Merlin negative G cutout too quick?

From an earlier discussion there was the conclusion that there is a two stage cut out, one arriving quite early the second later IIRC.

Up to know only one is simulated while it should be both.

[TomcatViP]

yes alrdy discussed with even some kind of calculation.

Merlin flyer hve to keep in mind that flying was done a different way at the time (and nobody likes neg G).

Did the German had there an advantage ? Certainly. And this is why the allied took the efforts to cancel this by their own design. It's all abt BoB and post BoB.

This debate will be only legitimate if we were discussing a 1943 simulation.

Take it as it goes : as soon as your pushing the stick frwd your eng start starving -> RPM decrease slightly then rapidly -> eng sputter (single cylinder miss firing) then the carb is empty the eng stop -> traction vector is null, you feel instantly the drag that was compensated by the eng power (your pilot head shld lean frwd-> then the carb is full and cylinder flooded -> the eng rev is maintained by the prop and the air stream -> then eng restart -> Sputtering (rich condition) -> then back to normal.

Remember that at a time when fuel cells were not wallowed, pilots were used to experienced eng cut out while manoeuvring.

I really don't understand this debate. Change your habits pull and don't push... Easy. Damn nobody ask you to turn gay !

[IvanK]

Great work Klem 0.5g was the original FM setting. As suspected the value has never been changed just the cut effects.

I really don't understand this debate. Change your habits pull and don't push... Easy. Damn nobody ask you to turn gay !

I think you are missing the point Tomcat. No one is disputing the phenomena just the onset. The fact is normal every day control inputs like setting up a cruise descent can result in the cutout they didn't in real life for such everyday piloting tasks .... it was referred even back in the day as "Negative G cutout or effect". All we are suggesting is getting the onset values correct.

"Take it as it goes : as soon as your pushing the stick frwd your eng start starving".... No only if you exceed a given threshold G. Stay below that threshold and you should have any 'negative" effects.

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Great work Klem 0.5g was the original FM setting. As suspected the value has never been changed just the cut effects.

I really don't understand this debate. Change your habits pull and don't push... Easy. Damn nobody ask you to turn gay !

I think you are missing the point Tomcat. No one is disputing the phenomena just the onset. The fact is normal every day control inputs like setting up a cruise descent can result in the cutout they didn't in real life for such everyday piloting tasks .... it was referred even back in the day as "Negative G cutout or effect". All we are suggesting is getting the onset values correct.

Thx to the doc you have provided, we hve alrdy computed the inner pressure in the carb and the fuel flow and see that the flow is impacted with even a very minor value of neg accel.

That is why the cut out effect start as soon as you are in condition where the load is < 1G. There is no physical delay unless it is very low (the 0.1G value). Of course the effects are marginal (slight rpm decrease). But here they are.

It's wrong to search for a magical number where you wld experienced a transition. It's simply progressive all around the 1G down to 0G load in an asymptotic way (1/x² as it's is a pressure value).

The question is now:

would, if the FM was set to cut out at 0.1g, the acceleration measured ingame at the same place as in RL corresond to 0.1g?

I do not know but I could well imagine that what is shown as 0.5g ingame as acceleration is something different from what was measured during the RL flight trials and might just not correspond to 0.5g in RL.

So perhaps the 0.5g could well correspond to the RL 0.1g case (tbc by devs). At least at this moment we cannot exclude as we do not know how the ingame acceleration is obtained.

Are we also sure that the ingame acceleration given is the acceleration in the symmetrical plane of the aircraft? or just a lateral acceleration hence including side forces?.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

I really don't understand this debate. Change your habits pull and don't push... Easy. Damn nobody ask you to turn gay !

I agree that historically pilots did not just push the stick forward, they would bank and dive away in a diving turn (just like in the movies) or even split S.

However the complaints seem to be that the cutoff occurs even in normal flight.

[Crumpp]

However the complaints seem to be that the cutoff occurs even in normal flight.

Given turbulence or a vigorous transition from climb to level flight, it should occur.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Given turbulence or a vigorous transition from climb to level flight, it should occur.

Agree 100%

In the sim the engine will frequently cut out when making fine adjustments to trim in level flight -- which seems a tad excessive.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

In the sim the engine will frequently cut out when making fine adjustments to trim in level flight -- which seems a tad excessive.

Not to mention the engine cutting as you taxi out of a hangar down a tiny 6 inch slope.

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

Not to mention the engine cutting as you taxi out of a hangar down a tiny 6 inch slope.

Which begs the question: How ever did the a/c take off without having an engine quit at the wrong time? Airfields weren't exactly billiard table smooth.