Author Topic: spitfire mk xiv (14)  (Read 3055 times)

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #45 on: April 19, 2012, 05:25:03 PM »
damping is a good description, its like its underdamped compared to the VIII. that is, its very stable under constant pitch loads, but transitions result in a noticeable oscillation. the VIII just settles into the new loading quicker.

I used to fly the XIV a bit but it was extremely frustrating pulling into a shot then having to wait (a couple of tenths maybe) for it to settle before you can take the shot every time. sometimes you can adapt by starting a shot set up by unloading it first then progressively loading it into the shot, rather than pulling a constant amount, but it takes time and wonk work if the guy has SA ...
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11621
      • Trainer's Website
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #46 on: April 19, 2012, 05:47:34 PM »
I believe pitch damping will give you a little "bounce" as the wing gains and loses a little AOA. Sorry I edited that again as you replied.

Your weight examples are appealing but I had second thoughts about them since ground based examples don't always translate well to aerodynamics. I'm sure you remember a similar example to explain turning in a 190.  :D 

I don't fly the Spits much so I'll defer to your experience. Just trying the 8 vs the 14 in the TA didn't show me any big differences.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #47 on: April 19, 2012, 05:59:35 PM »
I'm sure you remember a similar example to explain turning in a 190.  :D 

I did a couple of searches on WWII fighter CL, CG locations and the like, and to my amusement one name just kept on popping up in forum threads from all over the sim community. they usually went to 20 odd pages and ended up being locked after numerous contributers who have designed or flown warbirds gave up trying to explain the basics to this guy. :lol
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #48 on: April 19, 2012, 06:46:07 PM »
Does it?

Yes, the K4 handles its horses better than the Spit 14, althought it still gets pulled around by the engine a fair bit.


But personally, I feel the main difference isn't in how much the engine pulls you around, but in how stable you are and in stalls. My guess.... its the high-alt wing.
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #49 on: April 19, 2012, 06:50:06 PM »
Yes, the K4 handles its horses better than the Spit 14, althought it still gets pulled around by the engine a fair bit.


But personally, I feel the main difference isn't in how much the engine pulls you around, but in how stable you are and in stalls. My guess.... its the high-alt wing.

High alt wing?  On what?
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #50 on: April 19, 2012, 06:52:56 PM »
The spit 14.



If I understand it correctly (and it being a spitfire, its about 50/50 odds that I do), the Spitfire 14 has a redesigned high-alt wing, which resulted in poorer handling either at low alt or across the board (I've never taken a spit 14 up high, so I don't know).
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11621
      • Trainer's Website
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #51 on: April 19, 2012, 06:55:25 PM »
The spit 14.



If I understand it correctly (and it being a spitfire, its about 50/50 odds that I do), the Spitfire 14 has a redesigned high-alt wing, which resulted in poorer handling either at low alt or across the board (I've never taken a spit 14 up high, so I don't know).

You may be thinking of the TA-152. A Spit 14 was used to test a laminar flow wing but it wasn't used on that model.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2012, 06:58:40 PM by FLS »

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #52 on: April 19, 2012, 06:56:38 PM »
nope, exactly the same wing as the VIII. same plane really, apart from the engine, bigger tail and rudder and some tail ballast. :)


You may be thinking of the TA-152.

or the tempest vs typhoon maybe?
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11621
      • Trainer's Website
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #53 on: April 19, 2012, 07:02:14 PM »
The TA-152 is the only one I can think of where the wing itself was designed for high altitude. I'm no expert though.

Offline Tull

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 69
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #54 on: April 19, 2012, 07:34:24 PM »
Gents,

   The following popped up on the news today about the Spit XIV:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/04/19/buried-treasure-in-burma-squadron-lost-wwii-spitfires-to-be-exhumed/

   In that the thread was on this airframe I thought there might be some interest .

Tull

 :joystick:

Moriarty: suppose the bridge ain't there?
Oddball: [groans] Don't hit me with them negative waves so early in the morning. Think the bridge will be there and it will be there. It's a mother, beautiful bridge, and it's gonna be there. Ok?

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8632
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #55 on: April 20, 2012, 01:42:01 AM »
take your 944 and add 100kg of lead to the front and rear bumpers (and make the tyres 1/2" wider all round so it has the same grip). it will be more reluctant to turn in, and when you apply the power mid-corner and the back end steps out, it will be harder to catch :)

No, I think it would be easier to catch because it would break away more slowly because you have increased the polar moment of inertia even further, thus the step out would be similar to the slower turn-in. But I think we are agreeing that you require more force in the first instance to go from rest to a change of the velocity vector.  :headscratch:

We are essentially discussing Newton's laws of motion, but more specifically as you pointed out: we aren't so much interested in the rate of change of motion but rather the nature of the movement, i.e. the bouncing. Again wouldn't a larger wing dampen more quickly than a smaller wing  :headscratch:  :headscratch:

Any way I think of it the bouncing makes no sense. When you get to this point in your reasoning it usually indicates a missing piece of understanding. We need one of AH's aircraft dynamics experts to help.




"If man were meant to fly, he'd have been given an MS Sidewinder"

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20386
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #56 on: April 20, 2012, 02:13:23 AM »
The spit 14.



If I understand it correctly (and it being a spitfire, its about 50/50 odds that I do), the Spitfire 14 has a redesigned high-alt wing, which resulted in poorer handling either at low alt or across the board (I've never taken a spit 14 up high, so I don't know).

Nope, same Spitfire wing, initially the Universal Wing with the 2 20mm and 4 303s but mostly the E Wing with 2 20s and 2 50s.  The only "high alt wing" for a Spit was when they added extended wing tips that could be found on the Spit VI and VIII which were designated for high alt.  Some early VIII had them as well.  But the XIV did not.  Based on the VIII fuselage and Wing.  Even the high alt Spits with extended tips had the same wing.  There are photos of both VI and VII where they removed the extended wing tip and put on standard wing tips.  VIIs got used for ground attack after D-Day for a bit and had standard tips.

One of the trade offs for more power was less docile handling.  This applied to all fighters.  The Mustang probably should have had it's tail enlarged when it got the Merlin.  If you look at P40s they did extend the fuselage and tail as the engines got larger.  The D9 did this as well with the fuselage extension and larger tail surfaces.

With the Spit the tail grew as the the Spit did.  Standard rounded tail on the I, II, V, VI and early VII, VIII and IX.  Larger pointed tail introduced on the first Griffon Spit, the XII.  This was then fitted to most VII, VIII XVI and many IXs.   Even larger tail on the XIV, XVIII and 21.  Finally the really large tail on the 22 and 24.
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #57 on: April 20, 2012, 07:56:51 AM »
... wouldn't a larger wing dampen more quickly than a smaller wing  :headscratch:  :headscratch:

yes it would, but the XIV has the same wing as the VIII, so the same amount of damping but for more mass = more bounce.
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #58 on: April 20, 2012, 08:01:21 AM »
is this the thread about lowriders?

now posting as SirNuke

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8632
Re: spitfire mk xiv (14)
« Reply #59 on: April 20, 2012, 09:43:09 AM »
yes it would, but the XIV has the same wing as the VIII, so the same amount of damping but for more mass = more bounce.

I agree, but why doesn't the Bf109 suffer the same trait for a parallel development?
"If man were meant to fly, he'd have been given an MS Sidewinder"