Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-20-2011, 10:31 PM
Tempest123's Avatar
Tempest123 Tempest123 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 389
Default

I just tested several 500 mph pull outs starting from 3000m after bomb release with full fuel from around 70 to 80 degree dives with no breakup, certainly it stressed the aircraft a few times but this all depends on how hard you pull out (lol), what would you expect from a several ton aircraft. If you pull out of a steep dive with 500 pounds of bombs on each wing bad things are gonna happen, but I didn't notice a problem with no bombs. Still keeps energy very well, and zooms back up like it should. In short I didn't see a problem, it still out dives nearly everything.



What angle and speed are you diving at, with bombs? and how much fuel? and what speed is your pullout?

Last edited by Tempest123; 01-20-2011 at 10:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-20-2011, 11:22 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Bombs and fuel are now critical factors to what you can do during a dive bombing run. I've run a few dive bombing runs in the FW190, P-47 and Tempest which are all bomb carrying aircraft with historically above average strength airframes. I haven't broken any of them yet...except when I went nuts and I did a hard pull out in which case all of them exceeded the airframe limits as specified in the game and the aircraft broke.

I think this patch has been harder for people who in the past have treated the aircraft as unbreakable and stressed them to the limits at all opportunities. Although I flew like this in the first couple of years of playing the game I later learned that the better way to fly was smoothly and calmly with deliberate and planned out action. The benefit pre-4.10 was a aircraft that flew better and faster. Now those benefits are realized in not breaking the airframe as well.
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-21-2011, 12:23 AM
Zorin Zorin is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceFire View Post
Bombs and fuel are now critical factors to what you can do during a dive bombing run. I've run a few dive bombing runs in the FW190, P-47 and Tempest which are all bomb carrying aircraft with historically above average strength airframes. I haven't broken any of them yet...except when I went nuts and I did a hard pull out in which case all of them exceeded the airframe limits as specified in the game and the aircraft broke.

I think this patch has been harder for people who in the past have treated the aircraft as unbreakable and stressed them to the limits at all opportunities. Although I flew like this in the first couple of years of playing the game I later learned that the better way to fly was smoothly and calmly with deliberate and planned out action. The benefit pre-4.10 was a aircraft that flew better and faster. Now those benefits are realized in not breaking the airframe as well.
quoted for truth
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-21-2011, 07:21 AM
mazex's Avatar
mazex mazex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,342
Default

When flying IRL manouvre speed (Va) is one of the most important things to know for an aircraft, especially when flying aerobatics which I have done quite a lot. It's nice that we now have it in this game too. I'm pretty sure that the P-47 was famous for high speed dives as it did not get control surface flutter and compression problems, and not due to the fact that you could pull the stick in your belly at near mach speed?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-21-2011, 07:35 AM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

The P-47 suffered quite a bit from compressibility and certainly wasn't pleasant to handle at high speeds. It was famous because it was fast in a dive and because it usually survived the problems so the pilots could tell the tale.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-21-2011, 10:31 AM
TinyTim TinyTim is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 98
Default

Are you sure you are dropping all bombs before pulling up? If you drop only wing bombs, your underbelly bomb will cause problems during pull up.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-21-2011, 07:17 PM
mazex's Avatar
mazex mazex is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,342
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
The P-47 suffered quite a bit from compressibility and certainly wasn't pleasant to handle at high speeds. It was famous because it was fast in a dive and because it usually survived the problems so the pilots could tell the tale.
Well, I have never flown any plane that is pleasant to fly near Vne (Velocity never exceeded) - all movement in the air feels like riding over a road bump in a car and you sure understand without patch notes for 4.10 that sudden stick movements are a "no no" above Va (manouvre speed which is the maximum speed for full deflection of the control surfaces). That's the problems with sims - you don't get the stiff feeling of the air getting "harder and harder" as the speed increases

The fact that the P-47 could get close to mach 1 in dives must for sure tell that it was less prone to control surface flutter (which is really nasty - can tell you that from own experience), or compressability problems with rudders that are "locked" due to design of ailerons or elevator. I'm pretty sure that it was not the ability to withstand excessive G load during the pull ups that made it famous for surviving those dives... The planes with the problems mentioned before could not get high G:s - that was the problem as the controls where either torn away from flutter or "locked" due to compressability. I guess you had to be really smooth after shaking the 109 that when down straight into the fatherland with an elevator that was "stuck" after going 800 km/h in a dive... Not due to ripping the wings pulling 12 G:s...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-21-2011, 07:45 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Early P-47 tail design broke in a wind tunnel at 468 mph due to control flutter.
Flight tests of P-47 regularly state that the elevator froze in high speed dives and that trim was necessary to recover from it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.