Author Topic: Spit 14 turning circle  (Read 3471 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #30 on: November 29, 2007, 01:53:42 PM »
Both the RAF and AH players tested the real and AH Spits, respectively, turning in both directions.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #31 on: November 29, 2007, 06:57:20 PM »
Sustained turn performance is a tricky animal.  For what it's worth Urchin, here are my educated guesses.

First some math:

Radius(turn) =
                             V^2
                       -------------------------------------
                        g x sqrt [ ((Cl / Cd) x (T / W))^2 - 1]

From other relationships we can replace V^2 with 2x(W/S) where S= wing area.  This gives us the following:

Radius(turn) =    
                         2 x (W/S)
                      ---------------------------------------
                         g x sqrt [ ((Cl / Cd) x (T / W))^2 - 1]

So now we have turn radius as a function of the following aircraft variables:
a) weight
b) wing area (S)
c) lift (Cl)
d) drag (Cd)
e) thrust


(1) Spit 14 vs. 8/9/16 sustained turn radius
Others have pointed out already that the Spit 14 is significantly heavier than the other variants.  The AH website does list the Spit 16 as the same normal weight as the 14 but as pointed out by others this is probably incorrect and that the 16 is about the same weight at as the 8.

Looking at the equation we can see that turn radius increases with increasing weight.  So my guess is that though the 14 has probably a larger wing area and greater thrust, the greater weight more than offsets these other things and is the primary factor for the larger sustained turn radius.


(2) Spit 9 vs. Spit 16 sustaine turn radius
In AH if you look at the current climb charts the Spit16 has a much greater excess power margin compared to the Spit9 meaning the Spit16 having greater excess thrust.  In our friendly equation we can see that as thrust increases, turn radius decreases.  I surmise the additional thrust is the primary factor that gives the Spit16 a better sustained turn radius compared to the Spit9.

Tangent for sgtpappy - wingloading will give you an indication of instantaneous turn performance.  For sustained turn performance you have to evaluate it considering the variables above.


(3) Flaps flaps flaps
Where flaps come into play in is how the Cl/Cd values differ between the variants at the specific airspeeds that these sustained turns were flown at for each plane.

I Don't know anything about the spitfire flaps and don't have the time to spend researching the alphabet soup spit wings :) to try and figure what the lift-to-drag ratios with flaps are for the Spit variants.  What the tests suggest IMHO is that the spit 8 with flaps out has a good Cl/Cd ratio.

Cheers!

Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #32 on: November 29, 2007, 07:26:16 PM »
dtango,

The Spit XVI will have such a negligibly greater thrust that it will have no meaningful impact on turn radius.  See my earlier post vis-a-vis the thrust of the F4F-3 Wildcat, Spitfire Mk XIV and F-15 Eagle.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #33 on: November 29, 2007, 08:54:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by dtango
I Don't know anything about the spitfire flaps and don't have the time to spend researching the alphabet soup spit wings :) to try and figure what the lift-to-drag ratios with flaps are for the Spit variants.  What the tests suggest IMHO is that the spit 8 with flaps out has a good Cl/Cd ratio.


All Spits used a NACA 2213 root and 2209.5 tip.  NACA did not include data for the 2212 or 2214 in its Report 824, but they did include data for the 2400 series.  On the 2400 series, simulated split flap deployment @ 60 degrees boosts Clmax by approximately .8.  I don't know how to do it, but it could be interesting to plug that relationship into the formula to see what the overall affect on turn radius would be.

Given that the wing area was the same for all but the Spit XVI, and that the flaps were the same, only weight, drag, and thrust remain as the variables, right?

Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #34 on: November 29, 2007, 09:29:22 PM »
Karnak:

I saw that.  I'm inferring that it does :).  But you probably don't believe me so I'll demonstrate.

Let's say we have an airplane with the following parameters:

(a) sustained turn airspeed of 140 mph
(b) L/D = 8.4
(c) W = 7500 lbs
(d) engine BHP = 1720 hp
(e) prop efficiency @ 140 mph = .4

Calculated thrust = 1842 lbs
Turn Radius = 644 ft

Now let's increase the BHP = 2000 hp while holding everything else constant..

Calculated thrust = 2142 lbs
Turn Radius = 552 ft

So you see thrust does make a difference even for the values we would typically find for WW2 aircraft.

One thing to point out: Thrust is a function of BHP and Airspeed.  Here's the simple relationship:

Thrust = (prop eff. * BHP) / V

The lower your velocity, the greater your thrust.


==========
Stoney-

Thanks for the info!  We'll need more info than that though.  Basically we'll also need the drag polar meaning the corresponding Cd for a given Cl clean and with flaps deployed.

Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #35 on: November 29, 2007, 09:37:33 PM »
How are you calculating the effect on radius?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #36 on: November 29, 2007, 09:50:25 PM »
I posted the equation in my initial response to Urchin above.

Radius(turn) =

V^2
-------------------------------------
g x sqrt [ ((Cl / Cd) x (T / W))^2 - 1]


Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #37 on: November 29, 2007, 11:09:06 PM »
Heheh, that's where I learned that thrust was a variable.. thanks Dtango. If there's something that you and Crumpp agreed on, it was that thrust is a factor.

I may also like to add. The Spit VIII and Spit XIV actually technically have more wing area as their ailerons have been cut short, but that's probably negligible.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #38 on: November 30, 2007, 12:57:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SgtPappy
I may also like to add. The Spit VIII and Spit XIV actually technically have more wing area as their ailerons have been cut short, but that's probably negligible.


Ailerons and all but split flaps count as wing area.

Offline Stoney74

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1439
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #39 on: November 30, 2007, 02:21:38 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by dtango
Thanks for the info!  We'll need more info than that though.  Basically we'll also need the drag polar meaning the corresponding Cd for a given Cl clean and with flaps deployed.


Fired up XFoil to generate the drag polars.  I don't yet know how to make all of its functions work yet, so bear with me, but I did get a simple set of numbers.  A couple of questions...

In order to generate Reynolds number, I used an average chord length of 6.5 feet, as this was the result of dividing the wing area by the span.  I don't know the root or tip chords, so I had to guess.  I used 150 mph as a velocity, as I figured this was approximately flap deployment speed.  This gave me a Mach of approx. .2 and Rn of 9X10^6.  Do these numbers seem right?  I don't know how to make XFoil generate the flapped Cl, so I simply added the .8 to the clean Cl.  Unfortunately, NACA didn't generate the Cd flapped for the similar airfoils, so I hit a brick wall there.  Finally, which AoA should I use, the AoA at Clmax or any of them.  Obviously the relationship Cl/Cd changes based on AoA.  I've got the numbers generated after plugging all of the above in.  Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out how to make Excel plot them properly, so I can only present them in text form...

First column is AoA, Second is Cl, and Third is Cd

-4/   -0.2525/   0.00680
-3   -0.1347/   0.00669
-2   -0.0169/   0.00663
-1   0.1009/   0.00663
0   0.2190/   0.00659
1/   0.3353/   0.00619
2/   0.4528/   0.00595
3/   0.5704/   0.00586
4/   0.6883/   0.00577
5/   0.8056/   0.00596
6/   0.9204/   0.00632
7/   1.0316/   0.00691
8/   1.1373/   0.00782
9/   1.2412/   0.00885
10/   1.3579/   0.01003
11/   1.4566/   0.01118
12/   1.5527/   0.01247
13/   1.6393/   0.01390
14/   1.7081/   0.01572
15/   1.7713/   0.01817
16/   1.8223/   0.02180
17/   1.8578/   0.02730
18/   1.8761/   0.03540

I think I may have entered something wrong, as I was expecting 18 degrees of alpha to carry me through the stall, which obviously didn't happen (perhaps as a result of such a relatively high Rn?).

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #40 on: November 30, 2007, 03:58:48 AM »
RAE used following polars for the Spitfire I in the report called "Notes on the Turning Performance of the Spitfire Affected by Altitude and Flaps".

Basic form of the polar is given as:

Cd = (Cd0 + kCl^2) + Cl^2/(pi*A)

Cd0 flaps up = 0,018
Cd0 flaps 85deg = 0,0491
A = 5,61
k flaps up = 0,02
k flaps 85deg = 0,008

For more normal presentation:

Cd = Cd0 + Cl^2 / (pi * A *e)

these result values of e as 0,74 flaps up and 0,88 for flaps at 85deg.

The full throttle Clmax values at level flight stall in the report are:

Flaps up: 1,89
Flaps 85deg: 2,56

In the minimum radius of level turn at 12k the Cl values are:

Flaps up: 1,46
Flaps 85deg: 1,97

Offline Kev367th

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5290
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #41 on: November 30, 2007, 05:10:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Urchin
AFAIK the wings were all identical in regards to size and shape.  The difference was the armament that could be mounted in them.

If I am wrong on that then maybe that explains the differences.


Another difference -

E wings had a strengthened/stiffer main spar.

Lot of discussioin has gone on over E wings, my own personal take on them -

1) C wings with mod kits to fit .50 cals (avail prior to D-Day)
2) C wings fully modded at source

Both above recognised by still having the .303 panels.

3) Wings built as E wings, noticeable by lack of .303 panels.

I can only imagine that the XVI's stiffer E wing allows it a good turning circle.

The XIV is an anomaly though, what I've read -
Turning with the Griffons torque it 'should' match a IX, against the torque the turning circle is larger.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2007, 05:20:32 PM by Kev367th »
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
Asus M3N-HT mobo
2 x 2Gb Corsair 1066 DDR2 memory

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #42 on: November 30, 2007, 09:03:47 PM »
The only factor a wing's strength should contribute is max. +G/-G loads.

A slight warp in wing shape during high G maneuvers may have some affect, but not a lot. If the wings are warping, then you're probably screwed.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2007, 04:10:23 AM »
"I was expecting 18 degrees of alpha to carry me through the stall"

I would be surprised if it had. My guess would be somewhere around 15 degrees. The effect of wash-out needs to be considered too.


"A slight warp in wing shape during high G maneuvers may have some affect, but not a lot. If the wings are warping, then you're probably screwed."

The warpage would increase the washout momentarily worsening the turn performance some but would also contribute in delaying high speed stall.

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline Viking

  • Personal Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2867
Spit 14 turning circle
« Reply #44 on: December 16, 2007, 01:34:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
dtango,

The Spit XVI will have such a negligibly greater thrust that it will have no meaningful impact on turn radius.  See my earlier post vis-a-vis the thrust of the F4F-3 Wildcat, Spitfire Mk XIV and F-15 Eagle.


I find this argument a bit silly. Take any plane and turn it as tightly as you can. Then reduce power and watch as the circle grows quite larger. Obviously thrust has a major impact on sustained turning.