I just looked at the official FIA web site and can not find this portion of the rules. Not that they are not there, I just can not find them.

jeepers you are realy rubbish at research arnt you, if you cannot find this on the FIA site then i doubt you can find anything about anything unless its on wiki

your point was an f1 car does not make any power at 8000rpm and say it does. you movve the goal posts to suit your argument instead of admitting what you said was wrong (and may be stating what you actualy meant to say)

  yet you are saying that they are at 150% throttle what a laugh, 100%+ throttle explain explain how you get that how do you open a throttle to 110% of its capability?

Yes, that is what I am saying! You seem to be confusing deffinitions! "Full Throttle" is that setting at wich the engine makes full, but normal power. It is also known as "Millitary Power" or 100% Power.

    No full throttle is the throttle fully open, if you restrict the throttle to only 75% for reliability then thats find but its still 75%  you are at it again 100% is the full power of the engine npot some arbitary figure lower

to simpliy it for you, if t is the throttle opening by your argument we have     t = 150/100 x t  

Just tell me how that equation works? (try it for your self on power )  

 

No it had a full throttle of 2218 and a max safe continuos power setting of the throttle it is amazing how you do not see the diference (also this depended on the boost something seperate from the throttleand 2,218 HP WEP!


or anything else and if you think otherwise you are in need of a buit of research, wep gave at best 10% See above! So1395/2218=110%???   but thats a different equation that has full throttle as 110% of max continous not of max throttle if you cant get this basic bit of math correect then why should we believe anything you say?  lookup percentage and see what it means

Never mind, you are just being obstinate now. WEP is and has never been "Full throttle" Arguing this deffinition is obviously not in agreemen t with the vario us pilots manuals.
  
 

How do you account for the times were the hand lever in the cockpit is pushed all the way to the "Full" stop, but the carb is still partialy closed?   show me where it says 110% on the quadrant

Why did the R-R Merlin in the Mk-IX Spitfire make more power than the same engine in the P-51B/C&D?

did it? from what I remember both were 1390hp

Then you are wrong in this too! See; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Merlin<br" target="_blank" />link />

 

     Merlin 61
(RM 8SM)
    

1,565 hp (1,170 kW) at 3,000 rpm at 12,250 ft (3,734 m)

1,390 hp (1,035 kW) at 3,000 rpm at 23,500 ft (7,163 m); fitted with a new two-speed two-stage supercharger providing increased power at medium to high altitudes; used in Spitfire F Mk.IX......, and P.R Mk.XI.......^[83]...... First British production variant to incorporate two-piece cylinder blocks designed by Rolls-Royce for the Packard Merlin.......^[84]...... First production Merlin 61, 2 March 1942.^[18]......

        Merlin 66
(RM 10SM)
       

1,720 hp (1,283 kW) at 5,790 ft (1,765 m) using +18 psi boost (124 kPa gauge; or an absolute pressure of 225 kPa or 2.2 atm); low-altitude version of Merlin 61. Fitted with a Bendix-Stromberg anti-g carburettor;^[85]...... used in Spitfire L.F Mk.VIII...... and L.F Mk.IX.^[80]......

from above I can clearly see that you are a moron one is a 61 and one is a 66 and the 61 is the equvilent to the Packard the 66 being a low altitude version whichyou might have noticed had you read it

Is there an ignore feature to this message board? I would really like to edit out the chaff posts and just read the intelligent bits.

 

B.

 

I just looked at the official FIA web site and can not find this portion of the rules. Not that they are not there, I just can not find them.

jeepers you are realy rubbish at research arnt you, if you cannot find this on the FIA site then i doubt you can find anything about anything unless its on wiki

your point was an f1 car does not make any power at 8000rpm and say it does. you movve the goal posts to suit your argument instead of admitting what you said was wrong (and may be stating what you actualy meant to say) No, my point was that engines, unless specifically designed to do so, do not make good power at realitively low RPMs! 
The original argument was about the power delivery qualities of fighter plane engines. You are the one who brought up F-1 engines and how broad their power band was. I pointed out that their power band was not that wide and you countered with a rule quote that I was not able to find on the "Official" Web site of F-1!
Now can you please provide a link to the rule that you quoted?

FIA regulations...

 

you are rubbish arent you - it shows why you spout so much tosh, you cannot find this despite all the clues yet we are to believe you about something you post

 

a F1 engine produces power from 5000 rpm to 18000rpm (and that is restricted they used to run to 22000 the same engines as thier has been an engine freeze in place for the last few years) yes an engine is designed to produce hp/torque in the most suitable was for its purpose 

5.5.3-5 .5.4 " The maximum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand
equal to or greater than the maximum engine torque at the measured engine speed.
The minimum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand
equal to or lower than 0Nm."
5.5.5  At any given engine speed the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing
for an increase in accelerator pedal position.
5.5.6  At any given accelerator pedal position and above 5,000rpm, the driver torque demand map
must not have a gradient of less than – (minus) 0.030Nm / rpm. As a seperate issue, Why does the text collor switch fail to highlite the last part of the prior sentance as shown by the black letters?

5.6.6  Except when anti-stall or idle speed control are active, ignition base offsets may only be
applied above 80% throttle and 15,000rpm and for the sole purpose of reducing cylinder
pressure for reliability.

My point WAS and is, that engines that run well at 18,000 RPMs do not make good power at lower RPMs. Note the part of the rules that you did not post from the list you quoted above. The second part of this quote is that "Anti-Stall" and "Idle speed control" as highlighted above, are required to keep the drivers, skilled as they are, from stalling the engine due to it's lack of power down low! There are litterally dozens or maybe even hundreds of instances over the last two decades where drivers have stalled their engines on the grid or in slow corners. I have personally witnessed this at least twice in the last few years. I like to go to F-1 when I can aford it.Now are you going to dispute the fact that F-1 Drivers have stalled their engines on the grid?

Then IF you accept that fact, why would that happen IF the engine made good power down low! QV, My point is made!

I just did not expect to have to fight so much and long over it.

 

Some of reading this thread is like a reading a cut and past zombie-bot like the INFAMOUS Mike Sparks who grabs bits and pieces of concepts he barely understands, watch him make flash-card concepts out of them, then stack them up with gobbledegook meaningless English that he uses as his concept glue to form an argument skeleton of half-baked looney fantasy that is impossible for a sane mind (yours hopefully) to follow, because you realize that whatever connectivity he thinks is there in his disordered assemblage of ideas  DOES NOT in reality EXIST. 

 

B.