Author Topic: Spit and 190 diving (Read 1596 times)

MANDOBLE · « **on:** September 21, 2003, 07:26:39 AM »

What I've noticed over'n over is that spits can dive with 190s the first 5000 feet (starting at lo speeds), then the 190s outdives the spits. But what most reports describe is just the opposite. How should it be?

Wilbus · « **Reply #1 on:** September 21, 2003, 07:33:09 AM »

Believe 190 just as other heavier planes such as the P47 had exelent acceleration in dives. All reports state that the 190 could outdive the spit (usually with eas) in the initial stages. It also kept on outdiving however as the speed increased the superiority decreased.

Same thing with the Jug, it could outdive about every other plane in the ETO, not the case in AH IMO.

JAWS2003 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 21, 2003, 11:42:53 AM »

I know is frustrating sometimes. From what i read the fw 190 when bounced by a spit would flick into a dive and "leave the spit standing".Here are some exemples from the british evaluation of a FW 190 A3:

Dive: Comparative dives between the two aircraft have shown that the FW 190 can leave the Spitfire (V) with ease, particularly during the initial stages.

Manoeuvrability. The manoeuvrability of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire VB except in turning circles, when the Spitfire can quite easily out-turn it. The FW 190 has better acceleration under all conditions
of flight and this must obviously be most useful during combat.

Dive: The FW 190 is faster than the Spitfire IX in a dive, particularly during the initial stage. This superiority is not as marked as with the Spitfire VB.

Manoeuvrability: The FW 190 is more manoeuvrable than the Spitfire IX except in turning circles.
The superior rate of roll of the FW 190 enabled it to avoid the Spitfire IX by turning over into a diving turn in the opposite direction.
The initial acceleration of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire IX under all conditions of flight, except in level flight at altitudes where the Spitfire has a speed advantage.

http://www.odyssey.dircon.co.uk/Spitfire9v190.htm

LJbomber · « **Reply #3 on:** September 21, 2003, 07:18:28 PM »

Is there any comparisions of diffrent 190 models against the diffrent spits. I wouldnt mind knowing the comparison of the 190 d-9 to the IX and Perk version, I already understand its advantages on the V models due to facing alot. I find the 190 outclimbs and ourtuns this spit version with great ease

bockko · « **Reply #4 on:** September 21, 2003, 11:08:31 PM »

rs johnson [p-47 pilot] wrote in his book that when he played tag with a spit he could leave it behind by diving at will. also johnson got to fly a spit and i believe his quote was something like this: "in the p-47 you point the nose down and you dive like hell; the spit you have to fly down".

Karnak · « **Reply #5 on:** September 22, 2003, 12:20:26 AM »

I believe that Spits accelerate too rapidly in dives in AH. Their top dive speeds are fine, but their acceleration across their whole dive speed spectrum seems too fast.

Unfortunately I don't have any hard numbers to back this up.

frank3 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 22, 2003, 03:08:53 AM »

Lol, the pilots actually played tag?

Angus · « **Reply #7 on:** September 22, 2003, 04:54:56 AM »

I second you on this Karnak, - our Spit V in particular accelerates too fast in the initial stages of dive.
However, looking at terminal speed after a dive from high altitude, the Spit is the Champion, - doesn't it hold the WW2 absolute speed record?
There are some factors to be looked at in AH's flight model, and we should see those in AH II, always good to keep reminding HTC

Karnak · « **Reply #8 on:** September 22, 2003, 01:26:00 PM »

The only data I have on dives is the same data you have all seen from the AFDU Tactical Trials. I will post those relevant sections here for easier reference:

Spitfire LF.Mk IX (Merlin 66, +18lbs boost)*

vs Bf109G-6/U-2:

Comparitive dives between the two aircraft have shown that the Me.109 can leave the Spitfire without any difficulty.

*Note, this is a LF.Mk IX which is superior to the F.Mk IX (Merlin 61) in AH.

Spitfire F.Mk XIV (Griffon 65, +18lbs boost)*

vs Spitfire Mk IX:

The Spitfire XIV will pull away from the Spitfire IX in a dive.

vs Tempest Mk V:

The Tempest V gains on the Spitfire XIV.

vs Mustang Mk III:

As for the Spitfire IX. The Mustang pulls away, but less markedly.

vs Fw190 (BMW.801D):

After the initial part of the dive, during which the FW 190 gains slightly, the Mk XIV has a slight advantage.
...
In the attack it can afford to "mix it" but should beware of the quick roll and dive. If this manoeuvre is used by the FW.190 and the Spitfire XIV follows, it will probably not be able to close the range until the FW.190 has pulled out of its dive.

vs Bf109G:

During the initial part of the dive, the Me.109G pulls away slightly, but when a speed of 380 m.p.h. is reached, the Spitfire XIV begins to gain on the Me.109G.

*This is the same as the Spitfire Mk XIV in AH.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #9 on:** September 22, 2003, 01:52:54 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Angus
doesn't it hold the WW2 absolute speed record?
There are some factors to be looked at in AH's

As far as I remember, the only Spit record was to have one of the most unaccurate WW2 speedometers.

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #10 on:** September 22, 2003, 02:02:40 PM »

I sure do love the abundance of good science going on in this thread.

-- Todd/Leviathn

Karnak · « **Reply #11 on:** September 22, 2003, 02:07:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
As far as I remember, the only Spit record was to have one of the most unaccurate WW2 speedometers.

You are wrong in this case MANDOBLE. The dive speed wasn't even calculated from within the Spitfire.

I know you hate the very concept of the Spitfire and wish R J Mitchell had died before designing it, but you really need to try to reduce your bias.

AVRO1 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 22, 2003, 03:55:04 PM »

The spitfire's had very good aerodynamic from the start from what I have read.

I would think it could reach very high speed by the end of the war with all the improvements they made to it.

I am no expert, it just seems logical.

As to how fast, that is a question for people who know there stuff. Like HT and some guys on these boards.

Neil Stirling1 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 23, 2003, 03:24:18 AM »

R.A.E Farnborough, report aero 1906. Jan 44.

Drag and trim changes on Spitfire, Mustang and Thunderbolt in flight at high mach numbers.

Spit XI.

Neil.

HoHun · « **Reply #14 on:** September 23, 2003, 01:16:14 PM »

Hi Neil,

>Drag and trim changes on Spitfire, Mustang and Thunderbolt in flight at high mach numbers.

Wow, that's EXTREMELY cool information! :-) Do you have the corrosponding Mustang and Thunderbolt charts, too? I'd love to see them!

Note the right-hand column - that's energy.

Interestingly, during the dive from 40000 ft to 30000 ft, the Spitfire hardly loses any energy. This initial dive seems to be slightly "unloaded" judging from the acceleration column. The change in elevator angle doesn't look like a result of trim changes, but rather like the begin of the pull-out (or at least some pulling up).

Of course, the elevator forces are not indicated, so it's hard to say how good the handling qualities were in the dive. The maximum Mach number of 0.89 is quite impressive! Interestingly, it coincedes with the maximum Mach number an unmodified Me 109G airframe reached during similar tests.

The Me 109G was limited in the dive by aileron overbalance, probably indicating aeroelastic deformation of the wing. The Spitfire had the same method of wing construction and also suffered from some aeroelasticity problems. Mike Ssalamander's "Up in Harm's Way" gives some good insights on the Spitfire, and Radinger/Otto/Schick's description of the Me 109 diving trials leads me to believe that in the Me 109, you had to be careful with roll inputs during a dive just in the same way.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)