Question for developers

[Jaegermeister]

47 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

Klimov and/or the Soviet Air Force chose not to do that for whatever reasons. My guess is that pushing the limits decreased reliability to an unacceptable level. So the power you can get from the engine is available continuously (subject to the fuel supply and cooling system limitations), but it is less than what is physically possible with that piece of equipment.

 

Soviet philosophy at the time (according to American view) was to put as many soldiers as possible in simple and reliable equipment that they could operate with minimal training. The goal was to overwhelm the enemy with numbers, not superior technology. It worked.

 

Their aircraft could have operated at higher performance, but it would have required more training to keep them reliable at the discretion of the pilots and crew. If you eliminate that variable, you have more airplanes that you can count on taking off every day and more people capable of operating them.

[41Sqn_Skipper]

43 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Best ingame example: 109 g2 and G4. Same engine on almost the same airframe. But in the g2 for reliability reasons power was limited to combat - g4 was allowed to use emergency power. 

 

Another example is the Merlin 66 in Spitfire IX and P51. Same engine, but totally different engine limitations (different duration and RPM/boost). In my opinion simply reflecting different handling philosophies.

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

 

Not sure what you are talking about here. Engine design is always a trade-off between power output and efficiency, reliability, service life etc.

 

What I am saying is that the Klimov 105 engine block is physically capable of delivering more power, and could have been designed/tuned to do so for a limited period of time by running at higher RPM and MP (as was done by other engine designers with "Combat Power" or "War Emergency Power").

 

Klimov and/or the Soviet Air Force chose not to do that for whatever reasons. My guess is that pushing the limits decreased reliability to an unacceptable level. So the power you can get from the engine is available continuously (subject to the fuel supply and cooling system limitations), but it is less than what is physically possible with that piece of equipment.

 

well if are so convinced, take your car go in autodrome and push it for more then 30 min at the maximum speed, next come back here and talk me again about reliability, service life, efficiency etc etc. There is a big difference between how much power your engine could be develope and how much he can stay at the maximum speed (is irrelevant if you have limited the effective maximum power), you confuse the maximum capability with maximum speed. In the game you have cruise speed (that you can take until you finish the fuel) and combat speed (isn't the maximum speed yet). I hope you understand me (sorry for my english isn't so good)

 

bye Wolfen

 

[MattS]

30 minutes ago, Jaegermeister said:

 

Soviet philosophy at the time (according to American view) was to put as many soldiers as possible in simple and reliable equipment that they could operate with minimal training. The goal was to overwhelm the enemy with numbers, not superior technology. It worked.

 

Their aircraft could have operated at higher performance, but it would have required more training to keep them reliable at the discretion of the pilots and crew. If you eliminate that variable, you have more airplanes that you can count on taking off every day and more people capable of operating them.

 

Agreed...and the American experience with high-altitude engine problems early on with P-38s in the ETO shows us that reliability matters as much as raw output. So, sacrificing that margin at the top end for big increases in reliability is sensible.

 

The part of it all that I have a little bit of trouble squaring is the fact that in game the Klimov 105 in the LaGG-3 can produce 1200hp (nominal power) indefinitely, while the DB 601E in the 109 F4 and Merlin in the Spit MkV can do 1200hp for 30 minutes and the Allison v1710 in the P-40E can only do it for 5 minutes.

 

I know the Soviets were more clever than they're often given credit for, but I can't see how Klimov somehow found the answer to engine power and durability/reliability that nobody else could.

 

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

 

Great example!

 

That said, I am a little skeptical of the way limitations are implemented in the game, which grants the same level of reliability to the Klimov running constantly at full rated power vs. DB, Merlin, and Allison engines running their conservative published power schemes. But I'm not a mechanical engineer so I'll leave that to guys who know better.

 

G2 can stay at the maximum speed for more then 30 min (after 30 min he stay ok) G4 between 10/17 min next engine breaks)

 

[MattS]

7 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

well if are so convinced, take your car go in autodrome and push it for more then 30 min at the maximum speed, next come back here and talk me again about reliability, service life, efficiency etc etc. There is a big difference between how much power your engine could be develope and how much he can stay at the maximum speed (is irrelevant if you have limited the effective maximum power), you confuse the maximum capability with maximum speed. In the game you have cruise speed (that you can take until you finish the fuel) and combat speed (isn't the maximum speed yet). I hope you understand me (sorry for my english isn't so good)

 

bye Wolfen

 

 

My car has a 2.2L 4-cylinder engine that puts out something like 200hp at high RPM and boosted by a turbo. If I ran the engine at full power all the time, I suspect it would lead to some problems, but Honda gives us that ability for when we want or need it.

 

If instead Honda decided to install the same engine with no turbo and tuned to run at a lower RPM, then I could probably run it with the throttle fully open for a long time with no problems...at the expense of producing less power. This is effectively the choice that Klimov made...set a maximum power level that the engine could produce constantly and NOT give the pilot the ability to run it as hard as possible.

Edited May 13, 2020 by MattS

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

3 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

Agreed...and the American experience with high-altitude engine problems early on with P-38s in the ETO shows us that reliability matters as much as raw output. So, sacrificing that margin at the top end for big increases in reliability is sensible.

 

The part of it all that I have a little bit of trouble squaring is the fact that in game the Klimov 105 in the LaGG-3 can produce 1200hp (nominal power) indefinitely, while the DB 601E in the 109 F4 and Merlin in the Spit MkV can do 1200hp for 30 minutes and the Allison v1710 in the P-40E can only do it for 5 minutes.

 

I know the Soviets were more clever than they're often given credit for, but I can't see how Klimov somehow found the answer to engine power and durability/reliability that nobody else could.

 

isn't a problem between soviet and other engines, there isn't in the word en engine pistons that can stay at the maximum speed forever (30 min for me is ever  ), sure if you decrease the power of 50% is possible, but tell me how make this in a engine and cut 50% of power, in the war time.... F1 is an example, the engine are like engine plane, maximum speed, reliability etc etc, but try to push it at 30 min...

[MattS]

5 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

G2 can stay at the maximum speed for more then 30 min (after 30 min he stay ok) G4 between 10/17 min next engine breaks)

 

 

This is because in the G2, the Germans made a similar decision as Klimov made...limit the power available to the pilot in favor of reliability/longevity.

 

Once they were confident, they ran the SAME engine at higher output.

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

3 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

My car has a 2.2L 4-cylinder engine that puts out something like 200hp at high RPM and boosted by a turbo. If I ran the engine at full power all the time, I suspect it would lead to some problems, but Honda gives us that ability for when we want or need it.

 

If instead Honda decided to install the same engine with no turbo and tuned to run at a lower RPM, then I could probably run it with the throttle fully open for a long time with no problems...at the expense of producing less power. This is effectively the choice that Klimov made...set a maximum power level that the engine could produce constantly and NOT give the pilot the ability to run it as hard as possible.

Well try to win a race after this decrease... 

1 minute ago, MattS said:

 

This is because in the G2, the Germans made a similar decision as Klimov made...limit the power available to the pilot in favor of reliability/longevity.

 

Once they were confident, they ran the SAME engine at higher output.

 they weren't so stupid, why the G6 can't stay more then 7/10 min then ?

[MattS]

Just now, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

Well try to win a race after this decrease... 

 

I don't know what to tell you, buddy. There is such a thing as not squeezing every possible hp out of an engine, and that is the decision that the Soviets made. 

 

The way it impacts the gameplay is questionable sometimes, but you've got to accept that the same exact engine can be tuned to be run at "full throttle" safely all the time, or at higher power levels such that the amount of time at "full throttle" is limited. The 109 G2 vs. G4 and the gradually increasing boost levels tolerated by the Allison V1710 as the war progressed are examples of this.

15 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

 they weren't so stupid, why the G6 can't stay more then 7/10 min then ?

 

Look at the RPM and boost (ATA) levels.

 

"Full throttle" in a G2 is 2500rpm/1.3 ATA.

 

"Full throttle" in a G4 or G6 is 2800rpm/1.42 ATA...for 1 minute.

 

"Full throttle" in a G14 is 2800rpm/1.7 ATA for 10 minutes because the engine sprays a methanol/water mixture in there to prevent the engine from destroying itself.

 

Same throttle handle position in each case. The engines are configured differently.

 

 

[I.JG3_CDRSEABEE]

16 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

What?

 

This dial on the clock (just below the center)....I think it is setup for WEP timer or over continuous power). I know there is a thread somewhere in the forums that talks about this. Just cant find it. Try it. I think its only on German planes.

 

 

 

 

 

The clock obviously tracks time with a minute and hour hands, but can be also be used to (i) to track flight time by rotating the bezel (but unlike the dive watches the bezel can be rotated in both directions) and (ii) a separate 15 minutes timer utilizing the smaller dial on the bottom and the seconds hand. To activate the timer, you had to push the button situated on the bottom part, below the main crown. The seconds hand would start moving and the minutes counter hand at 6 o’clock. The counter would move one time for each full minute. If you push the button again, it stops the timer and the next push resets both hands to zero. The timer was necessary for approaches with no visibility, to track distance flown with dead reckoning and maybe to track the time engine was operating under emergency power. The main crown at 6 o'clock position was used to wind up the clock. Secondary function was to set the time if the lever at 5 o'clock position was pulled out, the lever had an additional marking with luminescent paint so the pilot could see whether the clock was running or not. 

 

[MattS]

7 minutes ago, CDRSEABEE said:

 

This dial on the clock (just below the center)....I think it is setup for WEP timer or over continuous power). I know there is a thread somewhere in the forums that talks about this. Just cant find it. Try it. I think its only on German planes.

 

 

 

 

 

The clock obviously tracks time with a minute and hour hands, but can be also be used to (i) to track flight time by rotating the bezel (but unlike the dive watches the bezel can be rotated in both directions) and (ii) a separate 15 minutes timer utilizing the smaller dial on the bottom and the seconds hand. To activate the timer, you had to push the button situated on the bottom part, below the main crown. The seconds hand would start moving and the minutes counter hand at 6 o’clock. The counter would move one time for each full minute. If you push the button again, it stops the timer and the next push resets both hands to zero. The timer was necessary for approaches with no visibility, to track distance flown with dead reckoning and maybe to track the time engine was operating under emergency power. The main crown at 6 o'clock position was used to wind up the clock. Secondary function was to set the time if the lever at 5 o'clock position was pulled out, the lever had an additional marking with luminescent paint so the pilot could see whether the clock was running or not. 

 

 

Very clever...I noticed this moving last night!

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

33 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

Well try to win a race after this decrease... 

 they weren't so stupid, why the G6 can't stay more then 7/10 min then ?

Ask to Honda if in that case "If instead Honda decided to install the same engine with no turbo and tuned to run at a lower RPM, then I could probably run it with the throttle fully open for a long time" you can keep the maximum speed for 30 min without burn your engine.

Matts says : Klimov and/or the Soviet Air Force chose not to do that for whatever reasons. My guess is that pushing the limits decreased reliability to an unacceptable level. So the power you can get from the engine is available continuously (subject to the fuel supply and cooling system limitations), but it is less than what is physically possible with that piece of equipment.

 

Migs are the same Klimov engine ? no, they can fly more then 30min at the maximum speed ? YES, I haven't LA-5 but if someone want to test it I'm sure he don't go in overheat after 30min, in case you ask me, the engine is different from Yaks and Migs.

[MattS]

12 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

Ask to Honda if in that case "If instead Honda decided to install the same engine with no turbo and tuned to run at a lower RPM, then I could probably run it with the throttle fully open for a long time" you can keep the maximum speed for 30 min without burn your engine.

Matts says : Klimov and/or the Soviet Air Force chose not to do that for whatever reasons. My guess is that pushing the limits decreased reliability to an unacceptable level. So the power you can get from the engine is available continuously (subject to the fuel supply and cooling system limitations), but it is less than what is physically possible with that piece of equipment.

 

Migs are the same Klimov engine ? no, they can fly more then 30min at the maximum speed ? YES, I haven't LA-5 but if someone want to test it I'm sure he don't go in overheat after 30min, in case you ask me, the engine is different from Yaks and Migs.

 

I'm sorry, I simply cannot understand the point you are trying to make here.

 

The MiG has a completely different engine (from Mikulin).

 

You are still getting hung up on "maximum speed". Again, it is an engineering choice of how much power an engine will produce at "full throttle". The closer you get to the maximum possible power that an engine can physically produce at "full throttle", the shorter its lifespan will be, and the more likelihood that it will experience failures.

 

Setting up the engine to deliver higher power, and imposing time limits on the pilot is one way to deal with it. 

 

Setting up the engine to deliver less power, but allowing the pilot to push the throttle forward and forget about it (subject to fuel quantity and cooling/radiator effectiveness) is another way to deal with it.

 

The Soviets chose the second choice in the case of the Klimovs. In the case of the La-5s, they got higher power out of the Ash-82 but had to limit full power/boost time. Full power/boost is also limited in time for the Mikulin engines installed in MiG-3s and IL-2s.

 

Personally I suspect that this was because the Klimov could be run relatively reliably at a constant 1,200 hp, but the risk of allowing the pilot to squeeze 1,350hp or whatever for a finite period of time by increasing propeller rpm to 3,000 or increasing MP was deemed not worth it.

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

4 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

I'm sorry, I simply cannot understand the point you are trying to make here.

 

The MiG has a completely different engine (from Mikulin).

 

You are still getting hung up on "maximum speed". Again, it is an engineering choice of how much power an engine will produce at "full throttle". The closer you get to the maximum possible power that an engine can physically produce at "full throttle", the shorter its lifespan will be, and the more likelihood that it will experience failures.

 

Setting up the engine to deliver higher power, and imposing time limits on the pilot is one way to deal with it. 

 

Setting up the engine to deliver less power, but allowing the pilot to push the throttle forward and forget about it (subject to fuel quantity and cooling/radiator effectiveness) is another way to deal with it.

 

The Soviets chose the second choice in the case of the Klimovs. In the case of the La-5s, they got higher power out of the Ash-82 but had to limit full power/boost time. Full power/boost is also limited in time for the Mikulin engines installed in MiG-3s and IL-2s.

 

Personally I suspect that this was because the Klimov could be run relatively reliably at a constant 1,200 hp, but the risk of allowing the pilot to squeeze 1,350hp or whatever for a finite period of time by increasing propeller rpm to 3,000 or increasing MP was deemed not worth it.

 

Well you told me that all engines produced by soviets factory were depowered and at the same time these engines had same or better performance of any other engine (American, English, German, Italian etc). very good

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, 41Sqn_Banks said:

 

Another example is the Merlin 66 in Spitfire IX and P51. Same engine, but totally different engine limitations (different duration and RPM/boost). In my opinion simply reflecting different handling philosophies.

In game if you use same engine settings that give you 15min combat time on P-51, on Spitfire 9, youll get message teling you you run out of time at same 15min time on Spitfire (just its emergancy mod run out on it). Also same works if you use combat engine settings for 1h for spitfire 9, in P-51, youll be able to fly also 1h at them. And afcorse you can see tech messages to test this only when you turn on Instrument Panel. So they just moved flags that triger continous/combat/emegancy mods in each airplane to how manuals say, but as engine is same he have same limitations in game on both airplanes.

Edited May 13, 2020 by CountZero

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

btw i wait the answer from developers....

[DD_Arthur]

11 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

btw i wait the answer from developers....

 

What was the question again?

[Raven109]

On 5/11/2020 at 1:40 PM, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

Hi guys, can i ask you why, there are some planes that can fly at maximum speed for more then 30 minutes and other can fly no more then 5/15 in max without damage the engine ?. Is it correct ?.

 

Thank you

Wolfen

 

The reason for the limits being different is because the aircraft manuals (real-life) specify different limits. Are you expecting all engines to have the same limits before seizing? This game (for the most part) is not trying to offer a level combat field, to the detriment of game-play sometimes and, if it's trying to be realistic, should not be going for fairness.

 

The fact that engines seize after 1 minute of emergency power is another story altogether.

 

 

 

 

 

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

7 minutes ago, DD_Arthur said:

 

What was the question again?

who did answer me ? i lost the thread ?

[MattS]

2 hours ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Well you told me that all engines produced by soviets factory were depowered and at the same time these engines had same or better performance of any other engine (American, English, German, Italian etc). very good

 

That was not what I intended to communicate ?

 

Look at it this way: if the Germans/Americans/British got hold of the Klimov 105 they would probably try to run it at a higher RPM and boost for some limited period of time (if the engine could tolerate it without problems) and call it "Emergency" power.

 

For whatever reasons the Soviets (Klimov and/or the Air Force) decided that was a bad idea. So they limited how hard it would run when the throttle and RPM levers were pushed all the way forward.

 

The fact that this gives them kind of an advantage in game compared to the strict limits on other countries' engines is a "game design" problem, not a "reality" problem IMO.

 

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

1 minute ago, MattS said:

 

That was not what I intended to communicate ?

 

Look at it this way: if the Germans/Americans/British got hold of the Klimov 105 they would probably try to run it at a higher RPM and boost for some limited period of time (if the engine could tolerate it without problems) and call it "Emergency" power.

 

For whatever reasons the Soviets (Klimov and/or the Air Force) decided that was a bad idea. So they limited how hard it would run when the throttle and RPM levers were pushed all the way forward.

 

The fact that this gives them kind of an advantage in game compared to the strict limits on other countries' engines is a "game design" problem, not a "reality" problem IMO.

 

 

Why you talk about only Klimov engine? it wasn't mounted on every russian plane ...

21 minutes ago, Raven109 said:

 

The reason for the limits being different is because the aircraft manuals (real-life) specify different limits. Are you expecting all engines to have the same limits before seizing? This game (for the most part) is not trying to offer a level combat field, to the detriment of game-play sometimes and, if it's trying to be realistic, should not be going for fairness.

 

The fact that engines seize after 1 minute of emergency power is another story altogether.

 

 

 

 

 

 

where an I can find these manuals ?, I'm really curious.

thank you

Wolfen

[MattS]

15 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Why you talk about only Klimov engine? it wasn't mounted on every russian plane ...

 

Because the Klimov 105 is the only Soviet engine in the game that can run 100% throttle and RPM continuously.

 

The Mikulin engines in the MiG and IL-2, and the Shvetsov engines in the I-16 and La-5s (with exception of the La-5F modification) will fail in game if you run them in "Boosted" mode past the time limit. 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by MattS
Specified "in game"

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

20 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

Because the Klimov 105 is the only Soviet engine in the game that can run 100% throttle and RPM continuously.

 

The Mikulin engines in the MiG and IL-2, and the Shvetsov engines in the I-16 and La-5s (with exception of the La-5F modification) will fail in game if you run them in "Boosted" mode past the time limit. 

 

 

 

Finally you reach the point!, isn't the Klimov 105 the only one, but all russian planes!, they never breaks after 30 mins of fly at the 100% of throttle..

[Herne]

25 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Finally you reach the point!, isn't the Klimov 105 the only one, but all russian planes!, they never breaks after 30 mins of fly at the 100% of throttle..

 

IL2, I16, mig3, and LA5 will definitely break much lower than 30 minutes at full rpm / boost and throttle.

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Herne

[Raven109]

2 hours ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

where an I can find these manuals ?, I'm really curious.

thank you

Wolfen

 

DB605AM with MW-50 (109 G-14 manual)

 

DB601A/B (manual):

 

DB605A (109 G2/4/6):

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/BF109_G-2-4-6_Bedienungsvorschrift_June43.pdf

The 109E models had a timer, which was activated when the throttle lever was pushed all the way to the emergency power setting. The throttle was automatically pushed back from the emergency power setting after 1 minute. 

 

On the other hand, there are several manuals for the 109 which do not list those limits. And on the other-other hand, there are in-cockpit 109 photos showing the RPM gauge marked with time limits for exactly the RPM values listed in the "Power settings" tables.

 

I think there are other threads on this forum discussing the engine timers, and they contain time limits for Allied planes. 

 

I see these limits more like "best before" dates. You can use the engine beyond the quoted time limits, but there is no guarantee about the consequences (i.e perhaps increased risk of knocking). In-game, going beyond these limits is a guaranteed dead engine.

 

Of course, also engine wear and tear was a concern.

Edited May 13, 2020 by Raven109

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

 

This shit show of a thread is 100% not my fault.

 

Np we can close this thread, if you can't keep the conversation with numbers and proven topics any words you wrote are useless.

 

thank you all 

Wolfen

51 minutes ago, Raven109 said:

 

DB605AM with MW-50 (109 G-14 manual)

 

DB601A/B (manual):

 

DB605A (109 G2/4/6):

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/BF109_G-2-4-6_Bedienungsvorschrift_June43.pdf

The 109E models had a timer, which was activated when the throttle lever was pushed all the way to the emergency power setting. The throttle was automatically pushed back from the emergency power setting after 1 minute. 

 

On the other hand, there are several manuals for the 109 which do not list those limits. And on the other-other hand, there are in-cockpit 109 photos showing the RPM gauge marked with time limits for exactly the RPM values listed in the "Power settings" tables.

 

I think there are other threads on this forum discussing the engine timers, and they contain time limits for Allied planes. 

 

I see these limits more like "best before" dates. You can use the engine beyond the quoted time limits, but there is no guarantee about the consequences (i.e perhaps increased risk of knocking). In-game, going beyond these limits is a guaranteed dead engine.

 

Of course, also engine wear and tear was a concern.

34/5000

I meant manuals of Russian engines, but thank you m8..!

 

 

[41Sqn_Skipper]

18 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

34/5000

I meant manuals of Russian engines, but thank you m8..!

 

 

 

1 minute google ... 

http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2017/04/yakovlev-yak-1-technical-manual.html?m=1

 

Good luck.

[MattS]

46 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Np we can close this thread, if you can't keep the conversation with numbers and proven topics any words you wrote are useless.

 

thank you all 

Wolfe

 

 

 

I provided valid information to you that has been discussed countless times on here. Instead of actually taking a moment to read what I was saying, you just kept blurting out new questions and telling me that I was wrong. Good luck with that approach.

Edited May 13, 2020 by MattS
Complying with forum rules

[Raven109]

24 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Np we can close this thread, if you can't keep the conversation with numbers and proven topics any words you wrote are useless.

 

thank you all 

Wolfen

34/5000

I meant manuals of Russian engines, but thank you m8..!

 

 

 

 

I see. I saw your first question and I assumed you were trying to find the reason why some are limited, but you are actually interested in knowing why some aren't. Then the Russian forums, perhaps.

 

The time limits discussion is going on for years, I'm not sure that there is a straight answer. The reason why some engines might not be limited could be as simple as "their manuals didn't have such guidelines". I've never had a look at Russian engines, so I can't really help.

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Raven109

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

9 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

I provided valid information to you that has been discussed countless times on here. Instead of actually taking a moment to read what I was saying, you just kept blurting out new questions and telling me that I was wrong...which is ironic considering that it is you who apparently cannot even engage Boost Mode (Forsazh) on the Soviet airplanes correctly. LOL.

 

So please take your pouting and passive aggressiveness out on somebody else, jackass. I'm done with you.

 

9 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

I provided valid information to you that has been discussed countless times on here. Instead of actually taking a moment to read what I was saying, you just kept blurting out new questions and telling me that I was wrong...which is ironic considering that it is you who apparently cannot even engage Boost Mode (Forsazh) on the Soviet airplanes correctly. LOL.

 

So please take your pouting and passive aggressiveness out on somebody else, jackass. I'm done with you.

 

You provided what ? are you an engine engineer ?, have you provided information that you have discuss with who ? developers ? you talk all times about kovlin engine when i talk about all kind of russian engine (maybe you need to read again this post). Aggressive what ? i just ask with education, where you read aggressive words or behavior ?, sure if not agree with you (because you never prove what you say) and you change it with aggression, well is not my problem. I have opened this thread with "question for developers", are you one of them ? nope, have you engine skills ? nope, but you reply all time without reason. I'm not en expert like you, this is the reason because i asked, but the difference between me and you is that i can prove what i said, you ? nope. Other people here posted manuals to confirm the data, you ? nope. I stopped believing in Santa Claus several years ago. Thank you for leaving of discussion.Best regards Wolfen

28 minutes ago, Raven109 said:

 

 

I see. I saw your first question and I assumed you were trying to find the reason why some are limited, but you are actually interested in knowing why some aren't. Then the Russian forums, perhaps.

 

The time limits discussion is going on for years, I'm not sure that there is a straight answer. The reason why some engines might not be limited could be as simple as "their manuals didn't have such guidelines". I've never had a look at Russian engines, so I can't really help.

 

 

Thank you for the answer I have appreciate

[MattS]

40 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

 

You provided what ? are you an engine engineer ?, have you provided information that you have discuss with who ? developers ? you talk all times about kovlin engine when i talk about all kind of russian engine (maybe you need to read again this post). Aggressive what ? i just ask with education, where you read aggressive words or behavior ?, sure if not agree with you (because you never prove what you say) and you change it with aggression, well is not my problem. I have opened this thread with "question for developers", are you one of them ? nope, have you engine skills ? nope, but you reply all time without reason. I'm not en expert like you, this is the reason because i asked, but the difference between me and you is that i can prove what i said, you ? nope. Other people here posted manuals to confirm the data, you ? nope. I stopped believing in Santa Claus several years ago. Thank you for leaving of discussion.Best regards Wolfen

 

 

Bullshit. Your question was:

 

"Hi guys, can i ask you why, there are some planes that can fly at maximum speed for more then 30 minutes and other can fly no more then 5/15 in max without damage the engine ?. Is it correct ?."

 

To which I replied:

 

"Think of it this way: the Soviet planes that run continuously at full throttle / full RPM could in theory be set up to run at higher MP & RPM for short periods the way that the German, British, and American ones do, but that option was not given to the pilots."

 

This was an accurate answer to the question, for the Soviet planes powered by Klimov engines...which is a large percentage of them. I never said it applied to ALL Soviet planes. That was your poor assumption.

 

All the rest of this thread are posts where you kept trying unsuccessfully to prove why you logically must be right and everyone else (who quite obviously understand these machines better than you do) are wrong. Then, you blamed me for failing to understand the original question and demanded that we provide to you the original source documents that the developers used to establish the engine limitations for the airplanes in the game. 

 

So yeah, the big mistake was trying to help you out in the first place. 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by MattS
Punctuation

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

42 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

Bullshit. Your question was:

 

"Hi guys, can i ask you why, there are some planes that can fly at maximum speed for more then 30 minutes and other can fly no more then 5/15 in max without damage the engine ?. Is it correct ?."

 

To which I replied:

 

"Think of it this way: the Soviet planes that run continuously at full throttle / full RPM could in theory be set up to run at higher MP & RPM for short periods the way that the German, British, and American ones do, but that option was not given to the pilots."

 

This was an accurate answer to the question, for the Soviet planes powered by Klimov engines...which is a large percentage of them. I never said it applied to ALL Soviet planes. That was your poor assumption.

 

All the rest of this thread are posts where you kept trying unsuccessfully to prove why you logically must be right and everyone else (who quite obviously understand these machines better than you do) are wrong. Then, you blamed me for failing to understand the original question and demanded that we provide to you the original source documents that the developers used to establish the engine limitations for the airplanes in the game. 

 

So yeah, the big mistake was trying to help you out in the first place. 

 

 

Unfortunately you can't help nobody, and as i said thank you for leaving, everything you said here, is useless. And in general don't spoke about things that you don't know or where you can use comproved documentation  (yes now i'm a little bit aggressive, sorry)

 

Goodbye 

ps "Hi guys" was for the developers not for you, but your are welcome if you have proven information, given the technical-scientific argument of the topic

Edited May 13, 2020 by II./JG52Wolfen_ITA

[MattS]

32 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Unfortunately you can't help nobody, and as i said thank you for leaving, everything you said here, is useless. And in general don't spoke about things that you don't know or where you can use comproved documentation  (yes now i'm a little bit aggressive, sorry)

 

Goodbye 

ps "Hi guys" was for the developers not for you, but your are welcome if you have proven information, given the scientific nature of the topic

 

Everything that several other members and I have posted is accurate. You simply can't accept the truth, so instead of being courteous and thanking people for the time that they invested in trying to help, you troll them by demanding more and calling their posts worthless.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by MattS
Complying with forum rules

[MattS]

21 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

learn from other people

 

When you finally figure out how to set boost power on the Soviet planes, you can teach us.

 

 

 

[CountZero]

26 minutes ago, MattS said:

 

When you finally figure out how to set boost power on the Soviet planes, you can teach us.

 

 

 

You fly with open canopy for whole time, and when you wont a boost you close canopy and vola 20-30kmh boost in speed ?

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

@II./JG52Wolfen_ITA most russian engines are time limited at their maximum power:

The Shevstov M-63 engine in the I-16 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Mikulin AM-35 in the MiG-3 has 10 minutes emergency power limit
The Mikulin AM-38 in the IL-2 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Shevstov ASh-82 engine in the La-5 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Shevstov ASh-82FN engine in the La-5FN has 10 minutes emergency power limit

The ones that can run continuously at their max settings are the Klimovs M-105RA and PF in the Pe-2s, Yaks and LaGGs and ASh-82F in the La-5F modification.

The Klimov M-105P/PA originally had 910 mmHg boost for around 1050 HP, in early 1942 they made field modifications to boost it further to 950 mmHg and 1050 mmHg boost giving around 1100 HP and 1200HP respectively, this field modifications would have been at a limited time period I suppose. Then the engine manufacturer developed the PF variant by strenghtening the design to make it better withstand the increased power settings and that's why after mid 1942 the M-105PF was produced that had this new boost as the nominal engine setting. Later on in 1944 the M-105PF2 was developed that made 1325 HP, this engine powered the Yak-3 and late Yak-9M, this one was also a nominal power setting.

The VK-107 engine in the Yak-9U had a limited time boost for 1700 HP, I think the nominal power setting was around 1550 HP if i'm not mistaken.

The ASh-82F was a similar upgrade like in the case of the M-105PF, the engine was strenghtened and cooling improved to make it able to sustain better the previous emergency mode and make it nominal.

[JtD]

17 hours ago, Jaegermeister said:

Soviet philosophy at the time (according to American view) was to put as many soldiers as possible in simple and reliable equipment

 

Only that Soviet equipment on average wasn't more reliable than other nations. Maybe it was better than Axis equipment some time in 1944, but this is because the Allies were winning and the Axis losing. Due to the simplicity it was easy to use, and the components that weren't there due to simplification could not break down. Means easier maintenance. But I've seen no indication that the overall failure/accident rates in the Soviet air force were significantly lower than in the Luftwaffe, RAF or any other air force.

Edited May 14, 2020 by JtD

[II./JG52Wolfen_ITA]

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

@II./JG52Wolfen_ITA most russian engines are time limited at their maximum power:

The Shevstov M-63 engine in the I-16 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Mikulin AM-35 in the MiG-3 has 10 minutes emergency power limit
The Mikulin AM-38 in the IL-2 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Shevstov ASh-82 engine in the La-5 has 5 minutes emergency power limit
The Shevstov ASh-82FN engine in the La-5FN has 10 minutes emergency power limit

The ones that can run continuously at their max settings are the Klimovs M-105RA and PF in the Pe-2s, Yaks and LaGGs and ASh-82F in the La-5F modification.

The Klimov M-105P/PA originally had 910 mmHg boost for around 1050 HP, in early 1942 they made field modifications to boost it further to 950 mmHg and 1050 mmHg boost giving around 1100 HP and 1200HP respectively, this field modifications would have been at a limited time period I suppose. Then the engine manufacturer developed the PF variant by strenghtening the design to make it better withstand the increased power settings and that's why after mid 1942 the M-105PF was produced that had this new boost as the nominal engine setting. Later on in 1944 the M-105PF2 was developed that made 1325 HP, this engine powered the Yak-3 and late Yak-9M, this one was also a nominal power setting.

The VK-107 engine in the Yak-9U had a limited time boost for 1700 HP, I think the nominal power setting was around 1550 HP if i'm not mistaken.

The ASh-82F was a similar upgrade like in the case of the M-105PF, the engine was strenghtened and cooling improved to make it able to sustain better the previous emergency mode and make it nominal.

 

Thank you for exhaustive answer and full of details m8!. Why i can't push the engine of Mig-3 over the limits ? in my test i make a single mission with start in air (3000mt), after mission begin i don't touch nothing (so the plane go straight) and push the throttle to the maximum speed (i don't touch mixture, manifold etc). The settings are in full realism without any kind of help (exept the external views), where I wrong ? the planes don't breaks after 30 min (I-16 actually breaks the engine between min 7 and min 15).

 

thank you 

Wolfen 

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

10 minutes ago, II./JG52Wolfen_ITA said:

 

Thank you for exhaustive answer and full of details m8!. Why i can't push the engine of Mig-3 over the limits ? in my test i make a single mission with start in air (3000mt), after mission begin i don't touch nothing (so the plane go straight) and push the throttle to the maximum speed (i don't touch mixture, manifold etc). The settings are in full realism without any kind of help (exept the external views), where I wrong ? the planes don't breaks after 30 min (I-16 actually breaks the engine between min 7 and min 15).

 

thank you 

Wolfen 

 

To activate the emergency mode in the Mikulin engines (both the MiG and IL-2) you have to set mixture to 100% and then throttle 100%, you will notice that with full mixture the throttle achieves a higher manifold pressure than at the normal Auto Rich setting at 50%