Author Topic: Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??  (Read 1035 times)

Offline Minotaur

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 130
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #15 on: May 01, 2000, 09:41:00 PM »
F4UDOA;

Some thing to consider, aside from the mathematics of turn radii.  

Assume that you and your opponent have the same center for your turn radii.  Both have the same center point of their respective turn circles.  This situation plugs well into your formula from above.

Now assume that you and your opponent did not have the same center point.  This now becomes an issue of "How did it appear?" and "How was it really?".  

If you sketch this out and run it in your head you can see how an A/C with a slower rate or a larger turn radius appears to turn faster.  This is do to the intersection piont of the two A/C flying in seperate circles.

Just something to consider.  Good Luck!  

------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #16 on: May 01, 2000, 11:36:00 PM »
Minotaur,

I see your point. However the F4U should still have the smaller radius. I have been reading all evening and I can't get past the lower wingloading and lower stall of the F4U.
The equation is F=mv2/r (when realigned for radius) which basically says that the lower the volocity the smaller the circle. I was at 120IAS. Or even just say hypothetically I am at 120IAS on the deck turning at only about a 60degree angle pulling 1.8G's. The slower the airplane the smaller the circle. Especially since the V is squared in that equation the speed accounts for much of the radius. Plus the fact that the F4U wing accounts for quite a bit more lift than the 109 meaning a lower stall speed.

So if I picture two A/C as dots one inch apart from one another and then draw two circles at the same time starting from these two positions the smaller circle will always be in better position that the larger regardless of how fast I draw either.
Oh well, Its late and I'm tired. I'll let the Gods of ACM worry about this one for now.

Thanks All
F4UDOA

Offline wells

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #17 on: May 02, 2000, 01:08:00 AM »
Ah,

but F is also directly related to V^2.  

If r = mV^2/F

reducing V also reduces F and r remains constant!

Offline Jinx

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #18 on: May 02, 2000, 08:28:00 AM »
Also, apart from the mathematical point of view, in the real world the speed in the turn and better climb of the 109 will let him do a hi yoyo to get a shot even if his turn rate and radius doesn’t allow him to ‘catch your tail’.

If you are at stall speed on the deck and he is outside your turn but faster he can use speed and climb, pointing the nose up over the circle, rudder into the turn and drop back into the circle. This will let him cut across the circle in the vertical plane using gravity assist to tighten the turn in the horizontal plane. He is still flying a longer way from his point of view, but in the plane of your circle he has decreased his turning radius a lot and cut inside you and pulled lead for the shot.

A way to defeat him is with scissors instead of a sustained turn, the hard part is to keep him down and turning hard instead of doing what he should do and use his climb to extend over your nose.

Turn radius is a very effective tool to deny the attacker the shot by keeping inside his turn, but doing just this will never provide you with an offensive opportunity unless the attacker mess up and pull to hard, trying to force the shot, which seems to happen a lot.

(I think everyone who posted to this thread are well aware of all this, so this is just for the benefit of others)

-Jinx


Offline DoctorYO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 696
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #19 on: May 02, 2000, 11:41:00 AM »
Being a 109 pilot with a little experience:

unless you in a spit/niki/205/202/p38/la5 dont flat turn with a 109

especially the g10:  why you ask? the g10 is superior with its engine thus making low speed cornering feasible.  As i start to lose angles i kick the rudder a good bit to adjust my radii to my opponents,  then combined with the awesome accel i gain angles thru lag pursuit on you before you get to accelerate to my corner velocity.

just becuase its a g10 dont underestimate its ability to turn...its engine keeps its at a better corner velocity in sustained flat turns...

most 109 pilots dont trim there aircraft right so maybe you have experienced some victories in the past but against a experienced pilot who knows how to use the rudder you have no chance. My personal trim settings in knife fight are 3/4 full trim allowing me a very energy efficient turn by barely pulling on the stick.


Rudder is key to the 109, use it live by it...

me and Hristo experimented one day i was p38 he was g10 believe it or not he was able to set up some snap shots on me(now this is a tight fight not a e fight so i was very impressed..  I use the same technique and have had much success)

regards,


DoctorYO



-towd_

  • Guest
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #20 on: May 12, 2000, 10:51:00 AM »
yo is correct the 109 with 20 mm will turn unbelievably if you use the rudder and eng torq ( like a gyroscope) but it is pretty much a experten thing . i.e. you fight a 109 hope it aint a expert they are real dangerous .

and the hog was refered to as the ensign eleminator. good low speed handelin is a laugh. they turn like zeeks here when slow.

get out of the hog it is visably stuntin the growth of many pilots with its lazer guns and wild low speed loops(not to metion breakin the sound barrier and livin).you fly that thing you get lazy ( pongo and i took out a force of 7 panzers and a wad of m16s in um last nite just silly.)

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2000, 11:24:00 AM »
Towd,

That ensign eliminator stuff is a little silly. Yes it did have a reputation for ground looping but if you ever read Marion Carl or Tommy Blackburn 's auto-biography you will find that the F4F had a horrible reputation as well. Everytime the HP increased people would scream ground loop.
But Blackburn's squad the VF-17 carrier qualified no problem in the early model F4U.
He volenteered to fly from a ground base because he didn't want to give up flying the F4U to fly the F6F. He also commanded and A/C carrier in his career and swore the only reason the F4U did not make on the decks the first time was because of the lack of spare parts avaiable to the Navy logistics for Corsairs. The F6F was easy because it used alot of the same parts as the F4F already in use. Many Marine avaitors had problems late in the war landing because unlike there Navy counter parts they were not Carrier qualified but were forced to fly off of carriers prematurely.

In fact the F4U has lower wing loading than the Bf109g-10, P-51D, P-38L, P-47D and FW-190. It proved it could outturn these A/C in numerous flight test. Check the thread under general discussion for SpitIXvrsFW190 for more information I have already posted.

Later
The Truth is out there
F4UDOA

Offline maik

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 402
      • http://www.jg301.de
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #22 on: May 12, 2000, 11:38:00 AM »
F4UDOA,

first, thanx for the test data, their just great info.

second, No offense, but   .
We all have our favorite plane, well i haven't decided that   , so it's natural that we are looking for arguments why it should be superior over another plane.

I followed the wingloading arguments in another thread where people were squeaking why the spit is supposed to be superior over the 190.

I am no expert, but i just can't believe that wingloading is the single answer to a planes maneuver ability.

The thing i figured at AH is that 90% is the pilot. If I am flying a spit and i.e. I have Hristo in a 109 I am just dead   .

Again no offense, but i just wanted to bring that in mind.


<S>
Maik

 

[This message has been edited by maik (edited 05-12-2000).]

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #23 on: May 12, 2000, 04:13:00 PM »
Maik,

I just grew a brain and posted some more test data on get this. My own web page. WooHoo!!

Anyway you are very right about I have my favorite plane thing. I guess we all do.
But because I do it makes my data seem one sided and my opinion seem a little childish.
But I am a little obsessive complusive when it comes to flight models.

The one airplane that I know more than the ohters is the F4U so I point out any inaccuracies. However I was doing offline testing and I find things like all of the A/C with a couple exceptions all stall at the same speed. So not only is the F4U porked but many others are as well. The Spitty on the ohter hand can pull 3g turns down to 140mph and is almost impossible to stall at low speed in the flat turning arena. So I just want to say that I'm not looking for an uber plane. I just can't stand when people say that the F4U couldn't turn well. It just couldn't turn well against a Zero. But then again either could a Spitfire. If it had seen
action in Europe I think it would have a completely different reputation based on it's advisaries. Also wing loading isn't everything in turning ability but it is the best of hand gauge for radius of a A/C turning ability. Rate may vary.
Anyway check my test data out at
 http://members.home.net/markw4/index.html

Thanks
F4UDOA
   

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #24 on: May 12, 2000, 05:31:00 PM »
Just one question....

Wife or Mistress?

hehehe

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"

Offline Pyro

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4020
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #25 on: May 13, 2000, 01:16:00 PM »
An important thing to understand is that I'm not inputing things like turn rate or turn radius into the model.  Those are based on the physical attributes of the plane, i.e. lift, drag, thrust.

As to all planes having the same stall speed, that's not correct, but most of the planes we have so far fall into the same area.  Stall speed will just be a factor of weight, wing area, and max lift coefficient.

BTW, thanks for the navy vs FW report.  I've seen it before but no longer had a copy.



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

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #26 on: May 13, 2000, 04:21:00 PM »
Pyro,

Please answer one question and I'll never complain again. (Did I really just say that?)

What are you using for a maximum lift coefficient for the F4U?
Is it...
A. 2.30 which is the pre-spoiler coefficient from early model F4U-1's
B. 1.88 Which is the post spoiler Max lift Coefficient.
C. 1.48 Which is totally porked and I can't figure out were it comes from.

Also Vermillion,

The lovely lady is me Wife. (Boss)

Thanks F4UDOA

Offline wells

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #27 on: May 14, 2000, 04:20:00 PM »
Note:  The following data has no relation to flight performance in AH.

Level stall speeds for corresponding CLmax using 12000 lbs airframe and 314 sq ft wing.

2.30 = 81 mph (70 knts)
1.88 = 89 mph (78 knts)
1.48 = 100 mph (87 knts) <---this matches the flight manual data as well as airfoil analysis of NACA 23018 and NACA 23009 airfoils used in the F4u wing (no washout).  

Results for Rn = 10M (flaps up) are as follows:

23018 (root airfoil) = 1.75 @ 19 degrees (2d flow)
23009 (tip airfoil) = 1.16 @ 12 degrees (2d flow)
23018 @ 12 degrees = 1.45

Average for the wing (60% root + 40% tip due to taper est.) @ 12 degrees ~ 1.33

With 50 degrees of flaps on 23018:

CL = 3.47 @ 12 degrees

If flaps span 45% of the wing surface (my own estimated measurement from a small drawing), then average CL with flaps down is approximately 2.20.  It can be estimated that the body contributes another 0.1 - 0.15 or so to the lift coefficient.  The reason the angle is limited to 12 degrees in these calculations is because that is when the tip stalls and aileron control would be lost.  For 3d flow, factoring in aspect ratio, the induced angle of attack is about 4-5 degrees.  What this means is that the above calculated lift coefficients actually occur at a higher angle of attack than 12 degrees, or rather 16-17 degrees.  Low aspect ratio wings have higher angle of attack capability than high aspect ratio wings (check f18, f15, f16, Su-27).


Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2000, 03:29:00 PM »
F4UDOA

if found some lift coefficients for the BF109 V24. It´s a predecessor machine of the 109F.

Tests were done in chalais meudon /france.
It did not have the rounded wingends, but this should not have too much influence on max Cl
Cl_max: 1,46  without flaps
Cl_max: 1,98  with flaps

have a look at:
 http://www.stud.mw.tum.de/~sl1/f4_windkanal.html

niklas
P.S.: when will we see here smiliar charts   from spits, P51, P38 instead of phrases like "elliptical wing", "laminar wing", "high aspect ratio" ????

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Turn Radius. Could somebody please explain??
« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2000, 05:03:00 PM »
Wells,

Err, I think your may be right? However the Max lift is what it is flaps or no. It still does not correspond to the flight model in AH. That's why I keep asking Pyro what numbers he is using. Test for yourself. A full loaded F4U-1D or C 50% flap and see where you stall. Also the F6F, P-51 and other A/C were also tested by NACA in the same format. This must also mean that there Max lift coefficients are proportionally lower. By the way, the Naval requirement for landing and takeoff speeds aboard carriers is not dependant on a head wind. Since wind nor a funtional engine in the carrier could be depended on in combat.

Niklas,

Thanks very much for the info on the 109.
That information is hard to come by.
I want to see this info posted as well. Pyro must have it somewhere since he did the FM's.
I hope they post it in the A/C section.

Later
F4UDOA