![]() |
|
FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Oh dear, Kurfurst has gone on another one of his rants.
![]() The Merlin in Perspective, no.2 in the R-R Heritage Trust's Historical Series "Before the end of the Battle Spitfire IIs with Merlin XIIs were in service, with the supercharger gear ratio increased from 8.58 to 9.09:1 giving a better full throttle height at 12lb boost......" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Thanks 41Sqn_Banks for the 17lb figure, I wasn't sure if other restrictions were in place before the 12lb modification was carried out. So I went with worst case. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
About +17 is the amount of boost that the supercharger can produce at sea level, it's not restricted.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
That I find highly unlikely, if it can produce +9 lb at 17000 feet, it should be able to produce about ((9+14)/527*1013)-14 lb at sea level, which is about +30 lb. The compression ratio should not change much. If it does happen, though, there's some sort of throttle in the way, and be it just too small cross sections somewhere between the intake and the supercharger.
(Note about the calculation: (9+14) - total pressure in the supercharger at full throttle altitude; 527 - outside pressure at full throttle altitude; 1013 - outside pressure at sea level; - 14 - to get from total pressure in the supercharger to overboost as used by the British) Last edited by JtD; 10-14-2012 at 07:38 AM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
With BCC-O, Merlin XII was technically capable of pressures higher than +9lbs., it was certainly safe to operate it at +12lbs. (for that was the take-off power with the throttle gate system and also supported by simple fact that XII was improved III and III was approved for that MAP). +17lbs. is consistent with R-R raw tests but perhaps JtD is right, I don't know. I agree that as for Pilot's Notes the Merlin XII are set correctly for the sim (at +9lbs max), there is not enought direct evidence and the date of amendment is not clear, unofrtunately. The best authority at early Merlins is the Merlin in perspective publication quoted by Al Schlageter in here but it does not clarify the date of emergency boost amendment. There was no modification necessary to achieve that fore sure, it was physically possible to have boosts higher than +9lbs from day one on Merlins XII. I agree with you that it would be great and interesting to have the BCC-O (ABC) modelled, I would not mind. It is logical and almost certain that it has been used in combat. For the operation and technical details of both Take Off power and ABC, there were some interesting scans and description by Banks in some other thread.
__________________
Bobika. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'm struggling with some of the logic behind the use of 12lbs here.......for the life of me I can't think of a single circumstance where a pilot would need to break a sealed lever to get an emergency take off boost in a single engine aircraft, take off performance should be accounted for using max available non emergency power...........OR have I got the wrong idea and 12lbs boost was available without breaking the seal but was instead achieved by use of a throttle gate and was automatically reduced above 1000' and if you hadn't climbed above 1000' on departure you were expected to reduce after a max of 3 minutes? thereafter the max boost was 9lbs?........which means that the sealed boost lever has not yet been used.......I wonder what would happen if I used it?
__________________
Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]() There was actually very specific vocabulary to describe the use of emergency combat boost. The same went for any other conflict where they could use some extra power available (e.g. afterburners in Vietnam war) and often described it in their narrations, written or spoken. I am sure German pilots would be doing the same if that was the case. The only thing that could explain that lack of specific references to Erhoehte Notleistung (and mind you it referred to by the pilots in some late war combat literature as they were flying German aircraft with extra combat power designed by one mean or another) is that in the Emil, for emergency MAP one had to slam the throttle fully forward, there was no switch or knob or any gate to go through to prevent the use of 1,45 ata. So perhaps that is why.
__________________
Bobika. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|