Author Topic: Climb testing AH2 aircraft  (Read 1037 times)

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8801
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« on: June 09, 2004, 11:25:47 AM »
I decided to do some basic climb testing of a small sample of AH2 fighters.

My criteria was simple. First, I tried to balance fuel weight as much as is possible. Some aircraft would carry 25% total volume, others 50%.

Tesing was equally simple. Spawn on runway, auto-takeoff engaged (eliminating any pilot influence), start engine and go to max power (WEP engaged)

Standard of measurement: Time to 5,000 feet from wheels stopped.

Results:

Bf 109G-10 - 82 seconds (50% fuel)
La-7 - 84 seconds (50% fuel)
Spitfire Mk. XIV - 89 seconds (50 % fuel)
P-38L - 91 seconds (25% fuel)
P-47D-40 - 94 seconds (used my favorite 6 gun, 247 rds/gun config, 25% fuel)
F4U-4 - 95 seconds (25% fuel)
Fw 190D-9 - 97 seconds (50% fuel)

Interesting factors noted:
1) Both the P-47 and P-38 displayed sharp increases in climb rate as they passed 4,000 feet. Both easily exceeded 4k/min once above that altitude. Must be related to turbo efficiency.

2) The P-47 required more than twice the takeoff roll than the Bf 109 or La-7. This added 7-8 seconds to time-to-climb total. Once above 4k, the D-40 climbs at least as fast as the SpitXIV!

3) Initial acceleration is everything in this test. The first fighter airborne was the La-7. Once airborne (about 2 seconds after the La-7), the Bf 109G-10's better climb rate made up the difference rapidly. Passing 10k, the P-47D-40 appears to climb faster than the La-7, and the La-7's advantage decreases between 4k to 10k.

4) At 5,000 ft, all aircraft tested are climbing at a rate exceeding 4k/minute (the Dora only just barely).

5) Configured with 8 guns and full ammunition load, the P-47D-40 loses 300-400 fpm.

My regards,

Widewing
« Last Edit: June 09, 2004, 11:31:08 AM by Widewing »
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2004, 11:56:40 AM »
interesting.

the P47 is not such a bad climber on wep. on wep is the key, since wep is very effective in the jug.

still, I find it hard to belive it climbed just as well as the f4u-4.

Quote
1) Both the P-47 and P-38 displayed sharp increases in climb rate as they passed 4,000 feet. Both easily exceeded 4k/min once above that altitude. Must be related to turbo efficiency.

strange. the jug (and I think the 38 too) have a very smooth power curve since it doesn't use a two speed charger like most planes. In other planes, there's a "jump" in power as the second stage kicks in.

Bozon
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Frost

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 281
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2004, 12:32:08 PM »
Should the F4U-4 be that far down the list?

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12425
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2004, 01:10:27 PM »
widewing change your test procedure to the following. after reaching 800 agl, engage auto speed. Other wise you will be getting strage climb changes do to the auto take off controller trying to slowy get you to auto speed.


HiTech

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2004, 01:27:43 PM »
Hi Bozon,

>the jug (and I think the 38 too) have a very smooth power curve since it doesn't use a two speed charger like most planes. In other planes, there's a "jump" in power as the second stage kicks in.

Well, I think Widewing's observation is correct in that the P-47 (and probably the P-38, too) should have a greater climb rate at 4000 ft than at sea level due to turbo supercharger characterstics.

Deviating from US rating practice, turbo supercharged engines (with a mechanically driven supercharger "engine" stage like that of the P-47 and the P-38) didn't really give constant power from sea level to critical altitude, but apparently more of a parabolic curve which peaked relatively low and dropped very gradually towards critical altitude.

I haven't really understood the turbos yet, but Widewing's conclusion seems sensible to me :-)

Of course, a test from a standing start is difficult to do with perfect accuracy - optimally, one probably would have to climb up out of a deep hole in the ground at stabilized climb speed :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline Naudet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 729
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2004, 06:01:58 AM »
Hi folks, just got back here on the boards to DL AH2Beta.

Stumpled into Aircraft and Vehicles out of an old reflex.

I really wonder why the D9 is that "far" behind.

From everything i know the bird should be rated right behind the Spit XIV, especially with WEP.

But so long i think FM for AH2 is not 100% done yet, right?

Offline GODO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 555
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2004, 08:06:48 AM »
P47D40 14500lb 100% fuel, 12799lb 25% fuel, no more than 2450PS at 5000 feet.

190D9, 9414lb 100% fuel, 8992lb 50% fuel, 2100PS at 5000 feet.

We have a 0.19ps/lb P47D40 and a 0.23ps/lb 190D9 at 5000 feet, P47D40 should not be even close to the D9 in a substained climb to 5000 feet.

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2004, 09:01:30 AM »
According to http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/190d9climb.gif

190D9 should be about 3000 feet per minute and 4000 fpm with WEP

P47-D40 should be just about 2500 fpm and 3250 fpm with WEP

http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/p47d30climb.gif

Where I'm wrong ?

Offline ra

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3569
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2004, 09:18:16 AM »
Quote
Where I'm wrong ?

You're not wrong.  The Jug was tested with 25% fuel and 6 guns, so that would have increased the climb rate.  These tests would be more meaningful if full fuel was used.

ra

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #9 on: June 10, 2004, 09:33:07 AM »
Also he started otr and used auto take off...

The results are mostly meaningless.

I dunno why folks dont do the tests with full fuel...

Offline GODO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 555
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #10 on: June 10, 2004, 09:39:15 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
Where I'm wrong ?


Partially, these charts are from AH1 and 100% fuel loaded.

P47D40 100% fuel (2259 pounds of fuel) at sea level has power loading of 0.16ps/lb on wep

P47D40 25% fuel (565 pounds of fuel) at sea level has power loading of 0.19ps/lb on wep

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #11 on: June 10, 2004, 10:31:18 AM »
the net power that goes into climbing is P=m*g*R
where R is the rate of climb.

So for different loads:
R2/R1 = m1/m2 -> R2=m1/m2*R1

from HTC's help page:
P47D40 climb on wep with 100% fuel is 3250 fpm = R1

P47's weight with 100% fuel is 14400 lb = m1

P47's weight with 25% fuel is 11700 lb = m2

R2 = 4000 fpm.

Bozon
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #12 on: June 10, 2004, 11:05:05 AM »
I'm completly confused :confused: , why would the D9 climb slower at 50% than 100% ?

Something is wrong either in the chart or in the test.

Offline joeblogs

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 649
Re: Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #13 on: June 10, 2004, 12:17:08 PM »
Say why not get the 109F in the test? It's quite a climber, that is, until the gas runs dry.

-Blogs

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
Climb testing AH2 aircraft
« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2004, 01:23:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by straffo
I'm completly confused :confused: , why would the D9 climb slower at 50% than 100% ?

Something is wrong either in the chart or in the test.


Because of auto take off?

Quote
widewing change your test procedure to the following. after reaching 800 agl, engage auto speed. Other wise you will be getting strage climb changes do to the auto take off controller trying to slowy get you to auto speed.


HiTech