Difference between revisions of "User talk:Suprā"
blastedryan (talk | contribs) m |
blastedryan (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
|} | |} | ||
:with a straight line connecting the points. So your graph is shaped correctly aside from the beginning values. Judging by my rough eyeballing of of your horsepower values your numbers are a bit off. Could you show me your raw data? Also please do not test in the test flight map many people have claimed it is inaccurate.--[[User:U30585107|U30585107]] ([[User talk:U30585107|talk]]) 02:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | :with a straight line connecting the points. So your graph is shaped correctly aside from the beginning values. Judging by my rough eyeballing of of your horsepower values your numbers are a bit off. Could you show me your raw data? Also please do not test in the test flight map many people have claimed it is inaccurate.--[[User:U30585107|U30585107]] ([[User talk:U30585107|talk]]) 02:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::The 1955 might look odd then you'll be even more surprising that the 100% hp of the F-82 is 1600hp from 0 m all the way to 6095m. Feel free to test it. | ||
| + | ::I'm not sure what would be the best map but I see there is a variance in atmospheric pressure between maps. Perhaps a map with as close to 1 atm at sea level would be optimal? I think some of the deviation from the expected values might also be from the speed of the plane. I tested the plane at ~300km/h and 1000m and got ~1800hp while going at ~640km/h got ~1930hp. I know jets exhibit this behavior but I've never seen it documented for prop planes as well.--[[User:U30585107|U30585107]] ([[User talk:U30585107|talk]]) 05:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 05:22, 9 November 2019
horsepower graphs
I'm not sure where you are getting those numbers. They are wrong.--blastedryan (talk) 01:17, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
- The expected values for the F-82e's WEP horsepower for 1 engine based on the code are
| Alt | WEP HP |
|---|---|
| 0 m | 1955 |
| 1000 m | 1955 |
| 6095 m | 1700 |
| 9143 m | 1329 |
- with a straight line connecting the points. So your graph is shaped correctly aside from the beginning values. Judging by my rough eyeballing of of your horsepower values your numbers are a bit off. Could you show me your raw data? Also please do not test in the test flight map many people have claimed it is inaccurate.--blastedryan (talk) 02:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
- The 1955 might look odd then you'll be even more surprising that the 100% hp of the F-82 is 1600hp from 0 m all the way to 6095m. Feel free to test it.
- I'm not sure what would be the best map but I see there is a variance in atmospheric pressure between maps. Perhaps a map with as close to 1 atm at sea level would be optimal? I think some of the deviation from the expected values might also be from the speed of the plane. I tested the plane at ~300km/h and 1000m and got ~1800hp while going at ~640km/h got ~1930hp. I know jets exhibit this behavior but I've never seen it documented for prop planes as well.--blastedryan (talk) 05:21, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
