Hi Tim,
>Hohun, why all the course changes on the way out? Are you avoiding concentrations? Just curious.
Yes, sort of - it's to ensure that much of the route is flown overwater.
Additionally, I had unexpected strong southerly winds over the North Sea, so I had to correct to make it to Kiel NDB. I promptly overcompensated over the Baltic, but noticed it while I was still received Kiel NDB. Unfortunately, X-Plane has no ground-mapping radar, so I couldn't really re-create the historical navigation method which would have been used over Soviet territory. I used NDBs in the proximity of Moscow, but I imagine the hunt for radar-recognizable landmarks would have required similar zig-zagging
You can see the different phases of the flight quite nicely on the power chart:
- a short period of take-off power to get airborne and clean up the plane,
- a 40-min climb to 25000 ft (actually to 26000 ft, then re-descend to "get on the step"),
- the cruise out to Latvia,
- another climb to 30000 ft (actually, 31000 ft, then back down),
- the cruise to the vicinity of Moscow,
- the run-in at increased speed,
- A 5-min burst of emergency power to get away from the blast,
- the egress at increased speed to the 1-hour-limit,
- the cruise out to Latvia,
- the power fluctuation from the failing #1 engine :-/,
- my attempt to get the planned cruise speed from three engines,
- the cruise back on three engines at reduced cruise speed to avoid overheating.
This was the first time I logged data from a simulator flight in such a way, and I like the results quite well. I could kick myself for not logging true air speed, since this would have been great to validate the B-29 modelling, and also to get air mileage in the various cruise conditions
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)