Search the Community

Hello gents', Thought I'd post some speculations and observations on the FM aspects of some things in FE2 and SF2 that I've recently been tinkering with. This might be an interesting post for those who like to follow these technical threads. I was recently installing more aircraft into my small SF2 install - something I wanted to get to last year but had no time - and I decided to install a couple of the late prop aircraft too, particularly the SeaFury and F4U-5 variant of the Corsair. Overall pleased with the handling of the types, I tweaked a few things such as desensitizing the rudder on them, and also giving them slightly heavier aileron feel - since those late model prop aircraft were fairly heavy, about 4500 kg on average. Further testing involved flying and inspection of the [FlightControl] and [Engine] sections...couldn't get much beyond about 500 kph near sea level or at alt. in the types...so I commented out the MaxSpeedSL entry for the FlightControl, and tweaked prop speeds to close to historical, within the 2000 to 3000 rpm range, also pushed up the value for the SLPowerDry entry for the Engine, usually by a noticeable amount, and then tested further. Some of the things I've noticed, in terms of SF2 specifically (but this post is relevant to FE2 too): a) WEP power is not modelled realistically, since you can keep running it without engine damage b) WEP power doesn't give much of a boost, if at all (although I've only tinkered with the SeaFury and Corsair so far) c) a better way of simulating, however simplistic it is, the potential of WEP power, is to manipulate the AltitudeTableData numbers instead (for example, I plugged in values ranging from about 1.05 to 1.35 around the 6000 m alt. band, which should be where the Corsairs benefitted the most from max. throttle) d) after manipulation of the AltitudeTableData, it's best to get rid of the WEP entries entirely, and set up "throttle gradients" instead under the engine sections, such as: ThrottleRate=0.65 IdleThrottle=0.12 CruiseThrottle=0.45 MilThrottle=0.70 MaxThrottle=1.00 The numbers above I've plugged in, for example, for the Corsair. The space between Military throttle and Max throttle would be where "WEP power" would theoretically in this case be engaged, somewhere around the 0.85 mark for the band I've selected above. For this to work somewhat realistically, the player should restrict themselves to about 85% throttle max. except in extreme situations, depending of course on where military and max throttle are set. Also important for this to work is to make sure that the max SL speed under the FlightControl section is left uncapped (commented out) - otherwise artificial barriers are set up that cannot be bypassed by more than about 20-30 kph. Speed caps work beautifully in SF2 for the jet engines, but, at least from my experience, don't work that well with the late prop planes since you can then never hit top max. recorded historical speeds, not even at alt. - and not at SL either. Also noticeable in the example above is that I've increased the throttle rate from the default of about 0.25. Historically, late prop aircraft would have had better acceleration than early jet planes (not better top speeds, but faster acceleration to their own max speed). By the 1960s/70s, jet engines should surpass the props even in acceleration. I then re-tested by dumping the modified Corsair into my FE2 install. In SF2 it can get into the 760s kph, as historical, using the engine and throttle values I've included in my graded throttle settings above, while in FE2 the same tweaks push the top speed into the 880s kph - a difference of about 120 kph for top speeds, across FE2/SF2. This is why it's not a good idea simply to transfer data inis from one of the sims to the other. I'm assuming that the discrepancy in top speeds means that TK went with calculations to give less air resistance in FE2 (maybe FE as well?) - to fit better with the more fragile and maneuverable WWI aircraft types. One thing that remains constant between FE2 and SF2 is that, at least from my observations, the WEP modelling is not very realistic - there was no high alt. band where I could push the top speed beyond, for example, a reasonable top speed that may have been possible at near sea level (such as 500 or 600 kph). Some preliminary conclusions, to be tested further: a) speed caps at sea level should be kept in place in FE2, as done in the data inis in my FM packs, since they fit better with the lower top speeds of the early aircraft anyway, and mach limits should also be kept fairly low (I have them set at 120% of the "top speed" of the WW1 aircraft....this allows for realistic dive speeds that I haven't been able to push beyond about the 460 kph mark even on the late war types such as the SE5a) b) flying late WW2 and early Cold War prop aircraft in FE2 is not recommended, but FE2 may be good for "Golden Age" stuff, as Geezer speculated upon in another thread (can't remember the link for that now), in other words for aircraft that don't have a top speed higher than about 350 or 400 kph c) the difference between top speeds at alt and at sea level are modelled just fine for the jet engines in SF2, since caps on SL speeds, and Alt speeds, work fine for those (have seen this in some Flogger tweaks that I did for my mini-SF2 install); in other words, SF2 respects the wet/dry mach values and alt table entries beautifully for jet-age stuff d) I think that the MaxThrottle value in SF2, for the prop aircraft, could use some more tinkering/testing...I've set it at 1.00, but will try other values of 1.20, 1.50 etc., to see if this creates more realistic differences between regular power and WEP, or some kind of "accordion" effect e) as it stands, I'm enjoying the SeaFuries and Corsairs but only with SL speed uncapped and giving historical top speeds not at alt. but near sea level (this is a compromise of sorts since, at alt, they still make about 600 kph and sometimes a bit more - so I'm not terribly irritated by not attaining 740 kph at 7000 m alt or so, for example, in the SeaFury, as recorded for that plane) f) a couple of pics included below of the AI in SF2 now losing control of their F4U-5 Corsair during a scrap, and doing several back flips (too much throttle applied perhaps?); he then bails out of the otherwise undamaged plane; so, overall, I'm liking the realism of some of the haphazard maneuvers they now make, and also the increased speed at which these late prop fights now happen, even on the deck g) anything that I find of further use in the SF2 data inis, and if relevant to FE2, I will tinker with more to bring even more realism into FE2 (the lockout speed trick implemented for control surfaces in the alternative Morane-Saulnier type N data ini posted under the FM thread for FE2 is an example of things discovered while combing through the SF2 files) Happy flying, Von S

Hello gents,' See pics below for oddities on the early Flogger-A (MiG 23 type S)....occasionally the plane drifts sideways at a 90 degree angle, throwing the cockpit view off...this also happens sometimes in spins/stalls...the only mods I've made to the data inis that come with the early Floggers is copying/pasting of stock CD0 values from SF2 (from the MiG 23 MS export variant)...otherwise it was impossible to push past about Mach 1.2 at alt. I haven't noticed this oddity on later Floggers, only the early ones with the narrower wing (have tried limiting yaw values but doesn't seem to make a difference). The Floggers I'm using are from the big 2-pack MiG install available on CombatAce, by the way, with Stary's enhanced cockpits installed. Comments/suggestions appreciated. Von S

Hello fellow FE/FE2 flyers, As a continuation of my experiment to include over-compression tendencies in the 200hp Daimler engine for Geezer's Junkers J.1 model, I did some (successful) tweaking of the previously tweaked data inis for the the BMW-powered Fokk. D.7 and late, 200hp Alb. D.5a. Tinkering with the following values in the data inis is required to get things working well, under the Engine section: AltitudeTableNumData AltitudeTableDeltaX AltitudeTableData The NumData should reflect how many values are present under the AltitudeTableData section. The DeltaX number is finicky, the general rule being that a higher number gives more powerful engine results across wider alt. bands but is perhaps less historically realistic, while in some cases a lower number is required, for example to "unglue" the AI from the ground in case the AI has trouble handling a particular plane, and also to create more subtle and gradual performance drops across smaller/thinner alt. bands. [Edited this section to include more accurate info.] TheAltitudeTableData entry begins with a value of 1.000 - ground level number, and then gradually falls off to 0.000. Correct over-compression of an engine requires that a number higher than 1.0, usually a few entries that are higher than 1.0, are included at the start of the AltitudeTableData entry - to generate the correct effect if an over-compressed engine is at full throttle near sea level. Values under the FlightControl section, particularly top speed values, then become a reflection of top speed at altitudes between about 1000 and 1500m - typical heights at which Idflieg would have over-compressed engines tested. (This also depends on the DeltaX number and where the AltitudeTableData value of 1.000 begins: for example, values of 1.200, 1.050, 1.000, etc., with a DeltaX no. of 500, would mean that 100% performance is at 1000 m alt.) It's no wonder that there is some confusion therefore regarding top speeds of the BMW-powered Fokk. D.7, and if its numbers are reflections of what happens near sea level or at 1 km alt. approximately. [Added important info. here too.] Here is a snippet from TheAerodrome.com for the 180hp Mercedes (au) installed in many Fokk. D.7s: "Climb rate is 5 m/s at sea level, falling linearly to 0 m/s at 6 km, marked as the "theoretical ceiling". Climb rpm begins at 1400 rpm at sea level, falling to 1310 rpm at 5600m." "Level speed: 0 km: 190 km/h @ 1570 rpm 1 km: 188 km/h @ 1580 rpm 2 km: 182 km/h @ 1530 rpm 3 km: 177 km/h @ 1490 rpm 4 km: 167 km/h @ 1430 rpm 5 km: 152 km/h @ 1360 rpm 6 km: 124 km/h @ 1280 rpm" Here are the results for the newly tweaked BMW-powered Fokk. D.7: near sea level: 210-211 kph @ 100% throttle near sea level: 176-177 kph @ 70% throttle (cruise, not using high alt. throttle) 1000 m: 201 kph @ 100% throttle (this is the top speed usually cited for the BMW-powered D.7, but probably refers to at alt., not at sea level) 1500 m: 198 kph @ 100% throttle 3000 m: 187 kph @ 100% throttle 4000 m: 176 kph @ 100% throttle climb rate to about 1000 m, at 70% throttle, is around 3.5 m/s; climb rate remains fairly consistent beyond 1000 m, at 100% throttle, if speeds in 120s and 130s kph are maintained Results are a noticeable improvement over the Mercedes-powered D.7 (no wonder pilots wanted this type). Here are results for the newly tweaked 200hp Mercedes-powered Alb. D.5a: near sea level: 206 kph @ 100% throttle near sea level: 183 kph @ 70% throttle (cruise, not using high alt. throttle) 1000 m: 202-203 kph @ 100% throttle (Goering supposedly reported maintaining over 200 kph in level flight in an Alb. D.5a...perhaps the 200hp variant?) 1500 m: 198-199 kph @ 100% throttle (this is the top speed sometimes cited for the late variant Alb. D.5a, again perhaps referring to at alt. and not sea level) 3000 m: 187-188 kph @ 100% throttle 4000 m: 177 kph @ 100% throttle 5000 m: 165 kph @ 100% throttle 6000 m: 110-112 kph @ 100% throttle (noticeable drop, since exceeding its ceiling here of about 5900 meters) 6025 m: 90-95 kph @ 100% throttle (begins to shudder and stall) climb rate to about 1000 m, at 70% throttle, is around 4 m/s; climb rate is around 3 m/s at 100% throttle beyond 1000 m, in 120s and 130s kph (slamming the throttle to 100% below 1000 m would not have been recommended historically, but gives a climb rate of about 5-6 m/s, similar for the Fokk. D.7...probably used in emergency scenarios) Results for the late Alby. are a noticeable improvement over the 180 hp Mercedes (au) Albies, and similar to results for the Fokk. D.7 - watch the wings though in dives on the Alb., especially with the now excess power. Also interesting is the historical realism of how the speed advantage at alt. for the high-compression engines remains fairly consistent across the altitudes (dropping off in small steps of about 5-10 kph per 1000 m), and then severely drops off close to the ceiling for the type. A gradual, more "curved" drop of speed for high-alt. engines should be seen for WW2 types - but is usually, mistakenly assumed of WW1, over-compressed types too, which would remain fairly consistent in power until close to their ceiling (see relevant discussions on TheAerodrome.com for more info.). Attached are the two tweaked data inis (will roll this eventually into a ver. 9.0 of the FM update pack). I'm still debating if I will tinker with the 180hp (au) Mercedes-powered types...the benefit of over-compression on those types would be small, probably too small to make any noticeable difference in FE/FE2. Happy flying, Von S [Files included in ver. 9.0 and later of my FM updates pack.]