Complex engine management vs automatic engine management

[LLv24_Veccu_VR]

Hi all!

 

Dunno where should I write this but lets try it here

 

As we all know that german engineering was quite high end in ww2 versus other nations when talking engine management in aeroplanes.

 

Forexample La5 had 6 levers for engine control. All that was done in Bf109 DB engine and in Fw190 BMW801 (commandogerät computer system)  in one lever (thrust-lever) but in this game i do not see a much benefit of this highly professional feature.

Manual engine management type planes are in my opinion still modeled as atleast "half automatic" and there is "invisible octopussy" handling those levers automatically depending on speed, altitude etc. What do you others think? Why it was then invented if there was no benefit of it? Was it? How well the difference is modeled in this game?

 

In the DB system, that "throttle lever" was, in fact, more of a "thrust lever" that automatically controlled the entire trumpet band with a single lever. The automation then adjusted the throttle position, mixture control (DB was a direct injection machine, fuel was injected directly into the cylinder, not the intake manifold), ignition advance and boost pressure (boost pressure adjustment regardless of speed was possible because instead of a fixed transmission there was a fluid switch. In addition to these, the automation also adjusted the flaps of the oil and coolant coolers, although the liquid coolers could also be taken into manual control as well as the propeller blade angle. That 109 "Propeller Clock" was specifically related to that manual adjustment. Prior to take-off, the system was "calibrated" by manually moving the propeller blade angles to the "12:00" position.

 

In La5, rapid acceleration required moving no less than six levers. In contrast, contemporary German aircraft with the BMW 801 used the Kommandogerät engine computer system that automatically controlled all of these settings from a single throttle lever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavochkin_La-5

-Veccu-

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2020 by LLv24_Veccu

[Dagwoodyt]

Accessibility is king.

[cardboard_killer]

28 minutes ago, LLv24_Veccu said:

Why it was then invented if there was no benefit of it?

The benefit is that there is less to deal with during combat. Systems overload is a huge problem for a pilot in combat.

 

How well does IL-2 model the differences? I have a six axis CH throttle quad and all six axes are used when I fly the La-5, but only one when I fly the Bf-109.

[JtD]

If you fly in game the same way you were supposed to do in real life, you'll also have a lot of things to do when changing from cruise to combat. It's just that players don't care as much about fuel consumption and engine life as real life pilots were required to.

[cardboard_killer]

Just now, JtD said:

If you fly in game the same way you were supposed to do in real life, you'll also have a lot of things to do when changing from cruise to combat. It's just that players don't care as much about fuel consumption and engine life as real life pilots were required to.

 

Of course. Players don't care as much about getting shot down either, but unless you pay someone to hold a gun to your head while playing the game that's not going to change.

[CUJO_1970]

No, the automatic feature is not the benefit in the sim as it was in real life. It never has been in any sim.

 

Not sure why you are getting the dumb “confused” emoticon reply’s but yes you are correct.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

10 hours ago, LLv24_Veccu said:

Manual engine management type planes are in my opinion still modeled as atleast "half automatic" and there is "invisible octopussy" handling those levers automatically depending on speed, altitude etc.

 

It sounds like you're playing with the "Engine auto control", "Radiator assist", or "Throttle auto limit" realism simplifications enabled. If you disable these assists, you won't see levers moving without your input. Only then do the effects of the automated systems become clear.

 

25 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Not sure why you are getting the dumb “confused” emoticon reply’s but yes you are correct.

 

Probably because he neglected the above explanation.

[41Sqn_Skipper]

Just because there's a lever for it, doesn't mean it's all manual. The majority of aircraft have a boost control, constant speed propeller and automatic mixture. Some have automatic radiator/oil cooler and automatic switch for supercharger gear.

 

So these systems are indeed "half automatic" and once the lever is set for the desired flight condition they don't need constant adjustments "depending on speed, altitude etc". 

You can set the levers in a configuration that gives sub-optimal performance and this is simulated. However, some additional constraints are not modelled in the sim, e.g. setting high boost at low RPM damages the engine.

 

This can't happen in the "one lever" design. So it's great for combat but it isn't perfect and doesn't give the optimal results in all situations, e.g. RPM still has to be set manually during take-off. It's also not possible to lower or increase boost and still keep optimal RPM for best range.

[the_emperor]

Well, there is still a lot to do in most russion air crafts:

Boost Control

RPM Control (thankfully it is constant a constant speed propeller)

Radatior control for Water and Oil for optiomal perfomance

Fuel mixture: depending on altitude...leaner can give you higher engine perfomance but also runs the engine hoter, so you have to re- adjuste with the radiators...finding the optimal settings during travel is easier than in a combat situation.

and dont forget the gear change for the super charger, otherwise you will have a hard time above 2000m

compared to that engine-management, the german single lever solution is a delight

 

[CUJO_1970]

Nope, auto controls do not have any actual advantage in this sim, as they did in real life.

 

Every control you need is just a key press within reach of all five fingers on one hand on the little keyboard right in front of you. These movements which for some aircraft was an actual workload, can be mimicked in a little more than 1 second on a keyboard. Nothing to realistically mimic how long it takes to work all the buttons and levers on each side of the cockpit -  with your fully gloved banana hands.  And you auto-bind keys to work multi-engine aircraft controls simultaneously. Early P-38 pilots would be shot down or completely distracted before they even had a chance to get their engines adjusted for combat, the workload was burdensome - it was a factor as told by the pilots themselves.

 

Eric Brown and many other pilots specifically mentioned the advantages of the system in addition to an ergonomic cockpit layout and how it compared favorably to other fighters - it was a real advantage, even if smaller on some aircraft - just like a G-suit or seating position was an advantage in certain situations.

 

Is it important and realistic to meticulously recreate how long it takes to operate the 109 flaps by hand? Yes? No? If yes, then maybe ask yourself why it wouldn't it be more realistic to mimic the very real and actual advantage of a single lever system.

 

[LukeFF]

On 12/19/2020 at 2:39 PM, CUJO_1970 said:

Not sure why you are getting the dumb “confused” emoticon reply’s but yes you are correct.

 

You got a "dumb confused" reply from me, because I'm not exactly certain what you are trying to achieve here. With full engine management enabled, the players still have to adjust everything manually - that we are all sitting in front of keyboards is neither here nor there. All of those settings still have to be monitored to ensure they are within the proper operating limits. I know for a fact that when I'm flying a Yak I'm constantly ducking my head down to ensure my temperature levels are within normal limits, and of course that's time taken away from looking outside for where the enemy is.

 

6 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Early P-38 pilots would be shot down or completely distracted before they even had a chance to get their engines adjusted for combat, the workload was burdensome - it was a factor as told by the pilots themselves.

 

Yes, and it was burdensome in part because they were freezing their cajones off and doing all they could just to stay warm and reasonably alert. It wasn't their fault that Lockheed had designed a plane with a cockpit heating system that didn't do jack.

 

6 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Is it important and realistic to meticulously recreate how long it takes to operate the 109 flaps by hand? Yes? No?

 

So, by that logic, everyone needs to have big, clunky handwheels for the flaps and stabilizer fitted to their home cockpits, or else it's, like you said, "Every control you need is just a key press within reach of all five fingers on one hand on the little keyboard right in front of you. These movements which for some aircraft was an actual workload, can be mimicked in a little more than 1 second on a keyboard. Nothing to realistically mimic how long it takes to work all the buttons and levers on each side of the cockpit -  with your fully gloved banana hands."

 

Or, are we just now picking and choosing now which controls need to be just like the real thing?

Edited December 21, 2020 by LukeFF

[CUJO_1970]

7 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Or, are we just now picking and choosing now which controls need to be just like the real thing?

Nope, we already pick and choose which controls need to be just like the real thing, hence the delay with the 109 trim wheel - which is more realistic in it’s implementation - and a nice touch.

 

The OP is simply correct - and I agree with him. There is no advantage to having an automatic system in flight sims versus the real life and sometimes cumbersome and distracting multi-step process required of most aircraft of the era.

 

That fact is not confusing, or controversial. It’s just the truth.

[41Sqn_Skipper]

16 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Nope, we already pick and choose which controls need to be just like the real thing, hence the delay with the 109 trim wheel - which is more realistic in it’s implementation - and a nice touch.

 

The OP is simply correct - and I agree with him. There is no advantage to having an automatic system in flight sims versus the real life and sometimes cumbersome and distracting multi-step process required of most aircraft of the era.

 

That fact is not confusing, or controversial. It’s just the truth.

 

Luckily there are a few aircraft in the sim without automatic systems: P40 without boost control and Hs 129 without proper constant speed propeller. Anyone who thinks the advantage of automatic systems is not modelled is free to try them for a few minutes and see if a magic octopus appears and moves the levers. 

Edited December 21, 2020 by 41Sqn_Skipper

[CUJO_1970]

Can you bind both engines to a single key? Thanks for playing and don’t forget to water your octopus  ?
 

It’s cool, you either don’t want to see the actual point and give it the merit it deserves, or want to water it down with semantics and whatabouts - which I’m not interested in. 
 

Peace out. 

[cardboard_killer]

9 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

semantics and whatabouts -

 

I don't really see the point either. I don't bind multi engines, I use the six throttles I have for twin engines (I don't fly the tri engine plane). Engine management is more cumbersome than automatic binding in the game. Is it as cumbersome as it was in real life? Of course not. Next tell us how water is wet and how we are all wrong not to agree with you.

[CUJO_1970]

11 minutes ago, cardboard_killer said:

 

I don't really see the point either. I don't bind multi engines, I use the six throttles I have for twin engines (I don't fly the tri engine plane). Engine management is more cumbersome than automatic binding in the game. Is it as cumbersome as it was in real life? Of course not. Next tell us how water is wet and how we are all wrong not to agree with you.

OK, nice cat. Looks just like mine ?

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

The engine controls for the La-5 are:

Throttle
Boost (not in the FN)
RPM
Mixture (not in the FN)
Supercharger
Engine cowling front shutters
Engine cowling rear shutters
Oil Radiator Shutters.

And all of them are manual and need to be managed in the game, nothing is automatic when using the expert difficulty mode.

Like JtD says, in game players (and specially multiplayer) aren't cruising at max economy settings, so they keep the RPM, mixture, supercharger, and cooling controls set for the auto rich maximum continuous operation... they don't have to do a combat air patrol for as much as they can stay in the air over the frontline until bingo fuel, or escort a bomber flight that has to hit a target 300km away, they just make a 40 min sortie and then either get shotdown or return to the closest airfield a couple dozen km away.

Veccu's post implies the planes don't have their manual features modelled properly and that there are automatic systems regulating them instead, but that's wrong. It's just that in the game's environment there is no need to do stuff like cruising at mid altitudes with weak mixture, first supercharger speed and low RPM, specially in the typical multiplayer mission.

Edited December 22, 2020 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[Caudron431]

On 12/21/2020 at 2:06 AM, CUJO_1970 said:

 Early P-38 pilots would be shot down or completely distracted before they even had a chance to get their engines adjusted for combat, the workload was burdensome - it was a factor as told by the pilots themselves.

 

[...]

 

 

 

I would say "as told by the "inexperienced pilot in a disadvantageous tactical situation" themselves"...

 

I think it is overexagerated to compare a complex  early twin engined fighter with an automated 109 in an advantage position to try to make your point. Fact is the more you are trained and experienced the less time you would need to trim your aircraft.

 

In this sim you still have to spend more time learning non automated aircraft than the amount you need to for automated aircraft.

 

 

[FeuerFliegen]

On 12/21/2020 at 10:59 AM, CUJO_1970 said:

OK, nice cat. Looks just like mine ?

 

I had no idea there was another orange cat owning, IL-2 playing, living in Atlanta, person out there.  

 

 

On 12/21/2020 at 9:54 AM, CUJO_1970 said:

There is no advantage to having an automatic system in flight sims versus the real life and sometimes cumbersome and distracting multi-step process required of most aircraft of the era.

 

I wouldn't say there's zero advantage; just much less advantage compared to real life.  But there's definitely SOME advantage... think of all the times someone gets into a dogfight and is distracted and forgets to adjust radiators for max performance, forgets to switch supercharger gears or mixture if there is an altitude change, etc.

[Yogiflight]

On 12/21/2020 at 8:35 AM, LukeFF said:

"Every control you need is just a key press within reach of all five fingers on one hand on the little keyboard right in front of you.

Keyboard? How old school I would have thought most people now have everything assigned to their throttle and stick and fly all HOTAS

As much as I can understand the OP but in a computer game it never will be equal for all players in MP. There will always be someone with better hardware, like PC, graphics card, joystick or what ever. So asking for fair cirumstances will always be like being Don Quijote, fighting with windmills.

Wait until we get drop tanks and the fighter jockeys fly with their drop tanks to the dogfights, jettison them and fight with 10% fuel. Isn't it all for fun?

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Wait until we get drop tanks and the fighter jockeys fly with their drop tanks to the dogfights, jettison them and fight with 10% fuel.

 

I highly doubt the developers will allow that sort of nonsense to be a thing whenever drop tanks are added.

[=621=Samikatz]

2 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

Wait until we get drop tanks and the fighter jockeys fly with their drop tanks to the dogfights, jettison them and fight with 10% fuel. Isn't it all for fun?

 

I feel like the drag from the pylons would somewhat negate the weight min-maxing. Besides that, do people not try to fly home? You can't bolt those bags back on after throwing them off into the sunset

[357th_KW]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

I highly doubt the developers will allow that sort of nonsense to be a thing whenever drop tanks are added.

?‍♂️  There aren’t good tools for managing player fuel levels in multiplayer right now.  Plenty of aircraft get flown around at extremely low fuel levels.  But it sure would be neat to see that addressed.

[Yogiflight]

9 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

I feel like the drag from the pylons would somewhat negate the weight min-maxing. Besides that, do people not try to fly home? You can't bolt those bags back on after throwing them off into the sunset

In my experience the drag of fuselage pylons is neglectable, only wing pylons are really an issue. From what I know the FW 190 A8 for eyample, usually was used with the fuselage pylon anyway.

To your question, isn't it enough in MP to get to your own side to be safe? I saw some videos of MP missions and the pilots never really cared if they would be able to return in the time the mission was still running.

[41Sqn_Skipper]

42 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

In my experience the drag of fuselage pylons is neglectable, only wing pylons are really an issue. From what I know the FW 190 A8 for eyample, usually was used with the fuselage pylon anyway.

To your question, isn't it enough in MP to get to your own side to be safe? I saw some videos of MP missions and the pilots never really cared if they would be able to return in the time the mission was still running.

 

Depending on the server, the aircraft number of each type and airfield is limited, so landing on the airfield is necessary (some even have repair/rearm/refuel points).

 

Flying with near empty internal tank + drop tank shouldn't be possible for aircraft that pump the the content of the drop tank through the internal tank.