New Hurricane Models and Flight Modelling

[MOSQ]

With the latest update we have a new Hurricane model, the Sea Hurricane, and new flight modelling for all of them. Some of the old timers here may remember my Turn and Acceleration lists which were used by DokGonzo's website and have also been used on some of the plane performance pages and by the trainers. I pretty much dropped out of AH the last couple of years and hadn't done much updating on my spreadsheet so I dragged it out to see how the new Hurricanes work into the performance scales.

The Quick Report: They are faster, both in acceleration and top speed. Of course that's "relative" to their prior performance, they've gone from really slow to just slower.
They don't Turn as well. Again that's relative, they've gone from really awesome turners to awesome turners.

Full Flaps turns don't help nearly as much as the old model, in fact I wouldn't bother dropping flaps now, the loss in dps isn't worth the slightly tighter radius.

The new SeaHurri w/cannons is really slow.  Beware, it still has the old carb of the Hurri 1 so the engine dies with negative G's. A SeaHurri 2 engine would have been much better.  

Here's some accel/top speed stats, all w/WEP; 25% fuel; at 500 ft:

Old Hurri 1: 150-250 mph, 51.2 secs. Top Speed Wep: 262, Mil: 254
New Hurri 1:150-250 mph, 34.1 secs. Top Speed Wep: 277, Mil:259

Old Hurri 2 (Cannons): 150-250, 35.3 secs. TSW:275, Mil:262
New Hurri 2 (Cannons): 150-250, 32.0 secs. TSW:281, Mil:261
New Hurri 2 (12 x 303): 150-250, 29.4 secs. TSW: 287, Mil: 266

Old Hurri 2D: 150-250, 45.3 secs. TSW: 266, Mil: 250
New Hurri 2D: 150-250, 39.5 secs. TSW: 272, Mil: 252

New Sea Hurri (Cannons) 150-250, 47.9 secs. TSW: 268, Mil: 250
New Sea Hurri (8 x 303) 150-250, 41.1 secs. TSW: 274, Mil: 256

Turn Radius and Rates No Flaps:
Old Hurri 1: 421 ft; 25.7 dps
New Hurri 1 431 ft; 27.3 dps (I need to recheck this dps, seems too high).

Old Hurri 2 (Cannons) 482 ft; 24.5 dps
New Hurri 2 (Cannons) 518 ft; 24.5 dps
New Hurri 2 (12 x 303) 510 ft; 24.7 dps

Old Hurri 2D: 529 ft; 19.6 dps
New Hurri 2D: 554 ft; 22.3 dps

Sea Hurri (Cannons) 554 ft; 20.8 dps
Sea Hurri (8 x 303)  534 ft; 21.9 dps

Turn Radius and Rates Full Flaps:
Old Hurri 1: 366 ft; 22 dps
New Hurri 1: 422 ft; 18.9

Old Hurri 2 (Cannons): 412 ft; 22.0 dps
New Hurri 2 (Cannons): 496 ft; 18.1 dps
New Hurri 2 (12 x 303): 465 ft; 18.9 dps

Old Hurri 2D: 457 ft; 19.6 dps
New Hurri 2D: 528 ft; 16.9 dps

Sea Hurri (Cannons): 517 ft; 15.4 dps
Sea Hurri (8 x 303):  482 ft; 16.5 dps


I didn't test the new Hurri 2 with 8 x 303, but I'm sure it's a little faster and turns slightly better than the 12 x 303. You can guesstimate by looking at the other planes by how much.

 
 

[Motherland]

I remember pouring over the Dokgonzo plane comparisons, trying to memorize every last detail before FSO... great site, it was invaluable when it was still current.

[RTHolmes]

interesting, thanks for the testing

[MOSQ]

A couple of more notes:

I re-confirmed the dps of the Hurri 1, it really does have that 27.3 dps, which is the fastest in the game, better than both Zeros and the Val. And both versions of the Hurri 2C are also awesome dps planes.

They climb faster now. The II with 12 x 303 starts at 3,600 fpm at sea level, a nice improvement.

The Hurris now suffer major parts failures at 490 mph. As I recall the old version could easily dive at 500+ with no ill effects. Don't try that now!  

And a couple of comments on DokGonzos  AH plane comparison page: I've tried contacting him to fix a bug in the data and add new data but he won't reply. the biggest issue is he imported the Spitfire data wrong, he got the models mixed up. So the page is still pretty good, just understand the Spits are mislabeled as far as my data goes. http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php

[Bruv119]

I can testify parts shredding, 

went in on a radar and ripped both ailerons on the pull out A20G / ki84 style.

[Fish42]

I can testify parts shredding, 

went in on a radar and ripped both ailerons on the pull out A20G / ki84 style.

Ailerons first? I lost my elevators first in a dive at 490+, keeped my ailerons and rudder though.

[Brooke]

Mosq, thank you for your data.  I still use Gonzo's page to this day.  If I had the time, I would love to set up an updated version of that, including deg/sec and perhaps performance with 1 notch of flaps.

[Mace2004]

Anyone got any observations regarding flying qualities?  I've only flown about a dozen sorties in the IIC 4x20 but my first impression was that it was slightly less stable in pitch and slightly more departure prone.  I got into a flat scissors with a K4 and a bit too rapid application of aft stick put me straight into a tailslide, something I don't really recall happening before.  Of course, I wouldn't swear there are any FQ changes at all yet as this is just my first, subjective, seat of the pants observation.

I don't think I'd say that the new version doesn't "turn as well." There are two components to turn geometry, radius and rate.  Radius does allow you turn turn inside but, with the lower rate, you will lag behind someone with a larger radius but higher turn rate particularly if the other aircraft is faster (and who isn't?).  To illustrate, imagine two planes in flat turns.  One aircraft does 30DPS while the other has 20DPS but has a smaller radius (granted, this is an extreme example but it's just intended to illustrate the point).  The 30DPS plane will complete a 360deg turn in 12 seconds. The other plane's turn circle will be inside of the first plane's circle but he will have only done 240degress of turn, only 2/3's of the circle.  In another two turns the first aircraft will have the second in his gunsight.  Also, radius is also the easiest to control with geometry, particularly nose high turns (i.e., high yo-yos).  Both components are important but overall the higher turn rate will serve you better in more situations.

I agree that changes with full flaps aren't really that important because you should rarely really fight this plane with full flaps.  Reasons: no intermediate flap settings and full flaps create a butt load of drag.  I've always just toggled the flaps down for a quick reversal and slap them up again within a few seconds.  This is easy because they move so slow and act more like maneuvering devices. I use this technique all the time in fights.  About the only time I use full flaps is in a 1v1 flat scissors where slow is what you need.

Overall, I do love the updates (especially improved acceleration) but I'm afraid that there are going to be lots of folks that are going to be unhappy, particularly those that have always claimed the Hurri was "overmodeled," as this version is a better plane.

[Karnak]

Overall, I do love the updates (especially improved acceleration) but I'm afraid that there are going to be lots of folks that are going to be unhappy, particularly those that have always claimed the Hurri was "overmodeled," as this version is a better plane.

Nah, it seems less responsive now.  New model "feels" more accurate.

[Mace2004]

Nah, it seems less responsive now.  New model "feels" more accurate.

I agree, it "feels" more accurate but there was nothing that seemed to jump out at me regarding reduced responsiveness.  If anything, it seems a bit lighter in pitch damping which could be why it seemed to me to be a bit more departure prone.  Again, this is all completely subjective and I really don't fly AH that much anymore so you could be right.

[Karnak]

Nor do I, but I grabbed a Hurri IIc and put it through its paces a bit before upgrading to 2.29.  Roll was definitely less responsive and, I think, pitch was a bit less responsive as well.

[MOSQ]

To illustrate, imagine two planes in flat turns.  One aircraft does 30DPS while the other has 20DPS but has a smaller radius (granted, this is an extreme example but it's just intended to illustrate the point).  The 30DPS plane will complete a 360deg turn in 12 seconds. The other plane's turn circle will be inside of the first plane's circle but he will have only done 240degress of turn, only 2/3's of the circle.  In another two turns the first aircraft will have the second in his gunsight. 

Yes the 30DPS plane will get around the circle faster and get behind the tighter radius plane, but you are incorrect when you say it will have the tighter radius plane in his gunsight. He can see it, but not shoot it, because to get enough lead to hit the plane the faster dps plane would need to pull a smaller radius, which it can't. So he can fly in trail of the tighter radius plane all day watching him in his forward up view but won't be able to get a guns solution.

[MOSQ]

Mosq, thank you for your data.  I still use Gonzo's page to this day.  If I had the time, I would love to set up an updated version of that, including deg/sec and perhaps performance with 1 notch of flaps.

Hi Brooke! It's great to see the old timers like you and Karnak still kicking around. I think I still have the awesome write up you did for Air Warrior in a 3 ring binder somewhere in my office. Holy cow, I just did a google search and found it online! HOW TO FLY AND FIGHT IN AIR WARRIOR, v3/21/1997
edited by Brooke P. Anderson (brooke@alumni.caltech.edu)
Folks, if ya'll haven't read his 1997 treatise, you should, it's classic!   http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/air_warrior/awtaman.txt
"To play Air Warrior, there is an additional cost of $1.75/hour." Can you imagine that today? We were nuts!
This should be posted in Aces High Trainers section, it's got great stuff in it.

Back to your comment, I've done some 1 flap testing and some testing with different fuel loads and weapons loadouts. The problem is there are so many permutations on planes like P-47s and 109's that it becomes crazy.  
But yes, it would be great to have an updated version of DokGonzo's page. I'm doing the 410 testing today and the A6M3 as well. I'd be happy to help with the testing part. You are always welcome to my spreadsheet.
 

[Mace2004]

Yes the 30DPS plane will get around the circle faster and get behind the tighter radius plane, but you are incorrect when you say it will have the tighter radius plane in his gunsight. He can see it, but not shoot it, because to get enough lead to hit the plane the faster dps plane would need to pull a smaller radius, which it can't. So he can fly in trail of the tighter radius plane all day watching him in his forward up view but won't be able to get a guns solution.

You're being far too literal. This is not a discussion about gunnery but simply the relationship between radius and rate. The point is as I explained.  If this is a problem the I'll change it to: "in another two turns and a quick yo-yo..."

[Brooke]

Thanks, MOSQ.

I would indeed love to get a copy of your spreadsheet.  Do you have it available online?