PDA

View Full Version : Ta-183 bug for feature?



AKA_TAGERT
02-27-2007, 07:42 PM
Hey Guys!

I was getting ready to do some testing of the Ta-183 for a Ta-183 vs. YP-80 test when I noticed the Ta-183 throttle range goes beyond 100% up to 110%.

Now I have seen that on prop planes but this is the first jet I have noticed this on.

Do any other jets have the ability to push the engine beyond 100%?

I know in version 4.07 the Ta-183 was a bit doggie and for 'some' reason (Luft whining) it got a big boost in power.. Based on what? Who knows! But it did!

So as with the Learch, where Oleg had to double the rated engine power just to get it to fly.. Did he have to 'play' with the Ta-183 numbers?

I guess what I am asking was the doggie 4.07 version 'too real' and Oleg caved in and boosted it by allowing it to go beyond 100%?

Anyone know if the 110% is a feature, a bug or necessity to get the Ta-183 on parr with the other jets?

AnaK774
02-27-2007, 07:57 PM
HG model of 262 has it also, wont bother going trough with any more of em

FritzGryphon
02-27-2007, 08:14 PM
There are lots of engines that go to 110% power.

Most likely the new jet engine has an emergency power setting that the old one doesn't.

AKA_TAGERT
02-27-2007, 08:31 PM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
There are lots of engines that go to 110% power.

Most likely the new jet engine has an emergency power setting that the old one doesn't. So all the Luft46 napkins can go beyond 100%? Huh, did not know that! Well that explanes that, but anyone know why the Ta-183 got such a big boost in performance from 4.07 to 4.08? Also, does that thing ever overheat?

FritzGryphon
02-27-2007, 08:44 PM
The thrust for the engine was too low in release version, and corrected in 4.08.

Like the other jets, it overheats only if you go too slowly.

AKA_TAGERT
02-27-2007, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
The thrust for the engine was too low in release version, and corrected in 4.08. Based on... what?

Bellator_1
02-27-2007, 09:11 PM
This isn't a big issue, let it go...

AKA_TAGERT
02-27-2007, 09:29 PM
Originally posted by Bellator_1:
This isn't a big issue, let it go... Afraid of what I might find?

Viper2005_
02-27-2007, 10:05 PM
Most of the new jets go up to 110% thrust for reasons best known to whoever modelled them. Some of them (eg the new He-162s) will actually overheat at very high speeds if you go beyond 100%.

It's all a bit arbitrary really, since we're never told what the thrust setting parameter is.

It is worth pointing out that overheat is a very strange concept in Oleg's world...

PS Ta-183 Design II was drawn in two versions to accept either the Jumo 004 or the He S 011. Obviously the latter promised considerably greater thrust. Chances are that the 4.07 version only had Jumo 004 thrust levels...

http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html

Brain32
02-28-2007, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bellator_1:
This isn't a big issue, let it go... Afraid of what I might find? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is YP/XP/P-80 still turning like Sopwith Camel?

Bellator_1
02-28-2007, 06:24 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
Afraid of what I might find?

Knowing the thrust levels of the engine, no.

anarchy52
02-28-2007, 06:30 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bellator_1:
This isn't a big issue, let it go... Afraid of what I might find? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Is YP/XP/P-80 still turning like Sopwith Camel? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agree 110% http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Manu-6S
02-28-2007, 07:05 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
So as with the Learch, where Oleg had to double the rated engine power just to get it to fly.. Did he have to 'play' with the Ta-183 numbers?


Don't worry, he played with lots of plane.

If not why can't the anton decellerate like all the other planes but you have to do scissors to slow it? maybe we have lower drag to compensate a bugged engine?

And I guess that the antigrav ability of the Spit (in vertical...?) are due to is energy retention retention needs (in horizontal... ok): really a great warbird, sure, but in il2 is exagerated...

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:09 AM
Originally posted by Brain32:
Is YP/XP/P-80 still turning like Sopwith Camel? Got Track?

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:11 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
Don't worry, he played with lots of plane.

If not why can't the anton decellerate like all the other planes but you have to do scissors to slow it? maybe we have lower drag to compensate a bugged engine?

And I guess that the antigrav ability of the Spit (in vertical...?) are due to is energy retention retention needs (in horizontal... ok): really a great warbird, sure, but in il2 is exagerated... Got Track(s)?

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:11 AM
Originally posted by Bellator_1:
Knowing the thrust levels of the engine, no. We will see

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
Agree 110% http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Disagree 110% http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

Manu-6S
02-28-2007, 07:21 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I was getting ready to do some testing of the Ta-183 for a Ta-183 vs. YP-80 test when I noticed the Ta-183 throttle range goes beyond 100% up to 110%.

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I know in version 4.07 the Ta-183 was a bit doggie and for 'some' reason (Luft whining) it got a big boost in power.. Based on what? Who knows! But it did!

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
So as with the Learch, where Oleg had to double the rated engine power just to get it to fly.. Did he have to 'play' with the Ta-183 numbers?

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I guess what I am asking was the doggie 4.07 version 'too real' and Oleg caved in and boosted it by allowing it to go beyond 100%?

Got Track?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Manu-6S
02-28-2007, 07:23 AM
BTW I never flied Ta183... nor all the new jets... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I was getting ready to do some testing of the Ta-183 for a Ta-183 vs. YP-80 test when I noticed the Ta-183 throttle range goes beyond 100% up to 110%.

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I know in version 4.07 the Ta-183 was a bit doggie and for 'some' reason (Luft whining) it got a big boost in power.. Based on what? Who knows! But it did!

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
So as with the Learch, where Oleg had to double the rated engine power just to get it to fly.. Did he have to 'play' with the Ta-183 numbers?

Got Track?


Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
I guess what I am asking was the doggie 4.07 version 'too real' and Oleg caved in and boosted it by allowing it to go beyond 100%?

Got Track?

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>So what part of "I was getting ready to do some testing" did you NOT understand? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:59 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
BTW I never flied Ta183... nor all the new jets... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif So http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Manu-6S
02-28-2007, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
So what part of "I was getting ready to do some testing" did you NOT understand? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Then do your tests and post the results, not just the opposite. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
So what part of "I was getting ready to do some testing" did you NOT understand? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Then do your tests and post the results, not just the opposite. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>So what part of "I was getting ready to do some testing" did you NOT understand? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

flyingloon
02-28-2007, 08:41 AM
the wasting of test time by posting part perhaps?

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 08:54 AM
Originally posted by flyingloon:
the wasting of test time by posting part perhaps? Nope, try again

Irish_Rogues
02-28-2007, 09:03 AM
I go back to the P-80 turning thread, You need to prove it's wrong, nobody needs to prove it's right.

flyingloon
02-28-2007, 09:16 AM
hoist by your own petard!

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
I go back to the P-80 turning thread, You need to prove it's wrong, nobody needs to prove it's right. Agreed 100%!

Which is why I said "I was getting ready to do some testing".

What part of that was not clear that I am planing on doing some testing?

Right now I am just trying to gather some information on the Ta-183 in lue of that testing.. Info on this plane is harder than real planes in that it never made it off the napkin it was scribbled on let alone a blue print, let alone a prototype, let alone production.

bazzaah2
02-28-2007, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by Manu-6S:
BTW I never flied Ta183 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

don't worry, nor did anyone else.

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Manu-6S:
BTW I never flied Ta183 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

don't worry, nor did anyone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>In RL? Sure! Hard to fly something that never was! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Irish_Rogues
02-28-2007, 09:48 AM
What part of that was not clear that I am planing on doing some testing?

I'm guessing it's the rest of the post because it is not prescribed SOP.

You of all people should know that before challenging any FM or DM, one must do research and asking opinions doesn't qualify as research. Then you will need to provide many scans of mysterious documents, with questionable authenticity that will be dismissed and then refuted with other questionable documents. Then do hours of testing and graphing, and also provide countless hours of tracks so other experts can dismiss your testing efforts.

In light of not having followed the SOP, then the questions at the end of your post are out of line. With out any proofs to the contrary everything as modeled by Oleg is to be considered 100% accurate, not a added feature, a bug or necessity.

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 10:26 AM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
I'm guessing it's the rest of the post because it is not prescribed SOP.
Guess Again


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
You of all people should know that before challenging any FM or DM, one must do research
Kind of hard to do in this case in that the Ta-183 never made it off the napkin it was scribbled on to a blue print, let alone a prototype, let alone production to collect any real world data.


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
and asking opinions doesn't qualify as research.
Where did you get the false impression that I was asking for opinions?


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
Then you will need to provide many scans of mysterious documents, with questionable authenticity that will be dismissed and then refuted with other questionable documents.
With regards to the Luft data, sad but true! So much of it was just theory and not real results! And in this case there was not even a chance of getting real data in that the plane never existed except for the napkin it was scribbled on.


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
Then do hours of testing and graphing, and also provide countless hours of tracks so other experts can dismiss your testing efforts.
That is the easy part for me, the only real hard part is finding the time to do the actually flight. I have all the analysis tools done and the processing time for that is a few min.


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
In light of not having followed the SOP, then the questions at the end of your post are out of line.
Disagree 100%! In that this is a special case, this plane did not exist, which is why I came here asking questions before I do a test for not.


Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
With out any proofs to the contrary everything as modeled by Oleg is to be considered 100% accurate, not a added feature, a bug or necessity.
In theory, but as we all know bugs can make there way into a patch.

There is no question the Ta-183 was changed from 4.07 to 4.08!

The readme confirms that! So no need to prove it!

My question was ˜why' was it changed?

What ˜theoretical' value was the Ta-183 in 4.07 not meeting that Oleg decided to change in 4.08?

Until we get the answer to that, my guess is the ˜theoretical' vale fine (read realistic enough) but the Ta-183 performance was so poor that Oleg had to FAKE it like he did the Leach just to enalbe it to compete with the other 46 stuff.

Long story short, don't confuse asking questions for more info with asking for opinions.

Irish_Rogues
02-28-2007, 12:30 PM
Ok, I'm semi-bored and in a mood so I'll joust and play some word games with you. Once this also bores me I'll move on because in the end it'll be like wrestling with an eel. A pointless, dirty and un-rewarding experience for both of us.


Guess Again
Opinion and worthless for discussion


Kind of hard to do in this case in that the Ta-183 never made it off the napkin it was scribbled on to a blue print, let alone a prototype, let alone production to collect any real world data.

This here alone proves you were trolling for opinion and not doing research. No need to explain your own words, easy to understand what your saying


Where did you get the false impression that I was asking for opinions?


See above


With regards to the Luft data, sad but true! So much of it was just theory and not real results! And in this case there was not even a chance of getting real data in that the plane never existed except for the napkin it was scribbled on.

More proof to trolling for opinion


That is the easy part for me, the only real hard part is finding the time to do the actually flight. I have all the analysis tools done and the processing time for that is a few min.

Fair enough, the proof will be in the results. Until then merely opinion and not worthy of further discussion.


Disagree 100%! In that this is a special case, this plane did not exist, which is why I came here asking questions before I do a test for not.

Again opinion, SOP should always be followed. At the very least you should have explained your attempts to find the data. Just stating it doesn't exist make what you say true or correct, please prove your statement.


In theory, but as we all know bugs can make there way into a patch.

Wrong, it's not a bug until proofs have been given and the proofs hold to scrutiny. I'm pretty sure somebody else once said this.


There is no question the Ta-183 was changed from 4.07 to 4.08! The readme confirms that! So no need to prove it!

Ok, score some strange point then if you want or makes you happy.


My question was ˜why' was it changed? What ˜theoretical' value was the Ta-183 in 4.07 not meeting that Oleg decided to change in 4.08?

That's not really what you asked and you know it. At the very least sometimes the crime is how it is asked. But all that aside, it is only a question Oleg can answer. Your "question" was for the general masses and you've already dismissed the possibility solid proofs could be provided. Therfore all you could get are opinions, which we all know in these discussions are worthless. This also proves your next statement was false.


Long story short, don't confuse asking questions for more info with asking for opinions.

Your wrong, be sure.

By now it is quite obvious with your own words, that the only thing your questions could receive is opinion. Which in these discussions has no value and is outside the bounds of the Ubi Zoo SOP. It would be much more productive and possibly educational for the rest of us for you to go forward with your test(s) and post the results and accompanying proofs.

anarchy52
02-28-2007, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by anarchy52:
Agree 110% http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Disagree 110% http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes, but you are limited to only 3 minutes of emergency disagreement level at 110%, while I can do it with rads closed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

HuninMunin
02-28-2007, 12:49 PM
Could anyone enlight me what Tag was going to test if there's nuthin real to put the results up against?

MEGILE
02-28-2007, 01:03 PM
You could test the difference between the two version, 4.07 and 4.08.
But without any real data it's difficult to make any conclusions.

Ask Oleg why it was changed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by HuninMunin:
Could anyone enlight me what Tag was going to test if there's nuthin real to put the results up against? The ˜theoretical' values to see how far above and or below it is. That and how it compares to other jets and itself in 4.07

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
Ok, I'm semi-bored and in a mood so I'll joust and play some word games with you. Once this also bores me I'll move on because in the end it'll be like wrestling with an eel. A pointless, dirty and un-rewarding experience for both of us.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Guess Again
Opinion and worthless for discussion


Kind of hard to do in this case in that the Ta-183 never made it off the napkin it was scribbled on to a blue print, let alone a prototype, let alone production to collect any real world data.

This here alone proves you were trolling for opinion and not doing research. No need to explain your own words, easy to understand what your saying


Where did you get the false impression that I was asking for opinions?


See above


With regards to the Luft data, sad but true! So much of it was just theory and not real results! And in this case there was not even a chance of getting real data in that the plane never existed except for the napkin it was scribbled on.

More proof to trolling for opinion


That is the easy part for me, the only real hard part is finding the time to do the actually flight. I have all the analysis tools done and the processing time for that is a few min.

Fair enough, the proof will be in the results. Until then merely opinion and not worthy of further discussion.


Disagree 100%! In that this is a special case, this plane did not exist, which is why I came here asking questions before I do a test for not.

Again opinion, SOP should always be followed. At the very least you should have explained your attempts to find the data. Just stating it doesn't exist make what you say true or correct, please prove your statement.


In theory, but as we all know bugs can make there way into a patch.

Wrong, it's not a bug until proofs have been given and the proofs hold to scrutiny. I'm pretty sure somebody else once said this.


There is no question the Ta-183 was changed from 4.07 to 4.08! The readme confirms that! So no need to prove it!

Ok, score some strange point then if you want or makes you happy.


My question was ˜why' was it changed? What ˜theoretical' value was the Ta-183 in 4.07 not meeting that Oleg decided to change in 4.08?

That's not really what you asked and you know it. At the very least sometimes the crime is how it is asked. But all that aside, it is only a question Oleg can answer. Your "question" was for the general masses and you've already dismissed the possibility solid proofs could be provided. Therfore all you could get are opinions, which we all know in these discussions are worthless. This also proves your next statement was false.


Long story short, don't confuse asking questions for more info with asking for opinions.

Your wrong, be sure.

By now it is quite obvious with your own words, that the only thing your questions could receive is opinion. Which in these discussions has no value and is outside the bounds of the Ubi Zoo SOP. It would be much more productive and possibly educational for the rest of us for you to go forward with your test(s) and post the results and accompanying proofs. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Disagree 100%! There is ˜theoretical' values to comp to

fighter_966
02-28-2007, 02:15 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
I go back to the P-80 turning thread, You need to prove it's wrong, nobody needs to prove it's right. Agreed 100%!

Which is why I said "I was getting ready to do some testing".

What part of that was not clear that I am planing on doing some testing?

Right now I am just trying to gather some information on the Ta-183 in lue of that testing.. Info on this plane is harder than real planes in that it never made it off the napkin it was scribbled on let alone a blue print, let alone a prototype, let alone production. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you need help Ican help with Ta183

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by fighter_966:
If you need help Ican help with Ta183 Cool!

In that it is allways good to have more than one person do a test! For the P38 ROC bug from a few years back put it out to all to try and meet the real world ROC values. No one could, so I knew it was just not something I was doing wrong.

The hard part about the Ta-183 is there is no 'REAL' data and thus just 'theoretical' values to test for.. But I think it would be interesting to see just how close it gets to those numbers.

p-11.cAce
02-28-2007, 02:52 PM
This is one of the best threads for awhile! Anyway my $.02 contribution is that the Ar overheats rapidly when at high throttle settings and lower airspeed (anything under 450knots) - I keep the throttle below 80% mostly and have no overheat. When you have to make a run for it advance to 90% and let the speed build then to 95% - once you get her smoking along at 620+ you can go to 98% -100% and leave it there for quite awhile as long as you maintain 650+. It will eventually overheat but by the time you come back out of warp drive ANYONE behind you is long gone. Oh and the rear guns rok once you master flying with mirror image inputs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Akronnick
02-28-2007, 05:52 PM
Why do I get this strange feeling that I've read A thread similar to this one before?

I can't find any threads where people were dis-ing the P-80 without posting any stats, but I'm pretty sure I remember seeing one like that...

Maybe I'm just drinking too much orange soda.

Bremspropeller
02-28-2007, 06:00 PM
TAG, testing that bird is a waste of time.

Nobody flies it on a serious server, therefore nobody gives a damn about it.
It's good fun on some no-brain airquake-server, but that's it.

You'd better stick with it's fairy-tale FM before Belator jumps in and tells us that the MiG-15 was derived from it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Akronnick
02-28-2007, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:
You'd better stick with it's fairy-tale FM before Belator jumps in and tells us that the MiG-15 was derived from it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Are you kidding? Watchin Tagert bait Bellator is the only reason I've been even looking at this forum for the last two weeks (be sure http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif)

Bremspropeller
02-28-2007, 06:09 PM
I know, but Tagert certainly won't follow my advise anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 06:16 PM
ROTFL Oh you two!

Bremspropeller
02-28-2007, 06:27 PM
Do I get an ice-cream now?

koivis
02-28-2007, 07:20 PM
The Ta-183 as planned was to be powered by Heinkel-Hirth HeS 11 turbojet, rated at 1300 kg @ 10000 rpm. In fact 10 011s ran , first in September 1943, and one was tested under a Ju 88. BUT, the Ta 183 when it first appeared in game, had the same Jumo 004 or BMW 003 (not sure which one), which powered earlier jets, rated at 900 and 800 kg respectively. Thus, it was changed in patch 4.071 into the current (and more powerful) HeS 011, which also He 162C/D and ME 262HG-II already had.

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by koivis:
The Ta-183 as planned was to be powered by Heinkel-Hirth HeS 11 turbojet, rated at 1300 kg @ 10000 rpm. In fact 10 011s ran , first in September 1943, and one was tested under a Ju 88. BUT, the Ta 183 when it first appeared in game, had the same Jumo 004 or BMW 003 (not sure which one), which powered earlier jets, rated at 900 and 800 kg respectively. Thus, it was changed in patch 4.071 into the current (and more powerful) HeS 011, which also He 162C/D and ME 262HG-II already had. Cool thanks for the info

WWMaxGunz
02-28-2007, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
With out any proofs to the contrary everything as modeled by Oleg is to be considered 100% accurate, not a added feature, a bug or necessity.

Up to there you had something good, but you had to take the extra step.

AVG_WarHawk
02-28-2007, 08:18 PM
From the Aircraft Guide included with IL-2 Sturmovik 1946:

"Pilot Notes:
A Captured model of the Ta-183 was tested in the TsAGI wind tunnel post war, and immediately uncovered a fatal mistake in the design. Flutter and subsequent structural failure of the tail unit began at only 700 km/h. Therefore we've had to artificially strengthen the tail unit by a great amount, in order to allow for the design to reach specified speeds while still keeping the famous shape.

In reality such a redesign would have been near impossible, and most likely the tail unit would have been radically redesigned instead ( such as was the case with the historical Pulgui II fighter built by Kurt Tank after the war)."

WWMaxGunz
02-28-2007, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by koivis:
The Ta-183 as planned was to be powered by Heinkel-Hirth HeS 11 turbojet, rated at 1300 kg @ 10000 rpm. In fact 10 011s ran , first in September 1943, and one was tested under a Ju 88. BUT, the Ta 183 when it first appeared in game, had the same Jumo 004 or BMW 003 (not sure which one), which powered earlier jets, rated at 900 and 800 kg respectively. Thus, it was changed in patch 4.071 into the current (and more powerful) HeS 011, which also He 162C/D and ME 262HG-II already had.

I have read about Heinkel and jets. He assembled engine people and had the He-178 prototype
fly mock combat with an early FW in 1941 before Milsch had the program stopped with nosewheel
as the excuse. And then before then end, who makes the better, more innovative engine?

AFAIK the Ta-183 did make it to the drawing table as Russians did seize the drawings and the
models made from those. They had wind-tunnel data and a flying model did they not?
That is a good deal farther along than the napkin stage.

Does any of that mean 600 mph and superb handling at ***all*** speeds?
Pull the other one, it's got bells on it!

AKA_TAGERT
02-28-2007, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by AVG_WarHawk:
From the Aircraft Guide included with IL-2 Sturmovik 1946:

"Pilot Notes:
A Captured model of the Ta-183 was tested in the TsAGI wind tunnel post war, and immediately uncovered a fatal mistake in the design. Flutter and subsequent structural failure of the tail unit began at only 700 km/h. Therefore we've had to artificially strengthen the tail unit by a great amount, in order to allow for the design to reach specified speeds while still keeping the famous shape.

In reality such a redesign would have been near impossible, and most likely the tail unit would have been radically redesigned instead ( such as was the case with the historical Pulgui II fighter built by Kurt Tank after the war)." Cool! Thanks for the heads up! I am not suprised, in thta Kurt himself dumpped the Ta-183 nakpin for the Ta-183II napkin so even he knew better that to waist any more time on it! So Oleg had to fudge the numbers for the Ta-183 in pretty much the same manor he had to fudge the Leartch to get it to fly.

VW-IceFire
02-28-2007, 08:26 PM
At the end of the day the Ta-183 is a fun aircraft to fly and should be taken in a light hearted manner. Those X-4 missiles are great fun to try!

heywooood
02-28-2007, 09:39 PM
I think this thread and its poster need to be taken in a lighthearted manner....

Ta-Napkin fish are a jumpin' in the boat.


How can the characteristics of a hypothetical plane be argued one way or the other?

The Ta-183 with the X-4 guided missile loadout and its current FM is a hooter-scooter and I think the napkin it was drawn on was from the local gentlemens club.

Anyone that hasn't flown it with that loadout against whatever...is plain missing the boat.

Badsight-
02-28-2007, 10:56 PM
jet engines wont overheat when airspeed is sufficient . get too slow & they overheat , get too fast & they wont . ever

Manu-6S
03-01-2007, 01:41 AM
Excuse me mates, but WHO CARES ABOUT TA-183??

There is really anybody who flies it?. Come on, it's a fantasy plane.

Irish_Rogues
03-01-2007, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
With out any proofs to the contrary everything as modeled by Oleg is to be considered 100% accurate, not a added feature, a bug or necessity.

Up to there you had something good, but you had to take the extra step. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I only paraphrased what someone else has said/implied in the past, so was also meant tongue and cheeck. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

fighter_966
03-01-2007, 07:59 AM
Anyway!!! there is phrase in book :Lufwaffe secret projects fighters 1939-45 by walter schick etc: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif after 27-28th february 1945 fockewulf ceased further work on this project.Although Ta183a-1 production aircraft were to be fitted with design 2 tail unit the ta183v1 prototype was to be used to test both design2 and 3 tail configurations.By the wars end the fw Ta183 aircraft had reached the most advanced development stage of all the single jet fighter with He011 projects.DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN WAS CONTINUED POST WAR IN BOTH ARGENTINA AND SOVIET UNION.the parallers to the Mig-15 are more than just pure chance. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

p-11.cAce
03-01-2007, 08:24 AM
the parallers to the Mig-15 are more than just pure chance
OMG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Let's see...they both have 2 swept wings, tricycle gear, a gas-turbine engine, tires made of rubber, aluminum skin - that's it you've cracked the code! Someone call James Cameron and tell him his next docu-fantasy movie subject is ready http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

AKA_TAGERT
03-01-2007, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
OMG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Let's see...they both have 2 swept wings, tricycle gear, a gas-turbine engine, tires made of rubber, aluminum skin - that's it you've cracked the code! Someone call James Cameron and tell him his next docu-fantasy movie subject is ready http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif ROTFL!
Exactally!

AKA_TAGERT
03-01-2007, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by heywooood:
I think this thread and its poster need to be taken in a lighthearted manner....

Ta-Napkin fish are a jumpin' in the boat. +1


Originally posted by heywooood:
How can the characteristics of a hypothetical plane be argued one way or the other?
My thoughts exactally.. up until the fix in 4.08 of the Ta-183. I mean what coloring book did they send to Oleg that convinced them it was wrong, let alone needed to be fixed?


Originally posted by heywooood:
The Ta-183 with the X-4 guided missile loadout and its current FM is a hooter-scooter and I think the napkin it was drawn on was from the local gentlemens club.
Agreed 100%


Originally posted by heywooood:
Anyone that hasn't flown it with that loadout against whatever...is plain missing the boat.
Some of the most fun I have been having with it is while sitting on the runway with engines off.. I sit there like a SAM sight and use the X4 to down incomming airplanes! It is a real hoot! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

fighter_966
03-01-2007, 12:27 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
OMG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Let's see...they both have 2 swept wings, tricycle gear, a gas-turbine engine, tires made of rubber, aluminum skin - that's it you've cracked the code! Someone call James Cameron and tell him his next docu-fantasy movie subject is ready http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif ROTFL!
Exactally! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Author also states With acces to much previously unpublished information etc.. so this books info hasnt published recently book is about 7 years old..Tagert..how is your Bf109 project going btw ..Iwould like also to know how much
starter of thread knows about ta 183 or HeS011 engines??

fighter_966
03-01-2007, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by p-11.cAce:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the parallers to the Mig-15 are more than just pure chance
OMG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Let's see...they both have 2 swept wings, tricycle gear, a gas-turbine engine, tires made of rubber, aluminum skin - that's it you've cracked the code! Someone call James Cameron and tell him his next docu-fantasy movie subject is ready http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

thats a quote from book not my opinion heh heh http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

TheBandit_76
03-01-2007, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:

Some of the most fun I have been having with it is while sitting on the runway with engines off.. I sit there like a SAM sight and use the X4 to down incomming airplanes! It is a real hoot! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Oh man I gotta try that!

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif