High altitude Bomber performance

[Karnak]

Test offline at 25% fuel and no bombs, used .wind command to get to 30k quickly then turned it off.  My offline fuel burn multiplier is set to 0.02 for easy testing purposes, 1/100th of the MA's.

As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.
At 32,500ft my climb rate was 102fpm.
At 32,750ft my climb rate was 45fpm.  At this point I decided to dump all ammo.  I emptied the nose gun first and the recoil pushed me into a 90fpm decent.  Using the top turret I aimed slightly to the side and down causing the 20mm as well as the starboard waist gun and the tail gun to all fire, spiking my climb rate to just over 500fpm until the ammo ran out.  The port waist gun, aimed down and back, produced a climb of 90fpm while it lasted.
Empty of ammo and at 25% fuel my climb rate was 7fpm at 33,100ft.  It took me 17 minutes to get from 31,070ft to 33,100ft, including using my ammo as thrust.

[Fish42]

What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?

We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.

[Karnak]

What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?

We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.

That should only affect its ground speed.  The speed at which it flies through the air is its airspeed.

[Tank-Ace]

Sounds like ~33,000ft the maximum theoretical altitude, since Karnak needed to empty the guns to provide an artificial boost to climb rate, and it still took him 17 minutes to gain a mere 2030ft of altitude. If he got above it, something wonky was going on.

[Wmaker]

Speaking of planes flying higher and faster than commonly known.............did Wmaker ever catch the plane he was pursuing in his ME163 earlier today?

If I had actually logged in earlier your choices would have been either to get shot down or turn back in time. I only logged in when you were on top of the Me163 field at 40k. At that point, there's isn't enough fuel to give chase and climb to a 40k Arado (no, it shouldn't be able to do ~480mph@40k) at the same time. Had I had the choice to climb to altitude while you were still heading towards me, it would have been another story. This again has nothing to do with this thread but then again, you are known for your constant chest thumping.

[Wmaker]

Test offline at 25% fuel and no bombs, used .wind command to get to 30k quickly then turned it off.  My offline fuel burn multiplier is set to 0.02 for easy testing purposes, 1/100th of the MA's.

As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.
At 32,500ft my climb rate was 102fpm.
At 32,750ft my climb rate was 45fpm.  At this point I decided to dump all ammo.  I emptied the nose gun first and the recoil pushed me into a 90fpm decent.  Using the top turret I aimed slightly to the side and down causing the 20mm as well as the starboard waist gun and the tail gun to all fire, spiking my climb rate to just over 500fpm until the ammo ran out.  The port waist gun, aimed down and back, produced a climb of 90fpm while it lasted.
Empty of ammo and at 25% fuel my climb rate was 7fpm at 33,100ft.  It took me 17 minutes to get from 31,070ft to 33,100ft, including using my ammo as thrust.

This very much reflects my experiences in that test I made. I never emptied the ammo from the guns though. But your results are very much inline with the results I got.

[icepac]

If I had actually logged in earlier your choices would have been either to get shot down or turn back in time. I only logged in when you were on top of the Me163 field at 40k. At that point, there's isn't enough fuel to give chase and climb to a 40k Arado (no, it shouldn't be able to do ~480mph@40k) at the same time. Had I had the choice to climb to altitude while you were still heading towards me, it would have been another story. This again has nothing to do with this thread but then again, you are known for your constant chest thumping.

It's to illustrate a point that some planes overperform at altitude.

I was at 33% throttle.

It will go a lot faster.

[Wmaker]

It's to illustrate a point that some planes overperform at altitude.

My name has nothing to do with it, however. Yes, there indeed can be loop holes in the flight models. A lot of them have been fixed, Lanc and C-47 being two examples. Arado's high altitude performance seems to be one of them aswell. Hopefully HTC looks into it.

[Charge]

In my film the 67 is at 33-34k making 260-235mph with plenty of lift to maneuver. I could barely make 30k with a 410 with 30mms and 50% of fuel to begin with and with tanks almost empty I could not get past 30k or 260mph. If it seemed that I was getting too close the 67 made a slight turn and any maneuvering sent me fluttering down. The chase began from our strats and ended at Bish strats when I ran out of fuel.

My source says that the service ceiling for 410A is 10,000 m with 9,500 kg. Gross weight for 410B with 30mms is 11,030 kg which I presume is with full tanks (7,940 kg empty).

I think that when my tanks were almost empty I should have been able to get past 30k.

Maybe the AH 410 is just a sick bird liftwise...

-C+

[Krusty]

I believe there are some flight modelling issues with the 410, especially at 30k+. I've run into several just-plain-unexplainable behaviors and also find the handling is extremely poor. Not in an "I'm banking and stall in a turn" but in a "this is level freaking flight, it shouldn't do that" kind of way.

I also suspect the elevator authority is somewhat underpowered, but that's a different topic entirely.

[Tank-Ace]

I'd agree with that Krusty. At times the 410 just feels.... unstable... in a way I find hard to imagine being realistic.

As to the elevator authority, IDK. It certianly doesn't feel as crisp as something like a 110, but then it looks like the 410 is typically packing around a fair bit more weight towards the nose, and so it may also be an inertia thing.

[EagleDNY]

What direction was the wind blowing on the Ki67?

We have wind in the MAs now so it might have giving it a bit of a climb rate boost. A 10-20 Mph head wind might do the trick.

Thats what I'm thinking - I'm betting he is in a 2K layer with a headwind giving him the alt, and the 410 is in another layer. 

[Karnak]

Headwinds don't help you climb.  They just slow your rate of travel over the ground.  Your airspeed is your speed through the air and it doesn't matter if you have a head wind or not your airspeed will be where your thrust and drag balance.

[Chalenge]

Everything I've read on the Ki-67 says it's max service ceiling was 31,070 ft.

ack-ack

Service ceiling is the altitude at which the climb rate drops to 100 feet per minute. It is not the same as the maximum ceiling obtainable.

[Wmaker]

As I crossed 31,070ft my climb rate was 485fpm.

As mentioned, I have no idea what was the Japanese wartime standard definition for service ceiling but if I had to bet I'd say it is closer to the modern universal standard (100fpm) than ~500fpm...

It is true though that in your test the plane was rather lightly loaded.

It is quite hard to resolve the issue without knowing the parameters at which the original service ceiling was obtained.