grafspee

Many engine abuses which effects should be noticed after 10 or more hours of engine life, DCS shows those effects sometime after couple minutes or even couple seconds. I am not telling that engine should be immune to whatever how you treat it, but if you follow plane's manual, engine should last many many hours. So for example over revving engine for 10s should not lead to immediate engine failure. Using WEP should not doom engine to death. Am i asking too much ? If anyone putting this issue to question, asking too much ?

This is big issue for all ww2 modules in DCS, they are modeled that way that pretty much engine will die after longer use like flying single airplane and going through couple tanks. Engine models are way too sensitive, at first release P-47 main bearing modeling was nightmare, even now after couple fixes you can't go above 2800rpm because it kills engine instantly, despite fact that every P-47 manual states that engine can handle 3060rpm for brief time. Famous P-51 WEP engine killer, i am so traumatized by this that i don't use WEP in P-51 anymore. Low carb temp is good, only concern is too high carb temp. Chances are that you are managing engine perfectly are high but it is just DCS which loves to kill engine w/o reason. Limits on WEP are only limits how long you can use it in single use not total flying hours. If you are doing WEP for max allowable time you need to drop power to continuous and cool engine down. My only advice is to keep oil cooler wide open in P-47.

It also depends which engine you lose, if it is left engine airplane is harder to control at low speed then if you would lose right one.

If any ED team dude don't come here and acknowledge this issue as bug and send report to the ED team, fix won't come ever at all. Unless this issue is already acknowledged, then this topic should get "already reported" status. I may be wrong but as far as i know there are 2 or 3 guys which sweep forum bug section trying to recreate bugs and file full bug raport to the team but there are lots of planes and other modules probably endless list of reported bug so it may take even month or so to complete sweep and get back to ww2 bug section.

Robustness of the radial engine comes not from resilience of pistons or connection rods or crank shaft to damage, both V and radial will suffer and self destroy when vital parts get hit. V-12 are liquid cooled engines which means that they have one big water jacked in engine block and headers, once this jacked is perforated fate of the engine is sealed. If V-12 were air cooled they would have upper hand over radials due to significantly lower frontal area. Lower frontal aera means less chance your engine being hit. So difference is in cooling, air cooling does not care about battle damage and liquid cooling even smallest possible damage can doom engine to death because there is no way to seal liquid cooling system in flight, even single small caliber rifle bullet can seal engine doom.

Issue reported many many times over. I don't know what status this issue has but my bet is on "can not reproduce" state.

If you have switches mapped to your hotas it may be a case that you turn off fuel or pulling cut outs by mistake especially if you have this checked ON

That would be incorrect order because engine has to shut down due to fuel starvation not by lack of ignition. So by shutting down fuel by fuel selectors is way closer then shutting engine via cutting off magnetos. I wish that ED would implement punishment for shutting down engines via magnetos by immediate fire of engine compartment, because when you cut magnetos and fuel is still introduced to inlet, hot fuel air mixture will come out of exhaust causing serious fire risk and on top of that those pressure carbs induce fuel even when engine is not rotating, so when engine stops fuel will pour out of engine inlet on the ground making small fuel puddle in quite short time. I just tested it and even when i cut off fuel via fuel tank selectors engines still get tis splutter at the lower rpm. Just same story perfect rpm run down to about 200rpm and then engines wakes up splatter loop with rpm spikes. So at that moment switching magnetos off is probably only way to avoid this splatter loop.

This is so ridiculous. It makes me sick by watching this. I advice to cut fuel via tank selectors next to cut outs. This way you should avoid this engine splutter but engine will still keep running quite long before cuts out. Running engines up to 1500rpm will speed things up.

This is exactly my point, if any splutter or backfiring happen it will happen while engine still has high rpm. Like on this recording, not at moment when engine is about to stop rotating.

This is why always say that, engine should not cut out at moment when you move mixture to cut off, engine should run for some time, and after noticeable delay engine should cut out and if any spontaneous fuel induction happen there is a time engine to splutter when rpm is quite high so that spark from magnetos is strong. In DCS we have instant reaction on cut off lever and perfect engine rpm run down to 100rpm and then magic happen. I wonder why in those planes you have something like boosters coil when engine without priming and coil boosting combust fuel without problem

@Art-J I won't hold my breath for full fidelity start ups and shut downs but ED could at least remove this splattering loop at 100rpm. This is my main issue and main issue of this topic.

@Art-J I agree, this splatter sounds and acts like this during start up with primer.

Just for sake of realism i just shut fuel, engines are running much longer after shut off but they won't enter this splatter loop at low rpm where engine is about to stop. @Slippa I would love to but i live in Poland, reason why i've been in UK was different then visiting museum. Maybe some day it will happen If i would live in UK i would not miss a single air show unless 2 or more would happen at the same time

+1

This issue was brought long time ago on this forum. This backfire script is present in spitfire p-51 and mosquito because all of them uses same code, could be in P-47 as well but i can't remember. Shutting via cutouts not by magnetos off is that engine burns out all remaining fuel from carbs it prevents fuel leaking in to inlet or outside of the plane. This is how this should work. 1 Run up engine to 1200-1500 rpm P-51 manual states it should be 1500rpm 2 Move cutoff lever or mixture lever to cutoff position 3. After lever is moved engine still runs because remaining fuel in fuel system is still distributed to inlet 4. After short period of time engine dies and prop quickly stops rotating if cut out is set in wrong way you may be not able to shut down engine or prop will come to stop after longer time, but if cut out allow to some fuel be distributed to engine it will not magickly stop firing and re-ignite at 100rpm, it will splutter through whole range of rpm. I had opportunity to visit Duxford air museum this year and in proces of exploring it, at least 3 or 4 spitfires started to take off, do fly by and some aerobatics like loops, so i ended up watching those Spitfires for at least 3-4 hours. I've seen couple start ups and shut downs as well as run ups. And i say that non of them act like DCS one. In DCS when you move this cut out lever engine shuts down immediately and when engine is about to stop it splatter again over and over you can see it on tachometer needle bouncing like a ball bouncing of the floor. My conclusion is that nether start up and shut down works correctly in DCS. Start ups are way to clean, throttle response with cold engine is way off, engine run immediately smooth as butter which for person who saw at least on start up knows that this is not true. Have you encounter any unsuccessful start up beside those in which you forget to turn on fuel or mags on ? And shut downs are off to, mainly because engines react instantly at cutoff lever movement and whole range from 1500 to 100 rpm doesn't splatter even once and when it is about to stop suddenly fuel is introduced to engine inlet sparking sporadic combustion. At 100rpm engine barely catch up when primer is used so why it should catch up when spark from magnetos are almost non existent due to that coil booster is off and some fumes of fuel magically ignites at 100rpm. This is ridiculous. This recording is the most interesting, we can hear idling spitfire up close and second spitfire is taking off, how i could hear that was exactly same way as on this recording, as soon far spitfire firewall throttle sound of the engine/prop overwhelmed everything else. If someone ask, yes spitfire sounds exactly like as on this recording from smartphone difference is only in how loud is that. Smartphone's software lowers microphone sensitivity when louder sound comes in, so idling and taking off spitfire loudness looks the same but it isn't, taking off spitfire is much much louder, this is why in DCS idling warbirds sounds so quiet.

It is just a simulation, it could be that starter is missing code responsible for battery drain. Also ambient temp should impact how fast starter will rotate engine,at lower temps due to lover battery efficiency and higher friction inside engine.

K-4 is very stable in pitch and responsiveness is way lower then in P-47, at low alt at high speed K-4 will struggle to pull +6G but at high alt pitch responsiveness is at good spot, in P-47 you have no problem to pull +8G at high IAS but at high alt where IAS is low you need extra care when applying pitch it is very easy to stall. Second thing K-4 improvement at high alt performance is very large comparing to earlier like G-6s. So P-47D vs K-4 combat is not as easy as you may thought, but still doable. K-4 production numbers were very low comparing to overall Bf-109 numbers so chances that allied pilot encounter K-4 were very slim.

It looks like tail wheel is jumping

@SharpeXB If you dogfighting and you are following plane while he is pulling 2-3-4-5 G you are experiencing WT equivalent to plane which weigh is 2-3-4-5 heavier then you, so trick it to not enter his WT by flying above him or with side offset, if you stay dead center behind expect rough ride.

You can lower saturation, it will transform stick movement to shorter elevator range. In those planes elevator movement range is much larger then it is used in flying. Only cone from this will be shorten max deflection of elevator which in case of elevator damage may lead to lost control over plane. Anyway if you complain about P-51 you should try Spitfire

Even if all antons by 1944 had increased ratings, this does not change fact that ED isn't planning adding this in near future. At least i haven't seen any news or statement from ED about it.

In DCS we don't care about engine life time in terms of total work hours before engines replacement, so data from flight testing is more then enough, if they could test D9 at 3250rpm for 30min and they established continuous power at 3000rpm i'm good with that. Modeling DCS D9 that way, that we could not follow those tests with success is even more bad, then not knowing factory limitations.

Still looks like error in DCS manual because 1,7ata isn't achieved at full throttle like DCS manual states. And in DCS Dora we can't go 1.7ata since w/o mw50 we get 1.56ata if i not mistaken and 1.9ata with mw50.

Ofc provided that manual is true, 3 min limit corresponds to emergency power or increased take-off power which will be 3250rpm and MW50 engaged. 3250rpm w/o MW50 will correspond to take off, combat and climb power with 30min limit. If we look at fuel consumption column it becomes clear that those 3 min and 30 min apply for different engine powers but throttle position is the same so only mw50 on/off is difference. I'm just reading DCS's manual exactly as it is. So i do not agree that 3 min limit apply to 3250 rpm with or with out mw 50, manual states other wise, if manual is wrong than it would be good to correct it.