PDA

View Full Version : ME-262 at altitude.



XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:10 AM
Is it just me or is the Me-262 still useless at altitude. (7000+ meters)

Can't seem to get the speed above 500 kmph. If I dive down a few thousand it picks up to the normal insane speed but it looses it all climbing back up to 7000+ again and the plane refused to exceed 500 or so. So what gives? Can anyone get it to go faster/higher? (even with only 25% fuel!!)

P.S. I am pretty sure I am flying it 'right' having copnsulted all the manuals and 'tips' on how to fly it.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:10 AM
Is it just me or is the Me-262 still useless at altitude. (7000+ meters)

Can't seem to get the speed above 500 kmph. If I dive down a few thousand it picks up to the normal insane speed but it looses it all climbing back up to 7000+ again and the plane refused to exceed 500 or so. So what gives? Can anyone get it to go faster/higher? (even with only 25% fuel!!)

P.S. I am pretty sure I am flying it 'right' having copnsulted all the manuals and 'tips' on how to fly it.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:22 AM
ya its way too slow at alt... i barely out ran p51s at 7500 which the 262 should be 100mph faster.. i dunno.. lol

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:33 AM
It's not just you, the 262's high altitude model is a disaster.

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~fiveds/images/anthony1.jpg

jg51.com

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 09:48 AM
Yeah, just yesterday, Lead and I played around for about 10 minutes above 7k. I wasnt able to out run the P51 with a very very shallow climb and turn.

But not only is the high alt performance a shambles, I would also have to say that the thing acts funny when you get it diving fast (1000 IAS). I can pull out of a dive with no trim like I was flying a Rata or something. It was quite disappointing.

Also, I still cant re-start the engines in flight, and once they start burning, they never go out, no matter what you do (Still wrong).

Someone quoted Oleg as saying that he plans to give the Pony a little more speed up high.. I hope he does the same for the 262.



http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehler.jpg




http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehler.jpg




http://webpages.charter.net/cuda70/Fehler.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 10:18 AM
hi,
..the problem: ..the programmers mixed up container datas of prop simmulation together with datas of jet simmulation datas in this game..
I guess..sometimes they test it more at 262... than to see the difference...in the main base FM...

..in the event of mixing up some resistivity value of flight dynamic at props...to well designed jets the FM degenerates to a slow and inflexible lory...
..even with turbine power on high altitude + diving speed ..to fly against bomber pulks...
...in game you need double of altitude to get the speed to attack....realy nonsens ...
..so far.. all tactics of the real pilots are not usefull to use in this game..in many cases...


Hunde_3.-JG.51 wrote:
- It's not just you, the 262's high altitude model is
- a disaster.



...just follow my wingman...
http://www.ss.iij4u.or.jp/~jime/images/Me109G6Anim/messer04LAN2.wmv

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 11:30 AM
Fehler that was the best fight i had in awhile, you were definatly outrunning me quickly up there, i was doing very wide slow turns and keep 7600 on the line, I was doing 360 max up there no matter what pitch or trottle it wouldnt go any faster,

to me it seems the me262 is alot faster then it ever was but high alt is wrong for almost everyplane in the game

<center>http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.txt
Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter
<a HREF="http://www.il2skins.com/?action=list&authoridfilter=:Leadspitter:&comefrom=top5&ts=1068087655"> LeadSpitters Skins
</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 04:53 PM
i can fly a me-262 to 930kph TAS at 8000m, IMO its already 60kph faster than recorded speed, so we cant say 262 is undermodeled.

TRK provided below:

http://jackly.cpgl.net/bbs/attachment.php?s=&postid=25676



Message Edited on 11/20/0312:06AM by SerpentBlade

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 05:08 PM
930 in a straight line? BS... lol... everytime i take the 262 up high thing feels like a dog... and slow, barely outrunning 51s... 930 in a shallow dive maybe lol...

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:01 PM
JG26_Red wrote:
- 930 in a straight line? BS... lol... everytime i
- take the 262 up high thing feels like a dog... and
- slow, barely outrunning 51s... 930 in a shallow dive
- maybe lol...
-
-

why dont you look at the TRK i provided?

I/JG54_SerpentBlade
http://www.jg54.net/

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:03 PM
At 6000m, I get a top level speed of over 940km/h TAS. This is more than 60km/h too fast.

As well, I seem to be able to exceed the 11,000m service ceiling with ease.

It seems that the Me-262 high alt FM has gone from being undermodelled to being overmodelled. One extreme to the other.

Acceleration is still poor, but then its supposed to be. It is a mistake to assume Me-262 has good level flight acceleration just because it is fast. The speed comes from low drag and good engine efficiency at speed, not a good T/W ratio.

<div align=center>http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/bis33.jpg </div>
<div align=center>[I]There's no Swordfish to save you this time.[I]

Message Edited on 11/19/0310:06AM by StG77_Fennec

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:13 PM
now 930... what speedo should i look at for that? speedbar, internal? or that out of cockpit view? i might be looking at something different because i do notice a big diff between the speedbar speed and say the out of cockpit view with those nice arcade gauges..?

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:18 PM
TAS.

The only way to see TAS is with wonder woman view. Speedbar and cockpit instruments show IAS.



<div align=center>http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/bis33.jpg </div>
<div align=center>[I]There's no Swordfish to save you this time.[I]

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:26 PM
Ahhhhhh ok, never looked at my speed with 262 in the out of cockpit view.. so speedbar i have gotten 700 something, would that be close to 900 TAS? i dont know if there is that big diff? if so, you wanna slow down the 262 by 60kph, i would think the 51 could catch it then lol... maybe 51s upper speed isnt so bad.. lol

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:31 PM
Didn't real life test pilots record IAS (not TAS I am sloppy today) from their cockpit? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif How do we compare our FB atmospheric conditions to those during the making of real life test charts? Or does it make that much difference? Full Real tests over the FB are done with no-cockpit view? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Bizzaro World

If I am missing something, please explain. ThanXX





Message Edited on 11/19/0305:32PM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:12 PM
Speed tests would be recorded in TAS always. The IAS values from the cockpit would be corrected for atmospheric pressure to give TAS value. Either that, or they would use an alternate method of gauging speed (radar, landmarks etc).

IAS is of no use because it changes with altitude. A plane going 400kmh IAS at 6000m would outrun a plane going 400km/h IAS at 2000m. All speeds must be in relation to the ground.



<div align=center>http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/bis33.jpg </div>
<div align=center>[I]There's no Swordfish to save you this time.[I]

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:18 PM
Thanks muchly...

I looked at the track. I saw I believe!

I'm happy sort of. I am aware that historically early jet aircraft were horribly slow to accelerate and I can appreciate that fact. I also "know" that the 262 fuel endurance was pitufully short... I still think that the acceleration is undermodeled in the game (If fuel flow was properly modeled you would run out of juice before you could build up speed to make a usefull interecept - opn say some B-17's)... oh well... still the best game there is.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:18 PM
Thats a neat pic fennec... is that a model?

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:24 PM
Its a 3d model of the Bismarck.

<div align=center>http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/bis33.jpg </div>
<div align=center>[I]There's no Swordfish to save you this time.[I]

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:27 PM
StG77_Fennec
- Speed tests would be recorded in TAS always. The IAS
- values from the cockpit would be corrected for
- atmospheric pressure to give TAS value. Either that, or
- they would use an alternate method of gauging speed
- (radar, landmarks etc).

I think you meant to post speed tests are recorded in IAS, then corrected later, at least in the case of the pilot doing the recording? Please clarify.


- IAS is of no use because it changes with altitude. A
- plane going 400kmh IAS at 6000m would outrun a plane
- going 400km/h IAS at 2000m. All speeds must be in
- relation to the ground.

I understand the need to use TAS for publishing and planning tactics at high altitude. But for testing, should we not be using IAS. Again I will ask, how do we know our TAS in FB corresponds to the method the TAS was calculated for the the old data charts?

Nobody wants to answer this, and I am beginning to see why. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 08:38 PM
StG77_Fennec wrote:
- Acceleration is still poor, but then its supposed to
- be. It is a mistake to assume Me-262 has good level
- flight acceleration just because it is fast. The
- speed comes from low drag and good engine efficiency
- at speed, not a good T/W ratio.


This deserves a clarification. Me-262 does have a poor acceleration ONLY at take-off. Some might wonder why. Total thrust for Me-262 is around 4000lb, roughly the same with a Dora, or a P-47 at take-off. So thrust to weight ratio though not good at this speed, it is still very close to the T/W ratio of a P-47D. P-47D was also renown for lenghty take-offs, but Me-262, even if it shares the same slow take-off acceleration, has a higher take-off speed, therefore an even longer take-off roll. This surpised many early jet fighter pilots accustomed with the short take-off of the german piston fighters.

But does Me-262 have a slow acceleration after take-off? The answer is NO. At 300km/h, right after take-off, it is already faster in acceleration than most fighters, at 350km/h it accelerates faster than any piston fighter, faster even than K4 or La7. Why? Me-262 keeps the 4000lb thrust constant up to max speed, whereas prop fighters loose the thrust constantly with speed. The reason for this is very simple, basic high school physics: thrust is a force, and force = power/speed, even if piston fighters keep the power relattivelly constant up to high speed, the thrust is decreasing with speed (see the graphs below).

This is the major advantage of the jet engines, thrust does not come from a propeller, but from expasion of gases, making the thrust constant with speed. A very simple idea, put in practice with very simple and cheap devices, as they were the early jets, made every previous engine and airframe development obsolete. Outstanding.

Dora with MW-50, one of the best performers in regard to acceleration, has for example aprox 4000lb thrust at take-off, aprox 3000lb thrust at 300km/h and aprox 2000lb thrust at 500km/h. On the other hand Me-262 keeps its 4000lb thrust up to 850km/h. Do you see the difference? This is the reason why at 300km/h Me-262 has aprox the same acceleration with Dora (aprox 6ft/sec^2), and at 350km/h Me-262 has better acceleration than anything else. And this performance with the 900l auxiliary fuel tank full, but not all Me-262 had this fuel tank installed.

I hope that this myth of slow accelerating Me-262 will dissapear at some point because it is completely baseless. We should replace it with the real problem of Me-262, the slow and lenghtly take-off.


Thrust vs speed for a propeller fighter

http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/flugmechanik/propeller.gif



Thrust vs speed for a jet fighter

http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/flugmechanik/jet.gif




<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 08:44 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- I hope that this myth of slow accelerating Me-262
- will dissapear at some point because it is
- completely baseless. We should replace it with the
- real problem of Me-262, the slow and lenghtly
- take-off.


One more thing. FB v1.11 does a good job in representing Me-262 acceleration, both in flight and at take-off (except at altitudes over 7000m, where is completelly off). I don't really understand why some fellow simmers consider that Me-262 has slower acceleration than it should in FB.





<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 09:22 PM
Well I couldnt believe it so just watched your track and tested myself - and you are completely right !

I did around 925 km/h TAS on the Moscow-wintermap and a stunning 950 km/h TAS on the Smolensk-summer map !

BUT it took me HORRIBLY long to reach this speeds, once I was at 8k alt still at least a full 3min flighttime and its almost impossible to keep a alt steady +- 5 meters above 5k to me !

And the 262 exceeds the 10k simulated alt with ease in a shallow climb. All above 10k are obviously not simulated in FB so all parameters stay the same as they were at 10k.
I reached 22000 meters (not feet !) alt at 800 km/h TAS after extensive testing and could have climbed unlimited if I wouldnt have run out of fuel... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Also above 10k you seen to suffer no damage from excessive divespeeds, i dove with 1550 km/h without damage and 1450 km/h below 10k without damage, but below 5k even 1300 km/h destroyed my nice 262... maybe right this way, ability to dive faster unharmed in thinner air.

In spite of Huckebeins statement of good simulated acceleration I still think, the 262 should acc. faster above 500 km/h, but otherwise i find it simulated very close now to what I had expected after reading lots of books.

Greetings
Jordan

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 09:31 PM
Jordan_72 wrote:
- In spite of Huckebeins statement of good simulated
- acceleration I still think, the 262 should acc.
- faster above 500 km/h, but otherwise i find it
- simulated very close now to what I had expected
- after reading lots of books.


You're right, over 700km/h acceleration is off, but that happens for most of the planes: acceleration at speeds 50-100km/h below max speed is off for piston fighters too.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 08:51 AM
wow ive just read all the posts

if you asked me B4 i read these i would have told you the 262 in FB is a terribly bad joke

i find it amazing to think that its terrible performance at high alt is realistic

sure it will go fast but its so slow at accel to that speed

i thought it was wrong because i read about how 262 pilots were attacking bombers & fighting them in the verticle

so all it really had is a fast top speed

& excellent weapons http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif))

i so love 262 coops

also its easy to fly & control , it handels real nice

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 09:34 AM
WUAF_Badsight wrote:
- wow ive just read all the posts
-
- if you asked me B4 i read these i would have told
- you the 262 in FB is a terribly bad joke
-
- i find it amazing to think that its terrible
- performance at high alt is realistic
-
- sure it will go fast but its so slow at accel to
- that speed
-
- i thought it was wrong because i read about how 262
- pilots were attacking bombers & fighting them in the
- verticle
-
- so all it really had is a fast top speed
-
- & excellent weapons http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif))
-
- i so love 262 coops
-
- also its easy to fly & control , it handels real
- nice


So no matter how many times you explain that Me-262 DID NOT HAVE A SLOW ACCELERATION some people will repeat the same absurdity.



<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 11/20/0304:28AM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 11:20 AM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
I was doing 360 max up there no matter what
- pitch or trottle it wouldnt go any faster,


Yey, this means the D9 should outrun the P-47 up there (haven't had too many encounters having to run from 47's yet).

Quick question though, at what alt, if any.. should the D9 lose it's speed advantage in level flight, on the P-47.

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 03:34 PM
Jordan_72 wrote:
-
- Also above 10k you seen to suffer no damage from
- excessive divespeeds, i dove with 1550 km/h without
- damage and 1450 km/h below 10k without damage, but
- below 5k even 1300 km/h destroyed my nice 262...
- maybe right this way, ability to dive faster
- unharmed in thinner air.
-
-
- Greetings
- Jordan
-
-

Jordan this is due to the fact that you are seeing TAS, not indicated. At 22000 meters, which is above 60000 feet, the air is so thin that a dive reaching 1500 kph may only be 300 kph IAS. Does the 262 come apart at 300kph at sea level? Nope. It will do the same at 60000 feet. The plane doesn't care how fast it's going across the ground, only through the air.

Airliners traveling at 500knots at 45000 feet only indicate about 230knots IAS. So, as far as the plane is concerned, it's only going 230knots. It will perform as if it were at sea level, traveling 230knots.

I hope this helps.

I think I've made this clear as mud.

EDIT: Yea, by the way, you were correct in your guess.

http://www.80snostalgia.com/classictv/airwolf/pic1.jpg


Message Edited on 11/20/0309:11AM by waterinthefuel