Author Topic: P51D vs Dora (Read 5671 times)

moot · « **Reply #45 on:** November 28, 2003, 08:13:57 AM »

wtf
'450 at most', not 350.

Shane · « **Reply #46 on:** November 28, 2003, 09:38:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by jodgi
It would bleed alot of energy turning, but is the "turn rate limitation" of the AH dora correct? Is it a AH design limitation placed on it to not make it über?

ding! it's the HTC LW conspiracy. now we have to kill you.

jodgi · « **Reply #47 on:** November 28, 2003, 09:52:09 AM »

Wait!

I'll give you an offer you CANNOT resist!

Widewing · « **Reply #48 on:** November 28, 2003, 09:55:10 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by jodgi
In sustained turning it makes sense that you cannot make the nose come around anymore, but at hi/mid speeds why shouldn't we be able get better turnrate?

(note: I'm not talking about turn radius)

Anyone "in the know" on this?

At high speed, turn rate is limited by G. At 400 mph, the Dora can turn with a Zero. Once speeds drop to where turning rate is no longer G dependent, the Zero wins easily. The Dora had a very high wingloading, about 46 pounds per sq/ft, considerably greater than a P-51D. Therefore, it is in the interest of the Dora driver to keep speeds high and avoid turning with the Mustang at or below the Dora's corner speed. This assumes pilots of equal ability. Since this is rarely the case in the MA, skill is usually the deciding factor.

My regards,

Widewing

jodgi · « **Reply #49 on:** November 28, 2003, 10:50:35 AM »

The reason I ask is that I've flown the Dora in other sims, and the the handling is different, especially the turn rate.

Same with the high power 109's, other sims don't make them as stiff as they seem in AH.

My guesstimations are primarily based on flying in IL-2 FB.
People seem to agree that, although there has been and are issues with the FB flightmodel, it is not too shabby.

I'm fairly competent as far as aerodynamics are concerned. My question is more related to the portrayal of these aerodynamics in different plane models (AH versus IL-2 FB).

It may be that AH has the most accurate model... I'm just wondering why two very competent design teams can come up with (as I perceive it) so different models, based on the same raw material?

I even like the AH way of doing it, as I mainly fly mid-war rides.

AH has the ENY values and perk system to balance the planeset. What I'm wondering is that has there been some sort of idea that "if the 109G10 is gonna be so hi-powered, we're gonna impede it's maneuverability". And that the drawbacks of added weight and all the prop effects has been exaggerated beyond the historical data?

I have no idea.

I'm just wondering what you guys think...?

AtmkRstr · « **Reply #50 on:** November 30, 2003, 03:16:46 PM »

I'd prefere the dora because of it's a better E fighter.

Steve · « **Reply #51 on:** November 30, 2003, 07:58:26 PM »