[REPORTED]Not accurate starting procedure - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-30-2019, 06:36 PM   #11
grafspee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,657
Default

I tested it when you move cut off lever full forward before priming, you cant start spit.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2019, 09:41 AM   #12
vanir
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 263
Default

The RAF, like many European air forces experienced a wartime production phenomenon which simply wasn't present in the US industrial complex and would not have been entirely understood in the US, where mass production of large numbers of aircraft and engines managed a relatively tremendous quality control, where so many are being produced, in such an orderly fashion that sub-standard component batches within the production series can be identified and substituted prior to assembly and the final examples maintain a far greater level of performance consistency than any aircraft production in Europe. By comparison every Merlin produced by Rolls Royce had to be put into the air because the backlog on demand at the front lines and the capacity of limited production facilities were so strained, the same story throughout the European powers. Quality control suffered.
Following a tour of the Allison plant by Rolls Royce officials midwar the British Ministry conducted a study of quality control within production batches of brand new, assembled Spitfires and found that performance varied by as much as 50mph speed capability and quite a lot of horsepower difference among Spitfires of identical type and series, produced at the same factory, in the same production batch and the same assembly crews. By comparison about the most variation you'd see between two brand new Mustangs was about 5mph and that's on a very bad day.
This phenomenon was so old hat among European aircraft operators that field maintenance and operating procedures was always far more loose among the RAF and others than would ever be tolerated in the USAAC/F. Aircraft were considered individual personalities with entirely individual requirements, where US procedure mandated that manufacturer procedure must be adhered to without question or challenge at all times, a Mustang was a Mustang, but a Spitfire was a Betty or a Louise or a Joan and they all wore different dresses even if they came from the same mother. One could handle more boost, the next liked low alt better than high alt unlike the other two, the third liked the wings tipped before you fired the guns, yet they were made alongside each other and for all intents and purposes, identical aircraft and equipment fit. This is punctuated by correspondence by Allison AC to foreign operators of their engines under lend lease, strictly instructing them to please stop ignoring Allison operational guidelines and substituting them with their own field operational procedures, such as boost regulator adjustments well beyond manufacturer guidelines. You could literally have two Spits built right next to each other and one pilot complains that it won't climb past 19,000ft and the crew chief jump in the other and take it up to 22,000 and then the rest of the squadron would start quoting all their own different alt top outs. Welcome to the wartime RAF, where the MkIX wasn't even airworthy under British regulation for its first year of production and in fact wasn't until it started using MkVIII parts in late war production, everything but the fuel tankage.
Then we fast forward to modern warbird restoration operators and it's an entirely different kettle of fish, where we're not desperate to save the nation from inevitable doom with the very last strands of operational capacity every day of the week and we actually want to preserve the aircraft flown in some reasonable manner, for one thing care is taken that modern operating procedures do not overly strain the rather expensive museum piece. And what you have is a far more standardized operational guideline not unlike something US industry is more used to, since Mexico was never really a military threat.
You can dredge up wartime RAF pilot/crew guidelines which, whilst historical aren't exactly mandate, they're far more circumstantial.

Just a thought for another take on the matter.
vanir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2019, 09:20 AM   #13
grafspee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,657
Default


Check 0:28
Even modern spits are firing with mixture control full forward before cranking.
You can clearly see thet mixture lever is moved forward before priming and cranking in this plane.
He follow pilot notes.
If you do exactly the same in dcs spit you will not fire up engine.
For me it looks like copy paste from p-51 code.

Last edited by grafspee; 10-02-2019 at 09:30 AM.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2019, 12:34 PM   #14
-0303-
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Art-J View Post
... and that video for a comparison reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzsJBjbCyvM
There's an error in the video at 2:39.

The narrator says "propeller contin's speed control fully forward" while the video shows a hand moving the mixture control fully forward (red handle). One can see that the actual "propeller contin speed" (rpm) is already fully forward. Listen and turn on subtitles.

Subtitles are auto generated, therefore it comes out as:
Quote:
"better contin speed control fully forward idle cutoff checked fully aft"
where google auto generated "better contin" when he said "propeller continuous speed control fully forward".

Did a camera guy move mixture while filming not knowing what he was doing? Rpm fully forward is what makes sense and what we do in DCS.

Last edited by -0303-; 10-02-2019 at 12:48 PM.
-0303- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2019, 12:47 PM   #15
grafspee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 2,657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -0303- View Post
There's an error in the video at 2:39.

The narrator says "propeller contin speed control fully forward" while the video shows a hand moving the mixture control fully forward (red handle). One can see that the actual "propeller contin speed" (rpm) is already fully forward. Listen and turn on subtitles.

Subtitles are auto generated, therefore it comes out as:
where google auto generated "better contin" when he said "propeller continuous".

Did a camera guy move it not knowing what he was doing?

Rpm fully forward is what makes sense and what we do in DCS.
This video is a mess mixing pre-startup check list with start up procedure. It is garbage. One who edited this video had no idea what is goining on in this plane.
grafspee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2019, 10:16 PM   #16
hazzer
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 591
Default

this still needs to be looked at. The p51 and spitfire refuse to even splutter or backfire when the mixture is on
__________________
RTX 2080ti, I7 9700k, 32gb ram, SSD, Samsung Odyssey VR, MSFFB2, T-50 Throttle, Thrustmaster Rudder Pedals
hazzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2019, 10:07 PM   #17
Birko
Member
 
Birko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 300
Default

Yup, got the pilot's notes here, for Merlin 66 engines the idle cut-off control goes forward to RUN before priming so the engine should start this way- which it doesn't
Birko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2019, 12:33 AM   #18
wuffman
Junior Member
 
wuffman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SE USA
Posts: 64
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birko View Post
Yup, got the pilot's notes here, for Merlin 66 engines the idle cut-off control goes forward to RUN before priming so the engine should start this way- which it doesn't
Now this is going to mess me up when they fix it, as I have learned from here...
(why is this box so large? )
wuffman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2019, 01:17 PM   #19
Birko
Member
 
Birko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 300
Default

This section of the start-up is the one with the largest difference between DCS and the actual pilot's notes (steps iii to viii in the notes). The idle cut-off in particular is used incorrectly in a few places in DCS

Pilot's notes:
Wobble pump (or main tank booster pump on for) 30 seconds
*Idle cut-off to run*
Prime engine
Ignition switches on
Starter and booster-coil on
Release starter when engine fires
Booster-coil on (and prime if necessary) until engine runs smoothly
Adjust throttle for 1000-1200 rpm
Main tanks booster ON

DCS flight manual:
Prime engine
Wobble pump til warning light off
Ignition switches on
Starter and booster-coil on
*Idle cut-off forward to run*
Release starter and booster-coil when engine starts to run
*Idle cut-off rearmost position*
Birko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2019, 01:20 PM   #20
hazzer
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Birko View Post
This section of the start-up is the one with the largest difference between DCS and the actual pilot's notes (steps iii to viii in the notes). The idle cut-off in particular is used incorrectly in a few places in DCS

Pilot's notes:
Wobble pump (or main tank booster pump on for) 30 seconds
*Idle cut-off to run*
Prime engine
Ignition switches on
Starter and booster-coil on
Release starter when engine fires
Booster-coil on (and prime if necessary) until engine runs smoothly
Adjust throttle for 1000-1200 rpm
Main tanks booster ON

DCS flight manual:
Prime engine
Wobble pump til warning light off
Ignition switches on
Starter and booster-coil on
*Idle cut-off forward to run*
Release starter and booster-coil when engine starts to run
*Idle cut-off rearmost position*
This needs to be fixed.
__________________
RTX 2080ti, I7 9700k, 32gb ram, SSD, Samsung Odyssey VR, MSFFB2, T-50 Throttle, Thrustmaster Rudder Pedals
hazzer is offline   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 01:48 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.