Can P-40 engine timers finally get fixed?

[GrungyMonkey]

I check this thread for updates more often than is healthy lol

[LukeFF]

[Mtnbiker1998]

That was my question for the upcoming Q&A, fingers crossed on some good news!

[CountZero]

6 hours ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

That was my question for the upcoming Q&A, fingers crossed on some good news!

i think youll have better chance of getting answer if you just ask:

 

P-40M ?

and then day after you ask:

 

P-40N ?

[GrungyMonkey]

14 hours ago, CountZero said:

i think youll have better chance of getting answer if you just ask:

 

P-40M ?

and then day after you ask:

 

P-40N ?

My deepest desire is to have a chance for the P-40E to develop 1780 horsepower, just once

[GrungyMonkey]

On 11/1/2023 at 4:39 AM, Roland_HUNter said:

Even the P-40N with 57 inch Hg, could not achieve more than 314 mph(505 kmh) on SL. (P-40N is 300 kg lighter than the E-1 ingame)
E-1: 8420 lb
N: 7900 lb
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-40/P-40N-RAAF.pdf

And for the E version, I've not found any report of using the 56 inch Hg, only 44-46 inch Hg.

Here is the E engine chart:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-40/P-40E_V-1710-39_specific_engine_flight_chart.jpg

It's allowing 56 inch Hg for 5 min, but there is no speed test.

If you can find one, I would gladly read it.

Your P-40N test seems to be from before the gun count was reduced and other weight reduction changes, so the actual N-1 model was a good bit lighter and faster.

Here's a good collection of tests. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-40/P-40.html

 

The P-40E was never tested at 56 inches, but we can estimate pretty well how it would fly.

560 kmh/348 mph is certainly high for 56 inches/1470 hp. On the other hand, 66 inches/1745 hp was not an uncommon limit.

I'm not sure what speeds were acheived with that horsepower, but they were likely absurd by 1942 standards.

[NO.20_Krispy_Duck]

I would buy a collector mid or late type P-40, be it the Merlin F, or the later L, M, or N series. Would not be the first time a line of planes has been expanded using collector slots.

Edited January 26, 2024 by NO.20_Krispy_Duck

[GrungyMonkey]

Any changes?

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, GrungyMonkey said:

Any changes?

 

Look at the 5.202 update notes.  

[GrungyMonkey]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Look at the 5.202 update notes.  

Just saw it, this is awesome!

[the_emperor]

you can even push her to ~ 69inches at SL for some time and keep her there to reach 580kph...feels now like a good representation of the Allisons durability. 

Edited February 20, 2024 by the_emperor

[silvergun]

With the new 1942 engine and a clean configuration at SL (winter Moscow map):

 

P-40E-1: "73~75" inch Hg, reach 623 km/h (387 mph) ?

 

Other late war fighters in the same conditions:

 

Spitfire Mk.XIVe: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 618 km/h (384 mph);

Spitfire Mk.IXe: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

P-47D-28: 70 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

Bf 109 G-14: 1.7 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379mph);

Fw 190 D-9: 1.8 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379 mph).

 

P-51B-5: 81 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel (V-1650-7), reach 675 km/h (419 mph); ?

Bf 109 K-4: 1.98 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DC), reach 648 km/h (402 mph);

Mosquito F.B Mk.VI: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 642 km/h (399 mph);

Bf 109 K-4: 1.8 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DB), reach 635 km/h (394 mph);

Spitfire Mk.XIV: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 629 km/h (391 mph).

 

*The transition from autumn to winter maps brings speed increases at SL of up to 7.5/8% (P-51B, P-40E, Mosquito), 5.5%/5.9% (Bf 109 K-4, G- 14), and nothing for the Fw 190 D-9. ?

 

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by silvergun

[CUJO_1970]

I take it this is being done with the high boost / prop pitch bug? That would cause detonation and ruin the engine in real life - didn’t realize that exploit still existed in the sim. 

[Hook_Echo]

On 2/20/2024 at 8:07 PM, CUJO_1970 said:

I take it this is being done with the high boost / prop pitch bug? That would cause detonation and ruin the engine in real life - didn’t realize that exploit still existed in the sim. 

The P-40 doesn't have a manifold pressure governor, so you can over boost it. I get 360 mph at sea level on Kuban autumn. You get 2 mins of engine timer at 69 inches. You have to run about 35% open cowls to keep from overheating.

 

The D9 is a weird one to compare on winter maps. For some reason the D9 doesn't get as much speed boost at winter temps compared to other planes. It does 375 mph on Kuban autumn.

Edited February 22, 2024 by Hook_Echo
corrected manifold pressure mistake

[CUJO_1970]

3 minutes ago, Hook_Echo said:

The P-40 doesn't have a manifold pressure governor, so you can over boost it. I get 360 mph at sea level on Kuban autumn. You get 2 mins of engine timer at 75 inches. You have to run about 35% open cowls to keep from overheating.

Understood about the pressure governor - but, you have to lower RPM at high boost correct? That’s a no no, because it causes detonation. 
 

[Hook_Echo]

@CUJO_1970 No you leave it at 3000 rpm and crank it to 75 in. The boost/prop pitch exploit won't work on the P-40 to extend the timer. It only works on planes with a combat setting that has rpm lower than WEP. Planes with combat rpm equal to WEP rpm, might gain a few mph, like 5 max, but they don't get any timer extension. And in the P-40 case if you lower the rpm from 3000 you can't get the full 75 in. The manifold pressure will drop too.

 

Edit: I don't really have any data on increasing speed with slightly lower rpm. The only plane I have data for is the Spit IX and the speed is the same at 2900 and 3000 rpm.

 

Edit 2: I just tested the P-40 again. On the autumn map

3000 rpm

69 in (that's the max on the autumn map)

30% cowl (minimum to not overheat)

362 mph

 

2900 rpm

65.5 in (max at 2900 rpm)

25% cowl

354 mph

 

3000 rpm

56 in

0% cowl

336 mph

 

2900 rpm

56 in

0% cowl

332 mph

 

Edited February 21, 2024 by Hook_Echo

[GrungyMonkey]

23 hours ago, the_emperor said:

you can even push her to ~ 69inches at SL for some time and keep her there to reach 580kph...feels now like a good representation of the Allisons durability. 

We are so back

22 hours ago, silvergun said:

With the new 1942 engine and a clean configuration at SL (winter Moscow map):

 

P-40E-1: "73~75" inch Hg, reach 623 km/h (387 mph) ?

 

Other late war fighters in the same conditions:

 

Spitfire Mk.XIVe: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 618 km/h (384 mph);

Spitfire Mk.IXe: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

P-47D-28: 70 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

Bf 109 G-14: 1.7 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379mph);

Fw 190 D-9: 1.8 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379 mph).

 

P-51B-5: 81 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel (V-1650-7), reach 675 km/h (419 mph); ?

Bf 109 K-4: 1.98 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DC), reach 648 km/h (402 mph);

Mosquito F.B Mk.VI: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 642 km/h (399 mph);

Bf 109 K-4: 1.8 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DB), reach 635 km/h (394 mph);

Spitfire Mk.XIV: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 629 km/h (391 mph).

 

*The transition from autumn to winter maps brings speed increases at SL of up to 7.5/8% (P-51B, P-40E, Mosquito), 5.5%/5.9% (Bf 109 K-4, G- 14), and nothing for the Fw 190 D-9. ?

 

 

The P-40 just became a gem for late war maps.

 

Outstanding turn, great dive, and now it can even beat a G14 in a deck chase?!

 

Obviously you can only run full throttle for a minute or so, but it just went from dead meat to treetop king.

Edited February 21, 2024 by GrungyMonkey
Removed swastika

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

7 hours ago, GrungyMonkey said:

We are so back

  Reveal hidden contents

The P-40 just became a gem for late war maps.

 

Outstanding turn, great dive, and now it can even beat a G14 in a deck chase?!

 

Obviously you can only run full throttle for a minute or so, but it just went from dead meat to treetop king.

I would love an N model.

[GrungyMonkey]

2 hours ago, =DW=_Drewm3i-VR said:

I would love an N model.

Reposting the chart I spent way too much time on:

 

It's a lot slower than the P-40E running 75 inches, but it would also turn way better. I agree it's a great choice.

[Roland_HUNter]

22 hours ago, silvergun said:

With the new 1942 engine and a clean configuration at SL (winter Moscow map):

 

P-40E-1: "73~75" inch Hg, reach 623 km/h (387 mph) ?

 

Other late war fighters in the same conditions:

 

Spitfire Mk.XIVe: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 618 km/h (384 mph);

Spitfire Mk.IXe: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

P-47D-28: 70 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel, reach 611 km/h (380 mph);

Bf 109 G-14: 1.7 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379mph);

Fw 190 D-9: 1.8 ata with MW-50, reach 610 km/h (379 mph).

 

P-51B-5: 81 inch Hg with 150 grade fuel (V-1650-7), reach 675 km/h (419 mph); ?

Bf 109 K-4: 1.98 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DC), reach 648 km/h (402 mph);

Mosquito F.B Mk.VI: 25 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 642 km/h (399 mph);

Bf 109 K-4: 1.8 ata with MW-50 (DB-605DB), reach 635 km/h (394 mph);

Spitfire Mk.XIV: 21 lb with 150 grade fuel, reach 629 km/h (391 mph).

 

*The transition from autumn to winter maps brings speed increases at SL of up to 7.5/8% (P-51B, P-40E, Mosquito), 5.5%/5.9% (Bf 109 K-4, G- 14), and nothing for the Fw 190 D-9. ?

 

 

A-8 winter speed: 612 km/h.
In the past I already reported something is wrong with the D-9, but some kind of "explanation" was "accepted".

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/75864-fw-190-d-9-do-i-doing-something-wrong/

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/76387-fw190-d9-engine-boost/

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

37 minutes ago, GrungyMonkey said:

Reposting the chart I spent way too much time on:

 

It's a lot slower than the P-40E running 75 inches, but it would also turn way better. I agree it's a great choice.

I think the N was also over boosted, not sure to 75 inches, but 66-70".

[CUJO_1970]

3 hours ago, Roland_HUNter said:

A-8 winter speed: 612 km/h.
In the past I already reported something is wrong with the D-9, but some kind of "explanation" was "accepted".

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/75864-fw-190-d-9-do-i-doing-something-wrong/

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/76387-fw190-d9-engine-boost/

 

To make a long story short - the D-9 motor has a mass-flow regulator and it is set to standard atmosphere in the handbook. The good news is, as shown with the P-40, manufacturers data is no longer all that important. In fact with P-40 they go directly against Allison manufacturer printed recommendations - never been done in the sim before AFAIK.

 

So now a new day has dawned and we no longer have to be held back by actual test data or printed clearance values for the type. You should be able to have things like the D-9 adjusted for winter temps, the DB605 1 minute timer done away with now that we don't have to worry about pilots handbooks or manufacturer clearances.

 

The FW190A5 fighter can now be adjusted to run at 1.58 ata in first gear (as was really done and actually cleared by BMW).

[Hook_Echo]

@CUJO_1970 you're very optimistic all of a sudden. May I remind you that we will never be able to remove the outboard guns of the A8! ?

[Roland_HUNter]

6 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

The FW190A5 fighter can now be adjusted to run at 1.58 ata in first gear (as was really done and actually cleared by BMW).

With U17 modi? If yes: you could use that 1.58 in the past as well.

[CUJO_1970]

6 hours ago, Roland_HUNter said:

With U17 modi? If yes: you could use that 1.58 in the past as well.

 

You can only use it with bomb racks currently, which negates the improved performance. It's a weird restriction and is not historic at all.

 

1.58ata must be made available in clean configuration, without bomb racks - as it could be done and was done in real life. Should be option to select when setting up your mission. Below are SG unit without racks doing Stuka escort:

 

Spoiler

 

Edited February 22, 2024 by CUJO_1970

[LukeFF]

15 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

To make a long story short - the D-9 motor has a mass-flow regulator and it is set to standard atmosphere in the handbook. The good news is, as shown with the P-40, manufacturers data is no longer all that important. In fact with P-40 they go directly against Allison manufacturer printed recommendations - never been done in the sim before AFAIK.

 

So now a new day has dawned and we no longer have to be held back by actual test data or printed clearance values for the type. You should be able to have things like the D-9 adjusted for winter temps, the DB605 1 minute timer done away with now that we don't have to worry about pilots handbooks or manufacturer clearances.

 

I would take caution with making such claims because printed test data has and still does provide the baseline for what changes are made to the flight modeling. 

[Roland_HUNter]

13 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

I would take caution with making such claims because printed test data has and still does provide the baseline for what changes are made to the flight modeling. 

10 page of documentation will be enough?

 

[CUJO_1970]

9 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

I would take caution with making such claims because printed test data has and still does provide the baseline for what changes are made to the flight modeling. 

 

Yes, definitely it provides a baseline, just as it should. It's not the final say, since with the P-40 you can now do exactly opposite of what the manufacturer recommends.

 

With 1.58ata option for clean 190A5 (actually F-series) and 109 DB605 engine timer increase from 1 minute to 3 minutes, - we know both of those were done (cleared historically) so at least there is no impediment to adding them now. P-40 seems to be a bit of a trailblazer in this regard to no longer strictly use published/test/handbook values.

 

 

On 2/20/2024 at 9:36 PM, Hook_Echo said:

@CUJO_1970 No you leave it at 3000 rpm and crank it to 75 in. The boost/prop pitch exploit won't work on the P-40 to extend the timer. It only works on planes with a combat setting that has rpm lower than WEP. Planes with combat rpm equal to WEP rpm, might gain a few mph, like 5 max, but they don't get any timer extension. And in the P-40 case if you lower the rpm from 3000 you can't get the full 75 in. The manifold pressure will drop too.

 

Edit: I don't really have any data on increasing speed with slightly lower rpm. The only plane I have data for is the Spit IX and the speed is the same at 2900 and 3000 rpm.

 

Edit 2: I just tested the P-40 again. On the autumn map

3000 rpm

69 in (that's the max on the autumn map)

30% cowl (minimum to not overheat)

362 mph

 

2900 rpm

65.5 in (max at 2900 rpm)

25% cowl

354 mph

 

3000 rpm

56 in

0% cowl

336 mph

 

2900 rpm

56 in

0% cowl

332 mph

 

 

Thank you for testing - I've no time to test myself since the update.

 

Per Allison you would need 3,000 ft of RAM in order to boost like this...are you getting these in level flight?

[LukeFF]

19 minutes ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Yes, definitely it provides a baseline, just as it should. It's not the final say, since with the P-40 you can now do exactly opposite of what the manufacturer recommends.

 

With 1.58ata option for clean 190A5 (actually F-series) and 109 DB605 engine timer increase from 1 minute to 3 minutes, - we know both of those were done (cleared historically) so at least there is no impediment to adding them now. P-40 seems to be a bit of a trailblazer in this regard to no longer strictly use published/test/handbook values.

 

Yes, operational usage of these planes is now more taken into account, yes. ??

[Hook_Echo]

@CUJO_1970 I test on Kuban autumn with auto level on at 100 ft above the Black Sea. 69 in hg was the highest manifold pressure I got on that map. When I have the mission editor open tonight I'll check what the default temp and pressure is.

Edited February 22, 2024 by Hook_Echo

[CUJO_1970]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Yes, operational usage of these planes is now more taken into account, yes. ??

 

That's great news!

 

I think it makes the sim more interesting and when we blow up our engines it's our own darn fault, lol.

[the_emperor]

12 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Yes, operational usage of these planes is now more taken into account, yes.

 

That is good news.

soooo...when the Germans literally painted a 3min marking for their Bf-109s for 1.42/2800 Start&Notleistung on their instruments. would that fall under this umbrella??

[Sgt_Joch]

17 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, operational usage of these planes is now more taken into account, yes. ??

Great news. So we can finally get the WEP limit on the P51 boosted to 15 minutes? 

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/353-hinchey-14nov44.jpg

[I/JG54_chuishan]

17 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, operational usage of these planes is now more taken into account, yes. ??

 

Hello Luke! 

 

Thank you for your attention in re-modelling the P-40. I would personally suggest to have a look at The Secret Horsepower Race: Western Front Fighter Engine Development, from Mr. Calum E. Douglas. There is very detailed analysis of German & Allies engine development in the book based on solid first-hand documentation research. The book also clearly indicates the different attitudes toward engine limitations on flight manuals from the German and Allies sides.  IIRC, DB and BMW engines were not as solid as the Allision or even the RR ones. Most of them suffered constantly from issues relating to fuel quality and durability issues caused by the lack of proper metal materials, resulting in numerous temporary operational restrictions. This book is the most current study in this field, and the author has the proper language & professional background for this topic. Hopefully you may find it an interesting read. 

[the_emperor]

3 hours ago, Sgt_Joch said:

Great news. So we can finally get the WEP limit on the P51 boosted to 15 minutes? 

 

a bit more WEP time for the mustang is certainly justified. One (if not the) of the best built engines during WW2 and the manuals allow for a total! of 5h WEP before overhaul. I really hate to run out of juice after 5min. 

Edited February 23, 2024 by the_emperor

[LukeFF]

I can ask about all this stuff, yes, but ultimately it's up to the engineering team to implement any changes. So, as always, please keep posting your supporting evidence here. ?

[CUJO_1970]

10 hours ago, Sgt_Joch said:

Great news. So we can finally get the WEP limit on the P51 boosted to 15 minutes? 

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/353-hinchey-14nov44.jpg

 

15 minutes and indicating 600 mph…lmao.

 

Sorry, but: FALSE.

 

Reminds me of the dude that claimed he went 800 mph in a dive in the P-47 and it was reported in his hometown paper. 

[Hook_Echo]

Hey if we update the Merlins to 15 mins, I should be able to squeeze 30 mins out of the Spitfire IX at 25 lbs and 2900 rpm!

[Mtnbiker1998]

At this point you'd think theres enough evidence that they could just axe the whole timer system all together... consistent modelling across all aircraft, Everyone is happy.

 

That being said, if any other aircraft is gonna get considered for revised time limits, the P-39 should be next in line as its no better off than the P-40 used to be. Frankly I'd hoped that we'd get an update to BOTH crippled allison engined planes and not just the P-40.

[easterling77]

2 hours ago, Mtnbiker1998 said:

At this point you'd think theres enough evidence that they could just axe the whole timer system all together... consistent modelling across all aircraft, Everyone is happy.

 

That being said, if any other aircraft is gonna get considered for revised time limits, the P-39 should be next in line as its no better off than the P-40 used to be. Frankly I'd hoped that we'd get an update to BOTH crippled allison engined planes and not just the P-40.

This also,  made me curious.

 I'm now diving in my library over the P39 - especially in the Soviet use, to fit in our current historical setting.

 

For now I'm searching in the Allison Operation and Maintenance Handbook for "F"-Models from 1943 (Since in game it says we got the 1710-39 - which is an "F" series engine).

 

But considdering other sources like Gordon & Komissarovs P39 in soviet service through WW2 - they state the P39 L-1 was fitted with teh 1710-63 which is an E6 -engine.

 

So now I'm asking myself:

 

- Which eninge would be the historcal correct one for our P39 L-1 in game? - 1710-39 or 1710-63?

 

I hope, somone here with way more knwoledge then myself could clarify this and above all - I hope the Airacobra gets some engine overlook in the future.

 

I allways liked the uniqueness of it and now seeing how much more fun and possibilities the P40 got, I hope the P39 will get the same attention from the devs.

 

Best greetings

 

DP