mabye proof the 1.03 model was right?

[Zigrat]

i was bored today and wrote this excel sheet, just input simple test parametrs you can find from aces high into the worksheet, i think its pretty straight forward


i should have been doing my 401 lab but i made this, LOL

it seems to *me* to be fairly accurate, but there will be about a 5-10% margin of error because i used a generic prop efficiency curve

give it a try with your favorite AC and post the results.
 http://www.iit.edu/~buonmic/aircraft-test.xls


btw its an excel file  

post your test results versus worksheet results here


[This message has been edited by Zigrat (edited 12-06-2000).]

[-towd_]

zig i love ya , but could you give some explanation of you findings . i promis ill jump any that flame ya.


 

[Ripsnort]

Zig, you canceled your account, right? Why bother?

[Westy]

 And TOWD said he is too.  "Last month"

  -Westy

[Zigrat]

mabye because it isnt only good for aces high but any piston powered monoplane?

anyways try it out, it turns out that the models really are pretty accurate, which will make you cheerleaders happy ;D

[Maverick]

Excuse me,

I fail to see where a spread sheet is a definitive explanation of flight characteristics. I recall several engineers were able to show that a bumble bee could not fly on the basis of their mathematical extrapolations. Fortunately bees don't do math.  

Mav

[Zigrat]

how do you think pyro makes flight models, he makes em up?

no he uses math  

[Pyro]

The bumblebee story is usually regarded as an urban legend.
 http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/aero/team/fjournals/wellman/bumblebee.html

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

[funked]

 

[Zigrat]

btw i just did a little yak testing ..

in aces high, the yak can sustain a 4g turn at 1000 ft and 215 MPH with a sink rate of 3800 FPM, predicted by worksheet 3600 fpm sink rate for that turn..


the yak was also able to flat turn on the deck at 215 MPH 3 G, which was rpedicted by the worksheet, exactly almost  


so it works pretty well for the yak anyways...


so if you think a plane is *uber* or whatever, plug in its info and then test it and see if its close.. if you test it right (keep good corrdinated turns etcera) it should be very close...

anyways i verified the yak flight model (good job pyro   ) so all the nik whiners etcera can go try it out

[easymo]

 I don't want to get into a "ours is good there,s is bad thing". But why are the FM,s so different in other sims? Arcade sims aside. There are sims claiming to have the most realistic FM. If it is just the math. why aren't the FM,s identical?

[tshred]

Bad equations and missing/excluded numbers Easy.

ts

[jedi]

Cool spreadsheet, but it appears to be using a "generic" airfoil.  So it may only approximate values for some of the planes with more "exotic" airfoils.

The more factors the modeling system attempts to track, the more likely it is to provide accurate data, but also the more likely it is to have erroneous data input at some point.

Also, the closer you come to "max performing" the airplane, or flying it "at the edge," the less likely it is that any "smooth" equation system will accurately predict the real performance.

Which is probably why the turn performance is so hard to get just right, and why the "anecdotal evidence" often fails to match the sim performance...

--jedi


------------------

[easymo]

 This is very interesting.

Again, not to start anything. But has anyone done a test of WB with this system. I would be curious how close they are.

[Zigrat]

well one thing easymo...

by climb rates for all aircraft i am testing are too high, but I am not sure why. It must be due to incorrect propeller efficiency curves but it is difficult to find good data on prop efficiency.