First rough tests on a/c

[gatt]

I have tested the AH a/c. These are rough tests, but I'd like to hear your opinion, exspecially from Verm and Leonid.

Settings: 75% fuel load (P51D with 50%), no ext fuel tanks, no ext ordnance. Climb speed 160mph (IAS). From 500ft to 20,500ft. Starting speed 300mph at 500ft. No WEP during climb, then WEP at 20,000 to get max speed. Max speeds are TAS. In brackets there are (cross-checked) average official data from various books[/i].

Here we are:

N1K2 George: time to 20,500ft: 7' [7'22"]; max speed at 20,000ft: 370mph [370mph].

Spit IX: time to 20,500ft: 5'30" [6']; max speed at 20,000ft: 400mph [410mph].

P51-D: time to 20,500ft: 6'35" [7'15"]; max speed at 20,000ft: 430mph [430mph].

Bf109G-10: time to 20,500ft: 5'15" [5'45"]; max speed at 20,000ft: 425mph [~420mph].

La-5FN: time to 20,500ft: 5'45" [~6']; max speed at 20,000ft: 415mph [385mph].

Ok, looks like the Spit and the G-10 are uber planes as far as climb rate is concerned ...     but, jokes apart, I need some serious feed back about the figures regarding the climb rate of the Pony and the max speeds of the La-5FN.

I didnt test the climb rates with WEP but I saw that the AH WEP gives a big help even at low alt (well, I know it depends on supercharger type ...)

Thanks for your help.

Gatt
4th Stormo CT  


[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 11-01-1999).]

[Fishu]

La5 seems real fast yes..
but about spit, I think that 410mph is achieved at 25k and 109G10 looks to be ok (couple books says 425mph and 426mph)

[fats]

The Spitfire Mk.IX to me _seems_ to climb perhaps too good. I say seems cause I haven't bothered to check _any_ sources. I can load 100% fuel and take DT and still get it to climb sustained 4k/min, admitedly with WEP on.


//fats

[leonid]

gatt,

If you're getting 415mph at 20k for a La-5FN, that is too fast.  Not even a La-7 went that fast at that alt.  I'll check it out too.




------------------
129 IAP

[leonid]

Gatt, I tested the La-5FN at 20k for top speed.  It had about 80% fuel at the time.  It was w/o WEP too.  It topped at about 412mph.  This is a bit fast for the La-5FN experimental testing.  Of course, it's quite  a bit faster than the production speed of 385mph, but since most flight data for WWII aircraft is of experimental tests, I'll go with the La-5FN's experimental data too   However, 412mph is around 5mph too fast even for the La-5 'doubler' experimental tests at that given alt.


------------------
129 IAP

[gatt]

Leonid,

heck! ... this is a BETA, so we can fly prototypes ...   Anyway, its strange couse my La-5FN data are from final "production" a/c. And IMHO, that +30mph is a bit too much. What do you think guys about the P-51 climbing like a rocket?

Regards,
Gatt
4th Stormo CT

[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 11-02-1999).]

[Vermillion]

Gatt, Im at work so I don't have much in the way of hard data but Leonid would have much better data than me on any of the Russian fighters.

All I have for the La5 is those max IAS vs altitude charts I posted the other day (also climb and turn vs alt). You might check those against the La5 at say every 2,000 ft and see how the speed (IAS) vs altitude compares, which is actually a better test of the flight models than a singular max speed at altitude test.

On the Pony I am guessing that maybe your fuel load is too light. I'm not sure, but if I remember right, the North American and NACA flight tests (assuming thats the data Pyro used) were done with full fuel and ammo loads, BUT minus the fuel in the auxiliary fueselage tank. And again if I am remembering correctly, that corresponds to the AH fuel load of %75.

Nothing definite, but someplace to start.


------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,

[Pyro]

Thanks for the tests.  I found the problem with the La-5, it's been receiving a little extra power that it shouldn't have.  The Spit has been reported as having a faulty rate of climb indicator which makes it look like it climbs better than it really does.  I'll look into that as well.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[gatt]

OH MY,
Leonid please dont kill me ....  

I hope PYRO will look into the Pony as well, even if at 50% fuel load (a huge fuel load if compared with other fighters), her climb time to 20K looks too good.
Anyway, I found all other data very much historical. And I love the TAS red marker.

<S> HTC

------------------
Gatt
4°Stormo CT

In the afternoon we again did this (strafing) and what I have dreamt of happened. A single CR42 took off and climbed up to engage me. We had a dogfight below the clouds and immediately over the aerodrome. It lasted a long time, about ten minutes. He was very good and much above the average italian. We believe he was a famous italian ace who had a crack squadron of CR42's. I'm very glad to say that he managed to bail out successfully when I finally finished him off."
P/O Talbot
274 Hurricane Sqn


[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 11-03-1999).]

[leonid]

*chuckles*  gatt, don't worry about it.  If the La-5FN was modelled with more power than it had, then I'm glad to see it corrected.  I fly these online games because guys like Pyro & Hitech believe in keeping it real.  If I'm flying a fantasy La-5FN, no one would be happier to see it rectified than me  


------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA

[gatt]

<S> Leonid, we'd need more characters like you here ...    

   

------------------
Gatt
4°Stormo CT

In the afternoon we again did this (strafing) and what I have dreamt of happened .... A single CR42 biplane took off and climbed up to engage me. We had a dogfight below the clouds and immediately over the aerodrome. It lasted a long time, about ten minutes. He was very good and much above the average italian. We believe he was a famous italian ace who had a crack squadron of CR42's. I'm very glad to say that he managed to bail out successfully when I finally finished him off."
P/O Talbot
274 Hurricane Sqdn


[This message has been edited by gatt (edited 11-03-1999).]

[-kier-]

Pyro said:
 

Thanks for the tests. I found the problem with the La-5, it's been receiving a little extra power that it shouldn't have. The Spit has been reported as having a faulty rate of climb indicator which makes it look like it climbs better than it really does. I'll look into that as well.

Ugh. This means "more Spit pilots, fewer anything else... "

Sound familiar?  

[leonid]

kier,
Actually, I think what Pyro means is that the Spitfire's climb rate appears greater than it should because its climb indicator is not working correctly.  What needs to be done is to make sure the Spitfire's climb indicator matches its present climb rate, not the other way around.

And I'm not too worried about loss of power that the La-5FN will have implemented.  It comes to something on the order of -5mph.  In fact, I bet you'll hardly even notice it.  It just means we'll be hitting WEP a bit more, that's all.

Also remember, kier, we are flying a 1943 aircraft among 1944 aircraft, as well as an ingenious 1940 aerial design in the Spitfire.  If we actually had the 1944 La-7 it would almost be like cheating  

------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA




[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 11-05-1999).]

[Pongo]

good point, but the spit is really an even earlier design, first flight in 36? or so