Originally posted by niklas:
I read a story from an german aviation author, i think his name was Baumann. He flew the FW190 in the war.
He wrote about a common accident during their training on the FW190.
Earlier they were trained on a Arado aircraft with about 4-500HP. When they came into a critical situation (during landing approch, slow flight) they got used to push the throttle full forward. No Problem with 500HP.
The next aircraft what they did fly was already the FW190. 1300HP more power. When someone wasn´t careful, he reacted in the same situation in the same way, like in the Arado and pushed the throttle quickly forward.
This let the Fw190 immediatly roll on it´s head, and they crashed. He wrote that he saw many dying this way.
This is of course no "steady state". I think it has something to do with the change of the RPM. How fast can a constant-speed-mechanism adjust the RPM? In AH it´s always constant, no matter how fast you change your power setting. I remember the mechanism of the P40 from zenoswarbirdsvideos, it worked pretty slow. That would mean if you open your throttle very fast you can reach 4000,5000 RPM for a short time right?
niklas
Let’s stop for a while right here. Forget about Hogs, Nikis, 27 loops etc.
Let’s hear analyze the story/anecdotes from Herr Baumann. Here you have someone who flew the particular type explaining the particular effect. Of course, he did not put out the numbers or formulas, just the effect he noticed. Does that immediately disqualify him ? Hmmm, I’d rather listen to this guy than a dozen of engineers with formulas (being an enginner myself
).
He states that 190 would flip on its back if throttle was pushed full forward from idle, at low speeds. Supposedly he is right. I believe I heard of P 51 pilots noticing/experiencing similar effect.
I tried it for few minutes, but could not reproduce this effect in AH. If you can, please tell me so we do not drag this further.
But if it really doesn’t feel like the 190 Herr Baumann flew, the 190 who would kill its pilot at low speeds, then what now ? What is the next step ? Whine ? No, just put the question here and discuss it. OF course asskissers will qualify it a whine, but let them. If there is someone with hidden agenda, it is them.
Is it possible that torque effect has been toned down for whatever reason ? Intentional or non intentional ? Formulas do not offer the ultimate answer many times. Being a civil engineer, I know it happens. Empiric formulas, coefficients etc etc. Almost every graduate out of technical college believes hard in his formulas. But he is in after a tough lesson once his formulas fail and some "uneducated" worker comes with the right answer
. The thruth is in between. I’d say it goes similar with aerodynamics.
Remember the torque effects from 0.33 beta ? Please, do find AH 0.33 and take off in G-10. And do it here. Planes DO feel different. And same programmers did both versions. Could it be they for whatever reason modeled something differently ? Some planes benefit out of it, some don’t.
Don’t get me wrong here, I am not jumping at particular plane or HTC.
I just want the Fw 190 to feel as a WW2 German veteran pilot would describe it.
Take Fw 190 in WB. You will notice it is a lot different in roll. So much inertia that you can call the plane almost unresponsive. I know HTC staf was at iMagic/iEN long time ago. But they did the WB flight model. Others only tweaked with it. Were they wrong then ? Are they wrong now ?
I can say that I like AH Fw 190 much more, in WB its roll rate advantage is hardly existant.
Forgive me if I offended some spirits, I would just like to know the answer. Who is right ? WB, AH 0.33, AH 1.03, AH 1.04 or CFS ? Or at leaast who is closer ?
