third reich: the final days scenario

[funked]

Two birds with one stone.    

Jekyll:  I wrote that what, 9 months ago?  I done learned me some information since then.  I bought some good books on Spits and I saw this site:  http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html

A Merlin 70 Spit will eat a Merlin 61 Spit for breakfast, and the 70's were in service in 1943.

I've got a really nice set of curves from Jeffrey Quill's book with climb and speed vs. altitude data overlaid for the M61, M66, and M70.  I'll scan it this weekend.

Zigrat the above link is what you are looking for.

PS Jekyll if you want to give me a hard time, you should bust me for referring to those NACA roll curves that I was doubting in the other thread!  

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-21-2001).]

[Jekyll]

All in good fun funked.  I just wanted to see how you got yourself out of this one  

And I'm being VERY diplomatic about that NACA roll data, don't you think?  

------------------
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
Chapter 13, verse 11

[funked]

LOL  

I'm going to crunch some numbers on that Spitfire roll rate curve.  I'm not sure the missing wing tip can explain the difference between normal and clipped-wing Spitfires on that chart.

[Nashwan]

I did a test offline yesterday on the Spit IX climb rate. Full fuel, ammo (303 mgs) amd no WEP.
Results:
Alt AH 9...F 9....LF9.... HF9....LF9(150 octane)
6K 2:01...1:45............1:24...1:15
10K 3:15...2:55...2:15....2:25...2:06
18K 5:48...5:20...........4:18...
30K 11:07..11:45..8:40....8:05...8:17

As you can see (if the table's come out right) the AH Spit IX is slightly below the climb performance of an early 42 F IX, though the difference could be down to my deficiencies in testing. It is way off the HF and LF versions, however.