1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Gameplay questions threads

Gameplay questions threads Everything about playing CoD (missions, tactics, how to... and etc.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-01-2011, 05:02 PM
Moggy's Avatar
Moggy Moggy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 272
Default

Well the thing you have to remember is...we still have fuel injection today so it was far from a bad engine. I also like the whine it makes from it's supercharger...for me it harks back to the late twenties and the races between the Mercedes and Bentleys. I just believe the Merlin was a better engine, it's problems were identified and fixed...partly by Miss Shilling and later by the diaphragm carburetor. As Bader and Stanford-Tuck say in the video, they could catch the 109 after it had dived because they believed word had got round the Luftwaffe that an ace pilot had ripped the wings off a 109 in a dive and pilots would pull out of dive early. Wasn't the 109 tested pre-war with an earlier Rolls Royce engine, the Kestrel?
Also, 1 last thing to consider...the Spitfire and Hurricane were never really designed to go up against 109s. They were at heart bomber interceptors kind of like 109s later in the war.
__________________
Keep calm and carry on

http://www.tangmerepilots.co.uk/

Last edited by Moggy; 04-01-2011 at 05:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-01-2011, 05:35 PM
Azimech's Avatar
Azimech Azimech is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Leerdam, The Netherlands
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moggy View Post
Well the thing you have to remember is...we still have fuel injection today so it was far from a bad engine. I also like the whine it makes from it's supercharger...for me it harks back to the late twenties and the races between the Mercedes and Bentleys. I just believe the Merlin was a better engine, it's problems were identified and fixed...partly by Miss Shilling and later by the diaphragm carburetor. As Bader and Stanford-Tuck say in the video, they could catch the 109 after it had dived because they believed word had got round the Luftwaffe that an ace pilot had ripped the wings off a 109 in a dive and pilots would pull out of dive early. Wasn't the 109 tested pre-war with an earlier Rolls Royce engine, the Kestrel?
Also, 1 last thing to consider...the Spitfire and Hurricane were never really designed to go up against 109s. They were at heart bomber interceptors kind of like 109s later in the war.
I understand what you're saying, and that's my point as well, the engines were tailored for their intended use. Yes, the prototype 109 used a Kestrel. Production 109's used the Jumo 210 until Emil showed up, that was the first production type with the DB601. But ... comparing the Merlin with the structural deficiencies in the airframe of the 109 misses the point
And sure, the problems with the Merlin were solved, and both engine types evolved dramatically during the war. Both engine types were examples of excellent engineering, like most engines in successful aircraft.
__________________
Insuber said: 1% of facts, 35% of passion, 19% of testosterone, 50% of intellectual speculation = Il2 fan cocktail is served, better with a drop of Tobasco ...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-01-2011, 06:19 PM
Sternjaeger
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Moggy,every inch of you is RAF pride,and u have any right to do it,but u need to be objective: Coventry was flattened and a good part of London was devastated.. had they kept on hammering airfields you would have had no chance to defend yourself. I'm not offending anybody's memory,I respect fighters on both fronts,but you need to get yourself a better source of info,not just watching documentaries.. You show poor understanding of aviation (your conclusions about engines is pretty senseless),I'm only trying to explain things in an objective way,and I know that sometimes I come out a bit blunt,but you can decide for a life in denial or listening to people that actually spent hours on books and met many historians.. Ask in person to Prof Holland what he REALLY thinks of the BoB..he's quite a renown English historian..
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-02-2011, 11:50 AM
GnigruH GnigruH is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Poland
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Coventry was flattened and a good part of London was devastated.
Quote:
*yawn* they still bombed a good part of London and other cities flat.
*yawn* bombed flat... you are exaggerating a bit.
Berlin was bombed flat, Warsaw was bombed flat in 1944... but London or any other British city in 1940? No.

Stop proving that germs lost the war because hitler was an idiot.
They lost because of too low manufacturing output and shortage of manpower resources.

Last edited by GnigruH; 04-02-2011 at 11:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-02-2011, 01:07 PM
Moggy's Avatar
Moggy Moggy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 272
Default

There are many reasons which contribute to the German defeat during the battle. 1 contribution was in fact German radar which was far in advance of the British chain home system. This led in part to the Germans simply believing the British system was ineffective. Another factor which is often overlooked was the British control of German intelligence gathering, All of the German spies operating in Britain had been captured by or during 1940 and some were double agents. 1 particular spy (Garbo?) fed false information about British aircraft production, telling the German high command that Britain was producing 200 fighters a month...the same as Germany. The figure of course was much higher (about 450 fighters a month give or take), so the Germans naturally thought to win all they had to do was keep pace with the ficticious production figures.
It's perfectly understandable to see why Goering thought (quite wrongly) the RAF was on it's knees.
There's no simple reason why the Germans lost the battle, it really is a huge combination of facts, circumstances, opinions, personnel, innovation and even double bluffs.
__________________
Keep calm and carry on

http://www.tangmerepilots.co.uk/
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-02-2011, 01:56 PM
MD_Titus MD_Titus is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 493
Default

So far from original topic...
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-02-2011, 08:15 PM
blitze blitze is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 9
Default

Yes back on topic, I found out myself in the quick flights you start in the air with closed radiators. First thing to do is open those puppies up and then look at the engine mixture, prop pitch and throttle.

Once you have them sorted, then you can get your cruise speed sorted and set about triming the plane.

Pretty crappy though when you are in the quick flight combat missions whereby you have f-all time to deal with these issues before having to deal with enemy aircraft. I would much prefer a few minutes flight time before interception.

Might have to look at mission building and set up various intercept missions starting from the ground.

So much to sort in this sim. Least I have my X45 sorted now, boy that one was getting me flustered and also Gun Sight View - who would have thought "loosen straps" LOL.

As for Germans and war, great machine, bone head leadership with squandered resources and over confidence. That should sum it up.

Had my first flights tonight without burning through my engines in the first 2 minutes. Even got a Spit down in a field in one piece (free flight with idea as to map reading and no vectoring from comms on airfields). I was happy.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-02-2011, 08:52 PM
Moggy's Avatar
Moggy Moggy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 272
Default

Yeah back on track, 1 quick tip I can think of is not to lean the Merlin engine too much when you're using a lot of throttle and prop pitch. Unless you need to conserve fuel or climb, keep your mixture fairly rich.
__________________
Keep calm and carry on

http://www.tangmerepilots.co.uk/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:34 AM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.