BF109 Engine Damage in boost/emergency mode

[LukeFF]

Hahaha, you should look at the graph that the Devs took as a basis to screw up the 190. that was evidence enough.

Evidence of what? That a mistake was made? Geez, must be nice to live in a perfect world.

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

So I wrote a message to Han regarding the 3 minute limit. He says that it had been replied to many times in the forum including posting sources etc.

I didn’t quite get that part though. He told

me to check the forum history. Has this topic been replia d to before? Maybe he was talking about the Russian forum...

Edited March 26, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[303_Kwiatek]

I dunno never saw such respond.

Have You send historical photos with marked 3 minutes emergency?

 

BTW developers have no problem with give La5FN 10 minutes boost when manual from1943 says only 5 minutes but have problem with 3 minutes emergency power for 109 even it is showed by historical photos and manuals says nothing about emergency limit?

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

Yes, I linked the photos.

i explained the situation again and said that there hadn’t been a response on the English forum to my knowledge yet, so he may have confused it with something else. It took him rather long to answer my first mail, which is absolutely understandable, since they had to finish 3.001 and he probably has other stuff to take care of too. So I just hope I get a response again.

Edited March 24, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[303_Kwiatek]

Ok thx for Your effort. Good luck

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

I dunno never saw such respond.

Have You send historical photos with marked 3 minutes emergency?

 

BTW developers have no problem with give La5FN 10 minutes boost when manual from1943 says only 5 minutes but have problem with 3 minutes emergency power for 109 even it is showed by historical photos and manuals says nothing about emergency limit?

 

In case it isn't bloody obvious to you, this topic is about the 109, not whatever your current pet peeve is with the La-5FN.

[RAY-EU]

We will have another confirmation  answer from Erich Brunotte fighter pilot of WW2 : 

 

 

Edited March 24, 2018 by RAY-EU

[303_Kwiatek]

1 hour ago, RAY-EU said:

We will have another confirmation  answer from Erich Brunotte fighter pilot of WW2 : 

 

 

 

At which moment is about emergency power?

[RAY-EU]

Not mentionet in the video , but we can ask them ... At the end leave an adress to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron with another more possible questions about this plane are open fore more questions .

 

The old other pilot beside Volker Vau that says hello at the beguins of the video is Erich Brunotte fighter pilot of WW2 as consultant manager .

 

Possible best way to make a report in the Youtube Video comments addresset to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron .

 

I know managers from Escuadron 69 in Barcelona some times they use to meet in the Aeroteca Of Barcelona I am from 111 Squadron theese Squadrons are from Spain .

Whe I return to Spain I will try to look to find another comfirmation answer from the Squaron III/JG 52 .

 

I have send  a comment  about the you tube Video right now waiting for an answer adressed and related from this forum ! 

 

Since my point of view I am no a technical expert . They have the bf 109 g with a historic engine of WW2 and they do not need to take a flight , only with the stop plane in the hangar or outside start engine and wait till is operational , them maximum emergency power and thats all chronometer the time with the ata 1.42 how many minutes ?

Till decrease power >=2.800rpm , >=1.42 ata . 

1, 3 or 3+ . Just realized that the engine historical from WW2 is not new and has been used so much . I would  send money € for this simple test of 15 minutes .

 

Now I am On Eastern Vacation on a Cruise for the Mediterranean Sea visiting  Italy  in Rome right now ... 

with hole family and kids . 

Edited March 25, 2018 by RAY-EU

[Dakpilot]

19 hours ago, RAY-EU said:

Not mentionet in the video , but we can ask them ... At the end leave an adress to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron with another more possible questions about this plane are open fore more questions .

 

The old other pilot beside Volker Vau that says hello at the beguins of the video is Erich Brunotte fighter pilot of WW2 as consultant manager .

 

Possible best way to make a report in the Youtube Video comments addresset to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron .

 

I know managers from Escuadron 69 in Barcelona some times they use to meet in the Aeroteca Of Barcelona I am from 111 Squadron theese Squadrons are from Spain .

Whe I return to Spain I will try to look to find another comfirmation answer from the Squaron III/JG 52 .

 

I have send  a comment  about the you tube Video right now waiting for an answer adressed and related from this forum ! 

 

Since my point of view I am no a technical expert . They have the bf 109 g with a historic engine of WW2 and they do not need to take a flight , only with the stop plane in the hangar or outside start engine and wait till is operational , them maximum emergency power and thats all chronometer the time with the ata 1.42 how many minutes ?

Till decrease power >=2.800rpm , >=1.42 ata . 

1, 3 or 3+ . Just realized that the engine historical from WW2 is not new and has been used so much . I would  send money € for this simple test of 15 minutes .

 

Now I am On Eastern Vacation on a Cruise for the Mediterranean Sea visiting  Italy  in Rome right now ... 

with hole family and kids . 

 

LOL

 

please do not contact anyone on behalf of 1C/777 and ask them to blow up their precious DB605 and offer to pay for the damages

 

 

I understand you say you are no technical expert, and I do not mean to take the piss....but seriously 

 

enjoy your holiday, and delete your Youtube comment

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

 

 

[Panthera]

On 25/3/2018 at 5:29 AM, RAY-EU said:

Not mentionet in the video , but we can ask them ... At the end leave an adress to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron with another more possible questions about this plane are open fore more questions .

 

The old other pilot beside Volker Vau that says hello at the beguins of the video is Erich Brunotte fighter pilot of WW2 as consultant manager .

 

Possible best way to make a report in the Youtube Video comments addresset to III/JG 52 Virtual Squadron .

 

I know managers from Escuadron 69 in Barcelona some times they use to meet in the Aeroteca Of Barcelona I am from 111 Squadron theese Squadrons are from Spain .

Whe I return to Spain I will try to look to find another comfirmation answer from the Squaron III/JG 52 .

 

I have send  a comment  about the you tube Video right now waiting for an answer adressed and related from this forum ! 

 

Since my point of view I am no a technical expert . They have the bf 109 g with a historic engine of WW2 and they do not need to take a flight , only with the stop plane in the hangar or outside start engine and wait till is operational , them maximum emergency power and thats all chronometer the time with the ata 1.42 how many minutes ?

Till decrease power >=2.800rpm , >=1.42 ata . 

1, 3 or 3+ . Just realized that the engine historical from WW2 is not new and has been used so much . I would  send money € for this simple test of 15 minutes .

 

Now I am On Eastern Vacation on a Cruise for the Mediterranean Sea visiting  Italy  in Rome right now ... 

with hole family and kids . 

 

There really isn't any need or point in risking a priceless engine in order to "reveal" something we already know, and that is that the DB605 could rather comfortably be run at 1.42ata for 5 min at a time without risk of catastrophic failure, no limit being imposed after the strengthed piston heads and improved oil cooler had been installed. Still pilots obviously tried limiting themselves to 3 min at max power at a time to prolong engine life, an important thing for Germany as they simply didn't have the resources to wear out engines as quickly as the allies could allow themselves to do. 

 

 

[RAY-EU]

Yes ! True ,  We really Know , it would be , only ,  another  confirmation .Thanks

 

Afther Rome to Eastern cruise to Pompeya very nice views !

Edited March 26, 2018 by RAY-EU

[LColony_Kong]

On 3/24/2018 at 2:40 PM, LukeFF said:

 

In case it isn't bloody obvious to you, this topic is about the 109, not whatever your current pet peeve is with the La-5FN.

In case it is not bloody obvious to you, pointing out that the La5FN limits also don't make sense is relevant because it shows that the rating system in this game is borked. 

 

Which is relevant to this thread. 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Fumes

[Brano]

On 26. 2. 2018 at 8:44 PM, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Hahaha, you should look at the graph that the Devs took as a basis to screw up the 190. that was evidence enough.

It was provided by forum user. Another reason for devs not to take every wannabe FM expert seriously. They learned their lesson hard way.

[LColony_Kong]

1 minute ago, Brano said:

It was provided by forum user. Another reason for devs not to take every wannabe FM expert seriously. They learned their lesson hard way.

The important bit is that they couldn't accurate discern the validity of it after received. How they got it is sort of irrelevant. 

[Brano]

3 minutes ago, Fumes said:

The important bit is that they couldn't accurate discern the validity of it after received. How they got it is sort of irrelevant. 

Under the pressure of vocal Fw idolaters and the drama they provided I do not wonder...

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

10 minutes ago, Brano said:

Under the pressure of vocal Fw idolaters and the drama they provided I do not wonder...

 

you are confused, man. About a lot of things:

1) You assume that the data sheet that was submitted by a forum user was a "FW idolist", as you call him. Well, that data sheet pretty much made the FM worse all around. I know him and it was a random find on his side. He is many things, but certainly not an FW idolist, or somone that I have ever seen fly blue in my life.

2) You seriously stand there and say that FW idolizers put pressure on the devs? Yeah to fix a totally broken plane. It is very amusing that people like you still voice that kind of BS.

3)Yes they should take stuff submitted by forum user with a grain of salt, maybe even a large grain, but the 3 min emergency power, which is the subject of this thread by the way has almost become a a thing that is so obvious that it is hardly an invention of 109 idealists.

Edited March 26, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[Kurfurst]

Thing I wonder about is that there is apparantly a bit of a fetish regarding the numbers printed in the manual next to the ratings.

 

Now, in Bodenplatte when you look at the manuals of LW fighter planes they will say that use this rating for then whole minutes and then you are free to use it again five minutes later.

 

I wonder how that manual fetish will work out for side balance then,  since the other side’s all-deciding manuals will still simply say 5 minutes.. its gonna be really awkward for sure. Because if they will still go by this manual fetish, one side basically will have infinite WEP and the other will keep breaking engines in the same weird way as it is currently.

[Willy__]

Maybe painting a red star on the plane makes the engines stronger and more reliable....  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BOO]

2 minutes ago, Willy__ said:

Maybe painting a red star on the plane makes the engines stronger and more reliable....  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The star on my P40 clearly isn't red enough for my luddite touch!

[Willy__]

That P40 came from those american capitalists, it isnt communist enough for the russians... 

 

 

Anyways, Happy April fools! 

[D3adCZE]

On 4/1/2018 at 7:09 PM, Willy__ said:

Maybe painting a red star on the plane makes the engines stronger and more reliable....  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dont forget that they must be build from Stalinium and running on Stalin's tears.  

 

[Sgt_Joch]

On 4/1/2018 at 3:31 AM, VO101Kurfurst said:

Thing I wonder about is that there is apparantly a bit of a fetish regarding the numbers printed in the manual next to the ratings.

 

Now, in Bodenplatte when you look at the manuals of LW fighter planes they will say that use this rating for then whole minutes and then you are free to use it again five minutes later.

 

I wonder how that manual fetish will work out for side balance then,  since the other side’s all-deciding manuals will still simply say 5 minutes.. its gonna be really awkward for sure. Because if they will still go by this manual fetish, one side basically will have infinite WEP and the other will keep breaking engines in the same weird way as it is currently.

 

so in other words, you are fine with the current system as along as it advantages GERMAN planes?

 

the difference, of course, is that there are multiple combat reports of allied pilots routinely exceeding the official limits in THEIR planes, i.e., from Mike William's excellent site:

Quote

Encounter Reports noting high boost obtained with 150 grade fuel

 

1st Lt. Raymond R. Flowers, 1 November 1944, 20th FG	“I closed steadily pulling over 70 inches.”
1st Lt. James F. Hinchey, 14 November 1944, 353rd FG	“For fifteen minutes at 74” hg and indicating 600 mph…”
2nd Lt. Thomas R. Drybrough, 27 November 1944, 353rd FG	"I had been pulling over 70" H.G. and was indicating about 425 MPH at approximately 14,000 feet."
1st Lt. Charles E. Yeager, 13 September 1944, 357th FG	“I rolled over and was pulling around 70”Hg.”
Capt. Charles E. Yeager, 6 November 1944, 357th FG	“I got behind him and was pulling 75” Hg.”
Lt. Col. Roy A. Webb, 25 June 1944, 361st FG	“I closed very slowly and pulled as much as 70 inches of mercury.”
1st Lt. Thomas H. Hall, 15 August 1944, 364th FG	“I put on 70 inches and gradually pulled up on them.”
Lt. Col. Kyle L. Riddle, 24 December 1944, 479th FG	"I pulled about 70" to 75" mercury..."
F/Lt Pearson, 5 April 45, 65 Squadron	"Opening up to 70 inches I overtook him..."
F/Lt. G. M. Davis, 23 March 1945, 129 Squadron	"Opened up to +25 lbs of boost 3,000 revs and dived down to engage."

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

 

I have asked repeatedly for anyone to post even one quote from a German WW2 pilot stating how long they could run their engines at WEP. Surely there must be at least one if exceeding WEP limits was as routine as all you guys are arguing. 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Sgt_Joch

[JaffaCake]

42 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

 

---

I have asked repeatedly for anyone to post even one quote from a German WW2 pilot stating how long they could run their engines at WEP. Surely there must be at least one if exceeding WEP limits was as routine as all you guys are arguing. 

 

 

Or LW pilots were more stringent and aware of the lack of engines and the wear? Testimonies like these do not prove that it was "impossible" to WEP for X minutes - they only prove that it may have been possible in the circumstances specified.

 

I am more convinced by the fact that engine had to perform 5 minute WEP during production, as a proof that it won't break after 1 minute as it is in the game, than a lack of LW reports stating that they routinely exceeded WEP timers. 

 

Could we also possibly have reports of people kamikaze-ing into tanks or bomb targets to have faster respawn back to the base too?

[Venturi]

Fuel detonation point is known for given octane rating...

CR of each engine type is known...

 

Simple really.

[Blutaar]

1 hour ago, Sgt_Joch said:

I have asked repeatedly for anyone to post even one quote from a German WW2 pilot stating how long they could run their engines at WEP. Surely there must be at least one if exceeding WEP limits was as routine as all you guys are arguing.

 

According to most manuals, the 109 had no such time limit so it might be so that it is not so special to use Notleistung and thats why you cant find it in german reports like it is in your qouted reports. Sounds like these Boostpressures are something you normally wouldnt use. If hg or inch is a refference to inches per hg then it means 70 inches is like 2.41ata or 1773 mm Hg which sounds really high. Can anyone tell me if im wrong and what hg or inches refers to so i can place the numbers where they belong in the pressure units calculator i use for it? I mean these pressures look really high so i think i have it wrong.

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

1 hour ago, Sgt_Joch said:

 

so in other words, you are fine with the current system as along as it advantages GERMAN planes?

 

the difference, of course, is that there are multiple combat reports of allied pilots routinely exceeding the official limits in THEIR planes, i.e., from Mike William's excellent site:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustangtest.html

 

I have asked repeatedly for anyone to post even one quote from a German WW2 pilot stating how long they could run their engines at WEP. Surely there must be at least one if exceeding WEP limits was as routine as all you guys are arguing. 

 

Wouldnt it make more sense to just show a single report which actually supports the 1 minute WEP? (Yeah - and not the one where it is banned totally)

Why would you need to disprove something that hasn’t been proven to exist.

It‘s like saying „I have repeatedly asked people to show me evidence against unicorns“ - well no one has ever even seen one. Maybe that should do it.

There is NO evidence of a 1 minute WEP

Edited April 5, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[Gunsmith86]

5 hours ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

 

Wouldnt it make more sense to just show a single report which actually supports the 1 minute WEP? (Yeah - and not the one where it is banned totally)

Why would you need to disprove something that hasn’t been proven to exist.

It‘s like saying „I have repeatedly asked people to show me evidence against unicorns“ - well no one has ever even seen one. Maybe that should do it.

There is NO evidence of a 1 minute WEP

Like this one?

Edited April 5, 2018 by Gunsmith86

[216th_Jordan]

Btw: Regarding the constant claim of 10 minutes for La5FN being wrong: There are sources for 5 and 10 minutes and it is not proven which one is adequate. I'm fine with 5 but please stop claiming that 10 minutes is wrong when it has not been finally proven. This is simply spreading wrong information.

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

Gunsmith,

the data that you found is - if you look at the engine name - for the bf109 e7. The discussion is on the F4, G4 and G6 which have different engines.

6 minutes ago, 216th_Jordan said:

Btw: Regarding the constant claim of 10 minutes for La5FN being wrong: There are sources for 5 and 10 minutes and it is not proven which one is adequate. I'm fine with 5 but please stop claiming that 10 minutes is wrong when it has not been finally proven. This is simply spreading wrong information.

Lets make it 20 seconds in game then to stay consistent across the board with historical reference data

 

you complain about spreading false data yet you upvote a chart showing WEP for an e7...

Edited April 5, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[Gunsmith86]

45 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

Gunsmith,

the data that you found is - if you look at the engine name - for the bf109 e7. The discussion is on the F4, G4 and G6 which have different engines.

Ok i thought its still about the 1min of the E7 from the first page:

 

BF 109 F1:

 

Bf 109 G2:

In the manual for the 109 G6 is still the same Warning!

 

Edited April 5, 2018 by Gunsmith86

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

That warning is only valid for a brief period, as has been mentioned many many many times. So no, apart from this brief period there are no restrictions on the G2, G4 and G6.

Edited April 5, 2018 by =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn

[MK_RED13]

 

[LColony_Kong]

There are two separate debates going on in these threads and I think some people are confused. 

 

One debate is about whether or not engine destruction should occur as a function of time, and the other debate is about the usage of 1.42ata and other higher boost settings. These are completely different subjects.

 

IMO, 1.42ata should be completely removed from the G-series since for the overwhelming majority of the time period this game currently covers, it was completely banned. It should probably be an option for scenarios or multi where the goal is to simulate very late kuban in very late 43.

 

But the other power settings in game, such as for the F4, 190, La5, etc. Are not questions of the authorized boost, but are debates on whether or not a arbitrary maintenance limit should be used as a substitute for mechanical failure. In my opinion the answer is no. Logistics and maintenance are beyond the scope of a combat flight sim. Quite frankly, they are beyond the scope of most games. The exception are large Operational or Strategic level RTS types. Which means we have no data whatsoever stating engines should die if run beyond some set time limit. Which means the engines should have unlimited power usage at approved power settings. 

 

Since we have no document or data proscribing a time limit where the engine dies beyond it, we can all agree that the engines should not die from this and unlimited operation at approved settings should be in place. Glad we cleared that up. 

[Dakpilot]

17 minutes ago, =EXPEND=SchwarzeDreizehn said:

That warning is only valid for a brief period, as has been mentioned many many many times. So no, apart from this brief period there are no restrictions on the G2, G4 and G6.

 

How long is a "brief period" ? thought that the 1.42 ban was for more than a year?

 

thought it was pretty much the entire life of G2 and only allowed at end of G4, restriction only being removed +- 3 months into G6 production life

 

am I misunderstanding something

 

Cheers, Dakpilot

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

You are correct Dakpilot, but isn’t the way to go, to make it an unlockable feature instead of having the 1 minute limit then?

[Jizzo]

That's pretty much how it was to my knowledge and i wouldn't really call that a "brief period". 

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

There is no 1 minute limit. Which is what I originally said. Nothing of what you have said have disproved that point. Either banned or allowed actually means no 1 minute limit. If it’s a year or 2 days.

[Venturi]

1 hour ago, Fumes said:

 

Since we have no document or data proscribing a time limit where the engine dies beyond it, we can all agree that the engines should not die from this and unlimited operation at approved settings should be in place. Glad we cleared that up. 

 

We have the data for the hard limit, which is the onset of detonation which destroys any engine in a minute at the most.

 

This data to determine the boost level where detonation occurs, in its simplest form, is

1. the fuel octane used,

2. the boost level used, 

3. and the mechanical compression ratio of the engine.

 

All of these I have posted on before.

 

The rest of it is purely to do with engine longevity over many missions. However, the upper limit for the Bf109F4-G2-G4-G6 is described by "burning piston tops" and is what happens at 1.42ata on the DB605 as a result of DETONATION, this is the reason why the setting was blocked. I have yet to see convincing evidence that it was unblocked. Strengthening piston tops may prevent piston burn through over a minute or two, but detonation will still kill the engine immediately afterwards...

[LColony_Kong]

38 minutes ago, Venturi said:

 

We have the data for the hard limit, which is the onset of detonation which destroys any engine in a minute at the most.

 

This data to determine the boost level where detonation occurs, in its simplest form, is

1. the fuel octane used,

2. the boost level used, 

3. and the mechanical compression ratio of the engine.

 

All of these I have posted on before.

 

The rest of it is purely to do with engine longevity over many missions. However, the upper limit for the Bf109F4-G2-G4-G6 is described by "burning piston tops" and is what happens at 1.42ata on the DB605 as a result of DETONATION, this is the reason why the setting was blocked. I have yet to see convincing evidence that it was unblocked. Strengthening piston tops may prevent piston burn through over a minute or two, but detonation will still kill the engine immediately afterwards...

Right I am not talking about 1.42ata on the G. I actually said that 1.42ata should be removed for the G except for situations modeling later periods. It was later unblocked, by Jan 44 certainly. Documents I have seen during the period where it was blocked do not say anything about detonation IIRC. There specify that the issue is with the burn through, and there was another issue with the oil pump as well. At some point they fixed the issues and the setting was fully authorized. Detonation might have been the cause, but thats not the only thing that could have caused those issues. Were the issue as simple as the fuel being unsuitable for that setting, then the Germans would never have planned for that power to be the max power setting in the first place. It would have been totally obvious that the setting would not have been attainable.