Energy Maneuverability Diagrams

[F1Bomber]

Search accross the net and only could find Energy Maneuverability Digrams or EMD for the following ac.

Spitfire MKIX
F6F-5


Really looking for some EMD for the following ac, or any other type of ac for that matter that are in aces high.

Yak9U <-- Very Important!
Niki
P51B,D
P47D11,D25,D30
SpitV
109**
190**

Other question is, how do you perform and calculate EMD in the first place. Do you take a air craft out and push it to its limits and also record the data then make a graph?

But i find that after reading some tutorials, the EMD give a much more undetstanding of whats your ac advantages and disavantages against other air craft in the arena.

Thanks.

[Badboy]

Originally posted by F1Bomber
Search accross the net and only could find Energy Maneuverability Digrams or EMD for the following ac.

Spitfire MKIX
F6F-5


Really looking for some EMD for the following ac, or any other type of ac for that matter that are in aces high.

Yak9U <-- Very Important!
Niki
P51B,D
P47D11,D25,D30
SpitV
109**
190**

Other question is, how do you perform and calculate EMD in the first place. Do you take a air craft out and push it to its limits and also record the data then make a graph?

But i find that after reading some tutorials, the EMD give a much more undetstanding of whats your ac advantages and disavantages against other air craft in the arena.

Thanks.

Here is an article you might find interesting and it includes one or two EM diagrams for aircraft you have mentioned.

http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_011a.html

Here is a thread with some more information and some links to a lot more EM diagrams.

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=83992&referrerid=2314


Hope that helps.

Badboy

[F1Bomber]

Thanks for the link, did help alot getting the data on the air craft.

But i am really intrested in the Yak9U EMD, against the la7,la5, and niki seeing they are the only aircraft i have to collect data for.  

Thanks for the hard work that you have put into the EMD, its helps alot to know what your limits are within aces high coding that means the difference between virtual death and virtual life.

Thanks.

[Soda]

But i am really intrested in the Yak9U EMD, against the la7,la5, and niki

Please, me too I'd love to have a complete set of whatever diagrams are available.  I have all the ones I've ever found off articles or simhq but there are some big gaps as compared to the list of diagrams you indicated were already completed.

soda_p@telus.net

F1Bomber, I've collected all the EM diagrams I've seen from Badboy and could send you the collection if you'd like.  They do not include the aircraft you specifically mention though.

[F1Bomber]

Soda ANy EMD diagrams are welcome. I will post them on a web site, with links and credit to Badboy so that we have one central location to find these diagrams.

Could you please send me the EMD at
Clion@homesat.com.au

Thanks.

[HoHun]

Hi everyone,

Let me point out that most of what has been discussed here describes manoeuvrability regardless of energy status.

Badboy's diagrams are a step forward from that as they contain the Ps = 0 fps information - that's for flight without energy gain or loss.

A truely useful energy manoeuvrability diagram should contain more information than that - you won't win a fight just by flying nice and gentle energy conserving turns, after all.

For example, adding the +/- 1, 2, 4, 8 kfps graphs to one of Badboy's diagram would give us a pretty good overview over energy manoeuvrability for most of this fighter's envelope.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[joeblogs]

I have a bunch that were generated using the Air Warrior flight model.  It's not clear that will help all that much in Aces.

-Blogs

[F4UDOA]

I have a load of these for different A/C including

F4U-1/4/5
F7F-1
F8F-1/2
P-51D


And I think I have some for the early Spit and 109.

Here is the F4U-1/4

[Badboy]

Originally posted by HoHun
Hi everyone,

Let me point out that most of what has been discussed here describes manoeuvrability regardless of energy status.

Badboy's diagrams are a step forward from that as they contain the Ps = 0 fps information - that's for flight without energy gain or loss.

A truely useful energy manoeuvrability diagram should contain more information than that - you won't win a fight just by flying nice and gentle energy conserving turns, after all.

For example, adding the +/- 1, 2, 4, 8 kfps graphs to one of Badboy's diagram would give us a pretty good overview over energy manoeuvrability for most of this fighter's envelope.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

In the past I've considered adding additional Ps curves to those diagrams, and that is useful when they are used on a stand alone basis, but when they are overlaid one on the other, as I always do for comparison, I think they simply become too cluttered to make the additional information worthwhile.

Also, when they are overlaid, the relative position of the two Ps = 0 curves with the other curves allow folk to see which of the aircraft will gain or lose energy more quickly relative to each other, and in what part of the envelope. Of course, without additional Ps curves they can't quantify it, but they are still able to make the correct decisions.

That's why I have generally chosen to omit additional Ps curves, because when the diagrams are overlaid, very little is lost in terms of the ability to make decisions that correctly influence the air combat, and a great deal is gained in terms of clarity.

Of course, I'm always open to helpful suggestions.

Badboy

PS
Recently I've been producing EM diagrams for the WWII fighters of a different type. The ones we are used to seeing are an evolution from diagrams that were produced as far back as 1939. The advantage of producing them in that way is that they can be more readily compared with the real aircraft, the other advantage is that the additional Ps curves are simply not required and so all of the original diagrams were produced without them. The main disadvantage is that they can't be overlaid in the same way for such an easy comparison with each other, so in future I will probably publish both types side by side for the best of both worlds.

[VO101_Isegrim]

F4U, those curves of yours seem to show more like a sturcure G-load limits than EMDs... I think it`s supposed to tell the pilots how much Gs they are allowed to pull at various alts at given IAS speed, w/o the need to calculate TAS constantly...

[F4UDOA]

Isegrim,

I think you are right on the max G limits but it is also an instantanious turn indicator.

For structural limitation only the 7G curve would be required. But the chart also tells you that you can pull 3G's at 140knots at 12,000lbs. That is not structural but instantanious data.

I have the same charts for many others including the P-38, P-51, F8F, F7F. The navy charts are always listed at Max loaded weight and the Army at the lowest weight. Not sure why.

[F1Bomber]

In the past I've considered adding additional Ps curves to those diagrams, and that is useful when they are used on a stand alone basis, but when they are overlaid one on the other, as I always do for comparison, I think they simply become too cluttered to make the additional information worthwhile.

Also, when they are overlaid, the relative position of the two Ps = 0 curves with the other curves allow folk to see which of the aircraft will gain or lose energy more quickly relative to each other, and in what part of the envelope. Of course, without additional Ps curves they can't quantify it, but they are still able to make the correct decisions.

That's why I have generally chosen to omit additional Ps curves, because when the diagrams are overlaid, very little is lost in terms of the ability to make decisions that correctly influence the air combat, and a great deal is gained in terms of clarity.

Of course, I'm always open to helpful suggestions.

Badboy

PS
Recently I've been producing EM diagrams for the WWII fighters of a different type. The ones we are used to seeing are an evolution from diagrams that were produced as far back as 1939. The advantage of producing them in that way is that they can be more readily compared with the real aircraft, the other advantage is that the additional Ps curves are simply not required and so all of the original diagrams were produced without them. The main disadvantage is that they can't be overlaid in the same way for such an easy comparison with each other, so in future I will probably publish both types side by side for the best of both worlds.

I have been mostly working though the week and only had a chance to get in on the boards for about 10 minutes at a time. Though, i can relate to what badboy is saying. I for one, want to tell what my air craft advantages and E state is from the enemy in a quick Alt+tab and also a quick glance at the EMD to tell who will win if we go down and dirty. This really becomes important because i have recently been flying with these EMD diagrams on my wall and have found that my kill ratio have started to clime, knowning that there is a mathimatical limit to the air craft i fly in this virtual word.

Most importantly, I have to thank badboy for putting in all the work in the EM diagrams. It has really made my flying and also fun in the arena 10x better. to you badboy.

If you got the yak9U badboy, could you please post it, all diagrams that i have made, do tend to be 50% correct well testing.

[HoHun]

Hi Badboy,

>Of course, without additional Ps curves they can't quantify it, but they are still able to make the correct decisions.

Well, not really. The interesting thing about specific excess power is that it's highly dependend on the flight condition. By your diagram, a Fw 190 would appear to be greatly inferior to a Spitfire V throughout the envelope (with the exception of its greater top speed). In reality, it has a considerable power advantage at 1 G at all speeds, and is no worse than the Spitfire at high speeds and moderate Gs either.

The conclusion from your diagram would be that the Focke-Wulf pilot should run away (from a co-energy fight). The conclusion from the excess power comparison is different: The Focke-Wulf pilot can climb, and should the Spitfire try to follow, he can still leave it behind while overclimbing it. Once armed with an energy advantage, fast dives with gentle pull-outs will leave the Spitfire without the means to close the energy gap again.

(As always, ignoring the inevitable errors in execution that make air combat so much fun ;-)

That's a different quality of conclusion than you'd get from your diagrams, and that's probably because your diagram type spends excess power for turn rate immediately.

>Of course, I'm always open to helpful suggestions.

Well, I don't have a solution, either :-) But I think we've got a great little problem here!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[F1Bomber]

The conclusion from your diagram would be that the Focke-Wulf pilot should run away (from a co-energy fight). The conclusion from the excess power comparison is different: The Focke-Wulf pilot can climb, and should the Spitfire try to follow, he can still leave it behind while overclimbing it. Once armed with an energy advantage, fast dives with gentle pull-outs will leave the Spitfire without the means to close the energy gap again.

This is exactly what i see each day in the Ma. Every 109 and 190 that decides to turn fight with the spitfires are dead.  Instead they opt for the BnZ tatic. THough i know how to counter them when they do this tatics so mainly they are dead in acouple of loops.

But i think Badboy could answer you question much better than I, seeing he designed the EMD for aces high.

badboy

[HoHun]

Hi F1Bomber,

>THough i know how to counter them when they do this tatics so mainly they are dead in acouple of loops.

The lack of permanence of death in the arena tends to invite the use of interesting tactics ;-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)