Grumman Rules the Sky

[Oldman731]

To me the angle of the climb as traveled is irrelevant, it is an irrelevant piece of trivia as it doesn't actually affect anything.  

Where it makes a difference is when there are tall trees at the end of a short runway.  But you're right, in the context of the present conversation everyone is talking about rate of climb, not angle of climb.

- oldman

[Karnak]

Where it makes a difference is when there are tall trees at the end of a short runway.  But you're right, in the context of the present conversation everyone is talking about rate of climb, not angle of climb.

- oldman

Yes, in reality it matters to me, but in a strict view of the subject it doesn't matter as we're assuming a take off from a flat plain at sea level.

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[Karnak]

Any R.C. guys flying with a GPS transponder aboard or a laser/radar range finder that run
a field test, trying.. climb rate vs AOA/speed into wind vs no wind vs tail wind?

Those are measurements from the ground.

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[Karnak]

Knak, - just stop.. now.. will you.. your level of 'understanding' is becoming  embarrassing..

The 'ground '  taken  R.C model measurements will be compared from a level/fixed basis..

The airborne measurements ( GPS vs aircraft ASI/climb) will be compared with each other,
in the dynamic/flight state -  in the plane..

Got it now?

Yes, you clearly don't understand.

In a best climb the plane's pitch is the same regardless of whatever the wind is doing or not doing (assuming steady state).  The steeper angle of the climb as measured from the ground is a trivia question and answer that has no bearing on the climb rate of the aircraft or the air speed of the aircraft or the pitch of the aircraft while climbing.

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[J.A.W.]

See Rule #4

[Karnak]

See Rule #4

[Golfer]

What exactly are you contending JAW?

Make your statement as to what you're saying with regard to how things work.  Shelve the BS and in one sentence state what you're asserting with regard to climb rate and wind and how the hell we got here.  Then go from there supporting it.

[J.A.W.]

Sure G, to summarise..

How to TEST, as opposed to simply dismiss/deride - based on dogmatic 'knowing'..

The effect of head wind on climb rate..

A heavier than air - aircraft - has to generate thrust, for lift- in order to climb..

The greater the level of thrust - over drag - & > lift - the quicker the climb..

Climb rate is matter of lift produced - via Angle of Attack/speed..

You are an S.S. fan G, so you get that the S.S. has such an excess of thrust over drag that it don't need aero lift at all..

Planes however do, & air-speed is airspeed over a wing..& dependent on thrust being provided..

More thrust can overcome AoA induced drag & maintain a higher angle..

Which - for a given speed - will allow quicker climb rate & a faster time-to-climb..

& more speed - at original, lesser  AoA will too..

So will headwind induced 'free' airspeed come into play?

A valid scientific test will settle the question, & ranting dogma wont..

[Karnak]

So will headwind induced 'free' airspeed come into play?

It isn't free. Going by ground speed, which is what we have to do to even keep the headwind as a headwind, it means that to do 180mph we're doing 200mph the the air and to keep the plane moving at an airspeed of 200mph through the air we need to put more of our thrust to overcoming drag which means there is less thrust available for climbing.  The reason being that going 200mph produces more drag than going 180mph does, thus needing more thrust to accomplish.

[Golfer]

It appears jaw has a few months on us arguing with none other than a guy who has flown Bearcats and Mustangs. (Matt Jackson)

http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/showthread.php?11186-Time-to-climb

Your record is broken

[BluBerry]

It appears jaw has a few months on us arguing with none other than a guy who has flown Bearcats and Mustangs. (Matt Jackson)

http://www.aafo.com/hangartalk/showthread.php?11186-Time-to-climb

Your record is broken

hahaha wow.

[WWhiskey]

I found that stuff a day or two ago,, but got distracted

A few pages in Matt Jackson,, who has flown both modified and stock versions of the same plane sets the record

.Matt Jackson 
Registered Member
Join Date
Mar 2002
Location
Van Nuys CA
Posts
172
Blog Entries
2
 Re: Time to climb
 Originally Posted by J.A.W. 
That's great, & those highly modified racers must be quite a handful..

It is a given - that flight time aboard them is a rare & beautiful thing..

As for mil-spec stockers..
Well, the military acceptance service test standards -[ & not including 'manufacturers' figures]
- were established back in the day - when they were factory fresh..

The P-51H - was a factory hot-rod compared with a `51D, being a light-built airframe with 500 more hp..

Not nearly in the same category as a Strega for sure..
..but test-pilot proven to be line-ball performance-wise with the fastest U.S. R-2800 powered stockers, even so..
The reality is the H model was tested and max climb rate recorded was 3220 FPM at rated Military HP. The Bear Cat as I said has a bit more at 4570 FPM so I don't know where you get your info., but its a bit flawed. You can see the actual North American Data by looking under P51H climb performance on Google. It has a posted North American document that clearly shows the H is no where near the Bear Cat. Just is not so. Nice thought though. H is an awesome plane, but not nearly as great a performer as some have claimed. Michael O'Leary wrote an incredible book called Mustangs where all the North American test data is listed. There are no secrets, just a lot of misinformed people with stories of performance that was not there. The best climbing Mustangs were the Light weight models that were built to British standards. The H was an off-shoot but came no where near the light weight Mustang performance figures. So the H while a better performer as a stocker then the D is no where near the Stock Bear Cat. The Bear Cat also held the time to climb record from a standing start to 10,000 in 1946 and was only eclipsed by a jet. Rare Bear Hold the current time to climb and I don't see any H model records of note either.

But you still argue, much like a cow with a fence post,,, I'm not sure why you came here and brought this up now? you've already been schooled by someone who has actually flown all aircraft in question,,, what is it you hope to accomplish here that you couldn't get there?