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

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-14-2012, 10:42 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,247
Default Flight Model (FM) Testing Spitfire Mk.I v1.10.20332 Beta

Flight Model (FM) Testing Spitfire Mk.I v1.10.20332 Beta

CONFIGURATION:
The following Top Speed per Altitude (TSPA) test was performed starting with a full fuel load and ammo load (no bombs) and the radiators/cowlings are set to full open (worst case).

PROCEDURE:
The top speed is tested at each of the following altitudes:

Code:
   100ft
 1,000ft
 2,000ft
 4,000ft
 6,000ft
 8,000ft
10,000ft
12,000ft
14,000ft
16,000ft
17,750ft (Spit MAX)
20,000ft
22,000ft
24,000ft
26,000ft
28,000ft
30,000ft
The test begins with an air start near sea level. At each altitude the plane flies for a distance of 15,000 meters (9.32 miles) before climbing to the next test altitude. Note at SL and max altitude there may be some 'pilot error' associated with the data (spikes), therefore you may have to ignore the 'spikes' in the data at these two extremes and visually extend the graphs using the data above and/or below the spike. I am working on C# code to do this automatically, but it is not finished.

During the flight all pertinent data is logged using a C# script. The TAS and altitude (Z_VelocityTAS & Z_AltitudeMSL) data is than graphed (see attached). The graph only plots the max TAS value per altitude. If you would like to viewed/inspected all the TAS values you can do so at my web site http://www.flightsimtesting.com/.

NOTE at my site you can compare one in-game plan to in-game plane, or an in-game plane to one of the many real world data sets that are uploaded at my web site. This was done to make it easier to see how well the in-game plane test data matches the real world test data. You can also change the units SI to imperial, and save any graph displayed by simply right-mouse-clicking on the graph and saving it as an image to your PC.

I am also in the process of allowing you to upload your own in-game and/or real world test data at my web site, after which you will be able to graph and compare data via my web site.

SPECIAL THANKS TO:
FST for double checking my C# script file
FG28_Kodiak for all his help with C# scripts
Ataros for all his help with C# scripts
Attached Images
File Type: jpg TSPA_Spitfire_Mk.I.jpg (112.9 KB, 53 views)
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-15-2012, 02:51 AM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Question: What's with the ROC graphs on your site? I see a lot of spiky bits on the ROC graphs; is that a discretization error?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-15-2012, 10:26 AM
5./JG27.Farber 5./JG27.Farber is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,958
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES View Post
Hun?

Not sure how you came to that conclusion based on a top speed per altitude test? You should wait for my ROC testing to make such calls.

On that note, if your looking at the ROC data from this TSPA test at my website, DONT!

In that the ROC data collected during this TSPA test consists of a ZOOM climb between altitudes, thus not a valid ROC test!


None
It got me too.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-15-2012, 02:47 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
Question: What's with the ROC graphs on your site? I see a lot of spiky bits on the ROC graphs; is that a discretization error?
What you are looking at (on my website) is the rate of climb (ROC) data that was logged during the top speed per altitude (TSPA) test..

This ROC data is not valid ROC data in that this was not an ROC test..

The reason this ROC data looks odd, and much higher values than expected is that it is due to a ZOOM climb between altitudes..

In essance, what is going on there is at the end of my top speed test at a test altitude, I climb to the next altitude..

Thus my inital velocity at that start of that climb is the max velocity at that altitude..

So the ROC values are due to a ZOOM climb, which is not a valid ROC test and is why the ROC values are so much higher than expected.

With that said..

Near the top of the website on the 'IL-2 Cliffs of Dover' tab you should see a pull down menu called 'Test Type'..

The default is 'Rate of Climb (ROC)' which is why your seeing ROC data graphed instead of TSPA data..

Switch the 'Test Type' to 'Top Speed per Altitude (TSPA)'.

That will cause the graph to show TAS data from the CoD C# log files instead of the ROC data.

Also note, you can switch the units the graphs displays.

And you can compare the data of one plane to another..

Where the data can be ingame CoD data or real world data (RWD)..

For example, see the attached graph, which is the comparsion of the ingame CoD Spitfire Mk.I data to the RWD of a real Spitfire Mk.I

Enjoy
Attached Images
File Type: jpg CoD_vs_RWD_SpitfireMk.I.jpg (119.6 KB, 26 views)
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.

Last edited by ACE-OF-ACES; 10-15-2012 at 04:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-15-2012, 04:28 PM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES View Post
The reason this ROC data looks odd, and much higher values than expected is that it is due to a ZOOM climb between altitudes..

In essance, what is going on there is at the end of my top speed test at a test altitude, I climb to the next altitude..

Thus my inital velocity at that start of that climb is the max velocity at that altitude..

So the ROC values are due to a ZOOM climb, which is not a valid ROC test and is why the ROC values are so much higher than expected.
Ahhh, makes sense. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-15-2012, 09:11 PM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

While we're on the topic, what sort of pilot aids would there be in the FMB arsenal for doing sustained climb tests?

Given the lack of a variometer or an aoa gauge, it'd be difficult to make sure you were climbing at a constant rate.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-15-2012, 09:25 PM
bongodriver's Avatar
bongodriver bongodriver is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
While we're on the topic, what sort of pilot aids would there be in the FMB arsenal for doing sustained climb tests?

Given the lack of a variometer or an aoa gauge, it'd be difficult to make sure you were climbing at a constant rate.
You don't want a constant rate though, you need to fly constant speed and then measure the achieved ROC, no need for a VSI or AOA just an ASI, the best rate of climb speed should give more or less best rate up to 30,000'
__________________


Intel Q9550 @3.3ghz(OC), Asus rampage extreme MOBO, Nvidia GTX470 1.2Gb Vram, 8Gb DDR3 Ram, Win 7 64bit ultimate edition
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-15-2012, 10:03 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
While we're on the topic, what sort of pilot aids would there be in the FMB arsenal for doing sustained climb tests?

Given the lack of a variometer or an aoa gauge, it'd be difficult to make sure you were climbing at a constant rate.
The good news is the C# script has access to both the indicated (I_) values and the 3D world (Z_) values.. So, even if the plane does not have a variometer (ROC) gauge, you can still get the ROC from the Z_ values.

Another thing the C# allows you to do is print to the screen.. In essance a HUD overlay.. Which is what I do and one of the values is the IAS value.. It is a big font and is smack dab in the middle of the screen so you can allways see it and thus not have to try and read the guage..

There are sevral good C# out there.. FST has one and klem has one based on FST's. I have been working with FST to come up with a newer version of the C# script to help assist in FM testing.. That and it has the standard file format that my website uses, the idea being people can use this C# script during testing, than upload the log file to my website and than display thier results on my website. I was hoping to get that out this weekend, but, I just found out that my grandmother passed away yesterday, so, Ill be going to funeral this weekend instead
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-16-2012, 01:37 AM
trademe900 trademe900 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 186
Default

far too slow at low altitude currently.
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 01:53 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.