High speed turning

[Shuffler]

Holy cow.... spell check works! 

[GhostBer]

"the Mustang could out turn the Spitfire under certain circumstances"

This statement must be more clearly defined.

First we must define what the word TURN means.

The word TURN typically is used for 2 types of things.

1. Instantaneous turn. This is simply based on 2 things
    A. Stall Speed. (In general relates to wing loading but wing loading is only a quick approximation, Max LCO must also be considered) Lower stall speed the plane also turns faster.
    B. Max G Limitations. This is either based on pilot or plane. (You can not exceed either in a turn, or your brake the airplane, or G lock the pilot).

2. Sustained turn. I.E. Max Degrees per second that can be done with out loosing speed.
    This depends on wing loading, drag, thrust and can change for each plane at different speeds.

I do not know the numbers of the top of my head for all the spits and the stang, but it could be possible for a stang to have a better sustained turn, with a worse instantaneous turn than the spit.

HiTech

i couldn't agree with you more.  I think we were going with the sustained turn as this would be about airflow over the wing itself.  I also agree with you that the Mustang will probably have a higher sustained turn than the Spitfire. The Spitfire will ALWAYS have a higher instant turn than the Mustang simply due to weight. 

i also wanted you to know that in now way was this thread a slam against HiTech.  I think you guys have a done a heck of a job with this game.  Keep it up!!

[Angus]

Given a certain speed then?
Also depends on alt and what engine, - or hp rather at that alt. Not just wingloading....power is there too )

[SgtPappy]

Oh yes of course, thrust is a huge factor. The only reason why the Me262, Me163 and P-38 outturn a lot of lightly-wingloaded planes is because they have that huge thrust factor (and good flaps in the P-38's case) allowing them to turn with a better rate than many of the lighter-wingloaded planes.

But, for planes like the Mustang vs Spitfire, the designs are quite conventional and thrust, though a large factor, is probably not more of a deciding factor than the wingloadings. Sorry HiTech. I should be more specific. What I meant by the Mustang turning better under circumstances was that the Mustang had a better horizontal turn rate than the Spitfire under certain circumstances whether the turn be instantaneous or sustained.

Also a bit of clarification, the P-47 and P-38 dive flaps were not slowing down the plane in in order to pull them out of shock stalls.. They were not dive brakes, they were dive flaps. They changed the pressure of the air under the wing in such a way that lift would be regained.

[Chalenge]

I often take a P51D up to about 19k with a Spit 16 behind me then drop my nose slightly to build speed. The Spit will come along willingly because he thinks he has a chance and then at about 475 I start turning (not a hard turn) with the nose still down. Usually about the time he is looking out the side of his canopy at me he will roll and dive hard with me right behind him.   

[Agent360]

A lot of the answer has to do with "wing shape". Look up wing shapes and air speed and you will find the answer. The shape is related to lift and speed.

P51's have a flat wing endge and spits have rounded except for the s16.

Ask your self why a spit 8 can out turn a spit 16 and you have the answer.

 

[Steve]

I often take a P51D up to about 19k

WOW

[Murdr]

Some of the minor effects include changes to the airflow that lead to problems in control. For instance, the P-38 Lightning with its thick high-lift wing had a particular problem in high-speed dives that led to a nose-down condition. Pilots would enter dives, and then find that they could no longer control the plane, which continued to nose over until it crashed. Adding a "dive flap" beneath the wing altered the center of pressure distribution so that the wing would not lose its lift. This fixed the problem.[4]

This is correct.

While the P38 has a huge issue with compressability it had nothing to do with the shape of the wings or the wings themselves.  It was due, In a small part to the actual design of the airplane, and the small size of the control surfaces.  Once the airflow exceeded a certain speed the control surfaces were ineffectual due to the fact that they couldn't divert enough of the air to change the attitude of the airplane. Yes...This was fixed by the dive brake but only because it slowed the aircraft down enough to allow the small control surfaces to do the job. 

This is very incorrect.

[BnZ]

What is the reason as to why higher wing-loaded aircraft have better turn rates than lighter wing-loaded planes?

Better power-loading? As an extreme example, modern jet fighters that have more thrust than weight can maintain their maximum turn rate, pulling as many Gs as the pilot can stand 'till the fuel runs out. No prop-fighter can pull itself around against the drag generated by being at the maximum angle of attack very long. I believe you'll find the average fighter in this game can go around a flat circle pulling 3.5 Gs at best. But some have much more thrust  than others. Thus, we would expect that a 109K4 could sustain a higher rate of turn than a HurriMK1, even though the latter's lighter wing-loading allows it to fly a tighter radius.

Hypothesis #2 states that the heavier wing-loaded planes burn off speed faster since they burn off more speed for the same given AoA, thereby tightening the turn radius.

I believe this would have to be it. Spits retain energy in turns in this game in a way that is just freakish and hard to believe...I'll leave it at that. A P-51, with higher wing-loading and flaps that can be dropped to increase drag, can decelerate better in high speed maneuvering and thus conceivably get down to its corner velocity quicker, if both start out well above corner speed. It also rolls better than non-clipped wing Spits above 375mph IAS.

This would be the only explanation I could think of for a P-51 ever "out-turning" a Spit, since a contemporary Spit is superior in both wing-loading and power-loading at typical AH altitudes, and does not suffer from elevator authority issues at high speed either.

[hitech]

Bnz power loading as in regards to sustained turn rate, weight has nothing to do with the calculations. So do not think of  power/weight but rather power/drag.

Think of the sustained turn rate issue this way.

A zero (a6m2) top  speed on deck is 270 mph, a p51 is 355. So at 270MPH if the zero tries to turn on the deck, he will slow down. So a zeros sustained turn rate at 270 MPH is 0 Degrees per second.

The p51 at 270 MPH can maintain 270 MPH and turn at some rate greater then 0 with out slowing down.

HiTech

[BnZ]

Bnz power loading as in regards to sustained turn rate, weight has nothing to do with the calculations. So do not think of  power/weight but rather power/drag.

Good clarification there, although I believe I mentioned power v. induced drag in the turn.

Think of the sustained turn rate issue this way.

A zero (a6m2) top  speed on deck is 270 mph, a p51 is 355. So at 270MPH if the zero tries to turn on the deck, he will slow down. So a zeros sustained turn rate at 270 MPH is 0 Degrees per second.

The p51 at 270 MPH can maintain 270 MPH and turn at some rate greater then 0 with out slowing down.

HiTech

Makes sense, but if the turn is very hard at all, the P-51 will quickly bleed down below 270mpp. How would this information be useful for "out-turning" a Spitfire?

[GhostBer]

Makes sense, but if the turn is very hard at all, the P-51 will quickly bleed down below 270mpp. How would this information be useful for "out-turning" a Spitfire?

If i am not mistaken (And i have been quite a few times on this thread! ) I believe that the Stang, Turns sharper at lower speeds but cannot hold that turn for very long because of the bleeding of E. A spitfire can sustain its turn through almost any speed and this is why the Spiut is prefered by noobs because it is easier to turn and burn which is what most noobs see as a dogfight. Those of us that have been playing this game for a while know that you can "Dogfight" with almost any airplane as long as you know how. It is something that is learned and can only come with time. 

[Wyld45]

            Hey Pap, what do we have to pay you for MORE posts like this? I never thought
        of that one while my knuckles went white while twisting my "Saitek" into oblivion.

                Think there might be an "Einstein" answer of "Relativity",E=MC (or whatever that
          was about mass + speed = ??)

                 Really, after all the whiner and cryer "Tard-Threads", this is really nice!  TY

[Die Hard]

It is deceptively simple really. A high wing-loading aircraft produces more drag in high-G turns due to needing a higher angle of attack to achieve the same lift. This means that in high-speed turns where both aircraft are limited not by lift, but by G tolerance, the high wing-loading aircraft is able to slow down quicker thereby being able to tighten the turn faster (Stang turning inside the Spit for example). If both aircraft keep a constant speed neither aircraft will be able to outturn the other (given the same G-tolerance), but WWII fighters didn't have the engine power to sustain high speed through high-G turns, and thus would slow down. The best turning speed of any aircraft is the speed where it is just barely able to generate max tolerated G. This speed is well below the maximum speed of WWII fighters and thus the plane that can slow down to this "best turning speed" the fastest is going to turn inside the other. However, as speed continues to drop the light wing-loading aircraft will gain the advantage as the game now turns to who can generate the most G out of the available engine power (i.e. sustained turn rate). This is why planes like the Fw and P-51 could outturn more nimble opponents like the Spitfire and 109, but the advantage was only at high speed and only as long as the fight didn't slow down to a sustained turn fight.

My $.2

[bcadoo]

It is deceptively simple really. A high wing-loading aircraft produces more drag in high-G turns due to needing a higher angle of attack to achieve the same lift. This means that in high-speed turns where both aircraft are limited not by lift, but by G tolerance, the high wing-loading aircraft is able to slow down quicker thereby being able to tighten the turn faster (Stang turning inside the Spit for example). If both aircraft keep a constant speed neither aircraft will be able to outturn the other (given the same G-tolerance), but WWII fighters didn't have the engine power to sustain high speed through high-G turns, and thus would slow down. The best turning speed of any aircraft is the speed where it is just barely able to generate max tolerated G. This speed is well below the maximum speed of WWII fighters and thus the plane that can slow down to this "best turning speed" the fastest is going to turn inside the other. However, as speed continues to drop the light wing-loading aircraft will gain the advantage as the game now turns to who can generate the most G out of the available engine power (i.e. sustained turn rate). This is why planes like the Fw and P-51 could outturn more nimble opponents like the Spitfire and 109, but the advantage was only at high speed and only as long as the fight didn't slow down to a sustained turn fight.

My $.2

20 cents?