DCS: P-47D-30 Discussion

Looks like this one has removed turbo so i dont like it.

I believe quite a few warbirds on the airshow scene have their turbos removed as there is no real requirement for it/them and it is an extra item to maintain. I seem to remember quite a few B-17s have theirs removed as they were only really required for high(er) altitude flying so it is easier to remove them.

 

Also, don't forget that these aeroplanes would have been loaded heavily with ammunition and bombs so needed that 'oomph'... It isn't required now as they don't carry any payloads...

 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

The photography in that article is amazing.

 

John Dibbs is one of the world’s best aviation shooters.

 

I’ve looked up to him for years.

How can you explain that, when i landed p-51 turned off engine everything was fine, then after about 5-10 minutes sitting on the ground with engien turned off i heard loud bang and after this engien didnt want to turn anymore. Engiewn just jammed it self sitting turned off couple minutes ago

:doh: and that's a "timer"? I guess an old car I had years ago and happened exactly that had a timer either… In the ground there's no airflow for radiators, and if you didn't cool down enough the engine it gets broken. That's why some manuals tells you to keep engine running a bit until everything stabilises before quitting if it's a hot day or you come from a long run. And that's what happened to my car :D .

 

 

It's funny how a cool engine feature you haven't seen in any other sim just becomes "a nasty bug" or whatever in the hands of some people :lol::lol::lol:.

 

 

S!

:doh: and that's a "timer"? I guess an old car I had years ago and happened exactly that had a timer either… In the ground there's no airflow for radiators, and if you didn't cool down enough the engine it gets broken. That's why some manuals tells you to keep engine running a bit until everything stabilises before quitting if it's a hot day or you come from a long run. And that's what happened to my car :D .

 

 

It's funny how a cool engine feature you haven't seen in any other sim just becomes "a nasty bug" or whatever in the hands of some people :lol::lol::lol:.

 

 

S!

 

Oh no no i made decent taxi after landing,set my coolers wide open, i made full approach so i did run engine low power for quite time, So my engien was cooled preaty good once iturned it off.

What you saying is true you can damage engien by doing that but you need to turn off engine right after full power load, but it is very unlikely to engine get piston jammed in liners.

You may damage engine shorten its life time.

Maby its not a timer, it could be some fatal error in programing or something make this damage looping it self until engien is done, no matter what pilot is doing with engine

And definetly it wont make exact same sound like a catastrofic fail while engine running. No matter if you land or keep flying you will hear lound bang after some time and engine will seizure after it completely.

I will tell you another thing i can use 67' in p-51 in climb with IAS around 250mph and i had no issues with engien damage, you cna climb to 40k at full power from SL in p-51 no problem no engine damage.

My temps goes to red lines and stay there all the time during climb = no engien damage

Reason in that climb im not staying at 67' for too long

I have problems in level flights and while diving then i got my engien damaged in about of 4minutes of wep,

 

Test p-51 again, go for wep for about 4min30sec and drop to cruise power then after 10 minutes got for wep again,

Edited September 25, 2019 by grafspee

Oh no no i made decent taxi after landing,set my coolers wide open, i made full approach so i did run engine low power for quite time, So my engien was cooled preaty good once iturned it off.

Then it could be a too long wait on the ground, engine gets overheated of course as there's no airflow to counter that, and/or it was a hot day as that also influences really a lot in DCS and many people doesn't notice or pay attention to those details, but it counts, in DCS it does, maybe not in any other :smilewink:.

 

I mean, I know about the cooling issue with the second WEP use and that's why I had a go to see how long I could run full WEP in the first place, and found what I found which is consistent with RL if you don't care the bills. I don't say there's no bug at all, although we know a new cooling system for all warbirds is on the works and it'd be of very little sense to spend time with that now when it'll be completely changed and new with that model. Hope that comes with P-47 in a relatively short time.

 

 

 

What I say is a somewhat unlimited WEP use (a single time since there's a reported bug the second one) if you care about airflow in the radiators is no bug and either to those saying that's impossible, it's possible and realistic though unnecessary wear to the engine but hey, you hit refly and that's all the bill you pay, right? That and people claiming they break the engine the very first WEP time in a minute, that's more probably than not just a misused engine in one or another way, even if they didn't noticed, than any other thing and not everything is a bug. That's all.

 

 

S!

Then it could be a too long wait on the ground, engine gets overheated of course as there's no airflow to counter that, and/or it was a hot day as that also influences really a lot in DCS and many people doesn't notice or pay attention to those details, but it counts, in DCS it does, maybe not in any other :smilewink:.

 

 

 

S!

 

I already siad that that my temps went below green, it wasnt extreem long taxi, i alwayes remember to not do down wind taxi in p-51 i alwayes care about engine temps. It was standard taxi way from runway to starting position(cold spawn location).

What can i add hmm... i idle 1000rpm in p-51 too whole time.

I would not even think about posting anything in case where i got engien damage becouse i exeed temp limits, I can tell you another small secret you can exceed temp limits in p-51 for very short time and your engine will be fine (no looping damage into oblivion), what is killing it is long use of 67'(shorter then on engine chart limits.)

This is extremly wier becouse merlin engines could hit 500hours in service where DB engines could not get even half of that,but magicly you can run DB full power as long as you want in DCS and packard build merlin is getting wrecked just bearly hiting couple minutes WER.

When you exceed coolant temp limit,plane starts venting coolant in to air if you keep temp high for too long not much coolant will left in cooling system ending with fatal damage,But when you exceed for 10-20 sec nothing is gonna happen. It happen to me while climbing at 67' :)(when my supercharger speed changed i miss to check my temps right away, they went up preaty quick after 2nd speed was engaged)

Edited September 26, 2019 by grafspee

This is extremly wier becouse merlin engines could hit 500hours in service where DB engines could not get even half of that,but magicly you can run DB full power as long as you want in DCS and packard build merlin is getting wrecked just bearly hiting couple minutes WER.

IIRC, Merlin in general and Packard either had a 25 hours or so life span. At the end of the war with plenty of spare engines and 81" manifold allowed that time was even more reduced to some 10 hours. A modern Warbird usually features some 50 hours between overhauls time from what I've read, and that's reducing manifold a lot and being really conservative in engine management.

 

 

 

The Merlin 500/45 mounted in Spanish built Bf109 was a civil engine with 500 hours between overhauls (used in civil Lancaster version, for instance). That engine lacked 2nd stage supercharger and probably had a lowered manifold, that means something and why it had such a long overhaul time as 500 hours.

 

 

DB right now is a bit OPed due to MW50 being a bit too much effective, which anyway is just a way to cool down the engine (funny, right?). But again, makes little sense to lose time tackling that if we're getting a new cooling system in warbirds. And even without that somewhat advantage, K4 would still be the most powerful aeroplane in the planeset.

 

 

 

S!

IIRC, Merlin in general and Packard either had a 25 hours or so life span. At the end of the war with plenty of spare engines and 81" manifold allowed that time was even more reduced to some 10 hours. A modern Warbird usually features some 50 hours between overhauls time from what I've read, and that's reducing manifold a lot and being really conservative in engine management.

 

 

 

The Merlin 500/45 mounted in Spanish built Bf109 was a civil engine with 500 hours between overhauls (used in civil Lancaster version, for instance). That engine lacked 2nd stage supercharger and probably had a lowered manifold, that means something and why it had such a long overhaul time as 500 hours.

 

 

DB right now is a bit OPed due to MW50 being a bit too much effective, which anyway is just a way to cool down the engine (funny, right?). But again, makes little sense to lose time tackling that if we're getting a new cooling system in warbirds. And even without that somewhat advantage, K4 would still be the most powerful aeroplane in the planeset.

 

 

 

S!

75' p-51 has almost 2000hp so k-4 isnt that powerfull, and up high intercooling system and 2 stage supercharger will surpass k-4

Even fuel it self has cooling effect on engien

DB have mw50 but merlin has its own advantages

 

looks like you have wrong data.

Republic Aviation's P-47D-16, Army serial number 42-75882. This plane was assigned to us on 22 April 1944. Her crew chief from that date to the present time has been Paul D. Bussoli. The Assistant Crew Chief, Raymond Rathcamp. The pilot, F/O Francis Flood. This trio, assisted by Leon Hanford as armorer and Milton Hope as radio man, kept the ship in perfect condition with a flight record of over 600 hours before she was taken out for an engine change.

For example DB605 AS bearly could hit 50Hours,main problem in db engines was low oil pressure, ripping connection rod bearing apart especialy at high alt where oil had tendency to foaming.I know i know we have db605 db version improved, but as far as i know DB never managed to fix this low oil pressure, and you can see it in game where if you let idle k-4 while oil is hot, oil pressure drops below minimum.

Even in Russia merlins manages to live for 300hours even whne run on garbage fuel.

Allison V-1710-39 in RAF Service hit about 1500hours

Any way merlin life time ranged between 250-500hours.

Absolutely no one will convince me that any german engine was more reliable then merlin or alison.

Take note that, i would just gues here,90% of flight time engine was loaded with cruise power setting 5% climb setting and 5% combat power setting.

 

Im not talking about some engine disassamble for checks etc,etc its is not counting as Engine life time. So what spark plug change qualifying as engine life time for you ??

Dont create your own engine life time definition.

Right now civilian p-51 probsbly are hitting over 1000hours

Edited September 26, 2019 by grafspee

Right now civilian p-51 probsbly are hitting over 1000hours

That's not what I've read whenever you find something with regards to Warbirds upkeep cost nowadays, but maybe :dunno:.

 

 

The P-47 you mention (and pertinent to OP), well that I don't know. A big radial is probably way different than the "nimble" Merlin.

 

 

 

S!

The P-47 you mention (and pertinent to OP), well that I don't know. A big radial is probably way different than the "nimble" Merlin.

 

 

 

S!

 

Yeah 600 hours for air cooled engine and 25hours for liquid cooled V12. Yeah.

Edited September 27, 2019 by grafspee

That's not what I've read whenever you find something with regards to Warbirds upkeep cost nowadays, but maybe :dunno:.

 

 

 

S!

 

I asked p-51 pilot,he said something around 1000 hours before grand overhaul. Which still don't count as engine change so probably single engine can sit in p-51 for forever nowdays.

Maintaining reapirs,checks etc dont count as engine life time, those will happen much much often, even every flight.

Aviation engines life time difffer very from car engines. In cars you are driving engine until it blow up, in aviation you are disassembling and assembling engine countless times during its life time

after 10, 20, 50,100,150, etc etc.

After 50 hours, you disassembling Merlin and after checks turn out that piston rings for 3 5 8 9 12 cylinders don't hold dimensions so you replace them. So by your book this is end of this engine so you have to grind off engine serial numbers and make new ones hee, does it make any sense for you?

BTW piston rings change could be standard maintenance procedure for every 10 hours hehe for merlin.

Engine ends its life time in papers where engine's serial number is forbidden for any aviation use,you can still use it for your motor boat.

Edited September 27, 2019 by grafspee

Since Yo-yo is finishing turbo supercharger model for p-47,i will say that it would be sin to not make p-38 after p-47

So wait, didn't the P-47D-30 come with an A-23 turbo regulator from the factory?

 

This document dated Feb 3, 1944 says the A-23 regulator was already being used operationally and was to be preferred over the A-13.

 

From what I've been able to find in a quick search, the first P-47 block that came with the A-23 regulator from the factory was the D-22.

Since Yo-yo is finishing turbo supercharger model for p-47,i will say that it would be sin to not make p-38 after p-47

 

P38 ? I would buy it today if I could ! :music_whistling:

I am actually more psyched about the Thunderbolt than the Viper, and it would be my first WWII, aircraft other than the Mustang witch I got on sale and out of curiosity only...

Yo-yo which turbo rpm limit will we get 18250 or 20000?

D-25 and later versions had 22k rpm limit for turbo

Edited September 27, 2019 by grafspee

Interesting reading https://aviationshoppe.com/manuals/wwii_aircraft_superchargers/wwii_aircraft_turbosupercharger.html

https://aviationshoppe.com/manuals/pratt_whitney_double_wasp_radial_engine/r-2800.html

A-23 is totally a dark horse, though both A-13 and A-17 have necessary amount of information suitable at least to model their governing law and to set backpressure limits they can provide. A-17, as stated in the document from 10 Jan 1944 was used for P-47C thru P-47D-15.

 

As A-23 can be replaced with A-13, it's plausible that a real plane could have A-13 turbo regulator instead of failed A-23. I think, it's better to have modeled something that resembles original item than to have something fantastic.

Of course, if something useful for A-23 is available, we can replace it back.

 

By the way, what document stated that A-23 was compulsory for -22+?

 

Sure!

 

Page 234, item #28.

 

E: Added the revision history to show page 234 had remained unchanged since May '45.

Edited September 27, 2019 by antagonist

Yo-Yo do you have any data, how fast engine dies when overboosted during t/o?

So since p-47 dont have boost control, pilot can over boost even using supercharger only or supercharger alone is not capable of overboosting ?

Supercharger is adjusted for TO (or wet WEP if available) MP at SL at full throttle at low speed. Ram pressure, though, can be a problem, but the speed builds up not too fast to make MP adjusting unavailable.

At climb at higher altitudes the MP can be higher than at the SL.

 

The new kind of failures we will introduce is a main bearings failure due to LOW MP... in less than a minute the bearings will be dead. Thus, it will cure the bad habit to retard throttle at high speed.

 

This looks interesting

Connection rods bearing or main shaft bearings ??