MIG3 - High altitude performance

[HR_Tumu]

Hello all.

 

will be tunned this fm for high altitude?

Edited September 30, 2018 by 666GIAP_Tumu

[LukeFF]

Umm...you gotta be a thousand times more specific than that.

[kramer]

Since developers unlocked altitudes up to 10km in the last patch i have tested high altitude performance of many airplanes.

Tomorrow i will share but i can say one thing: for now high altitude performance are work in progress in many cases, i think untill Bodenplatte. It's more or less understandable, most fighting over eastern front took place below 6k. Probably it was the reason why only 6000m was available in custom missions. Performance of many planes or way off.

Edited September 30, 2018 by kramer

[JG5_Schuck]

Well lets put it like this,

On TAW the other night i crept up to the giddy height of 10,500m in my F4, (to out fox the VVS)

only to see a MiG in contrails a 1000m or so above me,

So i can vouch they have very good performance at high altitude!!

[HR_Tumu]

It's true Like . 
i made a little research, on true i no have many documents... maybe sources are wrong and here people have access to fiable sources.

 

From wikipedia:

"The MiG-3's top speed of 640 km/h (398 mph) at 7,200 metres (23,622 ft)^[6] was faster than the 615 km/h (382 mph)^[7] of the German Messerschmitt Bf 109F-2 in service at the beginning of 1941 "

From airpages.ru:

"When it came into service some time in 1941, the MiG-3 was easily the fastest Russian fighter, but its top speed of 360 m.p.h. (maximum speed of 640 km/h at the altitude 7.8 km) has almost certainly been bettered by still later types, such as the Yakovlev Yak-7."

 

Here we can read , between 7.2 / 7.8 km seems are maximum speed of 640 km/h .

 

Here  have some chart from game  , thx to LeLv_Erkki  , speed for mig3 are hold to 603 km/h TAS from to 6k  to 7k. I dont seems will be more fast. different around 37 km/h is sustancial diference

 

 

Thx Kramer for your test, i really wait results for mig3, but i not expect to much than 603 km/h at 7.2 or 7.8 K.

 

Based on this info.  Mig 3 is too slow .   Is relevant because MIg3 was especialy designed for be the most fast at high level ( year 1941 ) and this was a reallity.  is her better point, fast at high altitude.   More relevant because the rest of airplanes of the game are in the oposite site ( especially russian planes )... all are more fast at high altitude than must be.

 

After this little exposition,  i ask about  Mig 3 FM. 
Are planned reach historical values for this airplane, and why not, for all planes at high altitudes ?

 

thx in advance

 

 

 

Thx for your time.
sorry for bad english.

 

Edited October 1, 2018 by 666GIAP_Tumu

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

The 640 km/h MiG-3 was the early variant without slats and early cowling. We have the later one in which these new features caused drag and lowered the top speed to around 620 km/h as far as I know.

This is what I tested in previous patches:



In my testing I got the MiG-3 up to a bit more than 610 km/h but I think that's because my tests are at 1000 meter intervals, at 7600m it might have reached around 620 km/h but I didn't measure the temperature in that specific altitude to make the TAS conversion, as my tests are standard for all planes, each 1000 meters.

Notice that with the earlier 640 km/h MiG-3 it would indeed be one of the fastest planes at high altitude in 1941 settings (the F-4 at 1.42 ata is faster but that got cleared in early 1942, for Battle of Moscow it would be running at 1.3 ata as maximum).  We see the F-2 at 1.42 ata is slightly faster, by around 10 km/h.

There were some discussions about the F-2 speed in the past, and it looks like it's a bit too fast. At least in a quick comparison with this document http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109F1F2_Kennblatt/Kennblatt_fur_Bf109F1F2_DB601N.PDF  the F-2 at 1.3 ata and 2400 RPM should be doing around 496 km/h at sea level, while in game it does 507 km/h, and at 1.42 ata with 2600 RPM it should be doing around 515 km/h at sea level, while in game it does 536 km/h. This has to be done in manual prop pitch because the automatic settings use increased RPM settings (2800 RPM for 1.42 ata for example) a modification the 109s received to increase the high altitude performance of the engine

When I have time I will make a better comparison across all altitudes in between the in game F-2 and this document.

[LeLv76_Erkki]

MiG-3 needs to keep its water radiator very open now which hurts high alt speed a bit.

 

I think in general theres weird things going on above 7000 m or 6500 m. All planes that have very high critical altitudes(109 G, MiG, La-5FN) seem to not lose much speed up there. Curves just dont, well, curve back as much as I expect.

[kramer]

44 minutes ago, LeLv76_Erkki said:

I think in general theres weird things going on above 7000 m or 6500 m. All planes that have very high critical altitudes(109 G, MiG, La-5FN) seem to not lose much speed up there. Curves just dont, well, curve back as much as I expect.

 

I have noticed the same, for me it's not a bug untill release of Bodenplatte because eastern front was about low medium altitude fights. Looks like high altitude performance wasn't calibrated in the game for altitudes above 7km and deviation from the original models are big.

 

I.e. FW190A-5 in the game can go 666km/h at 10km ! and it's a lot better high altitude performer than all Bf109s, completely contrary to real life. On the other hand FW190A-8 can go only 590km/h... Nearly 80km/h less than A5.

An altitude on which La-5FN should fight BF109G-14 in the game, where La-5FN has the biggest advantage over G-14 is... 10km ! Yes. Also completely contrary to real life.

Both of them FW and LA should struggle and fall behind Bf109s higher than 6km.

I'll post my test in another topic.

[LeLv76_Erkki]

1 minute ago, kramer said:

 

I have noticed the same, for me it's not a bug untill release of Bodenplatte because eastern front was about low medium altitude fights. Looks like high altitude performance wasn't calibrated in the game for altitudes above 7km and deviation from the original models are big.

 

I.e. FW190A-5 in the game can go 666km/h at 10km ! and it's a lot better high altitude performer than all Bf109s, completely contrary to real life. On the other hand FW190A-8 can go only 590km/h... Nearly 80km/h less than A5.

An altitude on which La-5FN should fight BF109G-14 in the game, where La-5FN has the biggest advantage over G-14 is... 10km ! Yes. Also completely contrary to real life.

Both of them FW and LA should struggle and fall behind Bf109s higher than 6km.

I'll post my test in another topic. 

 

Tbh I think A-8 is bugged too, its much slower than A-3 even at the deck, EN enabled and half closed gills. I'm not too worried about bodenplatte planes as I'm sure they will all get revisited.

[HandyNasty]

The thing is, when throwing out those numbers (640kph), one needs to look at the primary source to see configuration, weight, model number, rad position etcetc of the tested plane. 

An example for the Germans would be tests for the 109 with or without gunpods, where sometimes websites throw numbers but you don't quite know whether those numbers are for a 109 with or without gunpods. 

 

For example, the in-game data specifications for the Mig series 24 mentions 626kph at 7600, in which I have more confidence than the 640kph from wiki, which doesn't specify the model.

My tests on patch 3.005 show me, at 7600 meters, MiG with fully closed rads does 621kph. This is 5kph difference with the 626kph the specification mentions. With rads as to not overheat* I get 602kph. 

 

 

Yet my tests show me indeed that many (most?) planes have a high-altitude top speed that is too high, doesn't curve back enough compared to charts

 

 

*I forgot which rad position that was, must've been 30%-50% for both oil and water rads

 

[CountZero]

I dont think there is problem with mig3, he is good up high, and to me its normal that f4 and gs are faster then him up high, just because its best vvs up high it doesent mean its better then axis airplanes, new overheatings at alts are better now in game after patch i just hope the techchat works correctly and report to you when your overgeating

[HR_Tumu]

Thx to all.

 

I understand on general terms, speeds . more high than  7 k have strange results,  based on comments from Kramer . I reach same conclusion playing game.

 

Thx supereternard 

 

[CountZero]

stalingrad summer, quick mission airstart at 10km altitudes, speeds in indicated read from hud, airplanes 100% fuel:

 

-109f2 combat 335kmh,  emergancy 3,5min 369kmh ( after 3,5 min brakes engine)

-109f4 combat 365kmh,  emergancy 2min 375kmh ( after 2 min brakes engine)

-109g2 combat max 372kmh
-190a3 combat 354kmh, emergancy 7min 393kmh  ( after7 min brakes engine)
-109g14 combat 357kmh,  emergancy 2,5min 359kmh  ( after 2,5 min brakes engine)
-190a8 combat 344kmh 0% outlets, emergancy 7min 357kmh outlet 20% ( 362 0% rad but overheats fast and brakes engine in a min)

 

-mig3 max power 350kmh rads 40% (overheats below, rads 0% 362kmh but brake engine in a min)
-la5fn max 371kmh outlets 0% 20min+
-spitfire 9 m70, max power 377kmh, rads 100% ( automatic is broken after patch) , 393kmh max power and auto rads, but engine brakes after few min because automatic doesent open rads

-lagg3 300kmh, yak1b 320kmh 20% rads 30mix both ?

 

dont have kuban or g6, but i bet a3 ( better then spit9 with high alt engine why axis made other 190s who knows  ) and g2 are still best up high for axis, and la5fn and spit9 (even broken after patch) for vvs   

 

 

Edited October 1, 2018 by 77.CountZero
add 109f2

[kramer]

Yes. I tested them with similar results in another topic. Radial engine FW190A-3, A-5 and La-5, La-5FN are able to maintain a lot higher manifold pressure than they should. They are 50-70km/h too fast at 10km.

FW190A-8 seems to be correct except overheating.

Edited October 1, 2018 by kramer

[CountZero]

190a8 with overheat bug was ok on 0% at combat but it overheated only when on emergancy and less then 20% outlet for few min, the overheat problems yaks and lags have after new patch are making them more interesting to play with, no longer just 60-70 rads on summer and climb on full pwer in lagg3 it gets hot on 100 rads, now you have to lower power from100% at times, untinkable in lagg before patch ?

Edited October 1, 2018 by 77.CountZero

[kramer]

Inline engine airplanes and Bodenplatte airplanes seems ok. Radial engine FW190s and La-5s are grossly overperforming at high altitudes where they should struggle to fly.

Edited October 3, 2018 by kramer

[CountZero]

looks to me as that also, but it doesent bather me mutch as it effects both sides equaly it will be interesting to see how P-47D behaves high up it should be a beast with this boost for radials. Good thing D9 is inline ?

Edited October 1, 2018 by 77.CountZero

[kramer]

P-47 will be correct for sure, it's Bodenplatte aircraft and developers will take care about high altitude performance. Only radial aircrafts from older titles are not calibrated; FW190A-3, A-5 and La-5, La-5FN.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

I tested the 109 F-2 at different altitudes with the reduced RPM settings so it can be compared to the German report.



We can see that at medium and high altitudes it's about 5 to 10 km/h faster, depending on engine power, which imho is not bad. What surprises me is the difference at sea level and low altitudes, specially at 1.42 ata, I wonder what parameter in the modelling could be causing this?

And plus we have a good comparison now between the "original" 2600 RPM setting and the upgraded 2800 RPM setting our Battle of Moscow Bf 109 F-2 has


As expected the extra RPM increases critical altitude for the manifold pressure and improves top speed at a higher altitude. I would still like to see a report/test with the 1.42 ata at 2800 RPM setting for a better comparison.

[Cpt_Siddy]

G-4 outperforms p-47 at 11km 

Edited January 6, 2019 by CptSiddy

[II./JG77_Manu*]

19 hours ago, CptSiddy said:

G-4 outperforms p-47 at 11km 

 

La5-FN outperforms G6 at 9km ?

Edited January 7, 2019 by II./JG77_Manu*

[Ehret]

19 hours ago, CptSiddy said:

G-4 outperforms p-47 at 11km 

 

You can switch to the manual pitch in the Thunderbolt too and readily over-rev engine up to 3000rpm without problems for about 5m; extra useful when that high.

A similar but weaker trick is possible in the P-39/P-40 - the real engine red-line is slightly higher than the 3000rpm; +100rpm higher. Doesn't seem to be much but when you are +17K ft then every bit of extra boost helps.

[Cpt_Siddy]

38 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

You can switch to the manual pitch in the Thunderbolt too and readily over-rev engine up to 3000rpm without problems for about 5m; extra useful when that high.

A similar but weaker trick is possible in the P-39/P-40 - the real engine red-line is slightly higher than the 3000rpm; +100rpm higher. Doesn't seem to be much but when you are +17K ft then every bit of extra boost helps.

 

 i was at 3000 rpms wioth 22k revs on turbo maintaining 42"  at 35k ft

 

Edited January 7, 2019 by CptSiddy