Author Topic: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?  (Read 15809 times)

Offline Dadtallica

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2570
Re: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?
« Reply #15 on: August 14, 2023, 08:24:11 AM »
I compress a 109 at least once a week.  :joystick:
October Player Poll Results

Back in 2022 after a loooooong break from 2010. Old name Ratpack, same for the BBS. Old squads, Excaliburs, 172nd Rabid Dawgs.

Offline SIK1

  • AH Training Corps
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
Re: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?
« Reply #16 on: August 14, 2023, 09:27:04 AM »
No - the P-47 and P-51 were the same, limit dive speed. Both were placard restricted at 0.75, both 'do not exceed at 0.8M. IIRC the max dive attempted and survived by P-47 was 0.83M. 0.85M for P-51D;

The P-47C and D made holes in the ground just like P-38s for the same reason, just a little higher threshold for the aft movement of Center of Pressure that caused the infamout 'mach tuck'. Both were more or less solved by P-38J and P-47D-30 (IIRC) installation of dive flaps.  The P-51 never had that problem due to he unconventional nature of the 45-100 airfoil.

The dive flap both moved the CP forward when deployed, and reduced the acceleration of the extreme turbulence that blanked the elevator authority.  The P-38 while also having wing mounted dive flap also moved the CP forward whe deployed but while it redced mach tuck, the centerbody was still blanking the elevator - but pilot 'got relief' anyway because the dive flap introduced a pitch up (small but important-both P-47 and P-38).

Great explanation.  :aok


I read some accounts of P51 pilots, switching from P51B to the D model, experienced problems trying to dive after the German planes, they experienced problems due to the bubble canopy.

The early 51 D models had some stability issues because they had less side area due to the removal of the turtle deck. It was resolved with the addition of the dorsal fin.

 :salute
Sik
« Last Edit: August 14, 2023, 09:35:52 AM by SIK1 »
444th Air Mafia since Air Warrior
Proudly flying with VF-17 The Jolly Rogers

"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG54

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7794
Re: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?
« Reply #17 on: August 18, 2023, 08:44:42 AM »
I explore all flight models at all altitudes.   
If you don’t you miss out.

Offline drgondog

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 326
Re: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?
« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2023, 06:35:16 AM »
Great explanation.  :aok


The early 51 D models had some stability issues because they had less side area due to the removal of the turtle deck. It was resolved with the addition of the dorsal fin.

 :salute
Sik

The 'reduced side area'due to installing the bubble canopy is a myth.

The RAF/R-R discovered the yaw instability immediately after Merlin installed in Mustang I. AL 963 was modified with both a dorsal fin,then increased chord fin/rudder combination. The issues and flight test results were reported to NAA in Feb 1943. NAA tested the dorsalfin o the P-61B-1 and NACA tested both he DF and a tall tail in fall 1943. InMarch 1944,both the DF for P-51B and P-51D  were released to Service Group for kit production, but the P-51D production article was only released for P-51D-5 (both Inglewood and Dallas) at #651, and for last block P-51C-10-NT.

The additional benefit to streamlining flow during yaw, increasing effective fin/rudder area - was reduction of torsional loads on empennage in yaw due to prop vortex.
Nicholas Boileau "Honor is like an island, rugged and without shores; once we have left it, we can never return"

Offline Brooke

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15995
      • http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/
Re: Did Enemy Have Compression Problems?
« Reply #19 on: October 16, 2023, 11:11:34 PM »
I remember reading an account of a 109 pilot who got into compressibility trouble.  I don't remember the reference, though.  I recall him, in desperation, deploying some amount of flaps during the dive, too.