Analyze This: QPM vs. grizz Venn

[Fox]

Thanks for help Grizz.  Hopefully it works this time. 

[Ardy123]

How did you make the graphs, I original wanted to use 3 axis too, (turn radius, acceleration, lethality)?

also, does anyone have the following stats on the brewster?

1) turn radius no flaps
2) turn radius full flaps
3) acceleration time from 200-250
4) lethality (hammer RtKh)

thanks

[Fox]

I made it in excel using an add-in that allows for a 3D scatterplot.

[Ardy123]

I made it in excel using an add-in that allows for a 3D scatterplot.

Ty, in the post

does the second image show up(its dtagos graph with a transparent blue circle superimposed on part of it) for all of you? I ask because on one computer it did, on the other it failed to..

[TonyJoey]

 I,m not finding teh P-20 on the chart  

Funny, I couldn't find the P-38 for some reason either. 

[dtango]

Funny, I couldn't find the P-38 for some reason either. 

You just ain't looking hard enough .  They be there!

[dtango]

Here's QPM-2...

Basis is combining S/W (inverse wing-loading), P/W (power-loading), and Power.  QPM-1 uses a P*S/W factor with some scaling.  It tends to inflate the anything that has two engines on it, Mossie, P-38's, 110's because of the amount of absolute power available for those aircraft.  QPM-2 smooths that out it a bit.



I've added performance topology curves for interest.  This is to highlight different perspectives on what is "easier".  I think a lot of the differences people have around what they consider easier or harder boils down to picking on the "extremophiles" for different categories.  My topology curves are trying to demonstrate this.  The topology curves represent increasing performance as they radiate out from the lowly P-40B.  Toward the edges are where we find the extremophiles, the airplanes that dominate certain categories.

In Ardy's case, he highlighted the extremophile "turners" which reside toward the bottom edge of the topo map.  Some folks will say the speed-demon bnz planes are EZ mode.  These typically are the extremophiles "speeders" which reside near the top edge of the topo map.  I suppose one argument could be that ANY aircraft that resides on the outer edges all around the topo map are the easier ones to fly because they dominate in their performance space.

Personally, the extremophiles that I believe are the "easiest" out of the all the extremophiles are the ones that reside toward to the top right because these aircraft have 3 major qualities that make them standout: 1) gobs of speed, 2) gobs of excess power to maneuver, accelerate, make up E very quickly with, 3) gobs of turning ability relative to others.  IMHO this makes them the most "COMBAT FORGIVING" because they provide the pilot with the most options while providing lots of muscle in to quickly make up for mistakes.

oh....added the A-20G and 109G-14 .

[Ardy123]

I suppose one argument could be that ANY aircraft that resides on the outer edges all around the topo map are the easier ones to fly because they dominate in their performance space.

well the p40B is at the left outer 'edge'....   j/k

it dominates the suckage?

[grizz441]

Here's QPM-2...

Basis is combining S/W (inverse wing-loading), P/W (power-loading), and Power.  QPM-1 uses a P*S/W factor with some scaling.  It tends to inflate the anything that has two engines on it, Mossie, P-38's, 110's because of the amount of absolute power available for those aircraft.  QPM-2 smooths that out it a bit.

(Image removed from quote.)

I've added performance topology curves for interest.  This is to highlight different perspectives on what is "easier".  I think a lot of the differences people have around what they consider easier or harder boils down to picking on the "extremophiles" for different categories.  My topology curves are trying to demonstrate this.  The topology curves represent increasing performance as they radiate out from the lowly P-40B.  Toward the edges are where we find the extremophiles, the airplanes that dominate certain categories.

In Ardy's case, he highlighted the extremophile "turners" which reside toward the bottom edge of the topo map.  Some folks will say the speed-demon bnz planes are EZ mode.  These typically are the extremophiles "speeders" which reside near the top edge of the topo map.  I suppose one argument could be that ANY aircraft that resides on the outer edges all around the topo map are the easier ones to fly because they dominate in their performance space.

Personally, the extremophiles that I believe are the "easiest" out of the all the extremophiles are the ones that reside toward to the top right because these aircraft have 3 major qualities that make them standout: 1) gobs of speed, 2) gobs of excess power to maneuver, accelerate, make up E very quickly with, 3) gobs of turning ability relative to others.  IMHO this makes them the most "COMBAT FORGIVING" because they provide the pilot with the most options while providing lots of muscle in to quickly make up for mistakes.

oh....added the A-20G and 109G-14 .

Once this gets "Ballistic Difficulty" adjusted I will endorse this system.  

I can't help but LOL about where the F4UC is on this though.

[dtango]

well the p40B is at the left outer 'edge'....   j/k

it dominates the suckage?

... it's at the "top of the mountain".  You can interpret that however you'd like .

[grizz441]

Thanks for help Grizz.  Hopefully it works this time. 

(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)

Nice graphic, although I don't think the three metrics you are using on your axes are evenly weighted nor the most important metrics in evaluating a fighter's difficulty.

[dtango]

Once this gets "Ballistic Difficulty" adjusted I will endorse this system.  

Can't think of a way to do this easily without being arbirtrary.  I'm open to ideas though.  But it can't require loads of research & maths- I'm too lazy .

I can't help but LOL about where the F4UC is on this though.

Well, as they say, "your mileage will vary" .

[dtango]

Dtango, can I get a copy of the data you used to make this graph?  I would be curious to change the graph from 2D to 3D and separate T/W and S/W on different axis?

I haven't forgotten.  I'll make the data available when I have the time.  Way to put in the effort on the 3D graphs.  However there's a reason I chose not to do that.  3D graphs IMHO are really hard to interpret.  Good for stuff where you want to understand surfaces or surface integrals.

Can you also add the ME163 and ME262?

I haven't forgotten this either.  My charts or based on P/W though.  Unfortunately jets and rockets don't have constant power like their piston-engine brothers.  This presents challenges to presenting the data.

[grizz441]

Can't think of a way to do this easily without being arbirtrary.  I'm open to ideas though.  But it can't require loads of research & maths- I'm too lazy .
Well, as they say, "your mileage will vary" .

Well based on your graph metrics the Ballistics adjustment will be slightly arbitrary but I suggest just taking a ratio from the each axis to slide down the aircraft at a 45 degree angle based on the adjustment.  What should the adjustment be for each plane?  Here's my breakdown of the big ones...

For example...

109K4 = 0.85
G14 = 0.85
Ta152 = 0.90 (Since it does have 20 mms to pack punch)
F4UC = 1.10
Tempest = 1.10
Typhoon = 1.10
HurriC = 1.05 (Not much ammo)
Spit8 = 1.10
Spit9 = 1.10
Spit16 = 1.10
Moss = 1.10

To make it fair, We have to come up with an equation based on Ammo Quantity, ammo lethality, and ballistic difficulty.

[dirtdart]

Very cool stuff gents.  When I get home I am going to do a cusory check on ENY values to see where things stand.  Grizz, in the Army we use what they call "battlefield calculus".  Part of that is assigning relative values to things.  Out of curiosity, what is your "1.0"?  I believe there are two stats to the numbers.  To obtain "1.0":

1.  What is the most common gun package or "single burst" similar damage package?  = 1.0 (1 second burst of 6 x .50 similar to 1 second 2 x Hispano and 4 x .303 etc..)
2.  What is a common (arbitrary) H/P for the system? = 1.0 

Say most guys average a 6% on H/P, what number would you assign to the MG-131 vice the Mk-108...etc. 

Just some thoughts.  Very enjoyable thread, as much fun in an intellectual way (similar to the infamous Gaston thread).