Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: GODO on May 25, 2004, 04:05:07 PM

Title: 0 - 375 mph acceleration
Post by: GODO on May 25, 2004, 04:05:07 PM
Sealevel, WEP, burn rate 1, 50% fuel, all planes with their minimum weapons loadout.

0 - 200 mph
La7 2x20 - 23 secs
N1K2J - 24 secs
109G2 1x20 - 24 secs
Tempest - 25 secs
109G10 1x20 - 25 secs
La5FN - 26 secs
190A5 2x20 - 26 secs
109F 1x20 - 26 secs
109G6 1x20 - 26 secs
SpitXIV - 26 secs
F4U4 - 27 secs
Typhoon - 27 secs
Yak9U - 28 secs
SpitIX - 28 secs
C205 - 28 secs
A6M5 - 29 secs
190D9 - 29 secs
SpitV - 29 secs
P38L - 29 secs
F6F5 - 31 secs
P51D - 32 secs
F4U1D - 32 segs
190A8 2x20 - 32 secs
P47D30 - 33 secs
Bf110G - 34 secs
190F8 - 34 secs
Mosquito - 35 secs
P51B - 35 secs
F4U1 - 35 secs
Ki61 - 36 secs
Ta152 - 36 secs

0 - 250 mph
La7 2x20 - 34 secs
SpitXIV - 36 secs
Tempest - 36 secs
109G10 1x20 - 36 secs
La5FN - 37 secs
109G2 1x20 - 37 secs
N1K2J - 38 secs
109F 1x20 - 39 secs
F4U4 - 40 secs
109G6 1x20 - 40 secs
Typhoon - 41 secs
190A5 2x20 - 41 secs
Yak9U - 42 secs
C205 - 42 secs
190D9 - 42 secs
SpitIX - 43 secs
P38L - 45 secs
F4U1D - 45 secs
SpitV - 46 secs
F6F5 - 46 secs
190A8 2x20 - 46 secs
P51D - 47 secs
A6M5 - 48 secs
P47D30 - 49 secs
P51B - 50 secs
Ta152 - 50 secs
190F8 - 51 secs
F4U1 - 53 secs
Bf110G - 53 secs
Mosquito - 53 secs
Ki61 - 57 secs

0 - 300 mph (* planes with top speed below 300 mph)
La7 2x20 - 50 secs
Tempest - 51 secs
109G10 1x20 - 53 secs
SpitXIV - 56 secs
La5FN - 57 secs
F4U4 - 58 secs
190D9 - 60 secs
Typhoon - 61 secs
Yak9U - 62 secs
109G2 1x20 - 63 secs
N1K2J - 68 secs
109F 1x20 - 68 secs
109G6 1x20 - 68 secs
190A5 2x20 - 68 secs
P51D - 70 secs
190A8 2x20 - 70 secs
F4U1D - 70 secs
C205 - 72 secs
Ta152 - 73 secs
P51B - 76 secs
P38L - 77 secs
P47D30 - 77 secs
190F8 - 77 secs
SpitIX - 80 secs
F6F5 - 80 secs
F4U1 - 80 secs
SpitV - 86 secs
Mosquito - 85 secs
Bf110G - 94 secs
Ki61 - 117 secs
A6M5 - * (top speed 288 mph 143 secs)

0 - 350 mph (* planes with top speed below 350 mph)
Tempest - 80 secs
La7 2x20 - 84 secs
109G10 1x20 - 96 secs
F4U4 - 97 secs
190D9 - 101 secs
Typhoon - 109 secs
SpitXIV - 113 secs
La5FN - 122 secs
P51D - 127 secs
Yak9U - 137 secs
Ta152 - 138 secs
F4U1D - 147 secs
P51B - 158 secs
F4U1 - 160 secs
190A8 2x20 - 232 secs
N1K2J - * (top speed 325 mph 183 secs)
P38L - * (top speed 332 mph 211 secs)
190A5 2x20 - * (top speed 340mph 225 secs)
190F8 - * (top speed 349 mph 248 secs)
SpitIX - * (top speed 320 mph ? secs)
SpitV - * (top speed 316 mph ? secs)
109F 1x20 - * (top speed 332 mph 175 secs)
109G2 1x20 - * (top speed 340 mph 179 secs)
109G6 1x20 - * (top speed 336 mph 180 secs)
C205 - * (top seep 331 mph 177 secs)
P47D30 - * (top seep 342 mph 196 secs)
F6F5 - * (top seep 329 mph 186 secs)
Bf110G - * (top seep 320 mph 188 secs)
Mosquito - * (top seep 337 mph 234 secs)
Ki61 - * (top seep 313 mph 194 secs)

0 - 375 mph (* planes with top speed below 375 mph)
Tempest - 117 secs (top speed 387 mph 208 secs)
La7 2x20 - 143 secs (top speed 380 mph)
190D9 - 225 secs (top speed 375 mph)
Typhoon - * (top speed 370 mph 201 secs)
F4U1D - * (top speed 356 mph 220 secs)
F4U1 - * (top speed 357 mph 336 secs)
Ta152 - * (top speed 361 mph 221 secs)
109G10 1x20 - * (top speed 367 mph ? secs)
P51D - * (top speed 366 mph 224 secs)
La5 - * (top speed 356 mph ? secs)
Yak9U - * (top speed 355 mph ? secs)
P51B - * (top speed 358 mph 262 secs)
F4U4 - * (top speed 374 mph 205 secs)
SpitXIV - * (top speed 358 mph 173 secs)

EDIT: added P51B, F4U4, A6M5, Bf110G, Mosquito, SpitXIV, Tempest and Ki61.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Tarmac on May 25, 2004, 05:20:09 PM
Wow.  I'm kinda surprised that the 190A5 has such good low-end acceleration.  

What was your method?  Autotakeoff and then autolevel?  Wep the whole time I assume.  

Any plans to fit other planes in there?  I'd be especially interested in the 109g2, 109f4, p51b, and C205.  Hellcat, F4U, and Jug too. ;)

Good stuff though.  Thanks.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: GODO on May 25, 2004, 05:30:50 PM
wep and manual takeoff (except with Yak9U), I'll keep adding planes to the list. I used a multi-stopwatch running 10 timers, used 4 for 200, 250, 300 and 350 and several for top speeds.

Yep 190A5 seems a good low speed accelerator. I'm kinda surprised about low speed acceleration of D9, outaccelerated by 190A5 up to 250 mph and by La5 up to 300mph.

I'm about to add 350 and 375 times now.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Kweassa on May 25, 2004, 06:45:59 PM
I knew the N1K2 was a fast accelerating plane despite its slow speed... but I never knew it was that fast...
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: GODO on May 25, 2004, 07:06:57 PM
Added 109F, 109G6, 109G2, C205, F4U1D, F4U1, Typhoon, Ta152H, F6F5 and P47D30.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Urchin on May 25, 2004, 07:19:14 PM
I always thought climb-rate and acceleration were strictly proportional.  I.E.  a plane that can out-climb a different plane at a given altitude will also out-accelerate it.  

Is this true or not true?
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Janov on May 26, 2004, 02:11:25 AM
First off: Nice work on the list!

The physics behind the whole deal is complicated, getting into efficiencies of props and such, but to simplify it: At 0 speed the amount of force the prop can pull and the weight of the plane determine acceleration. At higher speeds aerodynamics enter the picture, basically the drag (parasitic and induced) subtract from the force available for acceleration, until they become equal: top level speed.
For climbing its more complicated. You will have to put the plane at the best climb speed (rate), called Vy. It is the best compromise between going slow (less parasitic drag) and going at a speed where the wings can operate at the most efficient angle of attack. This will be different for different planes, and different weights.
So in conclusion, a plane with a great acceleration must not also be a great climber (though it will usually not be bad), since depending on the wing it might have to climb at a higher Vy than another plane, increasing parasitic drag, while planes built for slower speed can utilize that in a low speed climb (like the 109s).

One thing is shown by the chart very clearly: TIME TO FIX THE TA152!!!

Litjan
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: 13Promet on May 26, 2004, 02:53:19 AM
Nice work GODO.
A suggestion for your tests: the 0-x acceleration test doesn't say much about operational plane performance because very rarely you get still during fight, and when you do you will dive afterwards.
What about testing 200-350 (or 375) acceleration, which is the typical operational situation ?


Thank you for your work


Promet
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: TimRas on May 26, 2004, 03:36:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by 13Promet
What about testing 200-350 (or 375) acceleration, which is the typical operational situation ?


Just subtract the time 0-200mph from time 0-350mph, and you get the time 200-350mph.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: 13Promet on May 26, 2004, 07:50:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by TimRas
Just subtract the time 0-200mph from time 0-350mph, and you get the time 200-350mph.


Looks like I was not completely waken up when i posted :D
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: fats on May 26, 2004, 08:14:59 AM
--- Urchin: ----
I always thought climb-rate and acceleration were strictly proportional.  I.E.  a plane that can out-climb a different plane at a given altitude will also out-accelerate it.  
--- end ---

Think it's something like a plane that outclimbs  another plane at given altitude _and_ speed will also outaccelerate it at that altitude and speed.


// fats
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: hitech on May 26, 2004, 08:31:25 AM
fats you are almost correct , but you should state it thus. If a plane can out climb at a giving alt and SPEED.

Or to put it differently.

Climb rate and acceleration are linanarly proptional.( i.e. vary the same %) for any given speed and altitude.


HiTech
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Shane on May 26, 2004, 08:31:42 AM
it's not the other plane you need to worry about out-accelerating, it's the bullets you need to worry about.

:D
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: _Schadenfreude_ on May 26, 2004, 09:34:38 AM
Damn La7 needs perking..
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Mister Fork on May 26, 2004, 10:48:49 AM
Great results GODO.  BTW - here are my acceleration results from 150-250mph in AH1.  They're pretty equal.  I may have to retest the results again after AHII comes out. :)

Acceleration

Test Environment
Altitude: test 1 @ 150 ft , test 2 @ 18000ft
Winds: 0
Fuel Burn Rate: 0.01
Fuel: 25%
Vo: 150Mph
Vf: 250Mph
WEP: On

Description
All aircraft were loaded with 25% fuel and with minimal MG loads if available. Aircraft were auto-levelled at altitude (150 feet and 18000ft) and speed reduced to 125mph, except the Me 262* and Me 163*. 100% throttle was applied and WEP engaged (if available). At 150mph the timer was engaged to 250Mph. This was repeated five times for every aircraft. The average time was recorded to accelerate through 100 mph.   Ground speeds were recorded for all altitudes.

* Vo was 200, Vf was 300 due to stall conditions.

Forumla
Acceleration
a = (Vf - Vo) / t m/s^2
where
Vf - final velocity
Vo - initial velocity
t - time in seconds

Vf = 250mph = 111.8 m/s
Vo= 150mph = 67.1 m/s

a = (111.8m/s - 67.1m/s) / t
a = 44.7m/s / time

Acceleration Results: 150 ft
Aircraft | Seconds | Acceleration[list=1]Acceleration Results: 18000 ft
Aircraft | Seconds | Acceleration[list=1]
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Zanth on May 26, 2004, 12:05:48 PM
Important to remember that this all is based on how AH loads fuel.  So while 25% sounds equal you need to remember that it isn't equal at all.  When comparing performance this can be a large factor and I suspect why some planes don't compare as people expect (ex. The Ta152 in stories you have read were not nearly so heavilly loaded with fuel as the P-51's that encountered it).
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: GODO on May 26, 2004, 03:12:54 PM
Added P51B, F4U4, A6M5, Bf110G, Mosquito, SpitXIV, Tempest and Ki61.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: SELECTOR on May 26, 2004, 06:08:02 PM
you really have too much time..
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: bozon on May 27, 2004, 08:47:08 AM
this explains how so many "faster" planes have a problem with the N1K. the thing can't reach high speeds but it reaches there much faster.

conclusion: unless you start running at over 300 mph, a nik is likely to keep up or catch you.

Bozon
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Flyboy on May 27, 2004, 10:29:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by hitech
fats you are almost correct , but you should state it thus. If a plane can out climb at a giving alt and SPEED.

Or to put it differently.

Climb rate and acceleration are linanarly proptional.( i.e. vary the same %) for any given speed and altitude.


HiTech


how do you explain the 190d9 and a5 acceleration?
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Pyro on May 27, 2004, 11:47:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Flyboy
how do you explain the 190d9 and a5 acceleration?


Scope of the test.  Because it's starting from a standstill, takeoff characteristics form a major part of the result.  In your above example, it is easy to come to the conclusion that the A5 will outaccelerate the D9 up to 250 mph.  But that's only true when they both start from a standstill on the ground.  From a more practical test where both aircraft are inflight maintaining 150 mph, the D9 beats the A5 by 2.5-3 seconds in accelerating to 250 mph in my quick test.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: vorticon on May 27, 2004, 12:09:25 PM
is it just me or do planes reach 200mph faster if you keep your wheels on the runway until it hits there?
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Edbert on May 27, 2004, 12:20:01 PM
NICE WORK GODO!

A quick question, was the 51D flown with 4 @ 50s or 6? I ask because it seems to out accelerate the Bravo accross the board.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: hitech on May 27, 2004, 12:47:24 PM
Ground effect vortican.

HiTech
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Edbert on May 27, 2004, 01:06:24 PM
I'm gonna try and post some numbers I crunched using Excel...

   0-200   0-250   200-250   0-300   200-300   250-300   0-350   200-350   250-350   300-350   0-400   200-400   250-400   300-400
La7 2x20   23   34   11   50   27   16   84   61   50   34   143   120   109   93
N1K2J   24   38   14   68   44   30                        
109G2 1x20   24   37   13   63   39   26                        
Tempest   25   36   11   51   26   15   80   55   44   29   117   92   81   66
109G10 1x20   25   36   11   53   28   17   96   71   60   43            
La5FN   26   37   11   57   31   20   122   96   85   65            
190A5 2x20   26   41   15   68   42   27                        
109F 1x20   26   39   13   68   42   29                        
109G6 1x20   26   40   14   68   42   28                        
SpitXIV   26   36   10   56   30   20   113   87   77   57            
F4U4   27   40   13   58   31   18   97   70   57   39            
Typhoon   27   41   14   60   33   19   109   82   68   49            
Yak9U   28   42   14   62   34   20   137   109   95   75            
SpitIX   28   43   15   80   52   37                        
C205   28   42   14   72   44   30                        
A6M5   29   48   19                                 
190D9   29   42   13   60   31   18   105   76   63   45   225   196   183   165
SpitV   29   46   17   86   57   40                        
P38L   29   45   16   77   48   32                        
F6F5   31   46   15   80   49   34                        
P51D   32   47   15   70   38   23   127   95   80   57            
F4U1D   32   45   13   70   38   25   147   115   102   77            
190A8 2x20   32   46   14   70   38   24   232   200   186   162            
P47D30   33   49   16   77   44   28                        
Bf110G   34   53   19   94   60   41                        
190F8   34   51   17   77   43   26                        
Mosquito   35   53   18   85   50   32                        
P51B   35   50   15   76   41   26   158   123   108   82            
F4U1   35   53   18   80   45   27   160   125   107   80            
Ki61   36   57   21   117   81   60                        
Ta152   36   50   14   73   37   23   138   102   88   65
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Pyro on May 27, 2004, 01:15:27 PM
I forgot about ground effect.  That's something to keep in mind when you're doing these tests at low altitude.  I'd recommend making the runs at 100 ft to avoid that.  If you were making runs really close to the deck, your results would be skewed.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: GODO on May 27, 2004, 01:44:44 PM
Tests were done below 100 feet, starting to redo the tests now.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Mister Fork on May 27, 2004, 01:57:53 PM
Which is why I chose 150ft for my test.

Question Pyro - is there any merit to  redo my acceleation tests based on the changes in AHII?
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Pyro on May 27, 2004, 02:08:29 PM
Mister Fork, I would redo them in AH2.  Some planes have changed, overall changes to the flight model may have affected that somewhat, and perhaps most importantly, you can test to a much greater level of accuracy due to the E6B function.  It's easy for the analog gauges to vary in accuracy between the different planes plus they don't offer much granularity.
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: TimRas on May 27, 2004, 03:10:21 PM
After the thrust bug was corrected I tested the OTD WEP speeds of Tempest, La-7, 190D-9, Typhoon, P-51D, 109G-10 and Yak-9U. All the speeds are within 1mph of the results of AH1:
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57526
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Mister Fork on May 27, 2004, 03:22:45 PM
Thanks Pryo - valid point on the E6B.  I'll look forward to the release to redo the test.:aok
Title: 0 - 300 mph acceleration
Post by: Edbert on June 01, 2004, 11:06:00 AM
Plans to begin stopwatch at 150MPH, use the E6B, and at 150 feet (or so) altitude. Any updated numbers yet?