Author Topic: Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect  (Read 4972 times)

Offline Souless

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« on: June 17, 2007, 10:01:53 AM »
I was browsing the forums and read where widewing stated it was very similar to the P-38 critical mach.
Having flown the P-38 for a number of years here I am well aware of the compessibility factor involved.
Now I rarely fly the typhoon however it was quite easy to hit 500 without buffeting.
If the flight model is utterly wrong in the typhoon then it should be fixed.

Offline cpxxx

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2707
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2007, 03:51:28 PM »
As it happened I just re-read Roland Beaumont's book 'Fighter Test Pilot'.

I quote ' at the advertised dive limit of 500mph there was adequate control remaining, though with heavy control forces and a most impressive noise level. (My italics).

He also says it was very manoeuvrable at speeds above 400mph which was exceptional for that period.

I would not be inclined to disagree with such an esteemed authority as Roly Beaumont. So it would appear that the flight model of the typhoon is in fact accurately modelled. Maybe it should be perked.;)  I have been flying the Tiffie lately and am beginning to like it.

Offline Souless

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2007, 04:11:47 PM »
Hmm would like to hear more on this

Offline Gumbeau

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 164
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2007, 04:41:50 PM »
Mach number is not directly tied to indicated airspeed.

So quotes of 500 mph without data on altitude is basically irrelevant.

The P38 critical Mach number is right around .67 if I remember correctly.

NACA published a chart showing mach number vs altitude

Look at it here.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930093483_1993093483.pdf

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #4 on: June 17, 2007, 06:46:41 PM »
Typhoons had an extremely thick airfoil section. In testing a Typhoon was dived to 500 IAS at 10,000 feet and was virtually uncontrollable, with a tendency to tuck under.

Its critical Mach should be in the area of 0.69, very similar to the P-38s. As it is the AH2 Typhoon does not begin to buffet until 545 TAS at 20,000 feet, which translates into Mach 0.77, which is almost identical to the Tempest.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

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

Offline jon

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 419
      • http://http://www.wildaces.us
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #5 on: June 17, 2007, 07:13:29 PM »
what would that be in true air speed widewing?

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #6 on: June 17, 2007, 07:38:12 PM »
Golly, if that kind of change ever happened that's gonna piss a lot of chickenshi* BoreNZoomer Tiffy addicts.


 Such a lovely thing to imagine.. mmmm

Offline scot12b

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #7 on: June 17, 2007, 07:51:21 PM »
Quote
Golly, if that kind of change ever happened that's gonna piss a lot of chickenshi* BoreNZoomer Tiffy addicts.
Right on the money man:aok :aok

Offline Stang

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6119
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #8 on: June 17, 2007, 07:56:05 PM »
We need to get the detatchable tail section too.

:)

Offline Gumbeau

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 164
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2007, 08:32:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by jon
what would that be in true air speed widewing?


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930093483_1993093483.pdf

Chart is on page nine

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #10 on: June 17, 2007, 09:29:02 PM »
Its been covered in several threads, from Duma:


'The speeds given in the Typhoon's table (of 'limiting indicated airspeeds against height bands') were, after allowing for position error, equivalent to a Mach number of 0.79, which was higher than for any contemporary piston-engined fighter except the Spitfire IX. Our job at RAE Farnborough was to determine how critical this limiting Mach number was if taken to the ultimate loss of control. These tests were normally started at the highest possible altitude, so that if loss of control did occur in the dive the Mach number would automatically reduce as height was lost, provided the dive angle was kept constant, and thus allow control to be regained.
The aircraft to be used for the compressibility dive tests was Typhoon IB EK154, fitted with a Machmeter and powered by a 2,200hp Sabre IIA. THe aircraft was climbed to 32,000 ft and after a 3 min level run at full throttle at that height was half rolled and the nose allowed to drop 30 degrees before half rolling again to maintain that dive angle. The indicated Mach number (IMN) had built up to 0.82 by 27,000ft, with moderate buffeting, then at 0.83 a noticeable nose-down change of trim occurred and at the same time the buffeting inceased. Finally at IMN=0.84, the nose-down trim change increased dramatically and even a two-handed pull on the stick could not effect recovery. I could just manage to keep the dive from steepening, and held on with considerable effort until, at 20,000ft, the nose began slowly to rise; by 18,000ft recovery was complete. From these tests it was clear that the true limiting Mach number of the Typhoon was 0.79 and the true critical Mach number was 0.81.'

...in any case if somebody has any hard data they can send it to HTC.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2007, 09:32:13 PM by Squire »
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2007, 12:21:29 AM »
The Typhoon's airfoil was the NACA 2219 at the root and NACA 2213 at the tip... These airfoil designs worked well up until about 500 mph, where the onset of buffeting was sudden and quite pronounced. This is an 18% wing (at the root), at least 5 inches thicker than the wing of the Tempest, which was designed to raise the aircraft's critical Mach, which it did.

I recall that both of these fat airfoils had a critical Mach of 0.69 to 0.70, which is well below the ridiculous 0.81 Mach quoted above..... Those guys had some serious instrument error. 0.81 is far higher than the P-51, P-47, Fw 190, Bf 109, F4U ad nauseum.

The only other aircraft I can find that utilized the 2219 airfoil was the Airspeed Courier (with NACA 2212 at the tip). This was a single-engine transport dating to 1933.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

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

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2007, 01:21:32 AM »
What airfoil did the Tempest use?  If the Typh's is that much thicker and has more camber, then the critical mach should be much higher right?

Offline Souless

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 291
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2007, 01:59:19 AM »
.69 mach for the typhoon would love to see this modelled properly then

Offline TimRas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 560
Typhoon critical mach modelling correct or incorrect
« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2007, 02:47:17 AM »
From Typhoon pilot's notes: