Spit IIa climb test results.

[MadTommy]

I decided to do a climb test in the Spit IIa due to inconsistent data about.

I had some interesting results. Got to 27,000 ft, no engine damage or over heating.

Here are the settings i used:

2,000 - 12,000ft - 9.0lbs - 2,850 rpm
15,000ft - 7.5lbs - 2,750 rpm
17,000ft - 6.5lbs - 2,750 rpm
19,000ft - 3.0lbs - 2,750 rpm
20,000ft - 4.0lbs (went full throttle)
23,000ft - 2.5lbs - 27,500 rpm
25,000ft - 1.5lbs - 28,000 rpm
27,000ft - 1.0lbs - 30,000 rpm

I was unable to get above 27k. Had a nice vapour trail and, weirdly, vortices off both wings even at low AOA & speeds.

I got no shakes or rumbling, but there seemed to be a 'sensitive zone' between 16-20k. Once above 20k the engine seemed less sensitive.

Anyway thought i'd share this data.

[=AN=Lobo]

Lower your RPM to 26.500 and you can climb over 30.000ft. :thumbsup:

[ATAG_Snapper]

I did some climb tests with the Spitfire 2a in Cliffs of Dover, then compared it to the results of the actual trial done on the real Spitfire 2a P.7280; then for smiles and chuckles ran the same test on the A2A Wings of Power 3 Spitfire 2a. I don't know the precise methodology used for the real test done back in 1940/41, but for the two sims I used the same procedure. Radiator was set to Full Open (100%). Per the Pilots Notes and the test run on P.7280 I ran both sim Spits at 2850 rpms, boost 9 lbs (= 100% throttle), flew at sea level until speed stabilized, then pulled up and started the stopwatch. I did my very best at maintaining the same climb speed of 168 mph IAS for both aircraft. I filmed both cockpits with FRAPS and timecoded both in real time. My data was taken from reviewing this video. As soon as it's uploaded to Vimeo I'll post it here via edit.

Note: The Cliffs of Dover Spitfire 2a temps began getting dangerously high at 14,500 feet, so I coarsened pitch to reduce rpms down to 2600 which kept the engine from overheating. I concluded both tests at 20,000 feet as we know all the CoD flight model is borked above this -- no point extending the agony. OTOH, the A2A Spitfire 2a continued merrily on up past 25,000 feet at 2850 rpms with no overheating problems at all. I tried to get all the weights in line; the A2A Spitfire 2a came in a little light even with full ammo load, fuel 100%, and pilot weighing 300 lbs (burp! Supersize me!). Here are the numbers (video to follow):

Aircraft P.7280 CoD A2A
Weight (lbs) 6172 6158 6086

Altitude -------------------- TIME ELAPSED FROM START (' minutes " seconds)
(feet)_______________P.7280________________CoD____ ___A2A______


SEA LEVEL
0'00"
0'00"
0'00"


1000
0.35 = 0'21'
0'11"
0'06"


2000
0.7 = 0'42"
0'34"
0'15"


3000
1.0 = 1'00"
1'10"
0'30"


5000
1.7 = 1'42"
2'12"
1'01"


6500
2.2 = 2'12"
3'04"
1'24"


10000
3.4 = 3'24"
4'57"
2'25"


13000
4.3 = 4'18"
6'42"
3'14"


15000
5.0 = 5'00"
7'56"
3'51"


16500
5.6 = 5'36"
8'46"
4'17"


18000
6.1 = 6'06"
9'46"
4'45"


20000
7.0 = 7'00"
11'58
5'21"


12800*
4.3 = 4'18"
6'27"
3'11"


* FTH









































So, depending on the methodology used by the RAE testers, the A2A Spitfire 2a looks a little optimistic compared to the Real McCoy, but certainly closer in the ballpack compared to the John Deere edition of the Cliffs of Dover Spitfire 2a. But it certainly answers one aspect as to why Red players keep their Spits under 10 angels!

Top speeds of the two sims are a little off at 1000 feet (as tested):

P.7280: 294 mph IAS
CoD: 280 " "
A2A: 301 " " (Holy Moley....close to the dreaded Uber-Sissyfire 2a of the previous 1.59 Retail Version!!!!! Who'da thunk?)

Boring video alert!!!!!!

http://vimeo.com/53746471


http://vimeo.com/53746471

[ATAG_Colander]

Snapper,

So, in short, the A2A spit climbs more or less 2x faster at any altitude.

If that was changed, and to avoid head injuries, the ceiling on CLOD should also be lifted 2x :)

[Doc]

Which is wrong? A2A or CoD? We'll never know!

[ATAG_Colander]

Not only that but (for comparison purposes and not to start yet another discussion about it), I wonder what climb speed a 109 would have on A2A

[ATAG_Snapper]

Which is wrong? A2A or CoD? We'll never know!

Good question, Doc. The CoD Spit seems closest to the real life Spit below 10 angels, but then deteriorates badly in climb. The A2A Spit seems closest to the real Spit from 10K upwards.

I'm no Jeffrey Quill or Alex Henshawe test pilot; I'd want to find out what their testing procedure was since I'm no doubt doing it wrong. Also, this was a one time trial, so I'd sure want to do at least several more to get a better average for each plane.

[=AN=Felipe]

Good question, Doc. The CoD Spit seems closest to the real life Spit below 10 angels, but then deteriorates badly in climb. The A2A Spit seems closest to the real Spit from 10K upwards.

I'm no Jeffrey Quill or Alex Henshawe test pilot; I'd want to find out what their testing procedure was since I'm no doubt doing it wrong. Also, this was a one time trial, so I'd sure want to do at least several more to get a better average for each plane.

Compare with data tests (graphs), use correct settings to climb and you will discover how wrong its our spitfire, BUT... have this datas in mind, over 16k Spitfire got "same" acceleration and climb rate then ME109E, and over 16k we got better performance, in speed and acceleration ;)

cya!

[ATAG_Snapper]

Not only that but (for comparison purposes and not to start yet another discussion about it), I wonder what climb speed a 109 would have on A2A

I'd be the first to say the CoD 109 is probably too slow in level speed and climb compared to the real life 109E. I don't have the A2A 109, plus I don't have the necessary skill that you guys would have to get maximum performance out of them. It'd sure be interesting to find out. Somewhere someone suggested that the 109's in CoD are too slow at sea level by 20 - 30 kph, and the Spits (100 octane) are too slow by 20 - 30 mph at sea level. That kind of fits for the Spits from what I can determine, don't know about the 109's.

The guy that would know for both aircraft and is totally impartial AFAIC is IvanK. He posted on this topic (Rate of Climb) several patches ago. I'd love to get his take on this now.

I do know that with 30 - 50% fuel I can squeeze 290 mph at sea level with the Spitfire 1a 100 octane. From many dogfights on the deck I've found this pretty much matches the CoD 109's, both in long distance chases cross-Channel and long distance running for home with a 109 on my tail! Unfortunately the Rate of Climb is no match for the 109 by a large margin, plus the Merlin starts to quickly overheat in a climb which aggravates the situation since we have to reduce revs and/or throttle and open the radiator wide open -- at the worst possible time. These are all bad, bad things when the 109 is extending its climb above you and starting to commence its dive while you're slow and overheated! :D We've quickly learned to avoid climbing pursuits and instead, squinting into the sun, try to play the angle as the 109 descends. The Spitfire in CoD makes for a busy cockpit, but it's also vastly rewarding if you can catch a 109 by chopping the angle and scoring high deflection-hits at the right convergence.

Performance aside, from my perspective as an opponent the major glitch with 109's that desperately needs fixing IMHO is its nasty accelerated stall and spin. I admit I breathe a huge sigh of relief when a 109 I'm fighting stalls out and spins, but I realize that I'm lucky to get the "maneuvre kill" (if the 109 crashes before recovery).

We can always hope that somehow down the line these FM issues will be fixed.

[ATAG_Colander]

Snapper,

As you know, I'm not expert on a spit but I have the feeling that by only fixing the stuttering at certain alt and the overheating, it's climb rate and speed will be very close to the 109.

You are right about the spins on a 109. I would say that more than it's ease to enter a spin, what I dislike is the hard it is to get it out of it. The spits and hurris on the other hand, seem to need 1/2 a second to recover from a flat spin.

But more than the spin, I would like for the DMs to be tuned. In a 109 (except in very lucky cases) a couple of bullet hits will make the plane a mess by one or more of these 3 things:
1.- Controls disabled
2.- Wing surface damage inducing drag and loss of lift
3.- Radiator damage effects. You have around 20 seconds before the engine dies (Yes, the 109 has 2 so is easier to hit one)

Now, my experience against hurris and spits is that you need to empty half your machine gun ammo to make some tangible damage. Also, cannon hits on the wing seem (from the 109 point of view) not to affect their turning and E retention ability.

In short, I think that fixing the engine issues on the spits and balancing the DM a bit more, the plane sets will be more competitive.

Whadayathink?

[ATAG_Snapper]

Compare with data tests (graphs), use correct settings to climb and you will discover how wrong its our spitfire, BUT... have this datas in mind, over 16k Spitfire got "same" acceleration and climb rate then ME109E, and over 16k we got better performance, in speed and acceleration ;)

cya!

S! Felipe!

I'm glad you saw this because I know you've done a lot of testing on this stuff. My numbers above are very rough since it was just one try for each simulation (CoD vs A2A). I'm pretty sure I did this incorrectly, plus I don't have all the barometric data, etc that is necessary for true results. But as a rough comparison it's interesting. One advantage of capturing the cockpit instruments on video is that you can focus on flying the tests without the distraction of manually recording instrument readings while flying. It's so easy to leisurely review the video later and get precise readings that way, complete with Time Code for elasped time data.

The A2A Spitfire is breathtaking to fly vs the CoD Spitfire. The take off roll is so fast and you're wheels up before you're really ready. The CoD Spitfire seems to travel halfway across Kent, even at 12 lbs boost, before you can coax it off the ground! LOL

The A2A Spit is harder to overheat than the CoD counterpart, but it's MUCH less forgiving if you do! The CoD Spit reacts right away if you open rad/reduce throttle/coarsen pitch. Not the A2A Spit! If you're careless enough to get temps rising -- especially glycol -- you're screwed!!! The temps just keep going up and up, even if you do open the rad and cut throttle and rpms. If you're lucky the upward march will slow, stay high for a bit, then gradually inch down. I've actually set fire to my A2A Merlin by deliberately abusing it.....just to see what happens. Orange flames sweeping back to the cockpit! Usually, though, it's black exhaust smoke, power loss, horrible noises, and white coolant smoke pouring out the vent. Basically with the A2A Spitfire I've found that I just have to stay on top of it temp-wise and make sure I keep my speed up to provide good cooling. And not to drop my wheels or flaps too far from the runway, or......poof! :D

Now if I could just get some operating guns in the A2A Spit..........

[Doc]

Compare with data tests (graphs), use correct settings to climb and you will discover how wrong its our spitfire, BUT... have this datas in mind, over 16k Spitfire got "same" acceleration and climb rate then ME109E, and over 16k we got better performance, in speed and acceleration ;)

cya!

Felipe you AN guys are great pilots. :thumbsup:

[ATAG_Snapper]

Snapper,

As you know, I'm not expert on a spit but I have the feeling that by only fixing the stuttering at certain alt and the overheating, it's climb rate and speed will be very close to the 109.

You are right about the spins on a 109. I would say that more than it's ease to enter a spin, what I dislike is the hard it is to get it out of it. The spits and hurris on the other hand, seem to need 1/2 a second to recover from a flat spin.

But more than the spin, I would like for the DMs to be tuned. In a 109 (except in very lucky cases) a couple of bullet hits will make the plane a mess by one or more of these 3 things:
1.- Controls disabled
2.- Wing surface damage inducing drag and loss of lift
3.- Radiator damage effects. You have around 20 seconds before the engine dies (Yes, the 109 has 2 so is easier to hit one)

Now, my experience against hurris and spits is that you need to empty half your machine gun ammo to make some tangible damage. Also, cannon hits on the wing seem (from the 109 point of view) not to affect their turning and E retention ability.

In short, I think that fixing the engine issues on the spits and balancing the DM a bit more, the plane sets will be more competitive.

Whadayathink?

Agree with all the above.

I think the devs came sooooo close to getting the FM's right. Remember the "uber-Sissyfire 2a" from the earlier 1.59 Retail Patch? Although there were claims that it was too fast and had insane energy retention, I believe that of all the fighters -- both LW and RAF -- this was actually the closest to Real Life performance. I did some high - g lateral turns and Immelmans and found it bled energy off quickly. Working with GRAthos, I recorded on video a 100 mph IAS speed loss (1 complete turn on the airspeed indicator dial) doing a simple Immelmann starting at 5000 feet at 250 mph IAS and finishing at 7000 feet at 150 IAS. Unfortunately, this model was nerfed and huge barn doors were fitted on its radiator. What I (and others) had hoped was that the devs would have used this 2a as the Gold Standard and beef up the 109's and other RAF fighters to that standard.

The other aircraft in that same version that was very good was "JTDawg's Hurricane MK 1 Rotol". Its performance at 6.25 lbs boost was very close to the real Hurricane; it was just lacking the 12 lbs boost that 100 octane fuel would provide. Alas, that model was nerfed as well, even the current Hurricane MK1 100 octane (Rotol) doesn't meet the performance that JTDawg's earlier Rotol did, AFAIK. Interestingly, JTDawg's Rotol was a fair match for the 109's of that 1.59 version. However, that was because the 109's were too slow -- they should have been performing at the uber-Sissyfire 2a level!

Just my thoughts. :)

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Not only that but (for comparison purposes and not to start yet another discussion about it), I wonder what climb speed a 109 would have on A2A

Salute

I did a little less carefully planned test in CoD in an E-3, and it was the first time I had flown a 109, and I climbed at 1.23 ata at 2350 rpm and 250 kph. (to compare with a RAF test) I got approx. 9:30 to 6200k or 20,000. That is slower than the historical aircraft. Climb rate is relatively good till you hit 6000k, and falls flat on its face above that.

I had planned to do a comprehensive set of tests for all the planes, but the fact the game is in limbo right now makes it somewhat academic. I will wait till we find out what the future holds.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Salute

I did a little less carefully planned test in CoD in an E-3, and it was the first time I had flown a 109, and I climbed at 1.23 ata at 2350 rpm and 250 kph. (to compare with a RAF test) I got approx. 9:30 to 6200k or 20,000. That is slower than the historical aircraft. Climb rate is relatively good till you hit 6000k, and falls flat on its face above that.

I had planned to do a comprehensive set of tests for all the planes, but the fact the game is in limbo right now makes it somewhat academic. I will wait till we find out what the future holds.

That's great info, Buzzsaw. That ROC for the 109 is worse than I thought it would be, not too far off the CoD Spit 2a's time -- compared to the real life Spit and the A2A Spit. At some point it'd be great to see comparison graphs of all the fighters, with their real life counterparts' (if the data exists) graphs alongside for comparison.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

At some point it'd be great to see comparison graphs of all the fighters, with their real life counterparts' (if the data exists) graphs alongside for comparison.

Salute

That's what I intended to do before all this recent news came out. However, if this game is being abandoned in favour of a whole new engine, I am not sure it is worthwhile investing all the time required.

Off the top of my head, and without detailed testing, my opinion is none of the planes are really accurately modelled, even the G-50 on second looksee is off in aspects.

The biggest issue is the performance over approx. 10,000 ft, all planes start to tail off at that point, the British more so, but also the 109's. And then when aircraft hit 20,000 they are all gasping for air compared to the real life versions.

Re. my 109 test, it was a quick test, don't put too much emphasis on it, it's just a rough guide, I would want to do more tests to be sure, I might be able to do better at a lower speed and higher angle of attack, but in any case, my opinion is the 109 is climbing slower than historical.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Salute

Some historical 109 climb results:

109E1, without armour, test done at 1.30 ata with DB601A1, not Aa, game plane has Aa, which had better low alt perf. Time to 6000 m is 7:00. Test was done in 1939.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109e-handbookcurve.jpg

British translation of French test of captured 109E3 with DB601A-1, it includes the French results which show 8:01 to 6000k at 1.30 ata, but also includes German figures from an unavailable chart, (now unavailable) which show 6:18 to 6000 k at 1.3 ata. Note this plane does not have armour.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Me-109E3-French-2.jpg

And finally, RAF test of captured E3 showing several tests, by RAE and by Rolls Royce. Note this is the same plane captured by the French, and may be showing its age. Also without armour and with DB601A-1. Test done at 1.23 ata.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109e-climb_level-speed-rae.jpg

[=AN=Felipe]

Felipe you AN guys are great pilots. :thumbsup:


Thx Doc, its an honor for me and for AN guys simulate in ATAG server!

We are preparing our pilots to invite ATAG to train with us, red and blue pilots, again, it will be an honor!

-------
Great stuff Buzz! I read this charts before in spitfireperformance.org too!

Thx to post it and share with us!

:thumbsup:

-------

Yoo! Snapper! how you doing?!

So... in this patch i dont test spitfire, but i have one thing to say, we reach about 30k+ with spitfire IIa in operational conditions, climb rate more then +0.3 (operational limit).

30 min ago, we shoot down Mr.X, with all respect, too easy over 20k+, i think this time they improove, for who knows what to do, the merlin XII engine for IIa's.

One advice for red spitfire pilots, fly with the real manual, use the engine settings pre-defined in the book, attent to climb settings and cruise settings, in this patch i fell its more realistic, close to real thing...

Sorry about my bad english ok? im trying to learn! :D

Yoo! Guys!

S!

[ATAG_Torian]

Hi Felipe,
I've never had the IIa to 30,000ft. Will have to give that a try. Highest I've been is 27.000 in a Mk 1 Spit with 2 speed prop but I've not tried the others much over 20,000 since the new release. Would love to have been there to see the "too easy" kill on the 109 and see what sort of numbers u were running your engine at. Thx for your input.

[=AN=Felipe]

Yeah it was, and thx you! Ill try to give a precise feedback about that settings!

Yoo! S!

[=AN=Felipe]

Just for fun,

i do this simple test who show us many things about performance and engine settings.

To do this test i used:

1168
Spitfire IIa real manual.

Settings: No wind, 988mba at Manston airfield, 25єC, full fuel tank, Militar gear including full ammo, Spitfire IIa.

Climb to 20k ft full radiator open, then half closed to reach 25k ft and 30k ft.

No WEP used, only 2600rpm for better performance climb.

At 28k ft 3000rpm to try reach 30k ft

***Opearational service for Spitfire IIa in COD (Atual patch is 28,5k ft) +0.3fpm, under this we got more then +0.3fpm (able to fight) and over this we have less than +0.3fpm (unable to fight)



For a linear Climb we have this datas:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Climb Test - Spitfire Mk IIa

Altitude (ft) RPM Set (rpm) Time (min,sec) Time Acum (min,sec)

SL...................2600......................... .0......................0
5000.............................................. 2,37................2,37
10000............................................2 ,59................4,96
13000............................................1 ,53................6,49
15000............................................1 ,17................7,66
20000............................................. 3,5...............11,16
25000............................................6 ,52..............17,68
30000...........................................26 ,21.............43,89
--------------------------------------------------------------------

1169

What we can see reading this datas?

This datas show us the weakness of Spitfire, we got worst performance at 10k to 15k, thats why you (spitfirepilot) should never try to climb chasing a ME109E or enter in a vertical dogfight.

Over 15k our speed and acceleration beggins to be equal then ME109, over 18k our supercharger mantain 50% of our engine power against 33% of ME109 supercharger at same altitude, thats why ME109 got poor performance...

Its just a few conclusions, i can see, and i have more and more for this subject...



One picture to prouve 30k ft was a Service Celling for spitfire IIa in COD.
1170



So guys! Hope you enjoy and i hope to be clear with this information!


Yoo! S!

[ATAG_Colander]

This datas show us the weakness of Spitfire, we got worst performance at 10k to 15k

Hi Felipe,

If I'm reading your graph correctly, the spit climbs faster between 10 and 15k :confused!:

[=AN=Felipe]

Just look at Acumulated time, (red Line), you can observe between 10k and 15k i have to do a change of engine setting at 13k to correct a loss of "power" or rendiment, and adjust my fpm to climb faster, that time (13k) my plane was climbing slower, BUT... with the same fpm or better then under stages of climb...

At that point i am a good target for a B&Z, poor speed, no chance to defend.
:D

You are correct if you just read the datas, but i change horizontal speed for vertical speed, to pass between 10k - 15k faster, if i mantain the same speed then under stages, i have a big loss of my fpm, so i force my plane to pass that stage...

Understand?

[ATAG_Colander]

From 10k to 15K it takes 2.8 minutes. From 15k to 20K it takes 3.4 (all approximate numbers).
It seems to me that it climbs faster between 10 and 15 than 15 and 20 :confused!:


From what I see, is after 15K where it starts loosing climb speed

[=AN=Felipe]

For climb you are correct!

But for acceleration and speed its another history...

10k - 15k spitfire sux! ahah :D

Just look at performance datas i have made before, still the same thing...dont mixture climb tests to performance tests ok? In this post who you argument. i made a bridge between climb, acc and speed... so we have to take care when compare the datas!

At 10k - 15k we made better time climbing, but with lower IAS and poor acceleration, so you have to pay attention on this.

at 15k 20k we climb slower, but, we accelerate more and our speed was able to catch the ME109.

=)

[ATAG_Colander]

Ok, makes sense now :)

[=AN=Felipe]

Not yet col! You have to change for red forcers or ill have to kill you! Top secret informations! You understand...

Haha!

Yoooooo!

[ATAG_Colander]

I'm a red spy infiltrated in the blue army ;)

[=AN=Felipe]

Oops! Ok sorry lol! Haha

[ATAG_Torian]

Thx Felipe, really good info there. I'm all for working smarter, not harder.

[=AN=Felipe]

Nice! Thx you!

=)

[Dutch]

No WEP used, only 2600rpm for better performance climb.

Sigh.......

No-one ever listens to me. :(


:D

[=AN=Felipe]

Sigh.......

No-one ever listens to me. :(


:D

:thumbsup:

Hehe

[Dutch]

:thumbsup:

Hehe

I have been telling them for six months........:(

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Just for fun,

i do this simple test who show us many things about performance and engine settings.

To do this test i used:

1168
Spitfire IIa real manual.

Settings: No wind, 988mba at Manston airfield, 25єC, full fuel tank, Militar gear including full ammo, Spitfire IIa.

Climb to 20k ft full radiator open, then half closed to reach 25k ft and 30k ft.

No WEP used, only 2600rpm for better performance climb.

At 28k ft 3000rpm to try reach 30k ft

***Opearational service for Spitfire IIa in COD (Atual patch is 28,5k ft) +0.3fpm, under this we got more then +0.3fpm (able to fight) and over this we have less than +0.3fpm (unable to fight)



For a linear Climb we have this datas:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Climb Test - Spitfire Mk IIa

Altitude (ft) RPM Set (rpm) Time (min,sec) Time Acum (min,sec)

SL...................2600......................... .0......................0
5000.............................................. 2,37................2,37
10000............................................2 ,59................4,96
13000............................................1 ,53................6,49
15000............................................1 ,17................7,66
20000............................................. 3,5...............11,16
25000............................................6 ,52..............17,68
30000...........................................26 ,21.............43,89
--------------------------------------------------------------------

1169

What we can see reading this datas?

This datas show us the weakness of Spitfire, we got worst performance at 10k to 15k, thats why you (spitfirepilot) should never try to climb chasing a ME109E or enter in a vertical dogfight.

Over 15k our speed and acceleration beggins to be equal then ME109, over 18k our supercharger mantain 50% of our engine power against 33% of ME109 supercharger at same altitude, thats why ME109 got poor performance...

Its just a few conclusions, i can see, and i have more and more for this subject...



One picture to prouve 30k ft was a Service Celling for spitfire IIa in COD.
1170



So guys! Hope you enjoy and i hope to be clear with this information!


Yoo! S!

Salute AN=Felipe

Thanks for your information, no question there are ways to get the best out of the different aircraft in the game, but at the same time, that is a way of compensating for the inaccuracies.

The Spit IIA had a recommended max climb setting of 2850 rpm and +9 boost, with the recommended speed of 186mph at sea level, gradually dropping with altitude.

And perhaps it is better to climb at 2600 rpm at some alts, but again, that is a compensation for the poor modelling.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are ways to get the optimum performance out of the 109's which don't fit with the way the real aircraft performed. For example, we already know the game allows a player to run 1.33 ata for unlimited time periods without overheating, while for the real aircraft that was a 5 minute limit. And of course, 1.45 ata can be run for a minute, off for a minute, on for a minute, and not just on takeoff. And it seems the flaps can be deployed at speeds they were not designed for, etc. etc. All these compensate in some ways for the fact the 109's are a little slow and don't climb as well as they should, but really shouldn't we have something a little closer?

The game is way off from real figures, its unfortunate the developers couldn't find a way to fix this, and its too bad they won't allow us to try.

I'd just like to see a more accurate representation than we are getting.

Not that I don't appreciate that the current patch is better than some previous ones, not that I don't enjoy flying the game, but it is supposed to be a simulation.

[ATAG_Slipstream]

I know a few people, including myself have been doing this since the final patch. I mostly only ever use three main RPM settings,

Take-Off: 3000 RPM, Rads: Open.
Climb / Dogfight: 2850 RPM, Rads: 50%
Cruise / 10k+: 2600 RPM, Rads: 50%

Highest I ever made it was 29k at 80 knots. I hear so many people saying that it doesn't perform above 20k, but I can pull around 240mph right up to 24 or 25k. The only reason I stayed low was because of my problems spotting dots, but now I can see them, I tend to be up there a lot more when I need to.

[=AN=Felipe]

Salute AN=Felipe

The Spit IIA had a recommended max climb setting of 2850 rpm and +9 boost, with the recommended speed of 186mph at sea level, gradually dropping with altitude.

And perhaps it is better to climb at 2600 rpm at some alts, but again, that is a compensation for the poor modelling.



Hey Buzz thx for your reply! Nice to see you flying! Really good pilot =)

So... 2850rpm +9 PSI boost its not for normal climb, if you check the manual you'll see 2850rpm its a militar power, so when i cut and past a part of manual, you can read 2850 +9 PSI up to 13k ft (rated altitude) and 160mph its a best speed climb for "combat conditions" up 13k ft. Watch out when you put your engine to run at 2850rpm for normal climb under 13k ft... I dont know if its is modeling in this game, but i saw many times, frinds of mine, damaging their engines becouse they dont respect the operational limits, using 2800 2900 rpm to climb result in high temperatures in cruise... (its anormal behavior, i think its a kind of damage, reducing the life time of Merlin XII)



I know a few people, including myself have been doing this since the final patch. I mostly only ever use three main RPM settings,

Take-Off: 3000 RPM, Rads: Open.
Climb / Dogfight: 2850 RPM, Rads: 50%
Cruise / 10k+: 2600 RPM, Rads: 50%

Highest I ever made it was 29k at 80 knots. I hear so many people saying that it doesn't perform above 20k, but I can pull around 240mph right up to 24 or 25k. The only reason I stayed low was because of my problems spotting dots, but now I can see them, I tend to be up there a lot more when I need to.


Hey Slip how you doing mate? You should ask for more bombers to fly with you for level bombing at 20k+ ;), it will be an honor scort you and your mates!

I disagree in part of your three settings, firs of all, for best climb we have two settings, best climb for normal climb and best climb for militar climb ; In militar climb we use 2850rpm +9 PSI and 160mph in right spiral climb. Militar climb dont means you'll climb faster (high speed) means you climb with lower speed but with higher fpm, thats why you increase your rpm, this kind of settig should be used up to rated altitude (rated alt is 13k) tested and cheked, works... normal climb we dont have a "best" rpm setting, only best speeds of climb, so, we should use 2600rpm to reach high speeds befor acceleration, that change of 3000rpm when take off, 2800 after accelerate to 160mph and 2600rpm at final of leveling, its a prop manegement, gradually changes of fully fine to coarse position, like changing gears of a car.

So at normal climb, use that table, you'll climb faster... works...

In cruise, you have 2 tipes of cruise, normal and economical. In normal cruise you should run your engine to 2600rpm +3 PSI or +7 PSI (ill check this values ok?) and in economical cruise or weak cruise your engine must be setted to 2400rpm and under to +3 PSI with weak mixture (lean) (NEVER EXCEED +3PSI WHEN MIXTURE WEAK BEING USED, MAY CAUSE SEVERAL DAMAGES). Used for long cruises.

I use this weak cruise when im looking for enemys at 20k++, when i find they dive away... hehe =)

About rad positions, i dont belive 50% rad at climb and combat its a good thing to do, maybe in cruise settings up to 20k+, you should not enter in a combat with your temperature engine close to limit, i prefer mantain lower temperature to use full power in combat situations or very very hard climbs...

Its a little more complex this kind of management, but works pretty good so far with me and AN pilots, you should test, will work good with you too =) (Im just following the manual, real manual)

Only one more curiosity (lol name of mars robo haha sorry for the joke :D), Spitfire top speed was reached when you use 2850rpm under 13k ft, the engineers notice this behavior in Merling engines, so in this rpm setting you are using all your horse power, and no with 3000rpm which almost people think, thats why you use this setting (2850) to combat climb and combat situations, but it variates in dog fight, dont run your engine 2850 all the time in combat ;) or will explode!

Its just my point of view, ok? dont be mad! ^^

Hope be clear with my bad english haha, im learning with you guys! =)

[=AN=Felipe]

Guys im at work before a great holliday haha, and im surfing in internet and reading something, i find this real trials for climb at IIa Spitfire...

Compare with my datas =)

1171
Site: Spitfire performance
:D

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Hey Slip how you doing mate? You should ask for more bombers to fly with you for level bombing at 20k+ ;), it will be an honor scort you and your mates!

I disagree in part of your three settings, firs of all, for best climb we have two settings, best climb for normal climb and best climb for militar climb ; In militar climb we use 2850rpm +9 PSI and 160mph in right spiral climb. Militar climb dont means you'll climb faster (high speed) means you climb with lower speed but with higher fpm, thats why you increase your rpm, this kind of settig should be used up to rated altitude (rated alt is 13k) tested and cheked, works... normal climb we dont have a "best" rpm setting, only best speeds of climb, so, we should use 2600rpm to reach high speeds befor acceleration, that change of 3000rpm when take off, 2800 after accelerate to 160mph and 2600rpm at final of leveling, its a prop manegement, gradually changes of fully fine to coarse position, like changing gears of a car.

So at normal climb, use that table, you'll climb faster... works...

In cruise, you have 2 tipes of cruise, normal and economical. In normal cruise you should run your engine to 2600rpm +3 PSI or +7 PSI (ill check this values ok?) and in economical cruise or weak cruise your engine must be setted to 2400rpm and under to +3 PSI with weak mixture (lean) (NEVER EXCEED +3PSI WHEN MIXTURE WEAK BEING USED, MAY CAUSE SEVERAL DAMAGES). Used for long cruises.

I use this weak cruise when im looking for enemys at 20k++, when i find they dive away... hehe =)

About rad positions, i dont belive 50% rad at climb and combat its a good thing to do, maybe in cruise settings up to 20k+, you should not enter in a combat with your temperature engine close to limit, i prefer mantain lower temperature to use full power in combat situations or very very hard climbs...

Its a little more complex this kind of management, but works pretty good so far with me and AN pilots, you should test, will work good with you too =) (Im just following the manual, real manual)

Only one more curiosity (lol name of mars robo haha sorry for the joke :D), Spitfire top speed was reached when you use 2850rpm under 13k ft, the engineers notice this behavior in Merling engines, so in this rpm setting you are using all your horse power, and no with 3000rpm which almost people think, thats why you use this setting (2850) to combat climb and combat situations, but it variates in dog fight, dont run your engine 2850 all the time in combat ;) or will explode!

Its just my point of view, ok? dont be mad! ^^

Hope be clear with my bad english haha, im learning with you guys! =)

Hi Felipe,

Thing is with the Blenheim, is I don't know exactly how good the bombsite would work at those altitudes. or if I'd be able to see the target without actually being on top of it. I've tried level bombing at 5 - 6k feet, and its worked ok after a few tries. Its can be a handful even then trimming it to go straight and level. That's why I fly on the deck and skip-bomb usually, its fast in, precision strike, and fast out again, But I'd be willing to try it out, might take me 45 mins to get up there though lol.

Your Spitfire military climb settings are what I use to climb out, I usually go which to 2600RPM after 10k ft in the Spitfire IIA because it seems to overheat very quickly above that altitude. I've never really paid too much attention to boost settings apart from dropping them back when the engine gets hot, so I'm looking forward to trying them out.
Likewise with the weak mixture, I couldn't see dots clearly below me until recently so I never really cruised above 20k until the last two weeks, so I look forward to trying it out too. I have pilots notes for most of the Spitfire models, but I need to print them. I didn't really bother referencing them in flight earlier because of the problems with the simulations flight model & the fact that most people are running full throttle most of the time. (Just look how I fly the Blenheim, full throttle, boost, 35 rad, all the way :D).
As for the 2850 in combat, Its more dog fighting I use that setting for because I'm usually adjusting the throttle.

I'm not going to get mad over an informative post Felipe, :thumbsup:. We enjoy flying and we are discussing it as the pilots in the war would have done.
Besides, I have a huge amount of respect for you & your squadron for taking the time to come and escort a lone bomber to target and helping me take out the objectives, which some people forget is the whole point of the game.
I want to mention that the formation you guys flew was so tight and well coordinated, it looked and sounded incredible, for sure any 109's looking for an easy target that day, would have had a shock to see a squadron of Spitfires covering me.
And not just that, your professionalism and respectfulness to others in the community is something you guys should be very proud of.

Its a privilege and pleasure to fly with you!
:salute:

[=AN=Felipe]

The privilege is ours! :salute:

its a huge honor for us when one bomber, or more, ask for scort or give us a chance to do it!

You can count with us! :thumbsup:

thx Slip! Im very happy :salute:

[92 Sqn. Folmar (QJ-F)]

Check this out. Was done on your server several months ago, just for fun. This is the highest I have ever been able to get since I started the high altitude testing of the Supermarine Spit IIa. This was done with a full combat loadout and full fuel. In witness to this was Pstyle.

1746

[92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)]

Guys im at work before a great holliday haha, and im surfing in internet and reading something, i find this real trials for climb at IIa Spitfire...

Compare with my datas =)

1171
Site: Spitfire performance
:D

Hmmm.
2 minutes (an additional 30%) slower to 15k,
4 minutes (an additional 55%) slower to 20k
7.5 minutes (an additional 75%) slower to 25k

Pretty shocking comparison.

[danperin]

Mates, a noob question, when i'm above 5 kilometers with the 109, after some minutes, my engine overheat and everything starts to shake, so what's the correct management for high altitudes?
I need to keep my oil radiator 50% open in the 109 with the collant radiator fully opened?

Thanks in advance! :)

[ATAG_Colander]

Mates, a noob question, when i'm above 5 kilometers with the 109, after some minutes, my engine overheat and everything starts to shake, so what's the correct management for high altitudes?
I need to keep my oil radiator 50% open in the 109 with the collant radiator fully opened?

Thanks in advance! :)

As a rule of thumb, try to keep your rads 100% open unless you are doing 400Kph or more.

[danperin]

As a rule of thumb, try to keep your rads 100% open unless you are doing 400Kph or more.

Thanks, Colander!

I usually fly with my throttle at 100% and high prop pitch all the time (10h30 or above)! Too rush to get to the british side, i need to calm down haha. :salute:

[9./JG52 Jamz Dackel]

Thanks, Colander!

I usually fly with my throttle at 100% and high prop pitch all the time (10h30 or above)! Too rush to get to the british side, i need to calm down haha. :salute:

Lol...Yea that will kill it pretty quickly and the mechanics back at the fatherland will have your head on a stick..

Try and reduce your throttle to 1.3Ata and adjust your prop pitch to 22/23RPM when cruising obviously depending on ALt but your prop pitch (clock) will probably be around 9:30

Radiator is fine at 75% and oil 65% for most situations...unless your howling for the deck being chased then close all Rads providing your doing 400kph+ she will last :thumbsup:

Rule of thumb.. full throttle and full Prop pitch does not make you go faster :).. keeping it at 23RPM and 1.3.ATA does

hth

[danperin]

Lol...Yea that will kill it pretty quickly and the mechanics back at the fatherland will have your head on a stick..

Try and reduce your throttle to 1.3Ata and adjust your prop pitch to 22/23RPM when cruising obviously depending on ALt but your prop pitch (clock) will probably be around 9:30

Radiator is fine at 75% and oil 65% for most situations...unless your howling for the deck being chased then close all Rads providing your doing 400kph+ she will last :thumbsup:

Rule of thumb.. full throttle and full Prop pitch does not make you go faster :).. keeping it at 23RPM and 1.3.ATA does

hth

Oh, i need to keep more attention to the pitch indeed, too much E-4 with auto pitch made me lazy! But, just to assure, above 5 kilometers or more, with the 109, i don't need to manage my engine in a much different or specific way, that's correct?

[ATAG_Colander]

FYI you can squeeze more out of the E4 if you go with manual prop pitch control.
I tend to turn auto only under specific circumstances, like a big furball where your attention has to be in your SA more than in your engine controls.

[danperin]

FYI you can squeeze more out of the E4 if you go with manual prop pitch control.
I tend to turn auto only under specific circumstances, like a big furball where your attention has to be in your SA more than in your engine controls.

Oh, i didn't tried to manually control the E-4 yet. That's something i will certainly try!

Thank you mates! :salute:

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Mates, a noob question, when i'm above 5 kilometers with the 109, after some minutes, my engine overheat and everything starts to shake, so what's the correct management for high altitudes?
I need to keep my oil radiator 50% open in the 109 with the collant radiator fully opened?

Thanks in advance! :)

Please take the time to look at the flight manuals in the Team Fusion Wiki page:

http://www.theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/wiki/doku.php?id=start

[danperin]

Please take the time to look at the flight manuals in the Team Fusion Wiki page:

http://www.theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/wiki/doku.php?id=start

Thank you Buzzsaw!

I always look at the Wiki, but i never discussed about the engine managements with anybody, my english is ok but i'm shy
to speak in the Teamspeak channel when i'm playing in the server or even post something here! Silly me, i'm trying to get rid
of that and i will start to annoy you guys asking everything about engine management on the TS! Just kidding! ;)


Thank you again mates!!! :salute:

[ATAG_Colander]

Thank you Buzzsaw!

I always look at the Wiki, but i never discussed about the engine managements with anybody, my english is ok but i'm shy
to speak in the Teamspeak channel when i'm playing in the server or even post something here! Silly me, i'm trying to get rid
of that and i will start to annoy you guys asking everything about engine management on the TS! Just kidding! ;)


Thank you again mates!!! :salute:

Danperin,

Think of it as a good way to practice english :D
Anyway, there are several Portuguese speaking people in TS, some even from Brazil. You might even want to look for the existing Brazilian squadrons.

[danperin]

Danperin,

Think of it as a good way to practice english :D
Anyway, there are several Portuguese speaking people in TS, some even from Brazil. You might even want to look for the existing Brazilian squadrons.

I will! :salute:

[danperin]

Mates,

Thank you for all your attention! I don't know if you guys like to download singleplayer missions, but about some months ago i started to create some missions
and uploaded it into the airwarfare.com missions section, take a look here: http://www.airwarfare.com/sow/index.php/downloads/viewcategory/7-single-player-missions


My missions have this kind of screenshot description: 5566 5567 5572 5569 5568

Here some skins i made: 5570 5571

Oh, i have made some single/coop/multiplayer missions too: http://www.airwarfare.com/sow/index.php/downloads/viewdownload/8-coop-missions-multi-player/557-battle-of-britain-1940 5573

If you guys try some of this missions i would be proud! And if possible, give some feedback if they work well!

Cheers! :salute: