Thanks for the information. I still don't really get why the extra power is not supposed to be related to application of higher boost, in particular where Plane-Eater says he found that mentioned. If you built two alike engines just with different tolerances, the high quality version might be somewhat more powerful due to higher efficiencies (less losses), but that's not going to be excessive unless the standard production quality is abysmal. You'll need to increase boost or rpm in order to get more power out of it.
Regarding manual boost control means inferior pilots, imo that's not the case at all. I think looking at the record of the AVG and the conditions they operated under speaks for itself. Manual boost control means that it is simply a matter of clearance and application of boost levels in the field, suited to the conditions on site, with no technical changes to the engine or aircraft. With the P-40, this was done, too, with several squadrons considerably exceeding official limits. The point here is that higher quality engines should have less trouble with overboosting than standard versions might have, as they would most certainly be more reliable.
The application of 50" boost would yield an increase of about 340 hp (35%) at low altitudes over the standard emergency power settings. You'll get nowhere near this with just manufacturing (reasonably) higher quality.
Afaik, flight model wise there's no difference in game between a P-40B and the AVG Hawk 81. If I look at this topic, I think it would be better if there was a difference. But there's not much hard evidence to allow modeling a deviation from official specs.
|