Author Topic: You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?  (Read 1955 times)

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?
« Reply #30 on: March 12, 2003, 03:03:14 PM »
Yea, I did some pencil and paper work a few months ago, ~31 lbs/sq ft is spot on for the Spit IX, believe the 109E4 was ~33, F4 was 35-36, G10 was 40-41ish.  I do remember the 190A8 was 48, think the D9 was in the same area.  The 109K4 would be essentially identical to the G-10 we have, so I'd expect the K-4s wingloading to be in the low 40's, maybe high 30's, I'll have to go back and look in my books.  

I will say that I have absolutely no idea how wingloading corresponds to turn radius and/or rate, other than that I know lower is better.  I don't know that the difference between the La-7 with a wingloading of 37-ish lbs/sq ft and the 109K (or G10) with wingloading of 40-ish lbs/sq foot would be as obscene as it is in IL-2.  

In Aces High the two turn relatively close, the La-7 will take about 1 circle in 7 or 8 (Been a while since I did a straight flat turn comparison).  In IL-2 I had one rack around on my 6 after 2.. I started on his.  These were nose to tail turns, so it isn't like I flew out in front of him or anything, the guy just really really out-turned me.

Offline honda346

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 60
You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?
« Reply #31 on: March 12, 2003, 03:10:42 PM »
Urchin are you talking about an AI turning like that?  It's pretty well know that the AI doesn't use the same envelope ours do and they go outside the flight model params... cheat...

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?
« Reply #32 on: March 12, 2003, 03:18:42 PM »
No, I'm talking about another player, not AI.

Offline MANDOBLE

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1849
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s
You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?
« Reply #33 on: March 12, 2003, 07:27:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Urchin
I will say that I have absolutely no idea how wingloading corresponds to turn radius and/or rate


For same engine power and drag, for example, same airframe, wing loading will affect directly how fast you will spend your E in a turn as well as the stall speed. As an example, compare 109G10 100% fuel vs 109G10 50% fuel. But La7 has different engine and drag than G10, so the difference in turn capabilities will not be based only on the wing loading difference.

Offline Knegel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
Wingload
« Reply #34 on: March 13, 2003, 12:04:58 AM »
Hello,

the wingload is the relative weight of a plane to the Air, so a plane with less wingload seems to be more light, this is more important as higher the AOA get while a turn, cause as higher the AoA, as less count the airfoil.  Some Jets for example fly without a lowspeed airfoil, only with AoA, so only the wingload count while turning (at 1mach + its a different).
We could nearly forget the engine and the aerodynamic related drag if we know that  both planes have similar Vmax.
Only if one plane have a terrible aerodynamic and reach the Vmax due to a extreme strong engine we need to take this in account, cause at low speed the aerodynamic dont count that much, so this plane would have a relative good low speed behaviour while turning.  

Another important point is the weight/inertia, but La7 and 109G are similar. Much Inertia in combination with a good  aerodynamic but less power in relation to the weight, make a good B&Z plane, most US planes was like that, specialy the P51. The P51 have a similar wingload like the Me109G, can turn with it as long as it have E (altitude).


Greetings, Knegel
« Last Edit: March 13, 2003, 12:08:37 AM by Knegel »

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
You guys think the LA-7 is bad HERE?
« Reply #35 on: March 13, 2003, 01:14:29 AM »
Quote
On the question of FB flight model vs. IL2 I'd say it is much better overall. Funny thing is I think it has actually pulled closer to the Aces model now than before.


 I agree very much on this.

 After the revision of FM and DM in FB, man, it feels almost like Aces High. I don't think those proud bunch at 1C would deliberatley  "neuter" a FM for 'economic' purposes. That being said, the old IL-2 FM sucked. Though it was pretty fun to manage planes in that quirky environment.. as we all know "hard" don't necessarily mean "more real".

 ...
 
 Now, you can actually feel black outs as a factor of combat. Planes fly smooth and fast... and hell yeah, I can do tricks I used to do in AH in FB, too!