Author Topic: P-39 flap drag bug?  (Read 471 times)

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8800
P-39 flap drag bug?
« on: March 28, 2008, 03:50:09 PM »
I have done a great deal of flight testing of the P-39s. The one glaring issue has been flap function, or lack thereof. Of all fighters in the plane set, the P-39s have, by far, the most abysmal flaps. With a clean turn radius of 595 feet, the P-39Q gains very little when deploying full flaps, at 525 feet. That is just a 70 foot decrease in turn radius, with a huge hit in turn rate. Consider that the F4U-1 gains 250 feet, and the SpitIX with a simple split flap gains 200 feet. That simply didn't seem right, so I did some testing to verify that the drag increase using flaps was excessive.

I elected to test the P-39Q against the P-40E.

To begin, let's look at the coefficient of drag of the two.

P-39: .0217
P-40: .0242

Let's look at wing area:

P-39: 213.2 sq/ft
P-49: 236.0 sq/ft

Let's look at flat plate area:

P-39: 4.63 sq/ft
P-40: 5.71 sq/ft

So, the P-39 is much cleaner than the P-40 in terms of basic drag.

Let's examine the flaps of the two fighters. I'll provide flap area and full down angle. Both use simple split flaps.

P-39: 26.2 sq/ft @ 43 degrees
P-40: 33.1 sq/ft @ 45 degrees

So, the P-40 has greater flap area and when fully down, the flaps are at a more acute angle. Again, the P-39 flaps should generate less drag. The problem is that they don't. Indeed, they generate far greater drag than those of the P-40.

In level flight, with full flaps, the manifold pressure required to maintain a constant speed of 128 mph is:
P-39: 34" Hg
P-40: 27" Hg

Thus, we see that the P-39 requires considerably greater power to maintain the same speed as the P-40, yet it should have much lower drag, with or without flaps.

To verify this, I pulled off power to idle and pushed the nose over into a shallow dive. I established a dive angle that produced zero acceleration. IE: A constant speed. What I discovered is that the P-39 required a significantly greater dive angle to attain zero acceleration. See the images below.





My conclusion is that the P-39 suffers from excessive drag related to flap deployment.

Pyro, please have a look at the drag properties of the P-39's flaps.

Thanks,

Widewing


My regards,

Widewing

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

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: P-39 flap drag bug?
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2008, 03:52:35 PM »

Offline OOZ662

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7019
Re: P-39 flap drag bug?
« Reply #2 on: March 28, 2008, 04:37:09 PM »
I noticed one time at the top of a climb that with full flaps, instead of nosing over completely the Q pretty much leveled and (with very very little forward speed as to be expected when falling) began to float as if the updraft had suddenly been turned on. Obviously, the two nikis and the hog (yeah yeah, I know...don't try to rope the UFOs) below me were thankful for the full-aspect shot.
A Rook who first flew 09/26/03 at the age of 13, has been a GL in 10+ Scenarios, and was two-time Points and First Annual 68KO Cup winner of the AH Extreme Air Racing League.

Offline FireDrgn

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1115
Re: P-39 flap drag bug?
« Reply #3 on: March 28, 2008, 10:53:59 PM »
Nice work Widewing!!!   My personal exsperiance when flying was dang this trash can flys better without flaps.  As soon as you put flaps down you can tell something just wrong....


<S>
"When the student is ready the teacher will appear."   I am not a teacher.

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: P-39 flap drag bug?
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2008, 10:40:04 AM »
WW would you mind adding the Fm-2  to your tests as well?
See Rule #4