent. I applaud the devs / researchers/ contributors for continuing to improve this game and I look forward to pushing it through a GTX 1070 in the new year.

Salute!

Edited by Tailwheelbrownbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) Hope I meet one of those guys that doesn't know his cable stitch from his herringbone, because no matter what I wrote I won't be able to resist flying the Spit.

Cheers.

 

 

The prospect of a Mk V and a 190 together in the sim is really quite exciting.  My two fave aircraft of all time.  Makes me tingle just thinking about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic news about the FM ! And very glad scientific proof has been found, I sincerly hope this will soften the debate around the Butcher !

 

S !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prospect of a Mk V and a 190 together in the sim is really quite exciting.  My two fave aircraft of all time.  Makes me tingle just thinking about it.

 

Is it making you tingle that much that it has caused your wallet to open and we are about to see a Golden BOK bar next to your name?

Edited by Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really happy to see such a dedicated team of people devs and community alike, working together to polish this little gem of a sim. I wish I had somewhere I could call my own home right now and jump be into my cockpit. Instead I'll just keep supporting until then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it making you tingle that much that it has caused your wallet to open and we are about to see a Golden BOK bar next to your name?

 

 

This........ stop it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very interesting the Jabo C3 (1.65 ATA) feature for the A5. We'll have a chance to get it?

 

I asked Jason about it, his answer was "probably not".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked Jason about it, his answer was "probably not".

 

We must "probably" wait, I think the state of both 190 is carefully taken care of and may surprise 

Edited by 216th_LuseKofte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was 1.65 ata cleared for use in the A-5? This page seems to say it was not.

 

Focke-Wulf recorded that BMW had cleared C3 injection for use with the high blower gear as of 20.1.1944. When a Fw 190 A had theses changes for C3 injection they could use it for both gears. So the performance chart of the Fw 190 looks very similar to the Fw 190 with higher boost pressure 1,58/1,65 ata (without C3 injection). Due to problems with the fuel pump and engine cooling, however, the boost pressure increase in high blower gear without C3 injection was only released in June 1944. It should be noted that while the Fw 190 A-8 entered service in April 1944, Focke-Wulf’s Technical description No. 284 for the Fw 190 A-8 dated 30.11.44 states Fw 190 A-8’s were equipped with increased emergency power utilizing 1.58/1.65 ata as of July 1944.

 

Following completion of Fw 190 A-5 serial production, brief trials were carried out from 30.8.43 – 1.9.43 of a Fw 190 A5 equipped with a BMW 801D engine operating at 1.58/1.65 ata erhöhte Notleistung. Charts prepared by BMW dated 26.11.43 presenting the results of these trials show maximum speeds obtained were 578 km/h (359 mph) at sea level and 680 km/h (423 mph) at 5.2 km (17,000 feet). However, the Fw 190 A-5/A-6 aircraft handbook issued in December 1943 notes the engine limitations for Start und Notleistung (3 minutes) as 1,42 ata with maximum speeds being 560 km/h (348 mph) at sea level and 660 km/h (410 mph) at 6300 meters (20,669 feet). It should be noted, however, that Part 7 of the handbook (Triebwerksbedien- und Versorgungsanlage) contains the possibility of the C3 injection with the higher boost pressure. By using the ÄAnw 104 the C3 injection could used for 10-15 minutes up to the height of 1 km with the A-5. It is also apparent from the Fw 190 A-5 Flugzeug-Entwicklungs-Blatt dated 1 November 1944 that 1.58/1.65 ata was not cleared for service use for this variant up to the date of this publication.

Edited by LukeFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was 1.65 ata cleared for use in the A-5? This page seems to say it was not.

Yes. 1.65ata for high blower was not cleared until 1944. Low blower (up to ~2000m) was cleared in summer 43.

 

 

 

 

 

Ein weiteres Mittel zur Leistungssteigerung, das unter anderem (neben einigen A-4-Erprobungsträgern) mit der Fw 190 A-5 getestet wurde, war das C-3-Einspritzsystem. Ursprünglich entwickelt insbesondere für die F- und G-Varianten der Fw 190, die ihre Einsätze oft in geringen Höhen – in denen das GM-1-System nicht angewendet werden konnte – und mit großen Außenlasten flogen, sollte es eine Antwort auf die zunehmende Gefährdung der Jagdbomber durch das Fortschreiten der technischen Entwicklung der gegnerischen Jagdflugzeuge ab Mitte 1942 sein. BMW und Focke-Wulf entwickelten dabei ein kombiniertes System aus erhöhtem Ladedruck (1,65 ata statt 1,42 ata bei 2700/min. in Bodennähe) und zusätzlicher Kraftstoffeinspritzung zur Leistungssteigerung des Motors in Höhen bis 1000 m. Die zusätzliche Einspritzung von C-3-Kraftstoff war nötig, da die Höchstfördermenge der Einspritzpumpe des BMW 801 D bei maximalem Ladedruck nicht mehr ausreichend war (der Mehrbedarf an Treibstoff bei zehnminütigem Einsatz des C-3-Einspritzsystems lag bei etwa 12 l). Durch diese kombinierten Maßnahmen ergab sich eine Leistungssteigerung auf ungefähr 2060 PS in Bodennähe.[21] Focke-Wulf erprobte das neue System ab dem 3. Juni 1943 mit der Fw 190 A-5/U8 (W.Nr. 1428) und verzeichnete in 200 m Höhe eine Steigerung der Spitzengeschwindigkeit um max. 37 km/h. Dieses Ergebnis deckte sich mit den erzielten Leistungen, welche die Erprobungsstelle Rechlin von Mai bis Juli 1943 mit insgesamt sechs mit C-3-Einspritzsystem ausgestatteten Fw 190 A-4- und A-5-Versuchsträgern erflogen hatte, die einen Geschwindigkeitszuwachs zwischen 30 und 45 km/h auswiesen. Damit erzielte das C-3-Einspritzsystem zu diesem Zeitpunkt bei geringerem Bauaufwand bessere Ergebnisse als das ebenfalls für den Einsatz in der Fw 190 vorgesehene MW-50-System. Zudem konnte Focke-Wulf nachweisen, dass das C-3-Einspritzsystem auch noch in Höhen von 8000 m zu einer spürbaren Leistungssteigerung beitrug, weshalb seine Verwendung über die Jagdbombervarianten der Fw 190 hinaus auch bei den Jagdflugzeugvarianten dieses Typs empfohlen wurde

 

 

If you quote a source, you can just quote everything, and not only an excerpt...

Same source you used:

 

 

 

While we have no concrete numbers today, it is known that many Fw 190 fighter bombers used this injection at low level while utilizing 1,65 ata engine boost. The Rechlin evaluation center tested a number of Fw 190s using C3 injection during the summer of 1943. The various aircraft tested demonstrated speed increases averaging from 30 to 45 km/h (19 to 28 mph)

 

 

 

Use of C-3 injection in low blower gear was cleared sometime around the middle of 1943, principally for fighter bombers. The changes required were minor according to the Focke-Wulf modification instruction (Änderungsanweisung 104). By August 1943 the Reichsluftfahrtsministeriem (RLM) was satisfied with the reliability and performance gains of C-3 injection and ordered that an instruction be written for the Fw 190 A-4 Aircraft Handbook. The C3 injection could be used continuously for approximately 10-15 minutes. The pilot had to make certain that the temperatures did not rise over 85 degrees. Fuel consumption increased by approximately 70 litres per 5 minutes use of C3 injection.
Edited by II./JG77_Manu*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you quote a source, you can just quote everything, and not only an excerpt...

 

I skimmed over the article and didn't notice they were using 1,65 in part of the article and 1.65 in others when I did a text search. Relax.

Edited by LukeFF
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:scratch_one-s_head:

 

 

Sure, but referring to badges and continued pressure to people not wearing them.... but sure better to ignore

 

 

Yes. 1.65ata for high blower was not cleared until 1944. Low blower (up to ~2000m) was cleared in summer 43.

 

By cleared you mean they was able but not allowed before that. 1 thing I have seen in many if not all interviews, during dogfight and dangerous situations they disregarded any limitations  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I skimmed over the article and didn't notice they were using 1,65 in part of the article and 1.65 in others. Relax.

 

Skimmed over it, and saw exactly what you wanted to see, nothing else  :pilot:  human minds  :biggrin:

 

By cleared you mean they was able but not allowed before that. 1 thing I have seen in many if not all interviews, during dogfight and dangerous situations they disregarded any limitations  

 

I don't know if it was technically possible before January 1944 to be honest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it making you tingle that much that it has caused your wallet to open and we are about to see a Golden BOK bar next to your name?

 

 

Good question.  In fact, I've been asking myself the same thing.  Should I wait until I know for a fact that the 190 is performing satisfactorily or, should I trust that what I understand is to be done, will be done.  A few weeks ago it was absolutely the former.  Now I'm not so sure.  I may be wrong but I think I'm detecting a bit of an attitudinal sea change here.  I'll think on it some more over the next few days.  

Edited by Wulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question.  In fact, I've been asking myself the same thing.  Should I wait until I know for a fact that the 190 is performing satisfactorily or, should I trust that what I understand is to be done, will be done.  A few weeks ago it was absolutely the former.  Now I'm not so sure.  I may be wrong but I think I'm detecting a bit of an attitudinal sea change here.  I'll think on it some more over the next few days.

Go for it! You know it (probably) makes sense. Worth it for the Hs129 on its own... :)

Cheers.

Edited by 216th_Cat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus the 110 as tank hunter. And to be honest, I am also looking very much forward to it for the P39, Spit and A20. Plus mountains and sea with larger ships to attack, hopefully with torpedoes, too, at some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus the 110 as tank hunter. And to be honest, I am also looking very much forward to it for the P39, Spit and A20. Plus mountains and sea with larger ships to attack, hopefully with torpedoes, too, at some time.

 

 

Oh yeah! I am eagerly awaiting the 110G-2. I cannot wait to go ship hunting with and tank hunting.

 

 

I'd really love to make an Official Bf-110G-2 skin(s) or Fw-190A-5.

 

 

The Fw we have is right here about 20min away from me. So the resource I have is pretty great and it fought in the Kuban as well. It's a III./JG54 bird W+A.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

 

I believe we should be careful what we wish for when it comes to FM changes. Anyone familiar with all the angst over the FM changes in RoF should understand... :) *

 

Good hunting,

Conky

 

*Not a dig at the devs, who basically did what the community demanded  :P .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everybody in those forums is on the side of the franchise, why the heck would anybody spend time in it otherwise?

I can think of at least one person that seems to just come here to argue.

 

(And no I don't mean me :P)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

the 190 is performing satisfactorily

I think they will make a effort getting it close to what 190 fanboys want it without getting outside the parameters set by their available documents

 

 

 

Now I'm not so sure

The cheap investment do not need a confirmed "sure" 

 

 

 

 I may be wrong but I think I'm detecting a bit of an attitudinal sea change here.

Not quite sure either, but there has not been any statement last year like " haters" and "fanboys" The active players now was not here in the start, those active in the early days are not active anymore. COD enthusiast find time to fly here too. Smooth I say.

 

With Kuban you will see mountains and sea, there should be torpedoes and there will come more people from other sim´s . I am pretty sure you will find it worth the money. If not I will refund your money if you are willing to donate the game to another player

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The above post is a good example of the caustic community here.

 

Is it fanboyism to want the 190 corrected when it's been proven that the data was taken from a flawed wind tunnel test?

 

Guilty as charged, I guess.

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus last warning or I'm closing it. Stop the personal stuff NOW or I will start banning people.

 

Jason

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gents,

 

Did I miss if anybody had found out when the revised A-3 skins from Panzerbar were going to be released?

 

Regards

 

Haza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'd really love to make an Official Bf-110G-2 skin(s) or Fw-190A-5.

i would like that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus last warning or I'm closing it. Stop the personal stuff NOW or I will start banning people.

 

Jason

Did I miss something? Just re-read the last three days-worth and there's no personal insult worth the name. Has someone been expunged already?

Cheers.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prospect of a Mk V and a 190 together in the sim is really quite exciting.  My two fave aircraft of all time.  Makes me tingle just thinking about it.

 

I'm pretty excited about adding the Spitfire Mark V into the game too. I don't really care if it won't be the top spec Spitfire either... it's a Spit and I'll fly it. It'll be like IL-2 Ace Expansion when we got the Spit V but not the IX right away. I flew it all over the place.

 

Can't wait!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount of verbal buggery that will occur here when the Spitfires and FWs hit the DF servers doesn't bear thinking about.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Spitfire has always been on of my absolutely favorite Aircraft since I can remember. Maybee because my Dad used to fly an RC Spitfire when I was 3 or 4 years old. He also built Mustangs and Thunderbolts. But the Spitfire impressed me the most back then.

So I'm very looking forward to get it here in BoX. :)

(doesn't matter if I'm heavily spoiled by the A2A Accusim Spitfire. I love the new IL-2 franchise for what it is.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not quite sure either, but there has not been any statement last year like " haters" and "fanboys"
 

Did you read this and concluded this?

 

 

he above post is a good example of the caustic community here. Is it fanboyism to want the 190 corrected when it's been proven that the data was taken from a flawed wind tunnel test? Guilty as charged, I guess.

Boy you must take it as a challenge looking at things the wrong way. But do not drag me into your dirt 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus last warning or I'm closing it. Stop the personal stuff NOW or I will start banning people.

 

Jason

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount of verbal buggery that will occur here when the Spitfires and FWs hit the DF servers doesn't bear thinking about.

 

To be expected. People get pretty passionate about "their" aircraft... whatever it is. I was just reading an article for the course I'm taking and it suggests that people make decisions with the following motivations: 1) Emotional 2) Rational. I'd argue that many don't get past 1.

 

Still... ignoring all of the stuff that may get said when the Spitfire arrives on the scene. I'm expecting it to be a pretty good time to take one up for a spin and I'll do my best to not get dragged down into some of the types of conversations that happen. If there are flaws or issues, I know they will eventually be corrected. If there aren't and its a pretty solid release then all the better. Either way, I have faith that the team will do right by what they are working on and that they will work really hard to try and solve issues with the right data and info. That kind of constructive relationship is important and I'm all for bettering that within the community if possible.

 

I will now step down off my soapbox :)

Edited by ShamrockOneFive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking forward to the changes for the 190. I love this aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It does not work this way. We have a defined development schedule set months in advance. The only way we can develop so fast is that we stay on target and do no deviate often. So called "fixing something quickly" means delaying other stuff and it has an exponential delaying affect on the entire schedule. So, not a wasted moment. When you do not have any extra hands this is how you have to operate. And you can see the result when we do deviate and try to fix something in a hurry without a long enough investigative period for somthing like an FM, it can cause a larger problem! We build in small periods for revising things, but they are rare. So, when we take on the A5 we have a small window we can throw in the A3 changes and test both at the same time and not delay the whole ship much.   So when we get something wrong it a big problem. The only way to solve is to make more money and hire more "qualified" help. Not so easy even if we have the money anyways. It's the eternal situation we are always in and gets extremely tiresome and we've lost people over the years to this issue.    Jason

 

That is what I thought.

 

You got a good product Jason.  Keep it up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Studying airfoils for a lifetime for my glider models

where the wing drag is the real enemy (www.airfoils.eu)

 

I wanted to give my little contribution directly to the developer, with a suggestion:

It now seems to be very clear time that the airfoils are compared by a unique wind tunnel, because the w.tunnel data differ from each other.

This is especially true for wind tunnels of a time.

 

So if we compare two planes (or wings) with the tunnel data now publicly available 'to be

possible if the data is the SAME tunnel.

 

To all this must be added the problems of scale (NRe) almost always present

(Before taking a plane built a model)

 

Calculate the performance of the plane as a whole is not easy, but if you do not have data on wing, and especially on his wing airfoils, which may differ even for the same half-wing, you can 'just imagine,

but guess NOT simulate.

 

I think it is very important to evaluate the induced drag (properly)

sure it is not enough to know the flight speed coefficient of lift

Even less than the maximum to evaluate the performance.

 

The stall not at all certain that a thiny airfoil stalls more violently than a big (thikness) one, depends mainly from the nose radius

and then if the airfoil is laminar or not.

 

As old-fashioned "player" on the IL2 series I always saw the FW190 in serious difficulty,

which clashes with the common opinion that was one of the big planes.

 

Hope helped.

 

Sorry for bad english.

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

×
×
  • Create New...