RAF speeds and overheating TF4.3 [Archive] - The Air Tactical Assault Group - Team Fusion

ATAG_Colander

Mar-18-2014, 16:00

I'll quote Buzz reply from the other thread here:

You cannot run +12 boost/3000 rpm for 5 minutes without full open rad, and only if you are in straight line speed.

In fact, you are better to drop rpms to 2950 in speed runs because you will go faster. This will also keep your engine cooler.

Basically you are only going to be able to touch maximum speed for a short period, then you will need to open your rad.

The method for getting the most speed:

+12/3000 rpm and 50% rad till you hit 300 mph, (270 in Hurricane), then drop rpms to 2950, watch rad temps, open as necessary.

To get an accurate reading, you will need to use the no cockpit view, which is generally not available in multiplayer, so check in single player.

Also the speed tests were done with a default summer map, with default wind, with the aircraft flying directly south. If you are on a server with a different wind direction, or one with wind at a higher speed than the default, you will get a different result, depending on the direction you are flying.

Bounder!

Mar-18-2014, 16:04

Cheers Colander for quoting Buzzsaw's post. My tests have been straight and level fully trimmed - there was no wind (vertical smoke stacks). I will upload my track and people can tell me what I am doing wrong. TF4.3 is only just out and might be pilot error, so just reporting initial findings here, hopefully others can show what they get. Will be great to get feedback on how to run the Spitfire 1a 100 oct at 12lbs boost, 3000rpms to reach 310mph and also overheating - those settings lasting for 5 minutes. Cheers.

RAF74_Buzzsaw

Mar-18-2014, 16:08

Cheers Colander for quoting Buzzsaw's post. My tests have been straight and level fully trimmed. I will upload my track and people can tell me what I am doing wrong. TF4.3 is only just out and might be pilot error, so just reporting initial findings here, hopefully others can show what they get. Will be great to get feedback on how to run the Spitfire 1a 100 oct at 12lbs boost, 3000rpms to reach 310mph and also overheating - those settings lasting for 5 minutes. Cheers.

You won't get 310 mph for five minutes... that was not the result the RAF got. 310 mph was top speed.

In my tests I was able to maintain over 300 mph for five minutes at +12/2900 rpm.

That was proven by many members of the beta team.

ATAG_Lolsav

Mar-18-2014, 16:12

In my tests I was able to maintain over 300 mph for five minutes at +12/2900 rpm.

That was proven by many members of the beta team.

this!:thumbsup::thumbsup:

Bounder!

Mar-18-2014, 16:14

never got near 310IAS unless I put it in a dive - to clarify there are 2 points here - one is the top speed which straight and level was 290IAS and the second point was maintaining 3000rpms 12lbs boost for 5 minutes - I am getting overheating at those settings ~2mins 20 seconds. I am sure I am doing something wrong, it's release night just posting to get feedback - many thanks.

ATAG_Colander

Mar-18-2014, 16:15

The cockpit needle will not give you the exact speed, you have to switch to wonder woman view.

ATAG_Lolsav

Mar-18-2014, 16:18

To put more information:

Constantly i was able to achieve 300mph indicated (on cockpit) and on wonderwoman view (wich reads the speeds correctly since the old il2 1946) i get 310-315mph

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-18-2014, 16:50

310

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ8ypDB-lqg

recorded about an hour ago on ATAG

trademe900

Mar-18-2014, 17:00

Great vid philstyle. I was quite alarmed about the amount of whiners dwelling offensively on this issue just moments in to the new game. This video is well timed to put a halt to this before it could gather momentum. I got a 305mph indicated run just fine.

I really do find it quite disrespectful to TF and all the testers involved to be posting something like this after it was only released moments ago. To think that after all that work they might have a second job now to stay on and deflect these unsubstantiated claims. This is one of the most basic performance parameters and the easiest to be tested out on by the many who were signed up for the job. How could one just discard all this work that people have been doing?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-18-2014, 17:10

Bonkin

Mar-18-2014, 17:12

I
Great vid philstyle. I was quite alarmed about the amount of whiners dwelling on this issue just moments in to the new game. This video is well timed to put a halt to this before it gathers momentum. I got a 305mph indicated run just fine.

To the OP, I really do find it quite disrespectful to TF and all the testers involved to be posting something like this after it was only released moments ago. How oblivious and could one be of all the work being done behind the scenes here? This is one of the most basic performance parameters and the easiest to be tested out on by the many who were signed up for the job.
Since when did asking for help become disrespectful? Everybody is grateful for the work TF do. Suggest you read the OP again.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-18-2014, 17:15

I
Since when did asking for help become disrespectful? Everybody is grateful for the work TF do. Suggest you read the OP again.

It's OK Bonkin, no disrespect taken from my point of view.

See my video = you should be able to get to 310 mph

The overheat/ +12lb/ 3000 RPM thing does *appear* to me to be an issue. Investigating.

trademe900

Mar-18-2014, 17:18

I
Since when did asking for help become disrespectful? Everybody is grateful for the work TF do. Suggest you read the OP again.

Ah, I am sorry. My tone is perhaps not appropriate either. I am just really feeling still a little peeved off at the offensive language some were using to blatantly trash all of this work. In game chat, I mean.

Osprey

Mar-18-2014, 17:20

5 minute limit on +12lb and 3000rpm still appears to be a problem though. I'm not entirely sure why. I recall testing with Gromit and this had been fixed weeks and weeks ago....

Unfortunately I'm going to have to move my comments on this issue back to the TF forum.

Interesting point PS. In your video, how long were you in flight for exactly? Also, regarding the top speeds, is this also the case for the 109's or does evidence point to consistent maintained top speed?

I fly the Hurricane, I am getting good speeds although cannot hold 3000rpm @ 12lbs, nevertheless still up around the 290mph mark, just looking for that sweet spot where I can hold that for the recommended 5 minutes (in reality a warning, not a hard limit)

Osprey

Mar-18-2014, 17:20

Ah, I am sorry. My tone is perhaps not appropriate either. I am just really feeling still a little peeved off at the offensive language some were using in trashing all of this work. In game chat, I mean.

We are testing in a different server, no such comments from us.

Osprey

Mar-18-2014, 17:24

It's OK Bonkin, no disrespect taken from my point of view.

See my video = you should be able to get to 310 mph

The overheat/ +12lb/ 3000 RPM thing does *appear* to me to be an issue. Investigating.

Bonkin wouldn't set foot in a Spitfire. He's a member of the fighting five-oh-one :D

Bounder!

Mar-18-2014, 17:25

Great vid philstyle.

To the OP, I really do find it quite disrespectful to TF and all the testers involved to be posting something like this after it was only released moments ago. How oblivious and could one be of all the work being done behind the scenes here?

In my opinion it is not disrespectful to ask questions and get feedback which is what I am doing here and I hope no members of TF are offended. With changes in a patch we always test to see what has changed and in this case the Spitfire's top speed in the notes was reported as 310mph. As we couldn't see we were getting that it's nice to ask as we are probably doing something wrong (as I have stated throughout my posts). If we can't ask questions and get feedback in a polite and friendly way that would be sad - this hasn't been the case from anyone, the response from actual TF chaps and ATAG chaps has been great and helpful, so no need to start anything, can we leave feelings out of this please. Many thanks.

Here is my track recorded on the ATAG server tonight running with 100% fuel. The test begins at 2:42.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtvS4iU7nGQ&feature=youtu.be

Point 1 - Speed: I have read the comments about the cockpit IAS dial not being absolutely accurate but will post up my results and discuss that in a sec.
Also after reviewing I see that I reach almost 300mph IAS in cockpit view however I do notice that I had inadvertently descended a couple of hundred feet to get that (I hover my mouse over the IAS dial to see if it records going past the 300mph point which it doesn't quite do). I have just flown a bit offline in wonderwoman view and indeed I get 300mph in that view but the needle wouldn't move above that whilst flying straight and level. I will record this later and post up as it is far easier to see the top speed by this method. My flights were recorded starting at lower speeds and then engaging boost cut out so that we can see I am not achieving speed by diving etc.

Point 2 - overheat. Boost cut out is engaged at 2:42 running 3000rpms and lasts until 5:20 (2mins 38 seconds). Should we run lower than 3000rpms with 12lbs boost to get the 5 minute rating?

Many thanks.

trademe900

Mar-18-2014, 17:26

I apologize Bounder. Wrongly venting some steam off into this thread after that offensive trashing of TF's work that I saw in the ATAG server. By that I mean bad enough to send me out the new 4.3 game I have been busting to get my hands on like you just don't know!

Bounder!

Mar-18-2014, 17:42

Thanks Trademe, I know how you feel and I really don't want to whine. TF do a fantastic job and do it for free and we are very lucky to have these patches.
A discussion was started in another thread and I wanted to bring it here. I might well be doing something wrong and that's why I am asking. Cheers.

RAF74_Buzzsaw

Mar-18-2014, 17:44

Salute all

I and others have been working on this patch for quite a long time, personally for the last two weeks, night and day whenever I had spare time. I worked all Saturday night and Sunday morning dealing with last minute issues, turned in at 10am. I was up last night till 3:00 am.

Like everyone else on Team Fusion, I don't get paid a dime.

So you will please excuse me for not replying in detail at this moment.

I'd like to get a break and relax for a moment. I will reply in detail later this week.

If that is not good enough, then I'd suggest you take your interests and playing time elsewhere. :salute:

ATAG_Lolsav

Mar-18-2014, 17:47

As you close to 300mph 280-290 mph, start closing the radiator until it allows you. The temperature can rise till 116/117 degrees, but it will stay there. Usually i can close the radiator until 40%, but ive been to 35% closed or lower. It depends on the readings im getting. The rpm setting lower will produce a higher boost pressure, but im sure you guys know that by now.

So: graduatly close radiator as you close to top speed. Open/close radiator keeping a eye on temperature indicator. Fly straight :)

vranac

Mar-18-2014, 18:07

No one is trashing TF here. We waited almost 6 months mainly for the top speed fix and Boost cut-out overheating problem that was introduced with TF 4.0 patch.
Lot of things are improved and I really enjoy new sounds (I got scared when I shoot with 109 first time :D) and graphic effects but that's cosmetic stuff.

I am flying on both sides and I can tell you it started to get boring on both sides.

Why ?

In TF 3.01 there was a very slight chance to catch a 109 in a level flight on the deck with BCO on, 3000 rpm and radiator closed 35%.
You could get a bit closer on him in that ~ 20 sec pause in using WEP.
In TF 4.0 that's impossible. So it was boring on both sides, in 109 I know I can't be caught and in Spit there is no way to catch 109.

Phil , can you upload longer video or track so we can see how did you get that speed. My experience is the same as Bounder one.

RAF74_Buzzsaw

Mar-18-2014, 18:48

No one is trashing TF here.

Bullshit. What is this:

I am flying on both sides and I can tell you it started to get boring on both sides.

And this statement:

In TF 3.01 there was a very slight chance to catch a 109 in a level flight on the deck with BCO on, 3000 rpm and radiator closed 35%.
You could get a bit closer on him in that ~ 20 sec pause in using WEP.
In TF 4.0 that's impossible. So it was boring on both sides, in 109 I know I can't be caught and in Spit there is no way to catch 109.

If you can't catch a standard 109E-4 on the deck in TF 4.3 then you are a lousy pilot.

We have tested the Spitfire IA 100 octane versus the 109E-4 on the deck, and the Spitfire out accelerates the 109, and is just as fast. So, assuming both start at the same speed, the Spitfire will run down the 109.

------

Frankly the level of whining on this board has both myself and others in the team considering walking away.

I personally do not think it worth the huge amount of time I have invested in this mod to get kicked in the face.

vranac

Mar-18-2014, 19:13

Buzzsaw, I really wasn't expected this kind of answer.

I was writing about differences between 3.01 and 4.0. I haven't tested 4.3 thoroughly. But in those quick tests I don't see any differences or the fixes
for the problems that 4.0 introduced.

And yes, like you said I'm probably just a lousy pilot and I can't get more than 300 mph in a Spit.

But I'll shot down any of your test pilots in 1 vs 1 fight in any patch.

And I know some pilots that are much better than me, completely a different league.

And I just can't believe that you're acting like a little children, ohhh someone is criticizing the results, we are out.
That is wrong.

Team Fusion saved this game and all of you guys have great respect. Whatever happens.

ElGringo

Mar-18-2014, 19:27

Bounder I watched your video and you had your radiator at 100% for the whole time.

trademe900

Mar-18-2014, 19:33

Bullshit. What is this:

And this statement:

If you can't catch a standard 109E-4 on the deck in TF 4.3 then you are a lousy pilot.

We have tested the Spitfire IA 100 octane versus the 109E-4 on the deck, and the Spitfire out accelerates the 109, and is just as fast. So, assuming both start at the same speed, the Spitfire will run down the 109.

------

Frankly the level of whining on this board has both myself and others in the team considering walking away.

I personally do not think it worth the huge amount of time I have invested in this mod to get kicked in the face.

Get out of here. Go take take a break and enjoy yourself. The game is now perfect. I am quite perplexed at why this is called 4.3, seems way too humble an increment. Should have had a celebratory version name change of some sort. I never thought this would get even near to the point where we can say it's 'all done'. This is an astounding milestone. It's not often we are ever satisfied with anything in life to the point where you just don't want anything else and I am truly at this point with the simulation as of the 19th of March 2014. It's all changed today- gone are the hopes of a working this or more accurate that, but now instead there's an immense hope for preservation taking it's place. This has occupied a monumental amount of my time and the fun factor doesn't drop off, somehow. I now only dearly wish that this work and the community around it all can make a foothold and remain like this in the path of other factors in the sim world. I'm not interested in BoS- I do not trust finance driven developers any longer to develop an accurate and functional sim. No offence to anyone who is anticipating that release or interested in that theatre of aerial combat but quite frankly I don't want to go through all this shit and fixing headaches again- the miracle has been done! Only those that derive the energy from a real passion could have made this happen. The sacrifices people have made for this must just be colossal. The words 'thank you' don't seem to mean anything at this scale.

PS. A wellington bomber would be sick:salute:

Bounder!

Mar-18-2014, 20:12

Bounder I watched your video and you had your radiator at 100% for the whole time.

I kept the radiator at 100% as my engine was exploding quickly - as you can see in the video it only lasted around 2mins 40secs rather than the 5 minute rating (repeated twice with same result). I'll try closing it up momentarily to see if I can get extra speed and see how long I can maintain that, cheers, maybe that is the answer for top speed. Regarding overheating, when testing offline in the quick mission flight over the sea I have found my engine lasted for close to 5 minutes at full throttle + boost cut out and 3000rpms where as online on the ATAG mission tonight it was dying around the 2 min 40 mark. Not sure why there was a difference but posting the info. If someone can post a video of reaching 310mph in straight and level flight and their settings at some time that would be a great help as we may be doing it wrong - hopefully we will find it out, which is what discussions are for. There is always an adjustment period after a patch, this discussion was started in another thread and it was asked to be started in a new thread. When I am not getting the results I expect I like to ask as there are usually people you can tell you why that is - either I am doing it wrong or my expectations are incorrect (e.g. that 310mph could be reached/maintained at sea level in straight and level flight). Furthermore I have since noticed that I am not getting 12lbs of boost on the deck as is the rating at 3000rpms (I'm getting 11lbs), again I might be doing it wrong but am reporting findings. As I said in my posts, this is in no way an attack on TF, simply a question, if people have been offended I offer my apologies and can leave the discussion for others.

[EDIT] Further testing I have just managed 310mph at sea level straight and level! Only one test and carried out on the new ATAG mission up (French mission spawning in land) but got this by running at 2900rpms at full throttle boost cut out (read as 11lbs boost in cockpit) with 50% radiator. Water temps ran at 119'C and blew roughly at 5 minutes. Speeds were possible in the test just not at the rating of 3000rpms for length of time - doesn't bother me but that is what has been causing the confusion along with cockpit not recording 12lbs boost. 2900rpms 11lbs boost is the new 3000rpms 12lbs boost. Thanks for the feedback that got us there in the end.

Osprey

Mar-19-2014, 07:32

Buz, you said in another thread you were up until 3am fixing stuff and that is always a worry! Please take yourself away from the boards and get some well earned rest mate, you deserve it for sure :)

Vranac is not the best at english (and he won't mind me saying that), in fact Nitrous rips him apart on Teamspeak with his Borat impersonations, so please don't read too much into what he wrote which is not about 4.3 anyway.

In the meantime we'll be enjoying the fruits of the new version

~S~

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-19-2014, 08:14

Hi guys,

I'm in London for a few days and thus unable to play or make new videos. I cna however explain *how* to tget the 310 mph. You can do this witihn a few minutes after getting airborne.

1. Make sure the engine gets the appropriate warm-up to 40 degrees oil
2. Get airborne and, once stable, set up fora fast, but cool cruising flight. (2700 rpm, radiator 100%)
3. Get level, stable and trimmed.
4. Make sure throttle is 100%
5. Now increase RPM to 3000
6. Once at 3000 RPM, press the tit and retard/increase throttle to give you the full 12lb pressure
7. trim
8. Wait until speed comes up above ~280mph (in spit) or ~250mph (in hurricane)
9. Trim
10. Start decreasing radiator to 50%
11. Trim
12. speed should now read somewhere between 305 and 310 - READ the NEEDLE, NOT the silly pop-up window. The pop up rounds down to the nearest 10mph. You can be doing 289mph and the pop-up will say 280

- IF the needle shows 305(ish) - it can be hard to see exactly given the gradations on the dial - then you are doing 310mph. You can confirm this if you have lower realism settings and are able to switch to the wonderwoman view (ctrl+F1)

OK, now you've got to 310mpg, how do you stop the radiator from blowing up?

This is where you're going to have to reduce rpm slightly. Buzzsaw recommends dropping it back to 2950.
you might even get a slight increase in speed here.
I like to run at 2900 for safety.

That should give you quite a nice period of running at 310.

I hope this helps guys.

Bounder!

Mar-19-2014, 08:35

Thanks for the detailed feedback Philstyle, that's the stuff. I did try 2950 but popped the rad and like you found 2900 more usable. I repeated my test further (getting near 300mph and then going to 2900rpm with 50% rad) and out of 3 attempts late last night I managed to take the Spit 1a to 310mph twice on those settings (in the second test of three the radiator damaged quickly before reaching top speed). The confusion here was that the Spit was rated at 12lbs boost 3000rpms for 5 minutes and the engine was overheating within that timeframe with full rad and the boost gauge is reading 11lbs and not 12lbs. I haven't had a chance to test 3000rpms full boost and full rad again since my tests last night but since 2950/2900 seems to be the better rpm it's probably best to stick to that since it gives the results. Thanks very much for posting those details in full and to everyone who gave feedback and tried to help.

Cheers, Bounder.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-19-2014, 08:58

Thanks for the detailed feedback Philstyle, that's the stuff. I had tried 3000/2950 but found it overheated before reaching 310mph. Like you I am finding 2900rpms was the balance (with 50% rad) that worked for me. I can't hold it for that long at the speed but it gives that extra edge when chasing/running and to have it back is great. I repeated my test further and out of 3 attempts late last night I managed to take the Spit 1a to 310mph twice on those settings (in the second test of three the radiator damaged quickly before reaching top speed). I haven't had a chance to test 3000rpms full boost (which is reading as 11lbs) and full rad since my tests last night (which resulted in fast overheating) but since 2950/2900 seems to be the better rpm it's probably best to stick to that. Thanks very much for posting those details in full and to everyone who gave feedback and tried to help.

No trouble Bounder. S!

I'm aware that there are some physics problem with the core of the game. As yet, these remain unsolved and until that is done it's not possible to match the engine/speed (apparently) 1:1 with real life data at all altitudes. Getting it right at one altitude results in a pendulum effect at another. For example we might correct the performance at 0ft, only to find that, suddenly the aircraft cannot climb above 20,000ft... then we correct the 20,000ft climb only to find out that now it overheats too quickly at 9,000ft.. and so on and so on.... . this has caused poor old Buzzsaw endless hours of frustration. the amount of permutations for what might fail and the myriad of different atmospheric conditions makes testing very, very difficult.

Mu understanding is that the goal has been to tray and get as close as possible at the key altitudes that tend to be used by players. In some cases that has meant relying on slight RPM variations to what was historical at that height, in order to get the right speeds, without compromising things to drastically at other heights...

Anyways, until TF5, this sounds like a process of balancing* (not "team balancing" i.e. the 109 against the Spit for example, but "physics balancing" i.e. the spit at 1,000ft against historical records versus balancing the spit at 18,000ft against other historical records). Hopefully, some time in the future, the core physics problems (relating mainly to how the game calculates air density) will be fixed. Only at that point can the annoying pendulum effect be dealt with, and the final performance characteristics adjusted.

* this word is always a touch word! It's important to clarify what I mean by "balancing" in this context.

ATAG_Lolsav

Mar-19-2014, 09:07

* this word is always a touch word! It's important to clarify what I mean by "balancing" in this context.

I have my eye on you! :crazyeyes:

Lolsav: Be veryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy carefull how you say "balancing" - Please repeat after me: "B-a-l-a-n-c-i-n-g"

OlePhil: "Repeat please"

ATAG_Snapper

Mar-19-2014, 09:20

Excellent thread with vital information for us Spittie pilots. I, too, had some initial frustrations going strictly by the "book values" until I took a hint from Buzzsaw and went offline to try the no-cockpit "Wonder Woman" mode. The instrumentation is much more precise and easier to read than the Full Realism cockpit, and late last night my trials mirrored what has been presented here.

The Spitfire is certainly easy to fly and very forgiving, but challenging to fly well....at least well enough to shoot down a well-flown 109.

speedone

Mar-19-2014, 09:35

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)

Mar-19-2014, 09:43

Dear members of TF: please realise that for every complaint on this forum, there's 50 people that don't complain, because they are absolutely happy with the patch, be it perfect or not. Don't let the relatively small group of loudmouths give you the wrong impression... The happy people are the vast majority, they just don't post as often as the negative people do... ;-)

I don't consider a polite and factual observation to be either a "complaint" or "loud-mouthing".

The only complaints I object too are the ones that make sweeping generalizations or do not provide adequate evidence. When people use terms like "all X are whiners", or "all X love to vulch" etc...

Bounders observation was backed up by what he saw in-cockpit. He was able to provide his flight data as well as an uploaded track.
When further evidence was brought forward, bounder happily accepted it.

All in all, I would say this particular thread has been quite polite and congenial.

speedone

Mar-19-2014, 09:54

My response was not to this thread or even anyone in particular Phillstyle. I just needed to speak up after these comments that got me a bit worried:

"Frankly the level of whining on this board has both myself and others in the team considering walking away.
I personally do not think it worth the huge amount of time I have invested in this mod to get kicked in the face."

ATAG_Snapper

Mar-19-2014, 10:34

We all share your concern on that point, Speedone. Osprey and Trademe900 offered the best advice -- take a few days/weeks to walk away from it, get some fresh air, take a break. To Buzzsaw's credit, his professionalism had him in Teamspeak and on this forum monitoring the feedback on his and his team's accomplishments in order to note what's working and what may need further development. In fact, I spotted Buzz on TS, so I started uttering some tosh on "how the Spits are too fast now, I keep overshooting the lunky 109's and we need speed brakes to stay with them". To everyone's high amusement Buzzsaw cut in on my silly meanderings to comment that he'll have to detune the Spits to meet my expectations. LOL

We're all passionate about this sim, we're all hardcore enthusiasts. Unfortunately that frequently creeps in as expressed frustration that can be disheartening for a project leader to hear after countless hours of work to make it right. The best we can do right now is take a deep breath and play this fantastic patch like there's no tomorrow. By all means we should make note and document what works and what we believe needs further examination. In the meantime, let's all fly and shoot each other down in good fellowship! :D

speedone

Mar-19-2014, 10:50

I second to that Snapper :salute:

9./JG52 Ziegler

Mar-19-2014, 11:02

arglmauf

Mar-19-2014, 12:15

I guess the best way to solve this problem was the guide that Phil posted. The "problem" (Or rather misunderstanding) came from a counterintuitive misunderstanding on our part, namely "to reach the max velocity, you had to go back to 2900 RPM instead of keeping it at 3000 RPM". Perhaps a suggestion for the future for the TF team: Get a "noob" outside of the team, tell him to do XYZ (In this case, speed the Spit up to 310 MPH) and check where he goes wrong and why.

Problem is, when you constantly deal with these complex FM models and you work your head into this stuff, you lose track of what is general knowledge and what is special understanding. It's kinda like snowblindness and needs an outside person to notice. And people get confused and sometimes angry when stuff behaves contrary to conventional wisdom, namely "More RPM and Boost = more speed".

Osprey

Mar-19-2014, 13:04

Totally understand the 'tweaks' to get what's required, I mean, we already have a boost reading higher than FAE and I take little notice of this so it's a means to an end anyway, plus this is only one small part of a greater patch - for example loving the ground handling (haven't landed yet, too busy seeing how to pop rads and then bail out!) Like most of us I'm in for the long haul and we can all really see COD coming on.

When we get to TF5 I guess it can no longer be called just "Cliffs of Dover" though lol :D