[Logged] CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

[Logged] CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> [Logged] CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

[Logged] CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than c... - 11/2/2017 1:59:37 AM

Amnectrus

Posts: 80
Joined: 10/22/2015
Status: offline

In a couple of Shifting Sands scenarios, I noticed that the Skyraider and Noratlas had much lower fuel usage in military power than in cruise. Looking through the in-game DB viewer, I found several more:

A-2 Savage
AC-119
AD-1 Skyraider
Noratlas
P-40 Warhawk
PBY-5 Catalina
Mosquito
B5N2 Kate
P-47D
Seafire
Spitfire

(Almost all of these are listed as having a 'Turboprop' engine, even though most should be 'Piston'.) In most cases, all sub-models of these planes are also affected (e.g. P-40B/C/D/E/F/etc). I didn't find any jet-powered aircraft that had this apparent inversion. The inversion holds true in all altitude bands. CWDB build 469 and up has the problem, Build 468 and lower do not. I haven't found any planes in DB3000 with this issue, but haven't looked extensively.

I have a save file but can't seem to upload it. Duplicating is easy though, just start a new blank scenario with CWDB 469 or later, add one of the affected planes, and change the throttle between cruise and military, or look in the in-game DB viewer. Please let me know if you need any more info. Thanks!

Edit: Forgot to mention, this is the Steam version of CMANO, v1.13, Build 972.10.

< Message edited by apache85 -- 2/6/2020 9:53:15 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 11/2/2017 7:35:12 PM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

Thanks added to the list.

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to Amnectrus)

Post #: 2

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 11/2/2017 7:59:21 PM

.Sirius

Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amnectrus

In a couple of Shifting Sands scenarios, I noticed that the Skyraider and Noratlas had much lower fuel usage in military power than in cruise. Looking through the in-game DB viewer, I found several more:

A-2 Savage
AC-119
AD-1 Skyraider
Noratlas
P-40 Warhawk
PBY-5 Catalina
Mosquito
B5N2 Kate
P-47D
Seafire
Spitfire

(Almost all of these are listed as having a 'Turboprop' engine, even though most should be 'Piston'.) In most cases, all sub-models of these planes are also affected (e.g. P-40B/C/D/E/F/etc). I didn't find any jet-powered aircraft that had this apparent inversion. The inversion holds true in all altitude bands. CWDB build 469 and up has the problem, Build 468 and lower do not. I haven't found any planes in DB3000 with this issue, but haven't looked extensively.

I have a save file but can't seem to upload it. Duplicating is easy though, just start a new blank scenario with CWDB 469 or later, add one of the affected planes, and change the throttle between cruise and military, or look in the in-game DB viewer. Please let me know if you need any more info. Thanks!

Edit: Forgot to mention, this is the Steam version of CMANO, v1.13, Build 972.10.

Thanks on the to do list :)

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to Amnectrus)

Post #: 3

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 11/22/2018 7:00:10 AM

Izgud

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/29/2016
Status: offline

Hi,

I don't mean to sound impatient, but has there been any headway on this issue?

Here are some amusing images in the meantime:
A-20 with 50 mile range
F-51 with 8,000 mile range

Regards

(in reply to .Sirius)

Post #: 4

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 12/7/2018 9:12:19 AM

Dimitris

Posts: 13282
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline

Hi,

These have been fixed and will be included in the next CWDB release. Thanks!

_____________________________

Facebook
Twitter

(in reply to Izgud)

Post #: 5

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 12/12/2018 12:33:28 AM

ljdramone

Posts: 34
Joined: 3/28/2008
Status: offline

Planning to play Northern Inferno scenario 7 (The Mighty "O") and noticed a problem with the EC-121 (after updating to the latest version of CWDB.)

All versions of the EC-121 (military version of the Lockheed Constellation) show the type of the R-3350 radial engine as "Turboprop". The R-3350 is a piston engine.

Piston engines don't work well at high altitude, even if they are supercharged like the R-3350. CWDB says the EC-121 can fly as high as 45,000 feet, but Wikipedia says the Lockheed Constellation's service ceiling is 24,000 feet .

Database speeds are also high. Band 2 max / cruise speeds in the DB are 400 kt / 330 kt, but Wikipedia says max / cruise speeds for the Constellation at 22,600 feet are 327 kt / 295 kt. I'd guess the EC-121 would be slower than that with those radomes hanging out in the breeze.

< Message edited by ljdramone -- 12/12/2018 12:43:40 AM >

(in reply to Dimitris)

Post #: 6

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 5/5/2019 1:06:12 AM

Izgud

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/29/2016
Status: offline

Hi,

This is still an issue with the latest CWDB release. In fact, the F-51's range was increased to 9000 nmi.

Regards

(in reply to ljdramone)

Post #: 7

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/4/2020 11:47:27 PM

Izgud

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/29/2016
Status: offline

Hi,

Still an issue in CMO.

A very impressive 55,000 nmi range and 1 week endurance on this KC-97. Hopefully 2020 is the year this is fixed.

Regards

(in reply to Izgud)

Post #: 8

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/5/2020 10:06:38 AM

.Sirius

Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ljdramone

Planning to play Northern Inferno scenario 7 (The Mighty "O") and noticed a problem with the EC-121 (after updating to the latest version of CWDB.)

All versions of the EC-121 (military version of the Lockheed Constellation) show the type of the R-3350 radial engine as "Turboprop". The R-3350 is a piston engine.

Piston engines don't work well at high altitude, even if they are supercharged like the R-3350. CWDB says the EC-121 can fly as high as 45,000 feet, but Wikipedia says the Lockheed Constellation's service ceiling is 24,000 feet .

Database speeds are also high. Band 2 max / cruise speeds in the DB are 400 kt / 330 kt, but Wikipedia says max / cruise speeds for the Constellation at 22,600 feet are 327 kt / 295 kt. I'd guess the EC-121 would be slower than that with those radomes hanging out in the breeze.

Hi

I show in the db editor engines are piston , max alt 24,000ft and Band 2 cruise speed 330kt but will investigate the beta db I have is 479

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to ljdramone)

Post #: 9

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/5/2020 10:08:37 AM

.Sirius

Posts: 1404
Joined: 1/18/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Izgud

Hi,

Still an issue in CMO.

A very impressive 55,000 nmi range and 1 week endurance on this KC-97. Hopefully 2020 is the year this is fixed.

Regards

I show max fuel loadout in db 479 as 18500 kg

_____________________________

Paul aka Sirius
Command Developer
Warfaresims
Cold War Data Base 1946-1979 Author

Old radar men never die - Their echoes fade away in accordance with the inverse fourth power law

(in reply to Izgud)

Post #: 10

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/5/2020 4:39:46 PM

Izgud

Posts: 20
Joined: 12/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: .Sirius

I show max fuel loadout in db 479 as 18500 kg

Hi,

Thanks for your replies. In CWDB v478, the latest version publicly available, only #1653 (Israel) has 18500 kg, while #718 and #3100 (US) appear to be using a few values from the KC-135, such as 90800 kg of fuel and the name 'Stratotanker'.

However, just to be clear, the real issue here in my opinion is the enormous fuel consumption disrepancy between cruise and military speeds for many aircraft, as described in the original post by Amnectrus. This widespread issue still affects every single aircraft listed in this thread (including the EC-121 and KC-97), and perhaps even many more that aren't listed here. This issue sometimes results in fuel flow decreasing (or increasing) by a factor of 10 when switching from cruise to military and has been enough of a pain that I have been avoiding many CWDB scenarios for several years.

This is all with v478.

Regards

< Message edited by Izgud -- 2/5/2020 4:41:42 PM >

(in reply to .Sirius)

Post #: 11

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/6/2020 6:43:32 AM

boogabooga

Posts: 457
Joined: 7/18/2018
Status: offline

Late KC-97s (as with B-36, C-123) had fuel-thirsty turbojets as temporary thrust augmentation. Could that be why consumption increases by a factor of 10? Is that modeled?

(in reply to Izgud)

Post #: 12

RE: CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise? - 2/6/2020 9:53:05 AM

Rory Noonan

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline

Logged for investigation. #0013598

_____________________________

(in reply to boogabooga)

Post #: 13

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> [Logged] CWDB Military throttle fuel usage lower than cruise?

Page: [1]