190 D9 Emergency mode

[HandyNasty]

15 hours ago, Willy__ said:

What you guys think about the new D9

I think that if you're using the gyro gunsight, you need to have the toggle between "gyro mode" and "non-gyro mode" close at hand. Because the gyro is useful is some instances and completely horrific in other situations. Ergo, the switch between "use it as gyro" and "use it as fixed" needs to be close at hand

 

Then again, my opinion

14 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

I look in caeroplane_fw_190_d9.txt with extractor, and this is what it says for top speeds:

 Where do you find this file in the BoX-directory? Am really curious about comparing the stats I compiled over the months with what those text files say

[CUJO_1970]

I think it's deadlier than the K-4.

 

 

[Guest deleted@134347]

7 minutes ago, Tapi said:

I flew only a few sorties against AI (Ace level) Spit IX in QMB at low to middle level and though I finally managed to shoot it down, Spit IX is a tough oponent: seems it climbs better and turns better than Dora.

 

spit IX's were eating Doras for breakfast, lunch, and dinner last night on Berloga.

 

noticed on Dora if you cut the throttle to 0% and then back to 100% it takes 20-30 seconds to 'spool' back up..

[R6ckStar]

okay, as someone else explained to me on the discussion thread of the update the radiator is always auto.

What we can set is a certain temperature, this is done by looking at the water temperature this is the one that the mechanism is changing.

 

So if you haven't touched the radiator and have a certain temperature that is the temperature that is set, you can increase it by "closing" the rads or decrease it by "opening" the rads.

 

The plane will open the rads until the temperature drops and closes to stabilize. 

Edited March 19, 2019 by R6ckStar

[Voyager]

I thought I'd heard somewhere that 190's were designed to fly ina slightly nose down attitude for pilot visibility? 

 

I think I've also read that, at least the early BMW automatic engine control computers were not always on the most stable side of things. 

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, =FSB=HandyNasty said:

...

 Where do you find this file in the BoX-directory? Am really curious about comparing the stats I compiled over the months with what those text files say

 

You need to extract Scripts.gtp file with unGTP-IL2.exe from mods section, and null folder will be created with luascripts ai folder with thouse files for airplanes there, but pay atention on rusian text to know what power settings were used for getting numbers, not all have same regimes for top speeds climbs and so on data. for example for 190d9 top speed is on max settings there, but climb rates are shown in combat settings and so on...

Edited March 19, 2019 by 77.CountZero

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Voyager said:

I thought I'd heard somewhere that 190's were designed to fly in a slightly nose down attitude for pilot visibility? 

 

No

 

1 hour ago, Voyager said:

I think I've also read that, at least the early BMW automatic engine control computers were not always on the most stable side of things. 

 

BMW engine controls don't really have anything to do with the D-9.

[Voyager]

2 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

BMW engine controls don't really have anything to do with the D-9.

 

True, the Jump likely has its own computer. Do we have any reports on its stability? Also, is it an electric prop or a hydraulic one? From what I've seen so far, electric props tends to react slower than hydraulic ones. 

[Hobel]

17 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

im not even able to go in emergancy 3min mode like its in spec, only by presing boost at low alt i see emergancy, also it says 607kmh at sea level with 50% fuel and closed rads and boost on, but on stalingrad autum map i get max to 597kmh with that setup. Also for combat i get 557kmh on sea level insted whats said in specs 565kmh.

 

I look in caeroplane_fw_190_d9.txt with extractor, and this is what it says for top speeds:

 

50% fuel, 100% trottle and boost on, rad 0%
0m  =  607kmh   
1000=625
2000=642
3000=639     
4000=673
5000=693
5200=694
6000=688      
7000=679
8000=667
9000=650

 

The A8 with 100% fuel is faster... 0-3000/4000 waht I testet

[CountZero]

17 minutes ago, Hobel said:

The A8 with 100% fuel is faster... 0-3000/4000 waht I testet

i didnt run tests on a8 in new patch but from how it was in 3.010 when i test it and compared with what is said that d9 should do in game it should not be faster

This is how it looks, a8 is tested max speed in 3.010, and d9 line is max speed by what they say ( i didnt bather still to check that exept 0m speed that match )

Spoiler

 

[Hobel]

11 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

i didnt run tests on a8 in new patch but from how it was in 3.010 when i test it and compared with what is said that d9 should do in game it should not be faster

This is how it looks, a8 is tested max speed in 3.010, and d9 line is max speed by what they say ( i didnt bather still to check that exept 0m speed that match )

  Hide contents

 

 

Is this a new il2 compare?

Look the k4 stats in compare, 580km/h compare . Ingame 640 on sea lvl

 

The A8 fly with 100% fuel 625km/h on sea lvl

[CountZero]

8 minutes ago, Hobel said:

Is this a new il2 compare?

Look the k4 stats in compare, 580km/h compare . Ingame 640 on sea lvl

 

The A8 fly with 100% fuel 625km/h on sea lvl

 

Yes its good old Il-2 compare, i just delited 1946 stuff and use Box airplanes and data i get from tests its simple way to compare airplanes speed.

 

Are you testing them on winter mission? devs give us speeds obtainable in Autumn missions, and i run my tests there

[DSR_A-24]

So how does the D9 fly? This will be my weapon of choice against the Tempest and hopefully soon to come Spitfire Mk. 14.

[Pict]

7 hours ago, Semor76 said:

yup. And all my other settings for water radiators for all other planes too. No movement, not in cockpit,not outside.

 

I thought the same as you, but I noticed that the movement is delayed a little and slow, as if it is made with electric motors

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

4 hours ago, -99th-moosya said:

 

spit IX's were eating Doras for breakfast, lunch, and dinner last night on Berloga.

 

noticed on Dora if you cut the throttle to 0% and then back to 100% it takes 20-30 seconds to 'spool' back up..

Twenty to thirty? My experience is a delay of 5-7. Noticeable but not catastrophic.

[Guest deleted@134347]

8 minutes ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

Twenty to thirty? My experience is a delay of 5-7. Noticeable but not catastrophic.

 

did you try with mw50 engaged? ... i may have been running with it on..

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

No, I try to run at max continuous even during combat and be pretty conservative with WEP. MW50 for emergencies only. I try to have significant motor left for extending from fights or use during dashes for friendly lines. MW50 is always a last step for me.

[Bremspropeller]

Is there a difference between switching MW50 on ad hoc when needed and switching it on after startup on the ground and leaving it activated?

 

IIRC, this was how it was supposed to be used, since it only activates when the throttle hits the forward stop - at least that's how it worked in IL-2'46.

[CountZero]

6 hours ago, Hobel said:

Is this a new il2 compare?

Look the k4 stats in compare, 580km/h compare . Ingame 640 on sea lvl

 

The A8 fly with 100% fuel 625km/h on sea lvl

i check a8 speed on winter map and its 625kmh as expected, all airplanes in game are faster on winter maps then on autumn maps, but it seams D9 is slower on winter map then on autumn, on autumn on deck i can go 606kmh, while on winter map on deck only 580kmh, why is this i dont know, (even slow spit9 can almost do 570 on deck on winter map), so im sure you were testing this on winter map and thats why a8 is so mutch faster then d9 in your tests, maybe there is still some bugs with d9 engine or maybe d9 is only airplane in game that gets slower on winter maps   it seams i could not get even with boost on to activate emergancy power on d9 on deck on winter map.

 

[Hobel]

2 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

i check a8 speed on winter map and its 625kmh as expected, all airplanes in game are faster on winter maps then on autumn maps, but it seams D9 is slower on winter map then on autumn, on autumn on deck i can go 606kmh, while on winter map on deck only 580kmh, why is this i dont know, (even slow spit9 can almost do 570 on deck on winter map), so im sure you were testing this on winter map and thats why a8 is so mutch faster then d9 in your tests, maybe there is still some bugs with d9 engine or maybe d9 is only airplane in game that gets slower on winter maps   it seams i could not get even with boost on to activate emergancy power on d9 on deck on winter map. 

 

^100% this

 

but why is the A8 so Damm fast on winter holy shjt oO

and D9 not. ?

[CountZero]

i dont know, but how its now a8 in game you fly d9 in summer and autumn, and a8 in winter ?

[Bert_Foster]

On Winter Maps on the Deck D9 MW50 on you only get 1.38 ATA at 3250 RPM. On any other season maps you get 1.8ATA at 3250 RPM

Explains why its slower on the Winter maps.

 

But Why do you only get 1.38ATA on the winter maps ???

Edited March 20, 2019 by Bert_Foster

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

It seems a bit unusual but it's also still in development. Make a note of it in the FM section to get the ball rolling but remember to lodge a full complaint/FM suggestion you will need a lot more research that we have here so far. They may not see your concerns in a "fan" thread for some time here in General Discussion.

[L3Pl4K]

59 minutes ago, Bert_Foster said:

On Winter Maps on the Deck D9 MW50 on you only get 1.38 ATA at 3250 RPM. On any other season maps you get 1.8ATA at 3250 RPM

Explains why its slower on the Winter maps.

 

But Why do you only get 1.38ATA on the winter maps ???

Looks like a bug.

[JtD]

The Jumo uses a different type of regulation, it's a fixed air mass regulation, not fixed boost. Colder (denser) air therefore needs less boost pressure. Manual figures for 3250 rpm at sea level for instance:

 

1.38 ata at -30°

1.47 ata at 0°

1.56 ata at 30°

 

So 0.03 ata per 10° temperature change.

 

Haven't checked forum or game in days, so haven't had a look at the D-9 in game and can't say if things are OK there, but boost at least should vary depending on outside temperature.

 

Also depending on pressure (therefore altitude) and charger gear, given that the second gear heats up intake air far more than the first, boosts in second gear should be noticeably higher.

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by JtD

[Voidhunger]

22 hours ago, Voidhunger said:

Is the mw50 effective in Dora on the second gear above 3000m?

 

I will answer this by myself. Yes it is, but if you engage mw50 around 3K alt , mw50 is not activated fully and the pressure gauge shows only partial pressure. Once you go higher or lower, pressure starts to go up and the change in the sound of the engine is noticable.

 

But how to operate the engine at higher alt. If I set rpms to 3200 , ata is between 1.3-1.7 and in 1.7 ata and 3200rpm there is a limit to 3min.

 

Edited March 20, 2019 by Voidhunger

[Bert_Foster]

And what of this Emergency mode ? Its implementation seems confused to my eye. Keybinding wise Eng Boost only turns on MW50. I think there needs to be a separate binding available for "Emergency mode" that is to activate the red lever on the front panel labelled NOTLUG FUR BEDIEN GETR. As I understand this is similar to Erhote Nostilung in the BMW801 allowing increased fuel into the supercharger eye and therby getting more power ... independent of MW50. it had a 3min limit.

 

A couple of bursts on the Jumo 213 from a luminary from the the IL2 Classic days.... whose name escapes me:

 

 

35 minutes ago, JtD said:

The Jumo uses a different type of regulation, it's a fixed air mass regulation, not fixed boost. Colder (denser) air therefore needs less boost pressure. Manual figures for 3250 rpm at sea level for instance:

 

1.38 ata at -30°

1.47 ata at 0°

1.56 ata at 30°

 

So 0.03 ata per 10° temperature change.

 

Haven't checked forum or game in days, so haven't had a look at the D-9 in game and can't say if things are OK there, but boost at least should vary depending on outside temperature.

 

Also depending on pressure (therefore altitude) and charger gear, given that the second gear heats up intake air far more than the first, boosts in second gear should be noticeably higher.

 

JTD , so what is the difference in Power output ? i.e.is the power output at -30/1.38ata the same as at +30/1.56ata ?

Edited March 20, 2019 by Bert_Foster

[Guest deleted@50488]

But, is this MW-50 "button" / "lever" ( thought the red lever was the fuel cutoff ? ) common to all D-9 variants ?  I mean, do we really have to "enable MW-50" and also push the throttle fully fwd to set it going ? Wasn't the latter the only way of enabling it in the real thing ? Of course my only reference is from another sim where MW-50 engages simply by pushing the throttle fully fwd.

[Bert_Foster]

29 minutes ago, jcomm said:

But, is this MW-50 "button" / "lever" ( thought the red lever was the fuel cutoff ? ) common to all D-9 variants ?  I mean, do we really have to "enable MW-50" and also push the throttle fully fwd to set it going ? Wasn't the latter the only way of enabling it in the real thing ? Of course my only reference is from another sim where MW-50 engages simply by pushing the throttle fully fwd.

The MW50 switch is on the port console. You Arm MW50 but first selecting it on, then MW50 will start to flow (as seen on the gauge) passing a certain ata/throttle position. Not turning MW50 on means no MW50.

 

The large red "pull"  lever on the main panel labelled "NOTLUG FUR BEDIEN GETR " is meant to be the Emergency mode lever.

[StaB/Tomio_VR***]

With 3250 rpm and only 1.38 ata at sea level on winter maps, there shouldn't be any time restriction right ?

 

I made the test. The engine didn't broke after the usual 10-15 min of MW50 but there was the message after 30 min that the combat mode was over and the engine was therefore damaged after 35 min

 

 

To CountZero : Open the cowl flaps at 100% in winter at sea level and check speed results / radiator visually. The plane is faster xD

Edited March 20, 2019 by StaB/Tomio_VR***

[CountZero]

43 minutes ago, StaB/Tomio_VR*** said:

With 3250 rpm and only 1.38 ata at sea level on winter maps, there shouldn't be any time restriction right ?

 

I made the test. The engine didn't broke after the usual 10-15 min of MW50 but there was the message after 30 min that the combat mode was over and the engine was therefore damaged after 35 min

 

 

To CountZero : Open the cowl flaps at 100% in winter at sea level and check speed results / radiator visually. The plane is faster xD

LOL tryed that and your 10kmh faster with rads at 100% open settings then rads at 0% closed settings ( on both settings rads are visaly closed)

so winter map on deck rads at 0% 580kmh, same but rads at 100% 590kmh   crazy airplane (still slower then on autumn 606kmh), maybe lovering landing gear and opening canopey would make him even faster on winter maps ?

Edited March 20, 2019 by 77.CountZero

[MarderIV]

30 minutes ago, 77.CountZero said:

LOL tryed that and your 10kmh faster with rads at 100% open settings then rads at 0% closed settings ( on both settings rads are visaly closed)

so winter map on deck rads at 0% 580kmh, same but rads at 100% 590kmh   crazy airplane

 

I wonder why this is the case; maybe a bug or something intentional? I noticed the rad settings is mentioned as being a unit of temperature, so getting a particular rad setting meant assigning target temps. Is it possible the engine output and performance is tied to optimum temperature and the cold weather plus open rads cools the engine to a point where it doesn't perform well? 

 

I mean, it probably makes sense as long as it wasn't a bug. The engine on my bike has a hard time reaching high RPMs whenever its cold out. 

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

10 hours ago, JtD said:

The Jumo uses a different type of regulation, it's a fixed air mass regulation, not fixed boost. Colder (denser) air therefore needs less boost pressure. Manual figures for 3250 rpm at sea level for instance:

 

1.38 ata at -30°

1.47 ata at 0°

1.56 ata at 30°

 

So 0.03 ata per 10° temperature change.

 

Haven't checked forum or game in days, so haven't had a look at the D-9 in game and can't say if things are OK there, but boost at least should vary depending on outside temperature.

 

Also depending on pressure (therefore altitude) and charger gear, given that the second gear heats up intake air far more than the first, boosts in second gear should be noticeably higher.

 

 

But those manifold pressure regimes are without the full power MW 50 activation right? just like how at 15ºC sea level we have 1.51 ata in full throttle without MW 50 activation then 1.78 ata with it. So at -30ºC if it's the same then at full power with MW 50 it should be around 1.65 ata  (1.78 - 0.03*4,5)?

 

 

7 hours ago, jcomm said:

But, is this MW-50 "button" / "lever" ( thought the red lever was the fuel cutoff ? ) common to all D-9 variants ?  I mean, do we really have to "enable MW-50" and also push the throttle fully fwd to set it going ? Wasn't the latter the only way of enabling it in the real thing ? Of course my only reference is from another sim where MW-50 engages simply by pushing the throttle fully fwd.

 

I don't have DCS Dora, but looks like the MW 50 activation switch is part of one of the inflight/start up procedures? In BoX if you have the switch activated it only engages MW 50 when going above around 94% throttle, so you can always have it "on" but if you keep it in continuous or combat power it won't inject it to the engine.

 

 

7 hours ago, Agathos_Deimon said:

Does the plane really get ~607kph@Sl with MW50 and no bomb rack? If yes, it seems here - same as with the K4 - the devs choose "wishful thinking" again over reasonable and reliable sources, including test flights.

 

The deeper the game moves into territory where i have my main Knowledge and interest fokus on...the lest enthusiastic i become of the claimed historical accuracy...

 

The D-9 performance in IL-2 would represent the standard plane without engine gap seal, however we are able to take it without bomb rack (if you select a bomb then drop it you get the rack, same would happen once external fuel tanks are implemented). So the performance is kinda similar to the tests that had the sealing with bombrack. Also if you take the later bulged canopy it takes a bit of speed as well (605 km/h for the bulged canopy vs 606-607 km/h for the early flat one). With the ETC 504 our D-9 has a top speed of around 597 km/h.

 

Quote

The condition representative of standard production Fw 190 D-9’s during 1945 is as follows: Jumo 213A operating at 1.8 ata with B4 fuel & MW 50, equipped with ETC 504, main wheel fairing doors absent/fixed and engine gap not sealed. Of all the data charted in the compilation curve linked above, that curve best fitting the condition of a standard production Fw 190 D-9 is curve 4 of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 D-9 chart dated 11.3.45 (the red line). One shortcoming of this curve, when viewed in context with other curves from Focke Wulf’s Flugmechanik Department, is that it assumes the installation of the engine gap seal and is therefore approximately 13 km/h optimistic relative to the condition of delivered production aircraft (with rack minus the drop tank).

I took what I tested with the values of the real test and the speeds are rather close. Looks like our D-9 also has the landing gear wheel doors so looks like not having the bomb rack and having the landing gear covers counter the seal plus bombrack configuration of the real test.


Later on I will test with the bombrack to see what's the speed effect of the engine gap seal difference.

 

 

4 hours ago, 77.CountZero said:

LOL tryed that and your 10kmh faster with rads at 100% open settings then rads at 0% closed settings ( on both settings rads are visaly closed)

so winter map on deck rads at 0% 580kmh, same but rads at 100% 590kmh   crazy airplane (still slower then on autumn 606kmh), maybe lovering landing gear and opening canopey would make him even faster on winter maps ?

It is strange... I guess it has to be a similar effect for what I see at higher altitudes... maybe the engine is more efficient at lower oil temperatures, or as someone pointed out in the FM section the least drag radiator position isn't completely closed, but a bit open (he posted 23%), so with 0% radiator setting (100ºC water temperature) the radiator shutters are completely closed, but with the 100% setting (around 70ºC water), once the temp stabilizes the shutters are slightly open, so it would give less drag and make the plane go faster.

Edited March 20, 2019 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, Agathos_Deimon said:

I have gone through this discussion 15 years ago, i will not go through it again. Form the sources available any performance above 595kph@SL using MW50 is not representetive for a D9 flown in WW2 service.

 

Well, if you want anything to change instead of just complaining, send a PM with your info to @Han. That's the best way for them to see this. 

Edited March 20, 2019 by LukeFF

[Psyrion]

ww2performance online cites Dieter Hermann saying that report Nr. 4 Fw 190 D-9/210002 flew 606 km/h at SL at 1.75 ata. Sooo, spot on.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Psyrion

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, Agathos_Deimon said:

 If yes, it seems here - same as with the K4 - the devs choose "wishful thinking" again over reasonable and reliable sources, including test flights.

 

They gave people the option of the standard production engine and one that saw very limited service, at best. That doesn't really qualify as wishful thinking. 

[Tapi]

Noticed two things that may be considered at least questionable:

1. In the altitude 3000 m 4000 m with an emergency power (without and with MW50) it is possible to fly with nearly 2.1 ATA (??). With raising altitude ATA is decreasing to the  1.7 ATA at 6000 m.

2. It is possible to fly at least 10 min (but probably much more) with an emergency power 1.7 ATA (without  MW50) at 4000 m  (instead of 3 min limit as announced by devs) and NO ENGINE DAMAGE is noticeable. 

 

EDIT: My altitude for the 1.case was 4000 m (not 3000 m as I wrote by mistake) and it was WITH MW50 (apologize for the wrong conclusion)

Edited March 20, 2019 by Tapi

[Bert_Foster]

21 minutes ago, Tapi said:

Noticed two things that may be considered at least questionable:

1. In the altitude 3000 m with an emergency power (without MW50) it is possible to fly with nearly 2.1 ATA (??). With raising altitude ATA is decreasing to the  1.7 ATA at 6000 m.

2. It is possible to fly at least 10 min (but probably much more) with an emergency power 1.7 ATA (without  MW50) at 4000 m  (instead of 3 min limit as announced by devs) and NO ENGINE DAMAGE is noticeable. 

How do you select "Emergency power" ?

[Tapi]

18 minutes ago, Bert_Foster said:

How do you select "Emergency power" ?

Throttle full forward (no MW50) and supercharger has to be on the second speed (i.e. altitude has to be above 3500 m)

 

EDIT: My altitude for the 1.case was 4000 m (not 3000 m as I wrote by mistake) and it was WITH MW50 (apologize for wrong conclusion)

Edited March 20, 2019 by Tapi

[CountZero]

6 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

...

It is strange... I guess it has to be a similar effect for what I see at higher altitudes... maybe the engine is more efficient at lower oil temperatures, or as someone pointed out in the FM section the least drag radiator position isn't completely closed, but a bit open (he posted 23%), so with 0% radiator setting (100ºC water temperature) the radiator shutters are completely closed, but with the 100% setting (around 70ºC water), once the temp stabilizes the shutters are slightly open, so it would give less drag and make the plane go faster.

 

how come seting rads to 100% dosent make it faster on other maps then but best s 0%rads, also 0% or 100% on winter after few min position of cowling flaps gets to same place automaticly when you look at airplane from outside view, something is strange with it on winter maps either by design or bug.