Performance Charts for BoBP planes?

[FlyingNutcase]

I'm assuming some analytical person has put together performance charts for the BoBP aircraft. Anything floating around? Very preferably actual in-game performance but real-world charts if they're a good reflection. Finally delving back into fighters after a good while on bombers...

 

Thank you!

[FTC_DerSheriff]

 

You can download the data and the charts here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7NEbwyXgfdDRVNEZWtuVFFzSXc/view?usp=sharing

I recommend downloading and using excel.

[Gretsch_Man]

15 minutes ago, DerSheriff said:

 

You can download the data and the charts here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7NEbwyXgfdDRVNEZWtuVFFzSXc/view?usp=sharing

I recommend downloading and using excel.

Nice one!

 

Thanks, Sheriff.

[FlyingNutcase]

29 minutes ago, DerSheriff said:

You can download the data and the charts here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7NEbwyXgfdDRVNEZWtuVFFzSXc/view?usp=sharing

I recommend downloading and using excel.

 

Thank you Sheriff! There's a lot of really interesting data there. Did you put all that together yourself?  The fact that it's pretty color blindness friendly is very nice, even if by chance. ☺️

[FTC_DerSheriff]

55 minutes ago, FlyingNutcase said:

 

Thank you Sheriff! There's a lot of really interesting data there. Did you put all that together yourself?  The fact that it's pretty color blindness friendly is very nice, even if by chance. ☺️

By chance. If you use more than three graphs in one chart it gets super confusing really fast. So I vary graph thickness and style greatly to aid readability.
And yes I tested all planes* myself.

*I think I copied one or two aircraft tests from SuperEtendard, since he tests aircraft basically with the same method.

Edited March 11, 2020 by DerSheriff

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

1 hour ago, DerSheriff said:

 

You can download the data and the charts here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7NEbwyXgfdDRVNEZWtuVFFzSXc/view?usp=sharing

I recommend downloading and using excel.

 

Nice info. Wow looks like Tempest is an over performer in game when compared to real data you have compiled. Especially up high.

[Quinte]

59 minutes ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

Wow looks like Tempest is an over performer in game when compared to real data you have compiled. Especially up high.

 

Hmmm, no?

[FTC_DerSheriff]

1 hour ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Nice info. Wow looks like Tempest is an over performer in game when compared to real data you have compiled. Especially up high.

I can check later again. But the 11lb Version is quite fast. Even up high.

[Legioneod]

1 hour ago, III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson said:

 

Nice info. Wow looks like Tempest is an over performer in game when compared to real data you have compiled. Especially up high.

Not by a huge amount (if at all) from what I can tell. Top speed I see listed is around 435mph at 18-20k give or take.

Edited March 11, 2020 by Legioneod

[CountZero]

53 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

Not by a huge amount (if at all) from what I can tell. Top speed I see listed is around 435mph at 18-20k give or take.

its even slower in game at deck and up high compared to charts, that guy has his bias glasses on again.

Nerf Tempest and P-51 !!!! and .50 and Hisapanos!!! 

Edited March 11, 2020 by CountZero

[FTC_DerSheriff]

I do this now quite a while now and I notice that the devs have practically a impossible task. 
I notice this with every aircraft I compare against RL flight test.

Since the comment of Mr JG something something got me curious I tried to find some speedtests I could find with that Power rating. I found exactly two matching 11lb and another one for 12lb with 150 octane fuel.
I initially agreed that the 11lb tempest seems to fast at alt.

 

The first I found was a 11 Lb test from March 44. and that one is indeed some what slower than my ingame tests.

I found another one from an unknown date which is MUCH faster down low. Over 640 kph on the deck. But has no records up high.
Another one at 12lb is basically matching ur Tempest  down low. But has no records up high again.

All that tells me that the modelling of top speed is a lot of guesswork and reading the reports of the tests  carefully since you never know how the tests were precisely conducted.
Were the surfaces treated? Were there some bombs racks attached? Another propeller? What was the weight of the plane? Was ammo in the weapons?
Where the weapons even on the plane? You get so many variables, that you cant compare most planes 1:1 against the game version. 

And even knowing that, you cant be sure that the engineers back then made no mistakes correcting their results to standard atmosphere correctly, and for what they corrected it.
Did they removed in their calculations some mirrors on the planes? some weapons? 

I test my planes most of the time with half fuel, to simulate the most realistic encounter, but I vary that for planes with a lot of fuel. (P-51, P-38 and P-47 for example.)
So another variable.
 

Edited March 11, 2020 by DerSheriff

[CountZero]

And still :

 

 

 

 

And 9lbs to see how correct it is:

 

 

And poor K4:

 

 

D9

 

its easy to pick and chose any charts,

 

russian bias !!! oh wait wait no russian airplanes on west,

 

anti-axis bias yes yes thats the new motto. More 262 , nerf Tempests and 51s !!!  buff 109s and 190s!!! Where is my Ta-152H, Do-334, He-162, Go-229

Edited March 11, 2020 by CountZero

[MasserME262]

11 hours ago, CountZero said:

anti-axis bias yes yes thats the new motto. More 262 , nerf Tempests and 51s !!!  buff 109s and 190s!!! Where is my Ta-152H, Do-334, He-162, Go-229

what about no.

I mean, the "bias jokes". they get old quickly.... they are old after all

[Yogiflight]

11 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

what about no.

I mean, the "bias jokes". they get old quickly.... they are old after all

 

It is always the same story, if someone complains, that a german aircraft is not modelled correctly, it is ahhh, the Luftwhiners again. If someone complains an american aircraft is not modelled correctly, it is, yes of course, he is right.

[cardboard_killer]

There are consequences to losing a war

[Bremspropeller]

Funny how the D-9 is pretty much spot-on and nailed, while the K-4 proves to be a clown-car down-low.

[CountZero]

12 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

what about no.

I mean, the "bias jokes". they get old quickly.... they are old after all

 

But dont you know that every game developer is born with uncurable condition of russian bias no mather what country he comes from  ?

Edited March 12, 2020 by CountZero

[Dijital_Majik]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

Funny how the D-9 is pretty much spot-on and nailed, while the K-4 proves to be a clown-car down-low.

 

It's very much spot on indeed, but the testing conditions of the real plane (in all cases) can provide variations.  Even without the ETC 504 attached, I don't think a production D9 can reach those speeds in the graph (and thus game), without the rubber engine seal and inner gear doors.   The seal never made it into production, and the gear doors were, as far as I'm aware, very, very rare, and are not (visually) modeled in game.

 

it's always so hard with real-life data sources and testing conditions, but does provide for interesting threads and discussion like this.

[Bremspropeller]

That's true, but also dependant on other things:

Some pilots had their aircraft tweaked and polished and they'd perform a lot better than the standard birds (claiming up to 20km/h speed-differentials).

Just think of the airplane as a polished airframe without the gap-seals and gear-fairings. The relative performace-differences should about even out.

 

I think the case was once made to model the best sensible performing test airplane, so we won't have 50-page flame-wars, debating relative aircraft performance.

[cardboard_killer]

9 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

I think the case was once made to model the best sensible performing test airplane, so we won't have 50-page flame-wars, debating relative aircraft performance.

 

But then there'd be 100-page flame wars on the definition of "sensible".

[Bremspropeller]

I wouldn't quite expect a...Spanish Inquisition...

[DD_fruitbat]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

I wouldn't quite expect a...Spanish Inquisition...

 

[Dijital_Majik]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

That's true, but also dependant on other things:

Some pilots had their aircraft tweaked and polished and they'd perform a lot better than the standard birds (claiming up to 20km/h speed-differentials).

Just think of the airplane as a polished airframe without the gap-seals and gear-fairings. The relative performace-differences should about even out.

 

I think the case was once made to model the best sensible performing test airplane, so we won't have 50-page flame-wars, debating relative aircraft performance.

 

The polishing and the tweaking is exactly what I was getting at when I said there's so many variables to take into account with different testing figures; sometimes you get such unmentioned optimisations as polishing/paint removal, taping over gaps, other small mods etc and sometimes you get none, or a mix.  That's why it's so hard to nail down.

[APWVO_funkrami]

On 3/11/2020 at 10:03 AM, FTC_DerSheriff said:

 

You can download the data and the charts here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7NEbwyXgfdDRVNEZWtuVFFzSXc/view?usp=sharing

I recommend downloading and using excel.

Is this available somewhere currently?

[Jade_Monkey]

I wasn't aware how much of a dog the spitfire mk ix is at top speed. Still love it for its other great qualities though.

[Jaws2002]

[BlitzPig_EL]

 

I got your chart right here.