Jump to content
Oyster_KAI

P-51D-15 Specification page wrong??

Recommended Posts

I noticed that takeoff, glideslope, landing speed the same with P-47D-28!?
I don't remember that P-51D need 110~120mph for landing.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

North American listed the landing speed of a gross weight late model D at 110.7 mph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

To be honest the specification pages are hardly the most trustworthy source and are often much different compared to actual manuals for given type.

Best to either just use those and test stuff like top speed/climbrate/stall speed yourself.

 

Here's one for the P-51D

 

4SY9QeD.png?2

Edited by 4./JG26_Onebad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

To be honest the specification pages are hardly the most trustworthy source and are often much different compared to actual manuals for given type.

Best to either just use those and test stuff like top speed/climbrate/stall speed yourself.

 

Those numbers on the Spec. page are the in-game values the plane uses, so telling people to look elsewhere isn't exactly good advice.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

Those numbers on the Spec. page are the in-game values the plane uses, so telling people to look elsewhere isn't exactly good advice.

 

Following up on this logic this either means that the aircraft in game are modeled incorrectly (if real life manuals don't apply) or the spec pages are poorly written.

Though unsure of the former, I'm certain that the latter is at least partially correct for some aircraft. 

Also, I'd rather fly my aircraft how the manufacturer or operator tells me, than to what a guy in Moscow somewhere has to say.

Edited by 4./JG26_Onebad
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can touch down at 90mph in game, definitely not 110~120mph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Those numbers on the Spec. page are the in-game values the plane uses, so telling people to look elsewhere isn't exactly good advice.

 

Not quite. There's a LOT more nuance in the game than the specs page lets us believe. For example, a lower combat setting can last for an hour.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Oyster_KAI said:

I can touch down at 90mph in game, definitely not 110~120mph.

its guied line what you see in spec regarding thouse type of info

 

46 minutes ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

 

Not quite. There's a LOT more nuance in the game than the specs page lets us believe. For example, a lower combat setting can last for an hour.

 

They cant place all info in spec page it would be 20 pages long 😄

 

So for example fly P-51 at 9km youll have 15min combat timer, then try it at 10km and youll have 1h+, as your MP will be around 52" there ( and at thouse altitudes your using 100% trottle and rpm to be in combat regime of airplanes engine ). And you can see that only when you turn on instrument panel option ON and see games messages that tell you when your timers realy expired, Thats why thouse messages are important to work like others on all realisam settings. Depending on how mutch lbs MP or what not your using timer gets extended or shortened, its not if it says for example 15 min that it will be 15 min every time on all alts. And im talking about safe time untill message shows up that it expired ( as thats what spec say 5, 15 or 30min is ), im not adding extra random time that you risk on if you go abow when message shows up.

Edited by 77.CountZero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Yankee_ said:

 

Not quite. There's a LOT more nuance in the game than the specs page lets us believe. For example, a lower combat setting can last for an hour.


reducing the specs to 1 hour you get significantly less power than the 15 minute mode, it's not much above max continuous. A better setting imho is 61" at 2850 RPM which is very similar in performance than 3000 RPM and will last for around 30 min.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:


reducing the specs to 1 hour you get significantly less power than the 15 minute mode, it's not much above max continuous. A better setting imho is 61" at 2850 RPM which is very similar in performance than 3000 RPM and will last for around 30 min.

Yes there is countless posible options ( like we saw when 47 was introduced ) , and you as player will not know if they work and when you need to stop when messages that tell you that you exided alowed time dont work if instrument panel is not on, and as you climb your not able to maintain MP neded for max so timers are no longer same, and without messages its pure guess work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

 

Following up on this logic this either means that the aircraft in game are modeled incorrectly (if real life manuals don't apply) or the spec pages are poorly written.

Though unsure of the former, I'm certain that the latter is at least partially correct for some aircraft. 

Also, I'd rather fly my aircraft how the manufacturer or operator tells me, than to what a guy in Moscow somewhere has to say.

Following your logic we fly in authentic environment with correct physics coded in other words we fly for real. 

You guys need to get real. The planes are simulated together with physics in at the moment best possible way allowed by a aged game engine 

that is the problems following real charts and documentations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

 

Following up on this logic this either means that the aircraft in game are modeled incorrectly (if real life manuals don't apply) or the spec pages are poorly written.

Though unsure of the former, I'm certain that the latter is at least partially correct for some aircraft. 

Also, I'd rather fly my aircraft how the manufacturer or operator tells me, than to what a guy in Moscow somewhere has to say.

 

You are missing out an important variable.  Manual figures are always for IAS: this is what the RL pilot sees in his cockpit instruments.  If the game's FMs were exactly right, when flying in the game, you would not see the same IAS in your cockpit as the RL pilot at the same TAS. 

 

The game instruments take into account the TAS-IAS difference due to density altitude, but they do not take into account instrument errors. Even the PEC given in manuals do not take into account errors caused by flying at high AoA, which cause the instrument significantly to under-measure speed.  So when landing at sea level your game IAS=TAS, but in a real plane IAS<TAS.

 

So if you fly the plane according to the manuals, you will stall and crash.

 

If the instrument errors were modeled, you would find that the manual recommendations would work for the game. I wish they were: at the start of BoX this was modeled, IIRC, but was taken out because players found it "too confusing".   

Edited by unreasonable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

Also, I'd rather fly my aircraft how the manufacturer or operator tells me, than to what a guy in Moscow somewhere has to say.

 

The "guy in Moscow" is a highly experienced pilot who also knows a thing or two about good flight model coding. I trust him to get things right.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respect people flying the planes in a historical way. But you buy a dozen ac and a map for 60 buck. Ask yourself what can be done within that budget.

I think we get a bargain. Simply amazing what we get for our money compared to a module in DCS

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing people always forget is the sim tries to match the plane's performance to within about a certain percentage of accuracy (like 5%). 

So the process likely goes something like this (obviously extremely simplified):
1. Plane gets chosen for modeling and researched. 
2. Flight model is generated based on findings.
3. Flight model is compared to performance figures to see how it matches up. If it's too far out, work iterates again. Back to step 2.
4. The plane is run in game and the specs are generated from that, rather than using the 'real life' specs, because by necessity the plane performs differently than its real life counterpart, for obvious reasons ... because it is not the real plane, its an abstraction composed of code and 3D models trying to appear and feel like the real plane.

 

Step 2 and 3 are probably repeated over and over until they get close enough. Because the flight model is not perfect and things need to be simplified to run on a home PC (a perfect simulation of a real life plane would, by definition, have to model every single molecule affecting the plane), there are effects and edge cases it is difficult or impossible to model.

Once they get to a certain point they reach the point of diminishing returns, where longer and longer amounts of time spent on a flight model yield smaller and smaller improvements. or they reach a point where further changes to the model actually take it farther from how it is in real life, because they've run up against a fundamental limitation of the model.

I do find that I can largely fly planes according to the manual, with some tweaks. Since the manuals for the British and American planes are largely available in English I used them quite extensively when I'm first familiarizing myself with a given aircraft. After an hour or so of flight time I pretty well know what I'm doing and then go hunting for tips from other players or the manuals again. If I die because the manual is different from the game, no biggie, I didn't die in real life.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...