« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: WWII Fighter Performance update.  (Read 1069 times)

Offline Neil Stirling

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 50
WWII Fighter Performance update.
« on: January 25, 2009, 01:20:19 PM »
Meteor, Vampire, P-80, Me 262, He 162, AR 234 and Me 163.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/


Neil.
Logged

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2009, 06:32:02 PM »
sweet :aok
Logged
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2009, 01:13:40 AM »
Thanks for posting!

If one were to look at the info presented on that website, from the official typed out specs from WWII, there are enough incorrect stats in HTC's flight models to keep them busy for a loooong time.   ;)



Logged
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline killnu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3056
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2009, 01:18:09 AM »
AH 190A8 needs some love? 
Logged
Karma, it follows you every where you go...

++The Blue Knights++

Offline Neil Stirling

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2009, 03:16:49 AM »
Many thanks to Mike Williams for providing the site and for all his hard work.


Neil
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2009, 03:36:01 AM »
An amazing website  :aok
Logged
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2009, 01:22:13 PM »
It's a great website and I'm grateful to Mr Williams and Mr Stirling... I'd have just one wish: what about a section about Italian planes? AFAIK, there were Allied tests, I was guessing if it's possible to add that material to an already great site.
Logged
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Neil Stirling

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2009, 01:56:06 PM »
I'd have just one wish: what about a section about Italian planes?

Me too, unfortunately I cant find anything at the National Archive. Maybe the Finnish Archive?

Neil
Logged

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #8 on: January 27, 2009, 04:53:32 PM »
The Finns could have something about G.50... there was a group of Italian AH players who have a lot of material about our aircrafts, but they don't play anymore (basically, they created their own sim, Target Tobruk) and they've been less than inclined to share (told me they had the material from collectors who didn't want it to go on the Net... go figure!): in any case, it would be all stuff in Italian. Our Ministry of Defence archives are the only other likely source, but, as far as I know, it's not easy to do any search in there (lot of chaos and unfriendly bureaucracy!) :(
Logged
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Puck

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2009, 04:59:44 PM »
Quote from: Gianlupo on January 27, 2009, 04:53:32 PM
Our Ministry of Defence archives are the only other likely source, but, as far as I know, it's not easy to do any search in there (lot of chaos and unfriendly bureaucracy!) :(

I've never talked to the Finnish Ministry of Defense, but I HAVE talked to the Russians.  I suspect in comparison your bureaucrats are sweetness and light.  In any event the data I was after is still apparently considered a state secret.  Apparently some day a hot young F/A-18E driver is going to find herself up against a Yak-1 and knowing the performance envelope of her opponent will make all the difference.
Logged
//c coad  c coad run  run coad run
main (){char _[]={"S~||(iuv{nkx%K9Y$hzhhd\x0c"},__
,___=1;for(__=___>>___;__<((___<<___<<___<<___<<___
)+(___<<___<<___<<___)-___);__+=___)putchar((_[__
])+(__/((___<<___)+___))-((___&

Offline Gianlupo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5154
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #10 on: January 27, 2009, 05:08:04 PM »
Quote from: Puck on January 27, 2009, 04:59:44 PM
I've never talked to the Finnish Ministry of Defense...

Puck... I'm Italian! ;)
Logged
Live to fly, fly to live!

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5961
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #11 on: January 27, 2009, 07:07:09 PM »
Quote from: killnu on January 26, 2009, 01:18:09 AM
AH 190A8 needs some love? 

How come its so crappy compared to the A5 ?
Logged
now posting as SirNuke

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2831
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2009, 04:48:45 AM »
It was heavier, due to larger fuel tank and more armour.
That said, I suspect a AoA problem since even with less fuel than a5 ( down to same weight) a8 behave like a pig compared.
Logged
My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5961
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #13 on: January 28, 2009, 05:20:38 AM »
Quote from: save on January 28, 2009, 04:48:45 AM
It was heavier, due to larger fuel tank and more armour.
That said, I suspect a AoA problem since even with less fuel than a5 ( down to same weight) a8 behave like a pig compared.

Its supposed to have a bigger engine too

EDIT : I checked and I'm wrong

Quote
The next subvariant, the "FW-190A-8", turned out to be the most heavily produced of all FW-190 subvariants, with over 1,300 built. It was essentially an A-7 with the option for either GM-1 nitrous-oxide engine boost for high-altitude operation, or an additional internal fuel tank, as well as many detail improvements.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2009, 05:26:15 AM by Noir »
Logged
now posting as SirNuke

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: WWII Fighter Performance update.
« Reply #14 on: January 28, 2009, 06:01:18 AM »
The 190A never used GM-1.

The standard A-8 didn't get more armor. The armor was slightly increased in thickness for the BMW801TU powered A-8 over the BMW801D2 powered A-8.The A-8/R7 and /R8 got extra armor.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »