Speed graphs for Spitfire and Hurricane

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

Just a wild guess and don't laugh...is possibly a head wind

Definitely a good thought, Slip. I don't believe winds are programmed in either the offline or online (ATAG server). Even so, I'm not sure wind would have too much (if any) effect on INDICATED airspeed per my chart. It certainly would on TRUE air speed.

[SlipBall]

Yea I remember having trouble turning on ground in ATAG 1

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

Yea I remember having trouble turning on ground in ATAG 1

I'll check into that. Engine torque would also affect ground handling AFAIK.

BTW, I'm no test pilot -- real life or virtual. I certainly invite anyone/everyone to try this or any variation and/or aircraft. It was Camber's post somewhere in this forum that got me to wondering about offline to online. The A2A data I had done earlier for my own interest -- apples to oranges as I've already expressed on this forum.

[camber]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

I'll check into that. Engine torque would also affect ground handling AFAIK.

BTW, I'm no test pilot -- real life or virtual. I certainly invite anyone/everyone to try this or any variation and/or aircraft. It was Camber's post somewhere in this forum that got me to wondering about offline to online. The A2A data I had done earlier for my own interest -- apples to oranges as I've already expressed on this forum.

Hmm, my test results are fast compared to others on this forum...as a professional scientist this worries me Obviously on-line "test piloting" is not particularly precise, but SL speeds should be reasonably comparable I think with care.

I can get on ATAG and fly for hours without CTD post patch as long as I stay away from other planes so I retested on-line and offline for the Spit II only.

To summarise:

* significant and unpredictable speed differences between the tool tip (roundimg to 10mph doesn't help), the cockpit gauge and the no-cockpit gauge.
* No real difference between online and offline speeds for me, and Spit II offline speeds consistent with last test
* full to 1/2 radiator makes a small difference (about 10mph)
* canopy closed/open makes no difference

Again, ball centred, wave skimming, time allowed to settle.

Online speeds are
(tool tip reading)/(approx cockpit gauge to 5mph)

1/2 rad +6.25psi 3000rpm 270/275
full rad +6.25psi 3000rpm 260/265
1/2 rad +9psi 2800rpm 290/290

Offline speeds we can also add the no cockpit gauge
(tool tip reading)/(approx cockpit gauge to 5mph)/(no cockpit gauge)

1/2 rad +6.25psi 3000rpm 260/270/270
1/2 rad +9psi 2800rpm 280/280/293

I think the new patch is trying to make me feel better, it CTDs so fast so it lets me get there faster than others

[ATAG_Snapper]

Thanks for posting this, Camber.

Your SL data for the IIa squares with what I got for both online and offline ie 290 mph IAS +/- 2 mph. Where my data began to diverge (offline vs online) is when I climbed to 5,000 feet and 10,000 feet. The online Spit IIa begins to seriously decline in IAS while the offline Spit IIa holds a fairly steady IAS right up to 10,000 feet (and possibly higher -- did not test beyond 10K).

I can't fathom why the two flight models for the two same aircraft should be so different at emergency combat settings ie. 2800 at full overboost. (The needle goes off scale on the boost gauge, so I can't tell if it's +9 lbs or +12 lbs -- or something else for that matter).

[klem]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

Thanks for posting this, Camber.

Your SL data for the IIa squares with what I got for both online and offline ie 290 mph IAS +/- 2 mph. Where my data began to diverge (offline vs online) is when I climbed to 5,000 feet and 10,000 feet. The online Spit IIa begins to seriously decline in IAS while the offline Spit IIa holds a fairly steady IAS right up to 10,000 feet (and possibly higher -- did not test beyond 10K).

I can't fathom why the two flight models for the two same aircraft should be so different at emergency combat settings ie. 2800 at full overboost. (The needle goes off scale on the boost gauge, so I can't tell if it's +9 lbs or +12 lbs -- or something else for that matter).

I haven't used the no-cockpit gauges but why they woulld read differently is a real worry, surely these are the same gauges or are the gauges in the cockpit set in the 3D model whilst the no cockpit gauges are 'made' separately. In that case either the gauge plates could be calibrated differently or perhaps the needle rotation formulae are different.

Regarding the on line versus offline difference it could be that different atmospheric conditions are modelled, e.g. perhaps one is a 'standard day' and the other not or perhaps both are not and are different from eachother. Then again, the test environment used by 1C could be different from both.

http://stoenworks.com/Tutorials/Unde...0airspeed.html
That standard is:
1. at sea level
2. standard day (temperature, humidity)
3. a barometric setting of 29.92 inches of pressure

If any of these criteria are off then the indicated airspeed will be different than the actual airspeed of the aircraft.

http://www.elsevierdirect.com/compan...-d/default.htm
IAS = 'indicated airspeed'- this is the speed displayed on the aircraft instruments. As such it is a function of height (static pressure) and forward momentum (dynamic pressure). The value displayed on the instrument will be affected by local atmospheric conditions and by errors from the installation of the sensors on the aircraft.

I've added the 1940 documented data from spitfireperformance.com charts to your jpg so we can see how all the IAS's are off if its supposed to be a standard day.

However, note that the IAS's given for Spitfire IIa in the spitfireperformance chart we have been referring to is 'raw' so I have deducted the Positional Error Compensation and the Comp. figutres to give the true IAS's. I suspect this is what os modelled in CoD, I doubt if they modelled in a Positional Error or Comp. error.

[Winger]

I for my part as an almost exclusive 109 Pilot must say that i am having nice challenges against spits now after the patch. Seemingly the Spit IIa isnt as uber as it was before the patch. I cannot understand why everyone always complains until their plane is absolutely uber modeled so skill doesnt count anymore. I can understand if someone moans because his side/plane got nerfed to hell and back. But that is seemingly not the case with this patch. The 109 does roll like a tank since the newest patch but it at the same time feels much more authentic this way if you take into consideration the airspeed at wich this rolls take place. It just feels right.
I cannot tell about the Spitfire or hurricane. Only that good pilots make good fights now and not just the plane.

Winger

[IvanK]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

Definitely a good thought, Slip. I don't believe winds are programmed in either the offline or online (ATAG server). Even so, I'm not sure wind would have too much (if any) effect on INDICATED airspeed per my chart. It certainly would on TRUE air speed.

Wind does not/cannot affect IAS or TAS (True) , it will affect Ground Speed. From IAS you determine TAS you then apply the wind effect to get Ground Speed.

[SlipBall]

I reasoned that wind would be the only variable between the on-line and off-line test's done by Snapper...pitot tubes have been installed in RL with environmental faults (inherent errors) magnified due to placement error, and after all we are dealing with a game here, and proper coding being done.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Wind does not/cannot affect IAS or TAS (True) , it will affect Ground Speed. From IAS you determine TAS you then apply the wind effect to get Ground Speed.

Thanks for the clarification, IvanK!