Profile image

Power problems. Am I doing this correctly?

6,356 Aeromotive  3.7 years ago

So my airplane weighs 4,270 kg, and is powered by a single T1000 engine modified to provide 2,100 horsepower.

At full power, it is able to climb vertically at a constant speed of 390 km/h, or rougly 109 meters/second. Ignoring drag, the opposing force provided is provided by gravity and is equal to 4,270 x 9.81 = 41,900 N.

Taking the standard power formula: force x velocity, we arrive at a power of 4,609 kW, or 4.6 megawatts. Which would be over 6,000 horsepower. Yet my plane has a max capacity of rougly a third of that? Please correct me if I'm missing something in my calculations.

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @SnoWFLakE0s No object of that mass could climb vertically against gravity at that rate on that specific amount of power. The problem lies with how simpleplanes simulates its prop engines, which is a shame.

    3.1 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @OFFWORLDSHRIMP That could be it. But still, that shouldnt affect power at all. Kind of annoying how simpleplanes simulates this. I guess it really is simple.

    3.1 years ago
  • Profile image

    I know you posted 6 months ago but judging by your posts, i think it's because of your propeller size settings, specifically chord. From my experience, anything above 2.5 makes things unrealistically powerful

    3.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @SnoWFLakE0s Indeed it shouldn't be possible given the power/weight of the aircraft, guess I'm gonna have to cheat around it in some way.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    66.7k SnoWFLakE0s

    @Aeromotive
    .
    In any case, then it just means an incorrectly built flight model. You can build realistic planes in SP, just that it requires a lot of tweaking on your end. I suppose your design doesn't follow such needs. A vertical climb should not be possible.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @SnoWFLakE0s This plane here is an older, less powerful version of the aircraft in question. It delivers a total of 1750 HP from two T1000 powerplants. One of them is buried in the cowling. The exhaust stacks have been tested and add only a negligible amount of thrust. It should be able to climb vertically as well.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @SnoWFLakE0s Legit, a sustained 90 degree climb immediately after takeoff. Like a rocket.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    66.7k SnoWFLakE0s

    @Aeromotive
    .
    In a straight, 90º climb? If this is the case your numbers would be correct, but otherwise you're missing out a lot on your calculations.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @BornToBeBurned Yes but high drag often gives poor engine-out performance. I figure bringing down the power is the only option.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,356 Aeromotive

    @jamesPLANESii That seems to be the case yea. I'll be putting a little less emphasis on the numbers from now on.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image

    you can make something with drag

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image

    I always completely ignore how much HP my engines have and just give my planes realistic performance.

    3.7 years ago
  • Profile image

    HP is weird in SP. It doesn't really work right...

    3.7 years ago