Author Topic: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)  (Read 22875 times)

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11621
      • Trainer's Website
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #135 on: April 22, 2011, 12:52:16 PM »
It's a free download. A couple of off-line hops in a P-51B wouldn't hurt. You could quit any time.   :devil

Offline morfiend

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10470
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #136 on: April 22, 2011, 01:23:34 PM »
^^^


  I agree,Drgondog you really owe it to yourself and try it!   I for one would like to hear your impressions of the flight model.  And who knows you might even take Dale up on his offer after you give AH a go.




     :salute

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #137 on: April 22, 2011, 02:21:02 PM »
Maybe something like this?

Looks to me like every foot there's a vector.

(Image removed from quote.)

Have you got a full screen sized image of that pic?
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Old Sport

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 530
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #138 on: April 22, 2011, 03:22:10 PM »
Have you got a full screen sized image of that pic?

Sorry Stoney, just searched the net a few minutes and found the linked image. Maybe Mace has some of these images.

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2874
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #139 on: April 25, 2011, 06:05:14 AM »
Don't know if you have read Skip Holm's flight report on the 109 :

http://www.skipholm.com/event.php?bnid=20

My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera

Offline PJ_Godzilla

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2661
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #140 on: April 25, 2011, 07:06:03 AM »
Don't know if you have read Skip Holm's flight report on the 109 :

http://www.skipholm.com/event.php?bnid=20



Funny... Skip says flap deployment causes a nose-down pitch. I never find this in sim on landing, pitching instead slightly nose-up. Mind, Skiip's real-world take strikes me as the more intuitive
Some say revenge is a dish best served cold. I say it's usually best served hot, chunky, and foaming. Eventually, you will all die in my vengeance vomit firestorm.

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #141 on: April 25, 2011, 07:46:35 AM »
He doesn't seem to mention the trim state when the nose/flap movement happens.
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12425
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #142 on: April 25, 2011, 01:35:18 PM »
Stony the numbers displayed are lift drag aoa at each vector. Each wing section could be modifed to simulate the wing twisting, but first Im curious as to the net CL and AOA changes.


Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #143 on: April 26, 2011, 10:44:26 AM »
I missed all the aerogeek fun in this thread!  A few random thoughts:

1) Stoney talked about tip stalls & why stalled aircraft well roll on to their backs.  Another major factor to consider for power-on stalls is asymmetric wing stalls from the propeller slipstream.  On a clockwise rotating prop the left wing experiences an up-wash while the right wing experiences a down-wash.  This results in the left wing experiencing a greater induced aoa while the right wing has a lower induced aoa which means that all things being equal the left wing will stall first.  The asymmetric loss of lift results in a rolling moment to the greater stalled wing.  This is modeled in AH & could be seen in the pics Pyro had posted before but now removed that Stoney refers to.

2) As to aeroelastic affects I’d venture to guess that they would be more impactful to the FM from a stability point of view – i.e., aileron reversals, wing divergence, tail boom bending and the changes to control & stability with those sorts of things.  All sorts of fun in figuring out the basis to model the aeroelasticity though (don’t they teach whole classes on the topic?).  I can just see the whine-o-meter shoot through the roof. :D  Lord have mercy!

3) I vote ddog & PJ as the grand & vice grand pooba’s of Pyro & Hitech’s sacred order of propellerheads. :D
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #144 on: April 26, 2011, 02:16:38 PM »
asymmetric stall usually happens due to aileron more than slip stream. As the plane slows down, an increased deflection of the ailerons is required to counter the torque roll tendency. This makes one (usually left) wing require larger AoA at the aileron section while the other has a reduced AoA. The stall will happen at the outer section of one wing wich will (due to longer lever) produce much stronger roll than an uneven stall at the root. The sudden loss of lift on a large outer section of one wing, while the other is still providing strong lift will flip the plane over in an instant.
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #145 on: April 26, 2011, 03:19:43 PM »
Stony the numbers displayed are lift drag aoa at each vector. Each wing section could be modifed to simulate the wing twisting, but first Im curious as to the net CL and AOA changes.



I assume the designed twist is represented in the existing stations from which those numbers are created? 

@ Tango...  I had forgotten about the actual effect of the prop wash, even though I knew it was modeled.  Perhaps it accounts for more of the rolling moment than the tip stall characteristics?  Ironically, the aircraft shown in the invisible picture was the F4U, which had one of the least-tapered wings of the entire fighter plane-set.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline hitech

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12425
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #146 on: April 26, 2011, 03:41:18 PM »
I assume the designed twist is represented in the existing stations from which those numbers are created? 


Correct along with wing area tapers/flap/slats & control surface effects.

HiTech

Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #147 on: April 26, 2011, 04:33:52 PM »
@ Tango...  I had forgotten about the actual effect of the prop wash, even though I knew it was modeled.  Perhaps it accounts for more of the rolling moment than the tip stall characteristics?

Well whether you stall the tip or other part of a wing first you'd get the rolling moment if the stall was asymmetric (one wing vs. the other) so I'd say that either could be just as responsible :).  In either case you'd get asymmetric lift forces between the wings & a rolling you go!
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline dtango

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1702
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #148 on: April 26, 2011, 04:34:34 PM »
asymmetric stall usually happens due to aileron more than slip stream. As the plane slows down, an increased deflection of the ailerons is required to counter the torque roll tendency. This makes one (usually left) wing require larger AoA at the aileron section while the other has a reduced AoA. The stall will happen at the outer section of one wing wich will (due to longer lever) produce much stronger roll than an uneven stall at the root. The sudden loss of lift on a large outer section of one wing, while the other is still providing strong lift will flip the plane over in an instant.
:aok
Tango / Tango412 412th FS Braunco Mustangs
"At times it seems like people think they can chuck bunch of anecdotes into some converter which comes up with the flight model." (Wmaker)

Offline save

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2874
Re: FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)
« Reply #149 on: May 23, 2011, 04:59:25 AM »
The A6 would be an awesome addition, it's wingloading is 1kg per m^2 less than the A5, also has the upgraded outboard cannon. (I'm not ambitious enough to convert that to non-metric)
Did U know the Ta152 H has 1lb per ft^2 lower wingloading than the 51D? Its true    :banana:

The A8 is not that far from the A6, That extra armour protection helped to keep pilots alive after shooting vital parts of an plane, in real life.
My ammo last for 6 Lancasters, or one Yak3.
"And the Yak 3 ,aka the "flying Yamato"..."
-Caldera