Author Topic: Your s***ing me...  (Read 3418 times)

Offline Reynolds

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
      • http://flyingknights.csmsites.com
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2006, 06:07:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by moneyguy
i dont think that was really nessesary. :(


No, it wasnt. I over reacted.

Offline Reynolds

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
      • http://flyingknights.csmsites.com
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2006, 06:08:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wmaker
I truly wish I could get a ride in a Fox jets or not, there isn't one in Finland.


If you ever go to Hawaii, let me know, ill hook you up with him and you get a nice ride! :D

Oh, and how do you take off in condor? Can you fly the aero tow? Is there an auto-tow option?

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2006, 07:00:02 PM »
Hi Reynolds,

About Warbirds-speeds and the like....when Fox's Maximum Never-exceed speed is only 290km/h he really can't fly faster, no matter what extra propulsion he might have or he risks getting into a flutter which might cause the plane to break up in air.

So in that light Reynolds...

"You dont realise, this is an incredibly fast, incredibly maneuverable airplane. So, judging by your answer, you are blissfully ignorant and live in your own little world, and refuse to be edjucated. So please, keep your nose out of things so obviously beyond your grasp."

...Benny is actually correct. If we think about early war fighters VERY, VERY few of them were slower than 290km/h. The sorry Bristol Bulldog that finns had to use in Winter War is one but most were a lot faster. And like you said Fox can't maintain that speed very long after it has converted altitude to air speed. So it's like comparing apples to oranges.

Condor uses both common launch methods, aero tow and the winch. It really has state of the art physics too. As you have a chance to get some stick time in the Fox I recommend you to get Condor just to try the sim-Fox before you have your real life Fox-flight. It is a great sim for cross country and competition flying aswell. I really can't recommend it enough!

EDIT/The aerotow is an AI-plane but it works very well!/EDIT

Thank you so much for your offer Raynolds! I would be glad to take up it! :)

I hope I can get to Hawaii in this life time!:)
« Last Edit: October 22, 2006, 07:05:31 PM by Wmaker »
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline OntosMk1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 465
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2006, 10:31:06 PM »
Ok, suppose he does strap some turbine engines on the thing...Where in god's name does he plan on storing the FUEL for said engines. I mean, we're not talking about RamJets here. No Gas no Go...
TIGER, tiger, burning bright  
In the forests of the night,  
What immortal hand or eye  
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

Offline Golfer

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6314
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2006, 10:38:31 PM »
What kind of ramjets do you have that don't burn fuel?

Offline Golfer

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6314
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2006, 10:49:48 PM »
Reynolds...

I wouldn't get a high and mighty ego because you've flown a glider a few times.  You'll get torn apart here as well as in the real world.

Saying things like:

Quote
So please, keep your nose out of things so obviously beyond your grasp.


I can't help but get a chuckle at the thought of your
Quote
You dont realise, this is an incredibly fast, incredibly maneuverable airplane.


I hate to be the one to tell you this but...



...



...


It's a glider.

Before you start spouting off (crazy and incorrect) remarks about aerodynamics, aircraft capabilities and comparisons please do a little research on the subjects.  At this point your own quote applies to you.
Quote
you are blissfully ignorant and live in your own little world, and refuse to be edjucated


Here's your chance to turn the corner and do things right.

Offline Debonair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #21 on: October 23, 2006, 01:51:02 AM »
[SIZE=9]TROLL[/SIZE]

Offline Stang

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6121
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #22 on: October 23, 2006, 02:22:47 AM »
:lol

Offline Knegel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #23 on: October 23, 2006, 02:49:48 AM »
Hi,

actually i dont know many early wartime planes that did reach 290mph IAS or TAS in low level!! Since 290mph is good below a critical mach number in low to medium alt, i guess the flight restriction of 290mph is IAS related, but i doubt it will break appart. Probably this restriction include the typical extreme high safeness for civilian avaition.

The Spit1a, HurrI1 and Bf109E already had problems to gain this IAS in a level flight. Haw75, I-16, MS406, 110C, Fokker DXXI and most of the bombers dont got that fast(IAS).

I dont know this jet engines, but jets in general keep their thrust in higher altitude and a glider airframe also is somewhat perfect to archive relative high speed(as long as the critical mach dont get reached) in high alt, therefore i can imagine this glider will be as fast as most early WWII planes in higher altitude(10000-16000ft).

Althought Reynolds did overreact, like he already wrote, he wrote: "A Warbird MIGHT, depending on whether the fox has just come out of a dive, and what warbird it is. Now, these arent incredibly powerful engines, but I venture to say, once they are added the Fox will outrun, any early war plane."
This sentences dont seems to be ready and looks like bad formulated, but imho they maen: "with the jets added the Fox might outrun any early WWII fighter, depending on whether the fox has just come out of a dive.. ."

Despite the strange overreaction, i can imagine Reynolds is right!!

Would be interesting to know how many fuel can get added and how many thrust the jets provide.


Greetings,

Knegel

Offline Benny Moore

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2006, 02:59:57 AM »
Don't forget the P-38!  I haven't checked for the P-38D, but I'm sure it was over three hundred on the deck.

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2006, 03:03:56 AM »
The Vne is given as km/h, depending on source 282-293 km/h. This site seem to have an original specsheet.

gripen

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2006, 03:47:10 AM »
290 km/h is 180 mph.
And Knegel
"Since 290mph is good below a critical mach number in low to medium alt, i guess the flight restriction of 290mph is IAS related"
Well, at SL they are the one and same.
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 Knegel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2006, 06:03:35 AM »
Hi,

Benny, the P38 isnt a early war plane(1939/40).

Gripen, if the Vne is given as km/h and it was 290km/h, of course there is nothing to argue!!

Angus, it depends to the temperature is TAS and IAS is the same at sealevel, but anyway i was pointing to the fact that early WWII planes had problems to reach 290mph IAS(i got the wrong impression that Vne was 290mph).

Greetings,

Knegel

Offline Golfer

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6314
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #28 on: October 23, 2006, 06:40:02 AM »
I'd take a YP-38 over the glider.  That flew January 1939.  Sounds pre-war by my calendar.  Add in the Me-109 as well.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Your s***ing me...
« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2006, 07:35:41 AM »
Knegel:
"Angus, it depends to the temperature is TAS and IAS is the same at sealevel, but anyway i was pointing to the fact that early WWII planes had problems to reach 290mph IAS(i got the wrong impression that Vne was 290mph). "

Thought it was a mixup, so it's okay ;)
Anyway if you count out the bipes and fixed UC aircraft, even the Hurricane I passed the 300 mph mark (1936 or so?), but at sea level, - no.
The trick was to keep engine power declining slower than the air thinned if you see what I mean, so top speed was usually not reached at SL.
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)