Spitfire Coolant Problems in-game

[KatieLuna]

It has come to my attention that the spitfires had a flaw in its coolant system, so much as it's radiators we're not in the slipstream of the propeller, and were blocked by the landing gear during landing. Is this modelled in game? When I get home I will add a source, but for now all I can give is the name of the book: Haynes Supermarine Spitfire 1936 onwards

Edited December 4, 2017 by TheTacticalCat

[Herne]

It has come to my attention that the spitfires had a flaw in its coolant system, so much as it's radiators we're not in the slipstream of the propeller, and were blocked by the landing gear during landing. Is this modelled in game? When I get home I will add a source, but for now all I can give is the name of the book: Haynes Supermarine Spitfire 1936 onwards

 

My understanding was that this was only an issue on the Early single radiator spits aka Battle of Britain, where the engine would overheat while idling on the ground during a "Hot British Summer" I can't remember where I heard / read that, but it sticks out in my mind. The Mk V had tropical variants so the cooling issue one would assume must have been resolved with these, and then the dual radiators in later models should have been more than adequate ?

[ZachariasX]

It has come to my attention that the spitfires had a flaw in its coolant system, so much as it's radiators we're not in the slipstream of the propeller, and were blocked by the landing gear during landing. Is this modelled in game? When I get home I will add a source, but for now all I can give is the name of the book: Haynes Supermarine Spitfire 1936 onwards

It was mostly a problem with the early Marks, the single radiator ones. It is of note that you will, at least in real life cook almost any engine in any comparable plane whe sitting on the ground on idle.

 

The Spitfire was designed as a fast plane. The radiatior was dimensioned to give little drag when flying fast. This is not an error, but working as intended.

 

The landing gear was more of a problem if it got stuck partly lowered. When lowered all the way, the Spit requires little power in the pattern and you should be fine if your intention is really making a landing.

[EAF19_Marsh]

It should probably overheat quickly if standing still on summer maps for more than 5 minutes. I recall this happening in CLOD, when you had to close radiator for start and then open it quite quickly.

 

Various pilots accounts mention this, though do not recall it being listed as a critical problem but rather more one that had to be taken into account

[Lensman]

the engine would overheat while idling on the ground during a "Hot British Summer"

 

You wouldn't think that 5 degrees celsius and severe rain would cause it would you ...

(I'm British and I know our so-called 'summers' well.)

Edited December 4, 2017 by Lensman

[EAF19_Marsh]

Kent is practically the Med, you know. Damned foreign place!

[Herne]

You wouldn't think that 5 degrees celsius and severe rain would cause it would you ...

(I'm British and I know our so-called 'summers' well.)

 

LOL !! me too 30 degrees celsius + days are a rarity here, I wonder what they meant by "hot"

[Barnacles]

It has come to my attention that the spitfires had a flaw in its coolant system, so much as it's radiators we're not in the slipstream of the propeller, and were blocked by the landing gear during landing. Is this modelled in game? When I get home I will add a source, but for now all I can give is the name of the book: Haynes Supermarine Spitfire 1936 onwards

 

I think in BoX in general the low speed characteristics of the cooling model for all aircraft don't match reality as well as when in flight. It was mentioned I think in the recent TS event discussing BoBP. I think the answer given was along the lines of, 'owing to the complexity of modelling cooling, they've gone for as close a fit as possible to historical data whilst keeping the FM simple so they can devote time and effort to other aspects of the flight model, as it's a flight combat sim, not a study sim'. Clearly they prioritise the fit for 'in flight' rather than taxiing, as although it'd be nice to have high fidelity modelling of cooling whilst on the ground, 99% of the 'game' you'd be in flight.

Edited December 4, 2017 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[PainGod85]

I'm pretty sure a squadron of Mk 9s actually burned their engines out because they'd diverted to a bomber airfield for some reason, and when they were trying to take off for the flight home, the ATC used to bombers handled them like bombers - that is to say, in true 'hurry up and wait' fashion. Needless to say, he found himself saddled with a squadron of dead Mk 9s soon after.

[Wulf]

I'm pretty sure a squadron of Mk 9s actually burned their engines out because they'd diverted to a bomber airfield for some reason, and when they were trying to take off for the flight home, the ATC used to bombers handled them like bombers - that is to say, in true 'hurry up and wait' fashion. Needless to say, he found himself saddled with a squadron of dead Mk 9s soon after.

 

 

If the engine temperatures for the entire squadron were getting to the point where mass catastrophic engine failure was imminent; I wonder why didn't they just switch off?  

[ZachariasX]

If the engine temperatures for the entire squadron were getting to the point where mass catastrophic engine failure was imminent; I wonder why didn't they just switch off?

 

A whole squadron of Spitfire gliders in the pattern, now that would be a scary thought. They‘d be all coming in within a minute and at the same time. But I cannot imagine that happening. If a pilot is aware of a catastrophic event about to be happening, that‘s what you call „Mayday“ for and ATC has to let you land even if he doesn‘t care for you.

 

But as said, the Spit IX has automatic radiators and you can fly it at 0 boost as long as you have fuel. Even on hot days or you are doing something seroiusly wrong.

[Stig]

They were waiting for takeoff, not landing 

[EAF19_Marsh]

In Sheddan's Tempest Pilot he related one of the first comments made by the chief QFI at the Spitfire OCU in Wales: with hundreds of aircraft operational in the south-east, the new pilots had to get to grips with getting their aircraft off and onto the ground quickly, efficiently and as safely as possible. This was less about overheating and more about crowded circuits.

 

But I would be astonished if 12 Spitfire IX simultaneously killed their own engines...

[ZachariasX]

They were waiting for takeoff, not landing 

Right. In that case, Ground control had to ignore a sqadron of visibly fuming Spitfires. The coolant system has a relief valve on the right side of the cowling, just behind the spinner. The pilots had in fact to sit there until all the coolant was gone. It is not thinkable that they would attempt to take off in such a state.

 

That Spitfires regularly had problems keeping the temperature down until teakeoff is well known. But sitting there until the engine fell apart wich happens after the coolant is gone... don't think so.

[Stig]

Yes, it certainly seems a bit far-fetched 

[19//Moach]

It should probably overheat quickly if standing still on summer maps for more than 5 minutes. I recall this happening in CLOD, when you had to close radiator for start and then open it quite quickly.

 

Various pilots accounts mention this, though do not recall it being listed as a critical problem but rather more one that had to be taken into account

 

This is a problem I've been trying to raise attention to for quite some time. All planes in BoX appear to have impossibly effective cooling when stationary, often preventing us from following realistic procedures from historic manuals. 

 

 

I have even mentioned this in the last Teamspeak Q&A session, when I told Jason and the guys about how it was completely backwards in the P40, and a global tendency common across all planes, to varying levels of severity.   I then understood that he had taken note of it, (he did say he was taking notes of what everyone was saying) so I expect our devs are fully aware of this by now.

 

 

But for future reference, this is the behaviour I pointed out, and how it is incorrectly modeled:

 

 

 

 

The spitfire was very well known to overheat if it took too long taxiing or waiting for takeoff.  In those conditions, one had to make a choice between rolling out or shutting her down. Else it would overheat. Even if you had the radiators wide open, as they should be according to published ground handling procedures.

 

In winter time, I've also read it was possible to overheat the coolant even while waiting for the oil to warm up enough to flow smoothly through the engine (Which is why you don't wanna overcool such an engine) - This was a problem, historically, but in the sim it is not possible to reproduce it under any conditions.   All cooling is much too effective when parked.

 

The P40 is another plane which made this issue a high regard for pilots when taxiing. Same reason as for the spitfire. 

 

All these planes would certainly have had their radiators opened fully as part of the engine start and pre-takeoff procedures.  This is wrongly modeled in the game, where regardless of weather, they start closed and incorrectly require being left closed until takeoff power is applied, just to maintain minimum temps.

 

 

 

Conversely, in reality there was a real possibility than a "no-go" temperature maximum could be reached while taxiing.   

 

In that case, takeoff was forbidden and the engine immediately had to be shut down. (ideally facing into the wind)    Otherwise, even a fully open radiator would be incapable of preventing overheat under takeoff power before airspeed became sufficient to sustain minimal cooling.

 

 

 

Anyways, if this were correctly modeled, we'd have to taxi with our radiators all the way open, even in reasonably cold weather. But instead, here we have the need to shut them tight, even in summer, and taxi quick before the damn thing overcools.   

 

 

This is completely opposite behavior from historical.   So, it seems to me that cooling retains too much of its effectiveness when airspeed is near zero.

 

Also, this applies to every plane, although some are more susceptible to it and more obviously incorrect than others.   The P40 demonstrates this better of all, the Spitfire follows as a close second.  But despite variations in severity, this still affects the entire fleet in this series.

 

 

 

 

This is a bug:   All engines overcool during typical ground operation conditions, contradicting historic manuals and numerous videos with detailed instructor commentary.   A revision of this behavior is thus required, to lower the effectiveness of radiators at near-zero airspeed and/or increase heat generation under minimal engine power.

Edited December 5, 2017 by 19//Moach

[Dakpilot]

I am quite sure it is not a bug, just a design choice in the complexity of engine model fidelity, factoring in accurate system of engine overheat on the ground when not flying is not a trivial amount of work. Personally I am certain the dev's and engineers are aware of how their product works, just the amount of work needed for a regime of "flight" that maybe 10% of people would even care about is not considered critical on the list of many features yet to be introduced.

 

Of course it would be nice but more accurate fuel management, better fidelity in cooling systems and shock cooling etc. are higher on my 'list' among many other needed things.

 

Unless correct procedures for traffic control at airfields were also included offline and MP it would not add to game play or player 'enjoyment' in the quest for 'realism'

All in my personal opinion, having operated large piston engines in extreme conditions.

 

TL/DR ; nice feature but very low importance for resources/development time needed

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Sgt_Joch]

 

This is a bug:   All engines overcool during typical ground operation conditions, contradicting historic manuals and numerous videos with detailed instructor commentary.   A revision of this behavior is thus required, to lower the effectiveness of radiators at near-zero airspeed and/or increase heat generation under minimal engine power.

 

well no, technically it is not a bug. A bug would be if the code did not function as designed. This is a "feature" which was never coded into the game since it has little practical application and is a very low priority item.

 

If the team had unlimited resources and/or we were paying $100+ per AC, then yes, I would probably expect that level of detail, but for a survey sim, this is not an issue that ever needs to be addressed.