Spitfire mk. XIV engine management

[Razah]

hi there,

i recently started flying mk xiv and after flying almost exclusively 109 and 190 it gave me some troubles. 

I fly on 100 octane fuel.

i had the engine die on me thrice. 1st time was on take off, i applied full throttle too fast and it died, second time was just me overworking it to death. Third time was in a normal dogfight i went idle throttle to tighten the loop, and it died - I'm 100% sure i didn't overwork it, it was right after previous seizure, and i was very conservative about rpm and throttle.

Right now for the cruise i use 2400 rmp plus enough throttle to get me to 7 pounds of boost. 

For fighting i open up throttle to about 80% and increase rpm to the point where i get 12 pounds of boost.

I'm afraid of loosing the engine again. (I'm not afraid to go to balls to the wall and 16 pounds of boost in an emergency for few minutes)

Could you guys give me some tips how improve the performance without killing the engine? On yt, i saw tutorials with people saying to use 2650 rpm and 12 pounds of boost, and that i can fly for an hour on this setting. Is it the case? (I'm getting max 2600 on 100% throttle)

Another thing that i need to wrap my head around is the siren i get (even at high speed) when i reduce throttle too much. What's that about? Is there a way to go idle in flight without choking the engine?

Am i the only one who hates the compass on this plane? The directional gyro get's stuck during maneuvers, and it's so annoying to look at the compass in flight. 

It may look like i'm moaning, but i actually really enjoy the plane, and just want to get better with it, thanks! 

Edited August 3, 2022 by Razah

[CountZero]

12lbs and 2600rpm is not 1h combat mode, its some time betwen 5 and 1h and its mutch closer to 5min but you aint gona know what time exactly, also if you go by techchat combat messages they are wrongly saying to you your in combat mode at that state, youll brake your engine by engine timer like that, and because bugged message that tells you when you run out of engine timer devs decided you have , you have NO way to know that your in random fail time.

 

We have temp gauges and still we get messages teling us we are overheating engine, but we dont get most important messages that tells us when our engines will get tosted, with ths arcade engine timer system lol

 

In real life engine timer would not kill your engines this stricktly like we have in game, because its game, so pilots didnt have to know when exactly his 1-3-5 or 15min timer is out. In game this is important to know because your engines will just randomly get tosted by engine timers, and only way for player to know when his safe engine time is out or recovered is by techcat message, same ones that dont work in game , great system they build lol

 

There is reason why for tanks, hud displays compas even on expert mode, real tanks didnt have that, but because its game some things need to be there to inform player about things he would know about in real, same thing is with info about safe engine timer expired/recovered. In real pilot didnt have to be so accurate with it as we have too be in game, so he didnt have to know exact time (that changes alot depending on alts and power its not simple and strick time) like we need in game.

Edited August 3, 2022 by CountZero

[Razah]

Hi, thank you for reply, I don't use techno chat, i try to "fly planes by the ear". In 109 i mostly paid attention to ATA and temps, in 190 i look at tachometer first, than ATA, than temps, but i'm still at the loss how to sqeeze the most possible performance out of griffon.

I think the engine damage on "emergency" power, or close to it comes from shaft rotating too fast and damaging the engine, not overheating it. 

That's why i'm trying to figure out where's the slim line between engine damage and max performance for 30minutes to an hour of flight time, measurable in engine parameters.  

Edited August 3, 2022 by Razah

[Gingerwelsh]

@Razah

 

Spit XIV, My favourite.

 

I have 55 career kills in this plane, mostly 109 14 and 190 D9.

I run the engine at 2600 max during fights and have never had an engine break and have never found it needed any more revs against said opponents.

Temps are never a problem, it's cold in Feb but keep the speed up. Be gentle with the throttle, it will kill the engine if pushed too quickly.

I always start in the air and land back at base, no techno chat.

 

The siren tells you the wheels are up.

I never use the gyro for anything other than transit flight.

 

GLuck..

[Razah]

Hi guys, thank you for replies. From what @Gingerwelsh said i think what have killed my engine wasn't the idle, but going power on again. About the siren, in this case i can just ignore it? About the throttle at 2600rpm, do you go with 12 pounds of boost in combat? 2400 rpm with about 80% throttle gives 12 pounds too. Is there any reason why 2600 with less throttle is better? Thanks!

[von_Tom]

2 hours ago, CountZero said:

and only way for player to know when his safe engine time is out or recovered is by techcat message, same ones that dont work in game , great system they build lol

 

 

All aircraft have a clock.  Check the time before you use the extra power and make sure you come off it just before your time runs out.  Works for me.

 

@Razah I've found that very fast throttle movements can cause the engine to die, mostly when the throttle has been cut back for a while then shoved forwards.  The lesson is - be gentle.

 

von Tom

[Gingerwelsh]

33 minutes ago, Razah said:

Hi guys, thank you for replies. From what @Gingerwelsh said i think what have killed my engine wasn't the idle, but going power on again. About the siren, in this case i can just ignore it? About the throttle at 2600rpm, do you go with 12 pounds of boost in combat? 2400 rpm with about 80% throttle gives 12 pounds too. Is there any reason why 2600 with less throttle is better? Thanks!

 

Ignore the siren except when landing. ?

 

I use full throttle, 18lb or 21 lb in combat at 2600, depending on late or early career, but pull back at every opportunity.

Missions are usually no more than 30 mins. 2750 is there if you feel the need, but I just use 2600 and forget about it.

2400 is for cruising only.

 

..

[Jade_Monkey]

[Gingerwelsh]

2600 rpm at 18lb boost is good for 15 mins before the engine starts to conk. then you have 3 mins when it will seize.

2650 rpm, same. Reduce boost to 8lb when engine starts to conk and you will get 12 mins extra to get you home.

2700 rpm........ 10 mins to total seizure.

2750 rpm......... 7 mins to total seizure.

 

Speed at 1000' ASL was exactly the same for all cases, at 363 mph TAS.

 

IRL you would probably use 2750, but they didn't have a timer to worry about.

 

..

Edited August 30, 2022 by Gingerwelsh

[Razah]

Thank you guys, that's exactly what i was looking for! Special props to @Jade_Monkey  for the chart. 

[Jade_Monkey]

Here is the post with the full guide for all planes:

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/32596-quick-reference-printout-engine-settings-limits-temps/

[[CPT]Crunch]

Up till now I've hated Spitfires, but this one is something else.  Seems overpowered for my needs, running it pretty much 2600 RPM's the whole sortie, have never had any issues besides fuel consumption.  Nothing is safe against this beast.  I like the excess power in sustained turns, the way you can back off the throttle and the turn tightens without changing the stick or trim.  Takes a while to master the rudder, but when you do it's magical in a knife fight.  This plane is a killer in the right hands, the other side has nothing in comparison.  I love it when the Fw jocks try doing the Maverick overshoot trick, surprise!

[EAF19_Marsh]

On 8/3/2022 at 2:43 PM, von_Tom said:

 

All aircraft have a clock.  Check the time before you use the extra power and make sure you come off it just before your time runs out.  Works for me.

 

@Razah

 

That this sort of thing is necessary makes me wince. 

Edited August 30, 2022 by EAF19_Marsh

[ZachariasX]

8 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

That this sort of thing is necessary makes me wince. 

Yet I am very certain that if you sat in an Mk14 today and you felt like pulling 18 inches, you would be taking note of that clock and you‘d even remember to tell the mechanic after the flight how many minutes that was.

[EAF19_Marsh]

3 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Yet I am very certain that if you sat in an Mk14 today and you felt like pulling 18 inches, you would be taking note of that clock and you‘d even remember to tell the mechanic after the flight how many minutes that was.

 

"Help, I've got one on my tail and have had emergency rating on for 4 minutes and 17 seconds so I shortly need to throttle back for 5 minutes before I can re-engage maximum power!"

 

Was a radio call made by zero pilots 1939-45.

 

OTOH, after the flight and for the purposes of Form 700 you might well have admitted to your mechanic that you have cranked the ever-living shizzle out of the engine and frankly it probably needs some serious TLC. But that is war and no one would have raised an eyebrow.

[ZachariasX]

I said

32 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

if you sat in an Mk14 today

then you would take note. And probably you wouldn't be radio calling that much while doing it. Me saying the above was meant a bit tongue-in-cheek.

 

27 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

But that is war and no one would have raised an eyebrow.

Yes, certainly not. And given these kind of engines don't even need a proper reason to fail, the effect of casual (not systemic) engine abuse towards squadron readiness is probably less obvious than one might think.

[EAF19_Marsh]

1 hour ago, ZachariasX said:

I said

then you would take note. And probably you wouldn't be radio calling that much while doing it. Me saying the above was meant a bit tongue-in-cheek.

 

Well, yes, you would as the insurance is pretty high. As the sim is set in 1944-45 then clearly you would likely not in the air down to the last 10 seconds of boost setting but probably would mention it to your ground crew.

 

Quote

Yes, certainly not. And given these kind of engines don't even need a proper reason to fail, the effect of casual (not systemic) engine abuse towards squadron readiness is probably less obvious than one might think.

 

Aircraft of WW2 vintage failed for lots of reasons. Pilot abuse was one of them. As has been stated continuously, they did not fail at x+1 second over what the manual said unless the pilot was very unlucky and that aircraft was something of a lemon. Most failures were proceeded by warning signs mostly from T&Ps, which is the reason why the instruments were installed. A rough-running or abused engine was inspected very carefully and in most situations likely would not be cleared to fly the next day if the crew had misgivings about it. They still failed at random intervals, but that was the tech and production / tolerance limits of the time. Simulating that would not be much fun for most players.

 

So, push the engine all you want but the readouts will and should show that you are entering dangerous territory when temp and oil etc start to sit against the red lines and will not decline. That is - IMHO - closer to the actual operation of the systems in question and makes more sense for a sim than an invisible stopwatch. I think CLOD did it the former way, as in too much abuse and it was almost impossible to get the engine to cool without full rads and very low power for a prolonged period, which in a DF meant you were highly vulnerable and were better off heading home. Such an approach also has the correct 'game effect' in that a pilot worried about their engine and with clearly visible signs that he or she was in great danger can choose to break off. Counting off from your clock is not really the same thing, nor is it how aircraft were flown. The manual data is indicative of what can be expected to occur rather than a hard limit to the second.

 

But no point further beating the poor dead donkey.

 

 

[CountZero]

Also just saying look at clock is not gona make it work in this game, timer is not same all the time proven from tests, its longer or shorter depending on engine setting or alt, its not that when your in combat mode timer is always same or in emergancy its always 1 or 5 min, so you cant just look at clock and know how mutch is left or more importantly when you can use it again, thats something your imposible to know from clock. Its like saying i df ai and dont use trim or flaps and do ok... yes but if you df human who knows how to trim his airplane and use flaps in df your not gona do ok as you have to push it to limits... you cant push engine to safe limits as you dont know when your timer expires or when it gets fully recovered so you can use it again. Its like you dont have info at what angle your flaps are or your trim is... but yes i do ok vs AI lol so its ok.

Yes in clod you look at your engine like real pilots had to do you lisen what your engine is telling you, you dont need techchat or count min or secounds... its more natural, i liked to play with manual 109 or hurri there, here anything with more then 1 short timer is cringe to play with and i avoid it because of important techchat bugs still not fixed, here game needs techchat and info there to be correct, game is build around it, also any server online that is popular have it on for a reason.

Edited August 30, 2022 by CountZero

[von_Tom]

 

When I've used the clock I have never had an engine failure.  I have had (quite a few) engine failures from abusing the engine (simply forgetting to bring back the boost or rpm etc) or running high settings for too long, or perhaps not realising the second supercharger on the FW190 has kicked in, or when not ensuring it was properly cool etc.  That was pilot error, not a game mechanic.

 

What folks really seem to be saying is that they don't want any limitations, or at least limitations that prevent them from abusing their engines.  That doesn't sound realistic to me and, as it is, the time limits set in the manual appear to be a good guide.  I suppose a more workable alternative would be to slowly break engine components, with a percentage chance of catastrophic engine failure at points after the timer, but that's it.  I don't know if the game engine will allow that.

 

Edit:  I don't use the technocrat so I have nothing to tell me if I'm at combat or whatever power, or when a timer might expire.  Same for in CLOD where I used to like the E1 and juggling ATA and pitch a lot.  My engine died a lot in that until I figured it out and was more conservative.

 

von Tom

 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by von_Tom

[EAF19_Marsh]

14 hours ago, von_Tom said:

What folks really seem to be saying is that they don't want any limitations, or at least limitations that prevent them from abusing their engines.

Where does it say that? What ‘folks don’t want’ is an invisible stopwatch (totally ahistorical) tied vaguely to instruments that do not seem to match or offer sufficient coherence to understand how best to take advantage of engine limits.

[ZachariasX]

3 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Where does it say that? What ‘folks don’t want’ is an invisible stopwatch (totally ahistorical) tied vaguely to instruments that do not seem to match or offer sufficient coherence to understand how best to take advantage of engine limits.

Problem is that this game by no means really simulates all the effects that can quickly destroy even a supposedly tough engine. You fly as you are used in the game in such aircraft for real, you will walk home. Best case. E.g. just yanking the controls back followed by full throttle (a standard move in one circle moves) may well kill your engine. In real aircraft, you are very, very careful in setting the throttle in real aircraft, to the degree where it is a concious and careful setting of a specified power output *and then you leave it during the flight sequence for which you intended the power setting*. Nothing in the game simulates engine demise for being cranked by the prop after sudden power reduction without reducing rpm first. Things like that. It's not just heat in water and oil that kills the engine. It can well die with your gauges showing all ok. You can leave a smoke trail with gauges showing a-ok. I just don't  think that something as complex as engine wear can reasonably be realized at this price point (of our game) to enable what you are suggesting. And when you have that, people wouldn't understand that you can destroy "tough" engines with moves they deem fine. How uneasy pilots are wiggling the throttle is demonstrated by the happy use of the radiator flaps as airbrake to control the speed in formation flying instead of using the throtte.

 

I would absolutely love if we had what you are suggesting, but I don't think it is feasible to implement it in robust manner for 10$ a plane.

[EAF19_Marsh]

Totally agree with what you are saying and in many ways it is beyond an easy solution. I think it could be provided only as a difficulty level choice, it just bothers me that there is a vague number out there floating in the aether and if I forget to check my clock I might run afoul of it despite the primary gauges showing nothing much untoward. But as you point out, a lot of sim. flying inevitably 'games the game' and developing an engine (pun!) that minimised this would be extremely difficult.

 

But nevertheless, engines dying after a given time period with no rough treatment and no indication through instruments or other feedback seems wrong. If I get a chance I'll try a few flights with auto-level and see how it is with current version. Maybe it is better than I remember for mature engines.

 

 

 

 

[Supercharger]

47 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

But nevertheless, engines dying after a given time period with no rough treatment and no indication through instruments or other feedback seems wrong.

You are absolutely right, this is a weak spot in this simulation. I never saw any kind of unusual indications before the engine quit, currently the engine instruments (oil&fuel press. etc...)are just for optical correctness.

[the_emperor]

5 minutes ago, Supercharger said:

this is a weak spot in this simulation. I never saw any kind of unusual indications before the engine quit, currently the engine instruments (oil&fuel press. etc...)are just for optical correctness.

This, you not only need a good fm simulation but also a good engine model simulation.

and with the current premise the we always get a brand new aircraft and dont have to care for for a long engine life I would rather have it the CloD way:

 

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

They already have a natural feeling system with the yaks, I wish they made all planes that way. Compare the yak to most other planes. In the yak you watch your temps and balance power/rads/mix/speed etc and are flying based on feedback from your plane. Theres no strict timer and you aren't blasting 100 throttle/rpm all the time if your playing smart either, you're banking temperature for when you'll need it later. They could do the same for the other planes, and have a loose timer that gets displayed as the temperature and can be manipulated by whatever the plane has access to. All planes can at the minimum increase airspeed and manage throttle. This would be much more realistic and fun then flying by the clock instead of your planes feedback.

[blockheadgreen_]

Currently the Spit IX and XIV are missing their automatic prop and throttle controls which would make engine management easier. In Spitfires so equipped the prop control was automatic and tied to engine boost, and although there was an override whereby you could select an RPM setting higher than that provided automatically by the boost setting, it was not possible to choose a lower setting (this was possible in the XIV but was only allowed in severe emergencies). It was one of the things which differentiated the IX and XVI; the Packard Merlin 266 was not equipped for the interconnection system during the war and on at least one occasion that fact killed a pilot whose Squadron had previously flown the LF IX - in the LF IX one pulled the prop lever fully aft after takeoff to engage the interconnection system, but in a XVI this would just select the lowest possible RPM as in earlier Spitfires. This pilot habitually pulled the lever back just after takeoff and plummeted into the ground.

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, Lythronax said:

Currently the Spit IX and XIV are missing their automatic prop and throttle controls which would make engine management easier.

Thing is that for instance the torque of the engine far outpaces the prop pitch governor. If you are at low power and just shove the throttle forward in this arrangement, the engine and prop will drastically overspeed very quickly leaving your engine in a state that should convince you to abort takeoff. The engine picks up power very quickly. Almost like in a car. It is not like we have it in game in the Fw190D9, where after shoving throttle forward, it takes an agonizing long time for the engine to spool up. From my understanding *IF* the D9 had such a slow governor (ther Merlins governor is slower than what we have in the aircraft I sat in, but not that slow; however this is subjective feeling and not solid data), the engine should overspeed as well by opening throttle quickly. I doubt that any version of Kommandogerät has a feedback mechanism to retard throttle in case of overspeed. But would be cool if it had.

[CUJO_1970]

Yeah, but the Dora is a joke in this sim.

[Dr_Molem]

2 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Yeah, but the Dora is a joke in this sim.

 

How so ? 

[blockheadgreen_]

26 minutes ago, Dr_Molem said:

 

How so ? 

I presume for some it doesn't match the preconceived notions people have of it from loose historical anecdotes as a Mustang equivalent, when that probably wasn't the truth - especially with the sorry state of the German aircraft industry at the time. In-sim it seems to match contemporary performance figures as recorded by the manufacturer, which is good enough for me.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Lythronax

[CountZero]

All i know is that if overheat message didnt work in techchat, and worked only when you also turn on panel info, there would be ppl saying whats the problem its intended to be like that player can just look at cockpit gauge and see when he gets abow temps set in spec page.

Not acnoladging the problem with message not showing up in techchat when only techchat is turned on in realsiam settings, techchat is in game to help player with thouse type of info, so expired and recovered techchat mesages should be fixed to work when only techchat is turned on, and fixing that would make it atleast deacent to use this timers, then you can decide to stop when game wonts you to stop or go abow in random fail time, how its now you have option with techchat off for players who play like that (no servers with that off, so not popular) or techchat on for ppl who dont wont to guess when game wonts you to stop using emergancy and so on...exept messages dont work if only that is on, they are tied for no reason to info panel (HUD) on, what hud on have to do with engine messages, whats the point in having them tied to that realisam option, no point, its clear bug.

To me this is simple bug, messages exist, they show up only when both techchat and info panel is on, so cause of error is known, it should be simple to fix and it would make bad engine timers atleast controlable.

Just fined correct 0 and turn 0 to 1, and itz fixed ?

Edited August 31, 2022 by CountZero

[RossMarBow]

Most planes with controllable RPM can sustain maximum cruise speed at something like 59-69% rpm
while leaving boost at the 1 hour timer in the spit

 

added bonus of reducing fuel consumption, head, and extending timers

 

But quite a few planes will loose their engine if you chop the throttle to zero then firewall it again
Only cut it to 25-50% and you should be ok

 

Or just cut rpm to 50% for turning that will probably help you tighten the turn as much and no risk of engine breaking
it won't reduce your speed as fast as cutting pressure though

 

Personally I would recommend you try the spit9 out first - don't forget with 150oct super is manual 
I only fly the spit XIV with 150oct and only with a very narrow plan of use 

Edited September 2, 2022 by RossMarBow

[FTC_Evans]

Does anyone know when using 150 octane what alt you should manually change the supercharger for the spit XIV?

[RossMarBow]

On 8/4/2022 at 12:12 AM, Razah said:

Hi guys, thank you for replies. From what @Gingerwelsh said i think what have killed my engine wasn't the idle, but going power on again. About the siren, in this case i can just ignore it? About the throttle at 2600rpm, do you go with 12 pounds of boost in combat? 2400 rpm with about 80% throttle gives 12 pounds too. Is there any reason why 2600 with less throttle is better? Thanks!

Never cut to zero pressure in any plane with manual rpm
most planes will die if you cut pressure to zero then firewall it 
I think higher rpm is set more dangerous it is?
p47 has the same problem
If you only cut to 25-33% pressure that should slow you down the same if you keep rpm at 100
without a risk of blowing it up

honestly the XIV is a hard plane to fly well
you have to fly it like a d9, but you also have to be super careful with how you use the engine
cause its a pig in the green but your good modes are so short

If you want to fly fast keep RPM lower
If RPM is too high you will actually be bleeding speed to engine drag when your doing a high speed boom and zoom

"Is there any reason why 2600 with less throttle is better?"
It's not unless you are doing a slow speed climb

[Mad_Mikhael]

9 hours ago, Evans_ said:

Does anyone know when using 150 octane what alt you should manually change the supercharger for the spit XIV?

Source: 

 

[FeuerFliegen]

On 7/4/2023 at 4:30 PM, Evans_ said:

Does anyone know when using 150 octane what alt you should manually change the supercharger for the spit XIV?

 

It depends on what power setting you're at.  A lower power setting should be switched later than a high power setting.  2nd gear can provide more boost at certain altitudes, but also uses about 200hp more than 1st gear, so there needs to be a substantial jump in manifold pressure to be worth it.