Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Crumpp on August 22, 2004, 09:41:20 AM
-
Nashwan,
It's spelled out in black and white here:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html
Read about the physics and forces of climbing here:
http://www.av8n.com/how/
Nobody is saying that the Spit Mk IX did not have a faster climb rate. That is a fact.
Let me explain it ONE MORE TIME and PLEASE READ THE SCIENCE!
If we all flew gliders you could all understand this. Nobody is used to watching a “total energy variometer”, if we had TE Variometers this would make perfect sense to you.
The Spit does have a much slower best climb speed. That is a fact. The FW-190A8's best climb speed is around 182 mph. The Spit IX LF is 170 at best dropping quickly with altitude.
At a shallower angle and faster speed the than the spit the FW-190 reaches it's "rent free" zone in a sustained climb. If a spit points it's nose DIRECTLY at the FW-190 it will be out climbed because it cannot maintain the same VSI at the same AOA. It has to climb at a different AoA to get the same VSI.
If the spit cannot add any more power to the climb then he will pay the price in Airspeed. The TOP of the any A/C's power curve IS its best climb speed. That means the Spit wants to be going 170mph in the climb! The point where the maximum angle of climb and the top of the power curve meet is the best climb rate! Because the power curve is flat at the top, he will quickly find himself climbing at a shallower angle at 170mph.
So we have no gun solution and at the same VSI and the FW-190 is moving faster along the same vector. The spit gets out climbed.
Only way to reach the same VSI and angle is that both A/C are at the same point on the power curve. This would occur in a bounce when the FW-190 is climb at 1.32ata (climb and combat power) and the Spit comes in at full boost underneath it.
The ONLY way a Spit will be out climbed by an FW-190 is if he points his directly at the 190 and tries to follow him up.
If the Spit driver immediately goes for his best climb angle and speed he will readily out climb the 190.
Excellent example of how thrust effects climb:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From one of those links Crummp likes us to see.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fw190A-8 (4300kg) / Spitfire JL165
2400rpm, 1.32 ata
6km - 9.1min
7km - 11.4min
8km - 14.4min
2700rpm, 1.42 ata
6km - 7.5min / 4.97min, +17.1lb
7km - 9.2min / 6.0min, +13lb
8km - 11.4min / 7.2min, +8.6lb
2700rpm, 1.58/1.65 ata
6km - 6.8min
7km - 8.6min
8km - 10.7min
When the FW-190 received more thrust it's angle of climb increased BUT it's Best climb speed stayed the same.
Check out the spitfires best climb speeds:
Spit V Merlin XLV - 170mph IAS - 6,450lb TO wt
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/x4922.html
Spit V Merlin 45 (+16) - 170mph IAS- 6,945lb TO wt
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/aa878.html
Spit Mk IX Merlin 66 (+25) - 170mph IAS 7400 lbs TO wt.
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jl165.html
Crumpp
-
--- Crumpp ---
FW-190 it will be out climbed because it cannot maintain the same VSI at the same AOA. It has to climb at a different AoA to get the same VSI.
--- end ---
By AOA you mean the Angle Of Attack? Angle Of Attack refers to the angle of the wing compared to the velocity vector. I think you meant the climb angle?
// fats
-
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html#fig-incidence
Yep. "Angle of climb" is the correct term.
We continued the discussion in another thread.
Crumpp
-
12 miles an hour is not MUCH.
Now a well boosted spitty could then, at its slower speed of climbing still add the same distance on a vertical level, - around 11 miles speed UPWARDS.
How is that possible?
-
crump.
AoA is irrelevant to any "outclimbing" question. it's not a geometrical variable to the relative position of the planes and even doesn't mean anything about where the nose is pointing on different planes - you can build a plane who will be with nose 10 degrees above the horison at AoA=0.
that website you keep linking, gives nice data that is useless to a pilot. Although what pilots actually control is the AoA they fly by IAS and throttle and for a good reason. that's because Nobody cares about AoA - it's some parameter "inside" the machine and does not describe the motion of the entire body.
if the angle of climb (speed vector over the horison) is "a" than pretty much (using you notation):
sin a = VSI / TAS (leaving out small instrumental corrections).
get the rate of sustained climb for each plane at the given speed => get "a" and compare.
The way to use climb angle in a fight is when you are already slow and slightly above the plane with shallower climb angle. If you both start climbing as steep as you can and you started above his sttepest line of climb he will pass under you and forward even if he has a better climb rate.
This is one explanation to Spit V "helicopter" properties people complain about. It just can climb steep.
Bozon
-
that website you keep linking, gives nice data that is useless to a pilot. Although what pilots actually control is the AoA they fly by IAS and throttle and for a good reason. that's because Nobody cares about AoA - it's some parameter "inside" the machine and does not describe the motion of the entire body.
It's written by a pilot for pilots bozon. They guys is a certified FAA instructor and a PhD. It's VERY important you understand Angle of Attack as a pilot.
AoA is irrelevant to any "outclimbing" question. it's not a geometrical variable to the relative position of the planes and even doesn't mean anything about where the nose is pointing on different planes - you can build a plane who will be with nose 10 degrees above the horison at AoA=0.
Your talking about angle of incidence here. Totally different subject.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html#fig-incidence
get the rate of sustained climb for each plane at the given speed => get "a" and compare.
1. For a sustained climb
2. Top of the sustained climb power curve is THE BEST CLIMB SPEED.
3. First part of the climb is the zoom. Zoom climb is a function of mass/Drag. The Spitfire does not have much in the mass department and it's drag is unremarkable. It's a poor zoomer.
This is a repost Angus and was intended to move the discussion out of the Spit V thread. It didn't happen so I will repost the answer here:
Ok,
There seems to be some confusion as to what are A/C "numbers" mean.
Here:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suppose we wish to achieve the best rate of climb:
A) You could try to control the airplane by reference to the “rate of climb” number shown on the vertical speed indicator. This is not recommended!
B) It would be better to maintain VY, the nominal best-rate-of-climb speed, as shown on the airspeed indicator, and accept whatever rate of climb results. This is almost exactly the right idea.
C) It would be even better to realize that the best rate of climb is achieved at a particular angle of attack. In particular, if the airplane is lightly loaded compared to what was anticipated in the handbook, the best rate of climb will be achieved at a lower speed than is reflected in the handbook’s VY value.
This is not an isolated example. Many of the airplane’s critical performance numbers are really angle of attack numbers:
Þ The stall occurs at a particular angle of attack.
Þ The smallest power-off descent rate occurs at a particular angle of attack.
Þ The best power-off glide ratio occurs at a particular angle of attack.
Þ The recommended “approach speed” is really an angle of attack recommendation.
Þ The best rate of climb occurs at a particular angle of attack.
Þ The best angle of climb occurs at a particular angle of attack.1, 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html
An Airplane achieves it's best performance when flown by it's numbers. It makes sense to non-pilots that "Power plus attitude = performance" but that is not the case.
Lets examine the power curve:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life would be simpler if manufacturers would explicitly show the power curve somewhere in the POH, but they don’t. You have to figure it out for yourself. Fortunately, the general shape of the power curve is more-or-less9 the same for all airplanes, so the concepts discussed here are very widely applicable.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy....r-curve-regimes
That means all Airplanes have a FLAT power curve. The TOP of that curve is the BEST CLIMB Speed:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let’s start by comparing figure 7.5 to figure 7.6. As shown in figure 7.5, the highest point on the power curve represents the best rate of climb. The corresponding airspeed is denoted VY.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.h...est-angle-climb
Not lets look at BEST CLIMB ANGLE:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We see that the power curve is rather flat on top. That means that if you fly a couple of knots faster than VY, your rate of climb will hardly be affected at all. You will reach your destination a percent or two sooner, so this sort of “cruise climb” is generally a sensible thing to do.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.h...est-angle-climb
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But don’t get carried away; the power curve tells you that if you slow down enough, you will degrade the climb performance to the point where further reductions in airspeed don’t pay.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both A/C can do this and the 190 is faster.
Since the top of the Power Curve is flat there is a wide variety of angles the plane can fly that have No effect on Airspeed. Your still going 170 mph at a shallower angle.
Now any climb which is started ABOVE Best Climb speed is a ZOOM CLIMB which ends, provided the Angle of attack is not ABOVE best climb angle in a sustained climb at Best Climbing speed. That is the point of equilibrium the plane wants to be at to balance the forces of flight.
If the 190A and a Spit begin a climb at the same speed:
1. In the initial zoom the 190 will leave the spit.
a. The 190 has more mass
b. The 190 has less drag
2. At the end of the zoom, both A/C will slow to Best Climb Speed.
a. The 190's Best climb speed is faster
b. IF the spit maintains the 190's shallower angle he will be left behind.
Crumpp
-
Nashwan, bro.
I am not trying to sound like an arrogant know it all, so please don't think I am in this reply.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, the excess speed will only drop off if you keep the angle high enough. Any plane can climb at any speed up to it's maximum speed, because at anything less than maximum speed it still has excess power.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the Power Curve again and see what happens as soon as you raise the angle of attack above Zero.
The speed begins to drop. When your zoom climb is finished, your plane drops to sustained climb speed. Your speed will balance out along that power curve. Angle for angle the 190 is faster. The end of the power curve is level flight.
But ONLY at angles below the 190's Best Climb angle.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously, at maximum speed climb rate will be zero, as all the available power is going to maintain forward momentum, and none is available to climb.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes because the end of the power curve is level flight.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that this graph assumes a linear fall off of climb rate with speed, which I doubt is accurate. Someone like HoHun, GWShaw etc would probably be able to do a much better job.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure exactly what you are showing with this chart, bro. If you are trying to say the Spitfire had a large enough angle advantage it could directly follow the spit it did not. It seems that way but when you understand the physics it could not catch it just because it's angle was better by following it directly.
I will say though the light bulb came on with this. I am not about to say that at high altitudes where the Spitfire performs its best and the 190 it's worst, that a Spitfire could not directly follow a 190. As long as the 190's best climb speed is faster. When it becomes the same then the Spitfire can directly follow.
Here is what the angle advantage will get the Spitfire:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otherwise, the Spitfire would always be able to outclimb behind, level out and catch the 190 while still climbing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angus, bro, that is exactly what will happen IF the spit pilot abandons the direct chase and goes for his best angle of climb.
At that point a smart 190 pilot will level out and gain speed.
The Spitfire will end up above the 190 with more horizontal separation.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can climb at 300 mph at sea level in the Spit, just at a very shallow angle. You can hold a 300 mph climb in the Spit all the way up to 30,000ft or more. (TAS)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the reverse is true for the 190. Remember that degree of angle FOR degree of angle the 190 moves closer to its rent free zone in the shallow climb than the Spitfire. The Spitfires angle is steeper but is power curve height is much lower.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are adjusting the climb angle to keep a desired speed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only until your angle reaches the top of the power curve which is flat. From there you have a wide range of angle that produce little change in airspeed.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if the Spit has a large initial advantage, it can afford to climb at less than optimum speed and still be better than the 190.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Spit has a large climb advantage but due to his lower best climb speed he cannot point his nose directly at the 190.
If he does the 190 will soon be above him. The Spitfire pilot has to point his nose up and use his greater climb angle advantage to out climb the 190.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try climbing in AH without using auto climb. Watch the ASI, and try to keep 170 IAS. You puch the stick forward when the speed drops below 170, pull back when it goes above 170.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As it should. Your moving along the power band AND your on the "mushing" end of the curve so speed increases are more dramatic.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vx
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
After this we can discuss why the spitfire would not be able to get a gun solution in the climb without totally mushing his zoom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nashwan, IMHO, at some alt bands, only the best Merlin spits could compete with the 190's on any level (190 outrolling always). The death and dread being the IX LF and VIII with 25+ boost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking at the power/weight increases of both types I don't think the Spitfire Mk IX (+25) would be much different from the FW-190A3 vs Spitfire Merlin 61 (+12) tactical trials.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was nothing to choose between either aircraft as regards turning circles at any height; whether on offensive or defensive manoeuvres neither could make any impression on the other. In rate of roll, however, the Spitfire IX was considerably better especially at low altitude. A number of full rolls through 360 degrees were timed by the same pilot flying each aircraft in turn and although quanitative tests are difficult to produce, it appeared that there was often more than 1.5 seconds superiority for the Mark IX over the Mark VIII. The Mark VIII feels fairly light on the ailerons but at high speeds it becomes very heavy, and so this new combination of extended wing and small aileron cannot be considered satisfactory.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit8tac.html
At altitude the Spit VIII would be nightmare but it's roll rate would severely hamper it.
Now the Spit XII clipped wing would be a tough fight for the 190 or for that matter any clipped wing spit would go along way towards reducing the 190's odds. Wonder how the turning circle of the clipped wings is effected.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think FW190 series development was very very poor during the war. Spits and did much better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, that is a myth, if you study both series the FW-190A gained less weight and just as much power over it's lifecycle as the Merlin Spits.
Remember the Luftwaffe had it's own enemy test flight. The BMW-801 was "de-rated" while had a huge performance advantage. It increased in power/weight just enough to keep its traditional advantages. And like the Spit it received a much better armament package over it's lifecycle. Both the Merlin 66 (+25) and the BMW 801D2 (1.58ata/1.65ata) are 2000hp (+) motors. In fact they are almost exactly equal in power, just as the FW-190A3 and the Merlin 61(+12) Spit IX were in 1942.
Just as the RAF abandoned development of the Merlin Spits in favour of the Spit XIV, the Luftwaffe abandoned development of the 190A in favour of the Dora.
Now this only applies to jagd-einsatz's. The FW-190A became the Luftwaffe's "jeep" of the air. Comparing a jabo-einsatz's or a R7/R8 "Sturmjager" is apples and oranges to the Spit.
Crumpp
-
Crumpp.
My guess is that when the 190's had bounced enemy aircraft and escaped in their shallow climb, only to return again, they were already much faster, and the shallow climb performed at perhaps the range between 400 down to 250 mph.
12 mph speed difference in a climb takes very much too long to get you out of trouble.
And it isn't 12 miles anyway, that's just the difference between the most favourable climb speeds.
I'll try to get the time to get this to Newtons, but anyway, nice mindbogglers here. :)
-
Angus,
What I am saying is easy to see with the graph bro.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vx
The 190's Power curve and the Spits power curve will look very similiar to this curve.
Only difference is to raise the curve for the difference in Best climb speed. You can then draw any angle from the center and where the angle of climb intersects the power curve you can then judge the speed difference. It will not be strictly accurate but it is enough to know that at any angle below the 190's best climb angle the spit cannot follow it. The shallower the angle the greater the speed difference.
12 mph speed difference in a climb takes very much too long to get you out of trouble.
And it isn't 12 miles anyway, that's just the difference between the most favourable climb speeds.
Remember too, the gap will widen at the difference in climb speed AFTER the zoom climb. Meaning the 190 will have a good head start.
Remember the throttle adjustments move the entire curve up and down the graph.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vld
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vy
It's a brain teaser for sure. It certainly does explain why everyone just didn't build really light high lift fighters in WWII.
Crumpp
-
Crumpp, I give up on you.
Bozon
-
Heres a rough set of "power curves" I graphed for the Fw 190A-5 and Spitfire LF.IX - I used Aces High to get the climbrates at different speeds and then raised the Spitfire curve to match the increased power/climb from the Merlin 66(Since AH Spit F.IX has Merlin 61).
(http://users.tpg.com.au/adslec4m/powercurves.JPG)
-
Heres a rough set of "power curves" I graphed for the Fw 190A-5 and Spitfire LF.IX - I used Aces High to get the climbrates at different speeds and then raised the Spitfire curve to match the increased power/climb from the Merlin 66(Since AH Spit F.IX has Merlin 61).
Thanks for the effort you put into that graph. The Spits and 190's in Ah have the same Best Climb Speed. It still illustrates the point though.
Crumpp
-
Hmm, point is that if you draw a line representing a certain climb angle, that climb angle is achieved when it intersects the power curve - as you can see the Spitfire LF.IX would be able to follow the same angle as a Fw190 at its optimum and it would be catching up(higher VSI and IAS)!
Edit: On the graph shown, in fact any climb angle over about 4.5º would enable the Spitfire to follow the Fw 190 along the same vector and catch it.
However this is only for SUSTAINED climbs - says nothing about zoom climbs.
-
Hmm, point is that if you draw a line representing a certain climb angle, that climb angle is achieved when it intersects the power curve - as you can see the Spitfire LF.IX would be able to follow the same angle as a Fw190 at its optimum and it would be catching up(higher VSI and IAS)!
Yes in AH they can. And at low angles below the FW-190's best climb angle the FW-190 can get away in a climb. Just not that quickly right now. Again though the Best Climb Speed of the 190 is off in AH. It is exactly the same as the Spitfires. Pyro is going to redo the FW-190's flight model here in the future.
HTC is very busy with other things right now. I for one am looking forward to TOD.
Crumpp
-
justin, if we set the best climb speed for 190A5 to 182mph instead of 170, shifting the 190 curve to the right and compressing it, the result is that 190A5 will outclimb and outrun the Spit LF at 252 mph, while still doing 2790 fpm.
-
Originally posted by GODO
justin, if we set the best climb speed for 190A5 to 182mph instead of 170, shifting the 190 curve to the right and compressing it, the result is that 190A5 will outclimb and outrun the Spit LF at 252 mph, while still doing 2790 fpm.
That is true, but it is not what Crump is arguing. Crump is arguing that the Fw190A-5 will outclimb the Spitfire LF.Mk IX at 182mph.
-
Point is that we dont have real spit climb rate at 182 mph. AH2 best climb speed for 190A5 was set to 159mph, well below the real one.
-
That is true, but it is not what Crump is arguing. Crump is arguing that the Fw190A-5 will outclimb the Spitfire LF.Mk IX at 182mph.
At it will Karnak. That graph is NOT a power curve. It's a "I don't know what" illustration that of the games properties.
An Aircraft's power curve is flat at the top and the pilot has a wide variety of ANGLE at which he can fly the plane that produce only a tiny amount or no change in Airspeed. If the 190 was at it's best climb angle or below then it's airspeed would ALWAYS be faster than the Spits traveling on the same vector.
Karnak, the top of the Spitfires FLAT power curve is 170mph. The top of the 190's flat power curve is 182mph. The curves look the same just that one is higher.
Crumpp
-
At it will Karnak.
Typo
AND it will Karnak.
Crumpp
-
Crump,
I made no judgement. I am not familiar enough with this sort of stuff. I see what you are saying and I see what Nashwan is saying and they both make a degree of sense. Nashwan's argument seems to make a good deal more sense to me, but as I said I do not know enough to make the call.
It is clear that the Fw190's higher SL speed will, at some point, enable it to climb faster than the Spitfire at the same speed. It just seems suspicious to me that in 12mph the Spitfire will drop about 700fpm of climb, which is what your argument boils down to.
You're claim is that the Spitfire LF.IX obtains it's very good climb rate by climbing at a steeper angle (18.5 degrees) at 170mph and the Fw190 does it's best climb at a shallower angle (14.5 degrees) and a higher speed of 182mph. To me it seems that for your claim to be true the Spitfire would have to top out it's sustained level speed at SL at a speed of about 250mph as it loses about 700fpm of climb for every 12mph gained. And that is not even accounting for increased parasitic drag. Second it would seem that the Fw190's wing would need to generate more lift than the Spitfire's in order to climb faster at the same angle.
Another way I can try to look at it from a layman's eyes is that the Spitfire loses more than 4 degrees of sustained climb by changing from a 170mph climb to a 182mph climb. In this scenario we once again have the Spitfire's speed topping out at about 250mph at the point where it cannot raise it's nose at all without slowing down.
What it boils down to is that to a layman your numbers don't make sense. You are arguing for too extreme a change across a small performance spectrum to be readily believable.
MANDOBLE's suggested point of crossover between the Spitfire being the better climber and the Fw190 being the better climber of 252mph seems much more likely to me.
-
It just seems suspicious to me that in 12mph the Spitfire will drop about 700fpm of climb, which is what your argument boils down to.
The top of the curve is flat. The Spitfire does not lose 700fpm in his climb rate. He is just choosing to climb at a shallower angle than he is capable of attaining.
The red line in this graph is the power curve. All planes have basically the same shaped curve. The blue is the climb angle. Where the power curve meets the highest angle is the best climb angle.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vx
MANDOBLE's suggested point of crossover between the Spitfire being the better climber and the Fw190 being the better climber of 252mph seems much more likely to me.
Mandoble's argument is correct. It is called the Mushing End of the power curve. The power curve drops steeply at this end. If the 190 exceeds his best climb rate angle (which is actually just a tad shallower angle than his best climb angle) he will start to lose massive airspeed. If he holds the angle he will eventually drop off the curve and stall out.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-power-curve-regimes
You're claim is that the Spitfire LF.IX obtains it's very good climb rate by climbing at a steeper angle (18.5 degrees) at 170mph and the Fw190 does it's best climb at a shallower angle (14.5 degrees) and a higher speed of 182mph. To me it seems that for your claim to be true the Spitfire would have to top out it's sustained level speed at SL at a speed of about 250mph
In the first part of the climb BOTH A/C will zoom climb. That energy is spent bleeding off the difference in Airspeed between Level speed and power curve until both planes settle down to thier position on the power curve relative to the Angle of Attack they choose to begin the climb. The top of that power curve IS the best climb speed. Because the 190's power curve is higher, at any point below his best climb angle he will travel faster on that vector than the spit will on the same vector.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-roller-coaster
Hope that clears up the confusion.
Crumpp
-
No, not really.
I don't see how the Spit will lose that much climb with only 12mph gained.
The way I see it there are two options:
A) The Spitfire cannot climb as fast as the Fw190 at 182mph and so cannot match the Fw190's angle of climb.
B) The Spitfire can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph and can match the Fw190's angle of climb.
It simply seems to me that the fact that the Fw190's best climb speed is 182mph does not preclude the Spitfire from having a still better climb rate at that speed, even though the Spitfire's best climb speed is 170mph.
EDIT:
Or are you saying the the Spitfire can match the climb rate, but cannot keep a gun solution as the Spitfire needs an angle of, say, 16 degrees to match the climb at 182mph whereas the 190 has an angle of 14.5 degrees? So if the Spitfire sets the angle to 14.5 degrees for a gunsolution, the Spitfire's climb rate is less than the 190's. Is this what you're driving at?
-
Nashwan, bro.
I am not trying to sound like an arrogant know it all, so please don't think I am in this reply.
Not at all. It's been a nice polite discussion, which makes a change from most I seem to get involved in :)
Look at the Power Curve again and see what happens as soon as you raise the angle of attack above Zero.
The speed begins to drop.
I assume you mean angle of flight, rather than angle of attack.
Yes, speed will drop from maximum as soon as you raise the climb angle from zero.
However, it will stabilise. If your climb angle is very shallow, say 1 or 2 degrees, it will stabilise at a pretty high speed.
If you start a very shallow climb at say 400 mph, your climb speed will drop, but not all the way to 170 mph. It will drop to the best that can be maintained at that speed.
The speed begins to drop. When your zoom climb is finished, your plane drops to sustained climb speed.
Yes. But sustained climb speed isn't the same as best climb speed.
Best climb speed in a Spit LF IX was 170 IAS, but it could climb at 200 IAS, or even 300 IAS.
Angle for angle the 190 is faster.
No. Angle for angle, the Spitfire will be faster at slower speeds, the 190 faster at higher speeds.
Not sure exactly what you are showing with this chart, bro. If you are trying to say the Spitfire had a large enough angle advantage it could directly follow the spit it did not.
What are you basing that claim on?
Here's the graph again:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/282_1093216393_rocspeedspit190.gif)
This shows a linear drop with speed, which isn't correct, but doesn't seem to be that far off. Here's a real one for the 109F that Isegrim pointed out to me:
http://www.lanpartyworld.com/smallwoy/109Ftrial5.JPG
It's from Ring's page, http://prodocs.netfirms.com/
If you look at the Spit 190 chart again, you can see the Spitfire starts to lose climb rate as soon as it deviates from it's best climb speed, as expected.
But it's not going to squander it's 700 ft/min advantage just by climbing 12 mph faster.
Look at the 109F chart, which is from real life tests.
By increasing it's climb speed by 15 mph, it loses just 200 ft/min of climb.
The Spit has a 700 ft/min advantage over the 190. The 109F here lost 700 ft/min by increasing it's climb speed by over 50 mph.
The Spitfire could climb at 4700 ft/min at 170 mph. If the drop in climb rate with speed is the same as the 109F, then by increasing speed to 182 mph, the Spit would still be climbing at 4500 ft or so.
That means the Spit could easily follow the 190 at 182, in fact probably to more than 250 mph, which is what my simple graph suggests, and what Justin's graph suggests.
The Spit has a large climb advantage but due to his lower best climb speed he cannot point his nose directly at the 190.
Why?
Are you suggesting that a Spit that can climb at 4700 ft/min at 170 mph can't climb at 4000 ft/min at 182 mph?
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit8tac.html
At altitude the Spit VIII would be nightmare but it's roll rate would severely hamper it.
That Spit had the extended wing tips which increased wing area, but resulted in a poor roll rate.
The extended span wings were pretty rare on Spit VIIIs (and IXs, if any IXs had them at all)
Heres a rough set of "power curves" I graphed for the Fw 190A-5 and Spitfire LF.IX - I used Aces High to get the climbrates at different speeds and then raised the Spitfire curve to match the increased power/climb from the Merlin 66(Since AH Spit F.IX has Merlin 61).
Those actually match the shape of curve from that 109F test I linked to above pretty well.
justin, if we set the best climb speed for 190A5 to 182mph instead of 170,
I must be missing something. It looks to me that the 190s best climb speed is at 180 mph, with the Spit's at 160.
the result is that 190A5 will outclimb and outrun the Spit LF at 252 mph, while still doing 2790 fpm.
My quick and crude graph suggests somewhere between 250 and 260 as well, but seeing the real life drop off is not linear, I think the actual figure should be a bit higher.
It's quite clear though that a Spit LF IX should be able to easily match the 190 at 182 IAS, with power to spare.
At it will Karnak. That graph is NOT a power curve. It's a "I don't know what" illustration that of the games properties.
Crumpp, that graph, and the two I've posted, are illustrations of the drop in climb rate with speed.
The Spitfire will not climb as well at 182 mph as it could at 170 mph, but it will still climb better than the 190.
An Aircraft's power curve is flat at the top and the pilot has a wide variety of ANGLE at which he can fly the plane that produce only a tiny amount or no change in Airspeed.
No, he has a wide variety of speeds, little variety in angle. You can't change the angle much without changing the airspeed, unless you add more power.
Karnak, the top of the Spitfires FLAT power curve is 170mph. The top of the 190's flat power curve is 182mph. The curves look the same just that one is higher.
Why does the Spit have to be at the top of it's curve? We've established the Spit has a better climb rate, it can fly at less than optimum and still have an advantage over the 190.
-
The top of the curve is flat. The Spitfire does not lose 700fpm in his climb rate. He is just choosing to climb at a shallower angle than he is capable of attaining.
A shallower angle than capable of attaining?
Any plane can climb at less than it's max angle, down to 0 degrees and no climb.
Because I don't quite understand what you're saying, do you believe the Spit CAN climb at 200 mph and a shallow angle? A sustained climb?
The red line in this graph is the power curve. All planes have basically the same shaped curve. The blue is the climb angle. Where the power curve meets the highest angle is the best climb angle.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vx
Look at the scale on that graph. The blue is the climb rate.
Or are you saying the the Spitfire can match the climb rate, but cannot keep a gun solution as the Spitfire needs an angle of, say, 16 degrees to match the climb at 182mph whereas the 190 has an angle of 14.5 degrees?
That's just an angle of attack difference though.
The Spit will actually need less angle to match the 190s climb rate and angle, because at the same speed and climb rate, the Spit will need less AOA because it has lower wingloading.
So if the Spitfire sets the angle to 14.5 degrees for a gunsolution, the Spitfire's climb rate is less than the 190's and the Spitfire must throttle back to avoide going faster than 182mph.
That's the point. The Spit has the advantage over the 190 un to around 250 or more, which means that if the Spit maintains the same climb angle, and max throttle, it will climb faster and overtake the 190.
If it maintains the same speed and max throttle, it will have to increase the angle of climb to avoid going faster.
But if it wants to maintain the same speed, same angle, and thus same rate of climb, it only has to throttle back.
-
I assume you mean angle of flight, rather than angle of attack.
No, I mean Angle of Attack. Most of a planes "numbers" actually refer to an angle of attack. That is in one of the links I posted that explains what all the numbers mean.
ARRRRGH!!:(
Much love bro, but your killing me!:p
Both you and Karnak are following the thinking of "power plus angle equals performance".
It does not.
An airplane will climb at the speed that it falls on the power curve after the zoom!
Raise the angle of attack and the speed, after the zoom, drops to the POWER CURVE.
Raise the angle of attack even more and you reach the TOP of the power curve which is your Best Climb speed.
Since the top is FLAT you can raise the angle even more and you will not change speed drastically at all. The 190's curve is higher so its speed will ALWAYS be higher at the top of the curve.
When you raise it high enough, just before you drop off the "mushing end" of the curve you have reached your BEST CLIMB ANGLE.
ANYWHERE along that power curve UP TOO the 190's best climb rate angle it will leave the Spitfire behind IF the spit tries to follow directly.
That is a fact.
Now, some of the confusion lies in the fact that you want to fit the REST of the Spitfires POWER CURVE into the equation. The Spits power curve moves closer to the center of the graph than the 190's so it can climb at a much steeper angle than the 190 is capable of matching. That does not mean it can directly follow any angle below the 190's best climb angle.
So in principal we are both right. I don't think you completely grasp what I have explained but IF you graph the spitfires power curve and climb angle then YES, there is a point where the spitfire can directly follow the 190.
That is because the 190 has pulled too steep an angle and is reaching the "mushing zone", heading towards a stall.
The 190 pays less rent angle for angle up to its best climb rate because it's "rent free zone" is closer angle wise than the Spitfires. Shallower angle means it's lower on the graph.
Best climb rate is an angle just shallow of Best climb angle at the top of the power curve. The angle and speed cause the airplane to gain altitude at the fastest rate it can.
The 190 will drop off the power curve into the mushing realm if it tried to fly the steep angles the Spitfire is capable of doing.
Crumpp
-
OK. That doesn't make any sense at all. I thought I had it after my edit, but you say not.
First, lose the zoom talk. It is irrelevant and isn't what is beiong discussed.
Second, in plain english, does the Spitfire climb faster at 182mph than the Fw190? No worries about following directly. Just yes or no to the question of whether or not the Spit goes up faster or slower than the Fw190 at 182mph.
-
The real point is that changing the current best climb for 190A5 from 159 to 182 mph will give it a much larger range of speeds where it can outclimb and outrun (BOTH) spits or any other slower plane. The effect would be much more noticeable with D9. Current 190A5 is outran and outclimbed (BOTH) by the "old" spitV at most useful speeds and climb rates.
-
Pyro is going to change the Best Climb to what the 190 actually climbed at.
The FW-190's Best Climb speed is 182 mph in Real life.
The Spits Best Climb speed is 170mph in Real life.
Crumpp
-
When you guys say best climb speed for 190 and Spit do you mean all models, or any particular model?
-
With the 190 the Best Climb speed stays constant amoung the 190A's.
With the Spits it varies from Model to Model. The Merlin powered spits with the normal wing climb fastest climb speed is 170mph falling as low as 160 mph.
With the clipped wing spits the best climb speed matches the FW-190. They would have no problem directly following an FW-190.
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jl165.html
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/bf274.html
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/aa878.html
Now the Clipped Wing Spitfire Mk XII would be climbing up an FW-190A's butt so fast it would the cause the bratwurst to pop out the pilots eyes!
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/dp845.html
Crumpp
-
Hi Nashwan:
Documents I have on the Spit I show the following (below FTH its fairly linear):
Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 175 mph EAS costs about 28 ft/min in climb rate. Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 200 mph EAS costs about 315 ft/min in climb rate. This would suggest that increasing the climb speed on a Spit IX from 170 IAS to 182 mph IAS would have a negligible effect on climb rate.
-
Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 175 mph EAS costs about 28 ft/min in climb rate. Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 200 mph EAS costs about 315 ft/min in climb rate. This would suggest that increasing the climb speed on a Spit IX from 170 IAS to 182 mph IAS would have a negligible effect on climb rate.
Yeah by dropping the climb angle and adjusting your location on the power curve. The FW-190 can do the same thing. Just look at the USAAF test's against an F4U and a F6F.
Crumpp
-
Crump,
As I posted earlier, this is the only way that I can see what you're saying making sense:
Or are you saying the the Spitfire can match the climb rate, but cannot keep a gun solution as the Spitfire needs an angle of, say, 16 degrees to match the climb at 182mph whereas the 190 has an angle of 14.5 degrees? So if the Spitfire sets the angle to 14.5 degrees for a gunsolution, the Spitfire's climb rate is less than the 190's. Is this what you're driving at?
What I am trying to say here is that at 182mph the Spitfire can climb at a faster rate than the Fw190, but cannot keep a gun solution because to do so, or even match the Fw190's climb, the Spitfire needs a greater AoA than the Fw190 is using for it's best climb rate. The Spitfire can lower it's AoA to the same as the Fw190, but then the Fw190 will climb away from the Spitfire.
You previously said this was wrong. I was wondering if you could deconstruct it. Where am I wrong?
-
Come to think of it, it follows that a Spit IX matching a 190's best climb rate would have sufficient speed to run the the 190 down.
-
Come to think of it, it follows that a Spit IX matching a 190's best climb rate would have sufficient speed to run the the 190 down.
That is specifically what we are talking about. And No it's not happening. The Spitfire just cannot maintain the airspeed to catch the 190.
Karnack
The 190's best climb speed is 182 mph.
The Spitfires best climb speed is 170 Merlin 66 (+25)
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jl165.html
I am saying that the Spitfire cannot directly follow an FW-190A in a climb and hope to catch him.
They are traveling on the same vector but the 190 is moving along it at a faster speed.
Now this only works at the 190's best climb rate and below.
If the spitfire STOPS moving along the 190's direct vector and pulls the much sharper angle he is capable of climbing. THEN he will end up above the 190.
If he keeps his nose pointed at the 190 then the 190 will soon be above him.
Again, I am not trying to sound arrogant, so please forgive me. I am also not wondering, speculating, or guessing. I am correct on this. I am just frustrated I cannot explain it well enough for you guys to understand what I am saying! :(
Or are you saying the the Spitfire can match the climb rate, but cannot keep a gun solution as the Spitfire needs an angle of, say, 16 degrees to match the climb at 182mph whereas the 190 has an angle of 14.5 degrees? So if the Spitfire sets the angle to 14.5 degrees for a gunsolution, the Spitfire's climb rate is less than the 190's. Is this what you're driving at?
He might be able to trim his angle of attack to match the 190's and still climb on the same vector. He might be forced to climb at a completely different AoA. I suspect he does simply because different planes and different numbers. That is much harder to prove than the climb speed vs angle. However it is not like he will simply be able to lift the nose and shoot. Maybe in the artificial world of AH. In reality he would have things like Phugoid Oscillation (comes from changing conditions of flight) to deal with. Things that could make getting a shot an unlikely event.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoastab.html#sec-phugoid
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
If the spitfire STOPS moving along the 190's direct vector and pulls the much sharper angle he is capable of climbing. THEN he will end up above the 190.
If he keeps his nose pointed at the 190 then the 190 will soon be above him.
That is exactly what I said way up in my edit and you said I was wrong. At least that is what I meant and it is what I meant in my repost when I tried to reword it as it remained the only way I could see what you were saying actually working..
Originally posted by Karnak:
What I am trying to say here is that at 182mph the Spitfire can climb at a faster rate than the Fw190, but cannot keep a gun solution because to do so, or even match the Fw190's climb, the Spitfire needs a greater AoA than the Fw190 is using for it's best climb rate. The Spitfire can lower it's AoA to the same as the Fw190, but then the Fw190 will climb away from the Spitfire.
This says exactly the same thing.
Am I correct in understanding what you are saying?
EDIT:
As a clarification, if the Spit points his nose directly at the 190 and wants to maintain 182mph the Spit will have to throttle back and the 190 will climb away even faster than if the Spitfire simply matched the 190's AoA. In any case, matching the 190's AoA at 182mph means that the 190 will have a greater rate of climb.
The Spitfire still has the option of leveling off and attempting to use a zoom climb to get a brief gun solution on the 190, it simply cannot maintain an indefinate gun solution on the 190.
-
And what my graph is trying to show is that if the Fw 190 is climbing at its best climb speed of 182mph, the Spitfire has enough excess climbrate at that point that it can sacrifice climbrate for greater speed, so that it moves down the back of the power curve until it reaches a point that matches the angle of the Fw 190 but with a GREATER VSI and IAS = Spitfire outclimbs Fw 190 while flying on THE EXACT SAME ANGLE.
The Spitfire will be able to do this until its power curve intersects and falls below the Fw 190 power curve, which on my graph is at about 280mph - probably too high, it should be more like 250mph as GODO pointed out, or 260mph as in Nashwans graph(which is showing the same thing but with straight lines).
If the Spitfire COULD NOT climb with the Fw 190 at speeds over 182mph(ie: intersected its power curve at this point), it would have a top speed of about 250mph which is obviously wrong. This was pointed out before IIRC.
-
Originally posted by GODO
The real point is that changing the current best climb for 190A5 from 159 to 182 mph will give it a much larger range of speeds where it can outclimb and outrun (BOTH) spits or any other slower plane. The effect would be much more noticeable with D9. Current 190A5 is outran and outclimbed (BOTH) by the "old" spitV at most useful speeds and climb rates.
actually I belive this would be of a benifit to the A5. Even a P47 will outclimb a spit V - if they fly at 300 mph.
For an energy fighter like the 190A5, if he's trying to extend from the spit, the quickest way to gain both seperation and E advantage is a high speed shallow climb. If the spit tries to follow he'll eventually loose the E game. The spit's only option is to break the chase and climb.
Bozon
-
Karnak,
you were correct from the beginning. the only thing that matter is what is the spit's sustained climb rate is at 182mph.
for a gun solution, AoA or where the nose or the mounted guns, or the pitot tube are actually pointing is irrelevant. This is a 2D problem - velocity vectors don't have to be alligned, they can be parallel. If the spit needs to fly at a higher AoA (actually he'll be flying at a lower AoA at 182 than at 160mph, but I don't want to start a new argument here) he just need to be parallel and lower to the 190.
position is the only thing that matters, not allignment - you can consider the planes to be perfect round flying balls with an arbitrary power curve)
Bozon
-
LMAO
The spitfire does not climb at 182mph. The spitfire's best climb speed is 170 mph!!!
The 190 has the faster best clmob speed at 182mph.
Now both A/C can move along the power curve and increase their speed.
However, as long as the 190 stays below his best angle of climb he will be faster than the spit. The spit cannot directly follow him. If he does the 190 will soon be above him.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
LMAO
The spitfire does not climb at 182mph. The spitfire's best climb speed is 170 mph!!!
let me get this straight - you are trying to claim the spit cannot maintain a 182mph climb ?!
look at the plots justin_g and nashwan posted. if they are true, they clearly indicate that the spit can follow and gain on a 190 in a sustained climb up untill 260 mph or so. just look at the graphs, no need for aerodynamics or weblinks or calculations - it's speed vs. speed plots clear and simple.
Bozon
-
let me get this straight - you are trying to claim the spit cannot maintain a 182mph climb ?!
No bozon, I am not.
Please read the whole thread.
Crumpp
-
look at the plots justin_g and nashwan posted. if they are true, they clearly indicate that the spit can follow and gain on a 190 in a sustained climb up untill 260 mph or so. just look at the graphs, no need for aerodynamics or weblinks or calculations - it's speed vs. speed plots clear and simple.
Pyro thought the FW-190A had the exact same Best Climb speed as the Spitfire. It is not and he is going to change it. So until he does our 190 does not climb correctly.
Plane modeling is not HTC's priority right now.
Crumpp
-
So at 182 mph, the 190 will pull out.
At a snails pace though :D
-
How much does the climb rate of a Spit LF IX (@ +18lb, @ +25lb) decrease when increased to the Fw190A-8's best climb speed?
Are the speeds in IAS or TAS?
-
So at 182 mph, the 190 will pull out.
At a snails pace though
Yep, Angus bro.
After it left the spit pilot wondering what happenend in the zoom...:D
How much does the climb rate of a Spit LF IX (@ +18lb, @ +25lb) decrease when increased to the Fw190A-8's best climb speed?
Speeds are in IAS. Not sure what you are asking but if it is how does altitude effect the Best climb? Like everything else. Since the Spitfire is a much better high Altitude performer I would say there is a point where the speeds merge and the Spitfire can climb directly following a 190.
Crumpp
-
Milo,
The Spits speed will settle to a point on the power curve. The top of that curve (which is flat) is the best climb speed. 170 mph for the Merlin 66 (+25) Spitfire Mk IX. 160 mph for the Merlin 61 Spit we have in AH.
Crumpp
-
Hello Milo:
"How much does the climb rate of a Spit LF IX (@ +18lb, @ +25lb) decrease when increased to the Fw190A-8's best climb speed?"
I'd have to look and see what I have of the Spit IX , but the Spit I example given suggests the answer would be "not much". ;)
I think the better question though would be: what would be the speed of the Spit when climbing at the 190's best climb rate? Its readily apparent that the answer would be: "faster than the 190" ;)
-
Bottom line is, when the 190's zoomed away after making a pass at say Spit V's, which would than have broken away is this.
The 190's came from above, had a good 100 mph advantage, even increased with the Spitties breaking, zooming away in a shallow climb at a Speed greater even than the Spits max level speed.
In a direct climb trial, odds are that the 190 will at its best cirkumstances move away at a snails pace, and from the monster-merlin-spits, not at all.
-
What I am asking is, what is the rate of climb of the mentioned Spit at 182mph, or even 200mph?
Or to put it another way, at what speed for the mentioned Spit does its rate of climb match that of the mentioned Fw?
Looking for 'hard' numbers.
edit:
Yes Mike, that is where I am going.
Angus, for sure.;)
-
I'll join milo on that one.
a 160mph spit out climb a 160mph 190A5.
a 330mph spit is out climbed by a 330mph 190A5.
at what speed that both planes fly together at full throttle does the climbrate is equal?
Untill that speed, the spit can keep up and gain on the 190.
Bozon
-
Well Crump? I'm waiting. Or would you rather go on using over cumbersome language?
Obviously the Spitfire LF.Mk IX will climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph. That is self evident.
It will, however be at a steeper angle and that will deny the Spit the continuous gun solution. The Spit can use a zoom to get a temporary gun solution, but when the energy for the zoom runs out the Spitfire will have to either steepen it's climb angle or the allow the Fw190 to climb away from it.
You told me this is wrong after I posted it then you acted as though you were revealing it when you posted the same thing.
Which is it? Right or wrong. Make up your mind.
-
Well, my point about the monster-spitties climb vs the 190A is that there is no way the Spitties would have been able to trade 12 mph forward movement into 11 mph vertical movement, that's all. Since the 11 mph (1000 fpm) movement is well documented, I belive it is beyond doubt that those planes should have been able to follow the 190A at its preferred speed.
-
Obviously the Spitfire LF.Mk IX will climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph. That is self evident.
It will, however be at a steeper angle and that will deny the Spit the continuous gun solution.
If you can climb at the same speed at a steeper angle, all you have to do is reduce throttle, and you can climb at the same speed at the same angle.
There will be minor angle of attack differences, but you get those in all conditions of flight, including level flight.
-
Angus,
What I think Crump is arguing is that while the Spit can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph it needs a steeper angle to do so and because of that cannot simply follow the Fw190's exact path. The Spit cannot maintain an indefinate gun solution.
He isn't arguing about climb rates. He is talking about climb rates at a given AoA. Using made up numbers, it would look something like this:
Spitfire LF.IX at a 18.5 degree AOA and 170mph climbs at 4,700fpm
Spitfire LF.IX at a 17.5 degree AoA and 182mph climbs at 4,500fpm
Fw190A-5 at a 14.5 degree AoA and 182mph climbs at a rate of 4,000fpm
Spitfire LF.IX at a 14.5 degree AoA and 182mph climbs at a rate of 3,500fpm
Therefore at 182mph the Spitfire has the choice of either matching/exceeding the Fw190's climb, or matching the Fw190's AoA. It can do one or the other, but not both.
The problem is, Crump told me I was wrong the first time I posted this, and the second time I posted it he responded by saying no, and corrected me by describing what I had said in the above place.
He seems to not read other's posts.
-
Fw190A-5 at a 14.5 degree AoA and 182mph climbs at a rate of 4,000fpm
Spitfire LF.IX at a 14.5 degree AoA and 182mph climbs at a rate of 3,500fpm
I know they are made up numbers, but what you describe is physically impossible. Speed, climb angle and climbrate are directly related.
Sin(climb angle) = Climbrate/Speed
IF you climb at 182mph and an angle of 14.5º, you MUST be doing 4000fpm.
What my graph shows is that at 14.5º, the Spitfire would be able to fly at a climbrate and airspeed that exceeds the Fw 190. The only way it could not would be if the two planes power curves intersected at some speed equal to or lower than 182mph, which if you look at it is obviously not going to happen.
-
justin_g,
I don't think so. Different wing designs generate differing ammounts of lift.
What you are describing would only be true if wings were flat sheets that relied soley on AoA to generate lift.
Remember, all my numbers were made up, including the AoA numbers. Move the decimal point one space to the left if it helps you picture it in your mind.
-
Ah, I thought you were refering to the angle of the climb. AoA is of course a different thing.
-
Had that question also do you mean AOA, or climb angle Karnak?
Because AOA and lift are not very relivent to climb rate.
Climb rate is a function of drag and power.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by Karnak
What I think Crump is arguing is that while the Spit can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph it needs a steeper angle to do so and because of that cannot simply follow the Fw190's exact path. The Spit cannot maintain an indefinate gun solution.
...
Therefore at 182mph the Spitfire has the choice of either matching/exceeding the Fw190's climb, or matching the Fw190's AoA. It can do one or the other, but not both.
Karnak, don't be confused. you were right from the start.
AoA issues are irrelevant, it just add some offset to the direction of the plane from the velocity vector. If the spit want to maintain a constant gun solution all it has to do is climb at the same angle and keep it's velocity vector parallel to the 190's.
On the other half of the quote, I'm not sure if you cite Crumpp or stating your opinion. But If the spit can climb steeper at 182 mph, it can reduce throttle and climb exacly like the 190 AND it also can reduce it's climbrate a little and increase the speed - he'll climb exacly after (or parallel if you want the offset) the 190 and catch up with it if the 190 keep climbing at 182 mph.
He seems to not read other's posts.
and that's why this argument is dragged over 3 threads. I'm also to blame for replying.
Bozon
-
Documents I have on the Spit I show the following (below FTH its fairly linear):
Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 175 mph EAS costs about 28 ft/min in climb rate. Increasing climb speed from 160 mph EAS to 200 mph EAS costs about 315 ft/min in climb rate. This would suggest that increasing the climb speed on a Spit IX from 170 IAS to 182 mph IAS would have a negligible effect on climb rate.
Thanks. That sounds much more like what I was expecting, with little change at the start, a more rapid drop off as speed increases towards maximum
What I think Crump is arguing is that while the Spit can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph it needs a steeper angle to do so and because of that cannot simply follow the Fw190's exact path.
There is a lot of confusion between angle of climb and angle of attack on this thread.
Angle of attack means a plane is travelling in a different direction to the one it's facing, although only very slightly. In level flight, the angle of attack of the wings has to be slightly positive to provide lift. The slower you are going, the higher the angle of attack.
The same is true in climbs. The nose will not follow the angle of climb exactly.
That's true in all attitudes of flight.
It's like saying a Spit cannot get a guns solution on a Fw 190 in level flight because the Spit needs a positive angle off attack, and if he depresses his nose to bring the 190 under his sights, he won't have enough lift, and will start to descend, or if he pulls the nose up he will have too much lift and will start to climb.
It's true, but it's only a minor difference, and of course affects every aircraft. Using an AoA comparison, no plane can follow another in a climb.
He isn't arguing about climb rates. He is talking about climb rates at a given AoA. Using made up numbers, it would look something like this:
Spitfire LF.IX at a 18.5 degree AOA and 170mph climbs at 4,700fpm
Angle of attack is relative to the direction of travel.
So if your flight path is angled up 15 degrees, and your angle of attack was 18.5 degrees, your plane would appear to an outside observer to be pointing up at 33.5 degrees.
Here's a good explanation of the difference:
http://142.26.194.131/aerodynamics1/Performance/climb.html
Therefore at 182mph the Spitfire has the choice of either matching/exceeding the Fw190's climb, or matching the Fw190's AoA. It can do one or the other, but not both.
This is true in level flight, and for all aircraft that require different angles of attack.
If a Spit and a 190 are side by side in level flight at the same speed, they will have slightly different angles of attack.
If the Spit tries to match the 190s angle of attack at that speed, he will start to climb, but very slowly.
If the 190 tries to match the Spit's angle of attack, he will start to dive, very slowly.
These are minor differences every aircraft has trying to follow another plane, in climb, dive or level flight.
Sin(climb angle) = Climbrate/Speed
IF you climb at 182mph and an angle of 14.5º, you MUST be doing 4000fpm.
Exactly. The climb angle and speed determine rate of climb.
The AoA is seperate, and is just the ammount you need to angle the wings of the plane relative to climb angle to maintain lift.
I don't think so. Different wing designs generate differing ammounts of lift.
Angle of attack is small, though, whereas the angle of climb is much greater.
As an example, at 200 IAS, the Spit VIII at 7500 lbs required an angle of attack of 1 degree.
That means to maintain level flight, the wings had to be 1 degree above horizontal.
To maintain climb, the wings have to be 1 degree above climb angle.
If you assume the 190 needed 2 degrees angle of attack at the same speed, if both were climbing at 18 degrees, then the Spits wings would be 19 degrees above horizontral, the 190s 20 degrees.
But they would both be following the same path.
If they both kept the same speed, they would both be exactly the same distance apart when they reached the top of the climb.
The Spit might need to make adjustments in it's climb angle to bring the 190 under it's sights, but they are simply adjustments, just as you make adjustments in level flight to bring guns to bear.
-
OK. Maybe I meant climb angle. I thought Crump had mentioned AoA earlier.
I'm not saying that Crump is right, I'm just trying to figure out what his argument even is. He isn't being clear at all.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
He isn't being clear at all.
I noticed that.
Infact his reference to flat power curves aplies to both planes. And with the speed ranges we are talking, the thrust HP will hardly chage at all.
The primary factor in this discusion is simply the drag curve of the planes. Best climb rate, and best glide angle are normaly very close to eachother in speed. The resone for this is that they are both at bottom of the drag curve. And because on the climb side with a constant speed prop that is matched well to the engine.
The thrust HP hardly changes threw the planes full speed range.
The drag curve is shifted to the right as wing loading goes up. Hence Higher wing loaded planes best climb speed is typicly faster. But if you compare that climb speed to stall speed they will normaly be very close to the same %. So if stall is 100 and climb speed is 130. Just multiply stall by 1.33 of any plane with constant speed prop and you will be fairly close to it's best climb speed. Normaly this is around a 1.33 multiplier.
On a totaly side note, the question of what plane climbs better at what speed, is identical to the question, in level flight what plane accelerates better at what speed.
HiTech
-
Looking for hard numbers:
Then check out the USAAF tactical trials:
http://prodocs.netfirms.com/
The FW - 190 went over 200 knots in the climb and it hardly effected it's climb rate.
I am sorry you guys don't understand the science of what I am saying. It is the truth and it is how it works.
Pyro can confirm that.
There are folks that have jumped in here confused that the SPIT climbs at 182 mph!! Then start running their keyboard without reading the thread.
I am not claiming the AoA would make huge difference. The SPITFIRE CANNOT FOLLOW the FW-190 DIRECTLY below the FW-190's best climb rate. It will be left behind because it travels at a slower speed along the same vector.
Of course when you drop the Angle of attack the speed will increase on BOTH airplanes. The 190's speed will increase even more than the spits angle per angle. It's climb angle is much shallower and it's power curve much higher. Therefore angle per angle change it moves FURTHER down the power curve towards level flight speed!
I suspect getting a gun solution would be more difficult due to the need to retrim and a certain flight characteristics when you have a large stick movement you haven't trim for first. I have NOT claimed that to be true, yet. Honestly though it would not matter. With less drag and more weight the 190 will leave the Spitfire in zoom.
I have presented nothing but facts and science. I have been disputed with nothing but innuendo and speculation. If you disagree then by all means please find the science to back it up. There are some smart guys in this thread so use that noodle for something besides "I don't think that is right".
Crumpp
-
First off crump: I belive I do have a fair understanding of science. Especial when it comes to these caculations.
I have seen very little of it in your post, because you do not simply post 2 side by side speed to climb rate curves on both planes in question. That is all it takes to determin the answere to the question at hand.
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
I am not claiming the AoA would make huge difference. The SPITFIRE CANNOT FOLLOW the FW-190 DIRECTLY below the FW-190's best climb rate. It will be left behind because it travels at a slower speed along the same vector.
As written this must be false. For it to be true the Spitfire would have to shed more than 700fpm of climb rate for gaining 12mph airspeed. If that were true then the Spitfire would have a top sealevel speed of ~250mph.
Now, as I said, I can see the Spitfire climbing at a steeper angle and greater rate of climb at 182mph or with a faster airspeed and lower rate of climb than the Fw190 while matching the Fw190's climb angle.
Anything else is physically impossible.
You must pick one.
Now, Pyro has agreed with you that the Fw190's best climb speed in AH is too low, but has he also agree with whatever else it is you're trying to say here?
-
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=119961&perpage=50&highlight=190%20Level%20Speed&pagenumber=2
The other thread this question came up. This thread was not intended as a rehash of the same issue. I couldn't get my point across to Nashwan and did not want to Hijack another thread.
First off crump: I belive I do have a fair understanding of science. Especial when it comes to these caculations.
I am sure you do and I wasn't talking to you.
I have seen very little of it in your post, because you do not simply post 2 side by side speed to climb rate curves on both planes in question. That is all it takes to determin the answere to the question at hand.
It's the very first post Hitech!
Crumpp
-
Crumpp: I belive that the spit would be able to climb with the fw.
HiTech
-
I believe in the Tooth Fairey one time too.
:)
Crumpp
-
Crump list the folling for me, don't provide links, just the numbers you think should be.
FW:
BestClimbSpeed,BestClimbRate,max speed,Brake Horse Power,weight
Spit:
BestClimbSpeed,BestClimbRate,max speed,Brake Horse Power,weight
I would then be glad to run the math, and prove this topic.
If Im corret you get to click on my bribe link?
-
Crump,
Can you graph out what you are trying to say? If you can, but don't have a method to post it give me an email and I'll post it for you.
-
hitech are you going to consider in your math what happens when you pull hard the stick for 2 seconds and then release it? Just imagine the following situation, you are going down diving a bit and then realize you are too near the ground, you pull back the stick as hard as you can and ease it once you are flying level again and safe.
-
FW-190A8
Best Climb Speed according to USAAF Test 160knot = 184 IASmph
Best Climb Speed according to Pilots manual = 180 IAS mph
Climb rate and level speed:
Roughly according to this chart (notice climb speed) It's easy to vary the climb rate some. Looks to me like this pilot climbed at the begining of the mushing realm.
Level Speeds at 1.58ata/1.65ata please since the Spits using full boost in it's speed graph.
http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190-1.jpg
Spitfire Mk IX Merlin 66 (+25)
Best climb Speed = 170 mph IAS
Climb rate and level speed:
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jl165speed.gif
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jl165climb.gif
Now this only applies to the 190's best climb rate angle and below. Once the 190 exceeds that it's all over.
The Spitfire has to directly follow the 190. At anytime he would be able to abandon the direct chase, hike his nose up, and outclimb the 190 at a steeper angle but slower speed.
Crumpp
-
Thanks Karnak,
I just drew it out on a piece of paper according to how the Power curve and climb angle are graphed on this website.
I assumed the 190 and the Spit have the same top level speed.
There is a big difference in speeds at any angle under the 190's best climb rate angle.
I will see if can't pretty it up a little.
Crumpp
-
Dan there is another test with JL165,
Aircraft and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
1 Feb 1944
Spitfire IX JL.165
(Merlin 66)
Trials at +25 lb/sq.inch boost
with Rotol 4 blade propeller
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit9.html
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Dan there is another test with JL165,
Aircraft and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
1 Feb 1944
Spitfire IX JL.165
(Merlin 66)
Trials at +25 lb/sq.inch boost
with Rotol 4 blade propeller
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit9.html
Saw that after I posted so I deleted that post :)
Interesting the performance differences between the two LFIX with JL165 being the lesser performer of the two used.
Dan/Slack
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
The Spitfire has to directly follow the 190. At anytime he would be able to abandon the direct chase, hike his nose up, and outclimb the 190 at a steeper angle but slower speed.
The Spitfire should be able to hike his nose up, advance his throttle and outclimb the Fw190 at the same speed. If the Spitfire has to slow down to exceed the Fw190's climb rate then you would be claiming the Spitfire has a top speed at SL of ~250mph.
Fact: The Spitfire LF.Mk IX has a best climb speed of 170mph.
Fact: The Fw190 has a best climb speed of 182mph.
Fact: The Spitfire LF.MK IX has a significatly better maximum rate of climb than the Fw190 does.
Fact: The Spitfire LF.Mk IX has a higher rate of climb at 182mph than the Fw190 does.
Are any of these wrong? Note that I am not talking about following the same vector in any of the statements.
-
Yeah the other one is at (+18) and you have to guess/extrapolate. Looking at the incease in numbers with SU pump over the regualr (+18), that 30 mph is an average and the increase is not nearly as dramatic at full throttle hieght.
Whatever data you guys want though. I picked what I thought was the best complete data available.
Crumpp
-
Are any of these wrong? Note that I am not talking about following the same vector in any of the statements.
Your absolutely right Karnack. Those numbers are correct and no one is claiming the Spitfire cannot handily out climb the 190A8 is a sustained climb.
First you have to understand the Power Curve. The top level speed starts out on the right side of the x axis and moves closer to the origin than the 190's ending near the planes stall speed. The 190's is higher but does not come as close to the origin (stalls quicker), hence it climbs at a shallower angle. Both A/C power curves will look the same. Flat on top with the 190's being higher.
First what is the Power Curve:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-power-curve-intro
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-power-curve-regimes
Second what does Best Rate of Climb Speed mean:
The dividing line between the mushing regime and the front side of the power curve is the highest point on the power curve. At this point, the airplane can fly with the minimal amount of dissipation; this is the “low-rent district”. The airspeed where this occurs is called the best-rate-of-climb airspeed and denoted VY.7
The Spitshighest point on the power curve is 170 mph and the highest point on the power curve for the FW-190A8's is 182 mph.
What is the Best Angle of climb and how does it look in relation to the Power curve:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vx
So what is the Best Rate of Climb?
Where the climb angle (drawn from the origin) meets the green dot.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/power.html#fig-vy
You can draw any angle below the 190's Best Climb Rate angle and the Spitfire will be traveling slower on the same vector.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Whatever data you guys want though. I picked what I thought was the best complete data available.
Well, in fact I don't know if any of the performance curves for the Fw 190 in the Crumpp's source site (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm) are really flight tested. I get quite contradictory results if I use that data for calculations.
Otherwise I'm pretty much convinced that anykind of rational discussion on the Fw 190 is currently impossible here.
gripen
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
You can draw any angle below the 190's Best Climb Rate angle and the Spitfire will be traveling slower on the same vector.
For this to be true, this statement would have to be false:
Fact: The Spitfire LF.Mk IX has a higher rate of climb at 182mph than the Fw190 does.
Yet you just said that it was correct. If what you are saying is that the Spitfire LF.Mk IX can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph by using a steeper climb angle it should follow that if the Spitfire reduces it's climb angle that it now has an excess of power and that power will cause it to fly faster than 182mph.
E.g. the Spitfire can climb above the Fw190 at 182mph or it can go faster than the Fw190 at the same angle of climb. It may not climb as fast as the Fw190 at that angle, but it will be going faster.
-
Crumpp,m8, no matter how many links you post, (and actually I confess that you provide very good links), there is no way that you can directly calculate around Newton's law.
Like I said:
"there is no way the Spitties would have been able to trade 12 mph forward movement into 11 mph vertical movement, that's all."
It was perhaps not put up nicely enough in the English language. How I should have put it would be like this: (Sorry for the confusion)
There is no way that a Spitty would need to trade 11 mph of climb for 12 mph of forward movement.
I'll stick with that :cool:
-
Originally posted by gripen
Well, in fact I don't know if any of the performance curves for the Fw 190 in the Crumpp's source site (http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm) are really flight tested. I get quite contradictory results if I use that data for calculations.
Otherwise I'm pretty much convinced that anykind of rational discussion on the Fw 190 is currently impossible here.
gripen
Sorry you feel that way gripen.
I think as a Spitfire fan/historian I can safely say that it was the 190 that really pushed the development of the Spit. The 190 clearly dominated the Spit V and enjoyed a "happy time" to steal a phrase from the U-boats.
At the same time I think the back and forth development of the Spit and 190 propelled each other with the advent of the Spit IX followed by the VII, XII, VIII, XIV and 21 that all saw service in WW2.
All of those developments can be linked to the ongoing development of the 190 whether it be the quick introduction of the 'stop gap' Spit IX to even the balance early on, to the introduction of the XII to counter the low level 190 'tip and run' raiders on England's south coast.
Throw in the XIV vs the D9s and I suppose the 21 vs the Ta152 had the war continued.
Both great aircraft that as I've said before engaged in a punch and counterpunch of development throughout the war to keep up with and compete with each other.
Dan/Slack
-
Yet you just said that it was correct. If what you are saying is that the Spitfire LF.Mk IX can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph by using a steeper climb angle it should follow that if the Spitfire reduces it's climb angle that it now has an excess of power and that power will cause it to fly faster than 182mph.
Oops,
Led you down the wrong path. That fact is wrong. At the top of the curve the spitfire can only go 170mph. It cannot do 182 at the top. Now there are portions of the Power curve it can do 182. On those portions the 190 is also traveling significantly faster than 182mph because it's curve looks about the same, it is just higher.
There is no way that a Spitty would need to trade 11 mph of climb for 12 mph of forward movement.
The forward speed is traveled on the climbing vector, bro. It's not a measure of velocity straight up. Newton's Laws are not being violated AND this occurs AFTER the zoom climb in the sustained climb.
Graph it using the instuctions in my last post.
Crumpp
-
Don't know how to tell you more specifly but your wrong crump.
Just because it isn't at the max climb rate of the spit, its climb rate is still greater than the the fw's at 182.
HiTech
-
Sorry, but the way I see it power curves are irrelevant abstractions.
The fact is that the Spitfire can go 182mph and still climb. That isn't going to achieve it's maximum climb rate, but so what. Maximum climb rates don't really play any particular role here. The fact is that at 182mph the Spitfire LF.Mk IX is climbing at something like 4,500fpm and the Fw190A is climbing at something like 4,000fpm. Those are sustained numbers at 182mph, not zooms.
In order to achive that rate of climb the Spitfire needs a greater angle of climb. If it lessens the angle of climb to match the Fw190's angle of climb it will now be able to travel faster than 182mph as the power needed to climb at 4,500fpm at 182mph is more than the power needed to climb at the lower angle and 182mph.
Now, the only way for what you are saying to work is if the Spitfire, when matching the Fw190's angle of climb, climbs at a lower rate than the Fw190 does.
Any other scenario would either have the Spitfire's top speed far lower than it was or allow the Spitfire to directly follow the Fw190's vector.
-
Don't know how to tell you more specifly but your wrong crump.
This is exactly how Pips Priller used to get away from Spits. Eric Brown comments this was a hard concept to teach Spit pilots. Not to directly follow a 190 in the climb. Crank the nose back and climb at your best angle. Otherwise the 190 would end up above you.
The Spit cannot climb at 182 mph at the top of the curve. It can only climb at 170 mph.
And I didn't get the same result at all. The spit would not be ANYWHERE close to its max climb RATE by directly following the 190. It will be on the same vector traveling at a slower speed.
It's in black and white on how airplanes fly!
Crumpp
-
Now, the only way for what you are saying to work is if the Spitfire, when matching the Fw190's angle of climb, climbs at a lower rate than the Fw190 does.
That is exactly what he is doing by directly following the 190. Climbing WELL below his max climb rate on the same vector at a slower speed.
Give me your email and I will send you a graph.
Crumpp
-
That fact is wrong. At the top of the curve the spitfire can only go 170mph. It cannot do 182 at the top. Now there are portions of the Power curve it can do 182. On those portions the 190 is also traveling significantly faster than 182mph because it's curve looks about the same, it is just higher.
Crumpp, I think you've misread the power curve.
(http://www.av8n.com/how/img48/vx.png)
The vertical axis here is the climb rate, which we know is higher for the Spit. The power curve for the Spit will be higher than for the 190.
The horizontal axis is the air speed, which we know is slightly higher for the 190.
The Spit curve will be higher, but slightly to the left of the 190s.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/282_1093477870_vx2.png)
You can see that this too shows the Spit can outclimb the 190 at the 190s best climb speed, it's only when the speed gets closer to maximum that the 190 has the higher climb rate.
Note, this isn't meant to indicate anything like exact speeds, it's just a guide to the principles involved.
-
email:
aR3M0V3ahola@klassyR3M0V3.com
Take out the "1337" speak and caps. Sorry for the hassle, just don't want my email addy harvested.
As to what you are saying. The Spitfire would not be moving slower than the Fw190 at the same climb angle, but lower climb rate. The Spitfire would be moving faster than the Fw190 is that scenario. Read my above post. If the Spitfire has enough power to climb at a steeper angle at 182mph it can go faster than 182mph at the same angle as the Fw190 is at.
EDIT:
Did Priller say what speed he climbed away at? If not, why do you think it was 182mph and not 275mph or 300mph?
-
Did Priller say what speed he climbed away at? If not, why do you think it was 182mph and not 275mph or 300mph?
Oh I am sure he was down on the lower end of the power curve climbing at a really shallow angle.
-
It's sent off, Hopefully to the right address!
:)
Crumpp
-
Not 100% related to the topic, but very interesting link about P47 vs 190 (june 43), being the P47 a good performer at alt. Look at the results at 26000 feet. May be 190 (probably A5) was not so bad performer and climber at hi alts.
190 vs P47 (http://www.lanpartyworld.com/ww2/images/p47-fw190-4.jpg)
There is also an interesting comment about weights:
"The Fw.190 was loaded as a fighter to 8300 lbs., and the Thunderbolt to 13140 lbs."
-
I'll admit to not having read the whole thread but things seem to have got over complicated (i could be wrong, i could be over simplifying).
I imagine 2 cyclists. One is a heavy bodybuilder with strong legs, one is a regular cyclist who weighs less. On the flat the bodybuilder's sheer power allows him to pedal faster than the cyclist. However only a small amount faster not in proportion to the weight difference (the cyclists muscles are just for cycling he has no extra baggage).
In a simple model we have the foward force (a constant of how hard these guys can cycle) and a parasitic drag which determines the max speed of the cyclists.
If we cycle up an incline we have an extra "drag" the component of weight parrallel to the direction of travel. At a given angle each of the cyclists net forward force will decrease compared to the "flat" force. The steeper the incline the more weight is a factor i.e. the the bodybuilders net forward force will fall quicker.
It follows at shallow angles (i.e. following the same trajectory) the bodybuilder will pull away as he still has a top speed advantage. However as the trajectory increases the cylcist will match then exceed the bodybuilders velocity. i.e. anything above this critical point given the same trajectory the cyclist will catch the bodybuilder.
what is more the cyclist will be able to climb steeper as the net force will take longer to go to zero. This is akin to assuming identical stall speeds, power curves etc.
In summary : given an angle past the "critical point" the spit will catch the 190 wheather it is at best climb speed or not.
Question is at what angle is the critical angle?
-
You got it.
Good illustration.
Crumpp
-
Crump,
I got it, but cannot open powerpoint files on my home system.
niknak,
That is the question. It seems to me like it should be somewhere around 250mph to 260mph.
-
Yup - around 250mph would seem to be a reasonable figure for the intersection of the Fw 190A-5 and Spitfire LF.IX power curves.
Which would mean that(even if both planes are flying on the SAME angle of climb):
below 250mph = Spitfire outclimbs Fw 190
above 250mph = Fw 190 outclimbs Spitfire
-
Crump's Graph:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/ClimbAngles.jpg)
-
For power curves the vertical axis is meant to be climbrate - in which case the Spitfire is shown as having a lower maximum climbrate than the Fw 190! It should be at least 500fpm more.
Given the shape of those curves - if you moved the Spitfire curve up to represent it climbing at 4500fpm maximum - then the Spitfire curve would be above the Fw 190 curve until a speed very close to maximum level speed, maybe 300mph or so!
-
Originally posted by GODO
Not 100% related to the topic, but very interesting link about P47 vs 190 (june 43), being the P47 a good performer at alt. Look at the results at 26000 feet. May be 190 (probably A5) was not so bad performer and climber at hi alts.
190 vs P47 (http://www.lanpartyworld.com/ww2/images/p47-fw190-4.jpg)
Extra many thanks! :aok
very interesting website, will keep me busy for a while.
for those interested, the main page is:
http://www.lanpartyworld.com/ww2/
Bozon
-
Crump: Your graph has a few problems.
First the label on the vertical axis should be labled climb rate. Climb angle would be the grey lines.
2nd the red and blue lines are not power curves. They could be viewed as exsess power (i.e. (thrust - drag) * vel ) , but all those lines are showing is climb rate to vel. If they realy are excess power curvs, then to compair climb rates each would have to be divided by the mass. In which case the FW cuvre would shift down relative to the spit fire and you could see that they would cross much farther to the right. I.E. like we have been saying in the 250 - 280 range.
Finaly it dosn't match the data we are discussing. We have been basing this discusion for the spit having a max climb rate of around 700 greater than the FW.
In that chart look at the highest point on both curvs (the top point is max climb rate). Notice that the FW shows having a higher max climb rate than the spit. Hence it might be they just need to be adjusted for the mass.
On a side note the far left of each line is the stall speeds of the aircraft's.
HiTech
-
Finaly it dosn't match the data we are discussing. We have been basing this discusion for the spit having a max climb rate of around 700 greater than the FW.
Yes it does achieve a 700 foot a minute climb rate advantage. AT its BEST CLIMB SPEED and ANGLE.
FACT: BEST CLIMB RATE is achieved at a certain speed and ANGLE of Attack and it the point of equilibrium of forces on the Aircraft in a climb. In short, it is where the plane wants to be.
FACT:The Spitfires BEST CLIMB SPEED is 170mph. The BEST CLIMB SPEED is the TOP of the power curve.
FACT: The top of the Power curve is Flat, therefore it can fly at a wide variety of angles with LITTLE CHANGE to that speed. It can fly much faster than 170 mph BUT the speed changes occur at much shallower angles.
If they realy are excess power curvs, then to compair climb rates each would have to be divided by the mass.
I think you are reading too much into it. They are only graphical representations of ACTUAL performance.
ACTUAL performance numbers of what the aircraft DOES in the air.
Begining of the Power curve = Level flight speed
Top of the power curve = best climb speed
Very end of the power curve = stall speed
You are factoring variables that are already accounted for in the actual performance of the plane by adding in mass again.
In order to outclimb the 190 on the same vector the spitfire would have to be traveling along that vector at a greater rate of speed. It physically cannot due to the fact top of it's curve is lower and the curves look the same.
IF the top level speed of the 190 was less than the spitfire then there would be a portion of the curve the spitfire could directly follow.
In that chart look at the highest point on both curvs (the top point is max climb rate). Notice that the FW shows having a higher max climb rate than the spit. Hence it might be they just need to be adjusted for the mass.
It is not a representation of the climb rate just the climb angle. Now by adjusting the scale of the axis and the curves you could easily fit it into the acutal data.
Even then it works out that the 190 would leave a directly following spitfire behind.
Crumpp
-
Yes it does achieve a 700 foot a minute climb rate advantage. AT its BEST CLIMB SPEED and ANGLE.
Crumpp, if your Y axis is indeed climbrate, (it's clearly isn't angle) than your spit and 190 have the same maximum climbrate.
also, what you draw as the best climb angle, hits the curve at the point of best climb rate.
Bozon
edited.
-
Nobody has claimed that the Spitfire would outclimb the Fw190 at the same vector and same speed.
Your statements are contradictory.
1) The Spitfire has a higher maximum climb rate.
2) The Spitfire can climb faster at 182mph than the Fw190, even though 182mph is the Fw190's best climb speed and not the Spitfire's.
3) The Spitfire obtains it's superior climb rate by climbing at a steeper angle.
Now you have also claimed that the Spitfire can climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph by steepening it's climb angle.
FACT: If the Spitfire has the power to steepen it's climb angle beyond the Fw190's best climb angle and maintain 182mph it has the power to go faster than 182mph at a shallower climb angle.
If the above is true the Spitfire should be able to simply reduce throttle and follow the Fw190 directly at 182mph.
If the above is not true then the Spitfire should have a top sea level speed of ~250mph as it is losing ~600fpm of climb rate for every 10mph gained in speed.
-
The poor man, he's completely lost. :confused:
-
Karnack,
Did you check out the graph I sent you?
HTC is factoring in the MASS of the planes. That is already factored in by the measured performance.
The poor man, he's completely lost.
No I am not.
I confirmed this with my flight instructor and an F-18 pilot friend of mine.
Crumpp
-
Crump: Read your chart, where is the climb rate of the spit above the FW?
HiTech
-
Crumpp, the vertical axis of the power graph is climb rate, not angle. It's clearly labelled as such:
(http://www.av8n.com/how/img48/vx.png)
If you put the Spit and 190 on there together, the power curve of the Spit has to be higher, because the climb rate is higher:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/282_1093477870_vx2.png)
The vertical axis is clearly labelled "Vertical Speed ft/min"
The Spitfire has to be higher on this because it has a higher climb rate. The 190 will be futher to the left because it has higher speed.
Whichever has a hgiher power curve at a particular speed will climb better at that speed.
At high speeds the 190 will outclimb the Spits, but those speeds have to be a lot higher than 200 mph.
FACT: The top of the Power curve is Flat, therefore it can fly at a wide variety of angles with LITTLE CHANGE to that speed.
No, it can fly at different angles and speed with little change to the rate
Look at the graph. The best angle is where the power curve touches the climb rate line. That's the peak. You can make adjustments to the speed and climb rate, and still climb at very close to that, but when the speed is much different, then the drop in climb rates gets much steeper.
Look at the graph and ignore the "angle" label for a second.
What do you see? You have climb rate on the vertical scale, climb speed on the horizontal. There is a range of climb speeds where you can get close to optimum, then it falls away rapidly.
-
That is because the spits best climb ANGLE is NOT drawn on the chart!!
Crumpp
-
In order to outclimb the 190 on the same vector the spitfire would have to be traveling along that vector at a greater rate of speed. It physically cannot due to the fact top of it's curve is lower and the curves look the same.
WHY is the top of the Spitfires power curve lower? The vertical axis on a power curve graph is supposed to be climbrate - so if the Spitfire has a higher maximum climbrate than the Fw 190, the highest point on its curve would be higher than the highest point on the Fw 190 curve.
-
That is because the spits best climb ANGLE is NOT drawn on the chart!!
The angle on the chart is just where the maximum rate of climb is achieved.
Look at the difference between your graph and the graph you are basing it on. Yours has the vertical axis as angle, theirs has the vertical axis as climb rate.
Note that even on your graph, the Spit should be higher, because we've established the Spit can climb at a higher angle.
-
Hold on:
I added in both the best climb angles and best climb rates. I will send it off.
I did not change the axis to "climb rate" However you can do that.
It is NOT intended to be an exact representation of the performance. Just that it is possible to exactly represent the performance.
This just illustrates that whatever angle the Spitfire flys directly following the 190, it will be flying the same vector at slower speed.
Crumpp
-
FYI, I cannot access my home email from work. I will post the new chart you sent when I get home. Should be about 5:30PM PST.
-
Actually, you can try sending it to my work email.
Arizsun.AholaR3M0V3@R3M0V3thewhistlestop.org
Remove the red text.
-
Cool, thanks Nashwan.
In fact the answer to this in my basic flight manual.
The steeper angle an aircraft flys the more it relys on thrust to weight and less on lift.
That is why the top of the power curve is flat. Because Thrust is tranfers energy to lift to counteract weight. Since energy can niether be created or destroyed their is less energy opposing drag and the plane stays about the same speed for an angle change.
The Spitfire has a great thrust to weight ratio and a high lift wing. That is why it climbs so steep and so slow.
The 190's thrust to weight is not as good. It must rely more on the lift generated by the wing. Hence it HAS to climb at a much faster speed but shallower angle.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/4forces.html#fig-four-climb
Simplification guys I know lift thrust and drag all have verticle components.
Crumpp
-
It's sent off Nashwan
-
Crumpp: While your statment of the resone for different best climb speeds in 2 planes is close to correct, (not exatly). It has no bearing what so ever on the discussion at hand. Just because the spit has a slower best climb speed. It in no way inferse that it's climb rate must be slower than the fw at the fw's best climb speed.
All it sais is that the climb rate of the SPIT at the 182 must be less than it would be 170. It does not meen that it would be less than the FW's.
HiTech
-
Hitech,
If the Spit is traveling the SAME vector as the 190 but at a lower speed then it will not catch the 190.
If the spit is climbing at a higher rate but slower speed then it is not following the same vector and therefore not on the 190's tail.
Crumpp
-
Then what you are saying Hitech is that Best Climb Speed is NOT the top of the power curve and the PhD/Flight instructor has it all wrong.
Crumpp
-
Crump's Second Chart:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/ClimbAngles2.jpg)
-
Crump,
No, he is saying that the Spitfire's curve is still above the 190's curve at 182mph, even though it is also below the peak of the Spitfire's curve.
For what you're second chart says to be true the Spitfire would have to have a lower climb rate than the Fw190 at 182mph. According to your second chart the Spitfire's maximum sustained climb angle at 182mph is less than the Fw190's maximum sustained climb angle. If that were true then the Spitfire would have shed more than 700fpm of climb rate for only 12mph gained in speed. At that rate the Spitfire's ability to accelerate/climb would terminate at about 250mph. That is far below the 336mph sea level speed of the LF.Mk IX at +18lbs Boost and the LF.MK IX's 364mph at +25lbs Boost.
-
Not what Im saying at all crump. Just saying the curves on your chart do not match the data we are discussing.
The terms we are talking about are Vx and Vy. The Y axis of that chart is climb rate. The resone I Know it is climb rate is 2 fold.
One notice how the curves drop to zero: That is the planes stall speed. By definition climb angle is the ratio of Climb to speed. The grey lines you draw are effectly climb angle.
Now the problem is that red curves max is not above the blue curves max. Therefore that chart data shows that the spitfires max climb rate dosn't excede the Fw's max climb rate. Hence the chart data is simply incorect.
HiTech
-
If that were true then the Spitfire would have shed more than 700fpm of climb rate for only 12mph gained in speed. At that rate the Spitfire's ability to accelerate/climb would terminate at about 250mph. That is far below the 336mph sea level speed of the LF.Mk IX at +18lbs Boost and the LF.MK IX's 364mph at +25lbs Boost.
Why? Explain the science behind that statement.
The Spifire had one of the best power to weight ratio's of any fighter in WWII and a phenomenal lift producing wing. It makes perfect sense that it can draw upon that to achieve such a steep climb angle without much forward speed.
The only way this is not true is IF 170 mph is NOT the highest portion of the Spits power curve.
And if that is true the definition of Best Climbing Speed is wrong.
Crumpp
-
Hitech,
The Y axis represents VSI. It is plotted by points along the vector and represents a angle from the origin to the Power curve. The higher the angle, the higher the VSI.
The red and blue represent the Power Curves of the Spitfire and the 190 and are plotted along the x-axis. Power Curves do not change but move up and down as a whole unit representing throttle settings.
Crumpp
-
Crump Lift does not produce climb rate.
HiTech
-
I know that Hitech.
I am not saying that lift does! I am saying the Spitfire can climb at such a steep angle due to its high thrust to weight. That does not mean that for each drop in angle you will get a proportionate increase in speed.
You would think planes act like that but they do not. Speed gains will be minimal until a certain point because the top of the power curve is flat.
Because the 190 moves closer to it's "rent-free" zone angle for angle, its speed will increase much faster per angle of change down and consequently it will drop faster angle for angle up.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crump:
Why? Explain the science behind that statement.
The high mucketymuck number figurin' is past me. I'm just doing simple logic deductions here.
If the Spitfire obtains it's best climb rate by using a high angle of climb and it's peak climb rate of 4,700fpm is obtained at 170mph then in order for it to be unable to match the Fw190's climb angle only at only 12mph faster when the Fw190's climb angle is significantly shallower the Spitfire would have to have lost more than 700fpm.
If the Spitfire is losing 750fpm of climb rate for every 12mph it gains in speed it will be down to a 0fpm climb rate at about the time it hits 250mph. Since climb and acceleration are functionally the same the Spitfire will also have reached a state of null acceleration.
These are only crude guestimates as I don't have the knowledge to calculate the drag effects, but it gets the idea across.
EDIT:
Why are the power curves the same? They are different aircraft with different engines, wings and drag profiles. Wouldn't the power curves also be different?
EDIT2:
Why does the flat part of the power curve not represent a ability to significantly increase flight speed while only slightly reducing the rate of climb rather than the reverse?
You seem to be saying that by lowering the climb angle the speed and climb rate don't change much until you get out of the flat portion of the power curve. It seems that:
A) The Spitfire is climbing faster at the flat part of the power curve
B) With only 12mph separating the flat part of thew power curve the Fw190 and Spitfire are going to mostly overlap at their respective flat points
C) The Spitfire climbs faster at the flat points
D) Because they mostly overlap the Spitfire will climb faster than the Fw190 at 182mph.
-
Crumpp: Please answere the one question. Why is the excess power curve (yes it has to be exccess other wise how could it drop to 0 power) on the spit never above the fw, when you agree the max climb rate on the spit is higher than the fw.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Crump Lift does not produce climb rate.
HiTech
Hitech I'm curious does more lift or maybe more wing area play any role in climb rate?
Lets say you took an AH 190D9 and fitted it with a Ta152 wing, what would happend to climb rate?
Or if you took a 109G10 and swapped wings with a Spit 14?
-
Depends on the drag curv of the wing grunherz: And it will only slightly effect the climb rate. But more lift will effect where the best climb speed is. But the max climb would change only slightly.
-
The high mucketymuck number figurin' is past me. I'm just doing simply logic deductions here.
That's ok Karnack. I teach some pretty difficult concepts to grasp at work.
Please don't take my inability to get this point across an indication of my teaching ability!:eek:
I see people all the time who can "parrot". There products will look exactly like the examples provided but in reality they have no understanding of the underlying concepts. Somebody throwing co-efficients around to me, in aerodyamics, is a clear statement of their inability to grasp what they really mean.
"Power + Atitude = Performance" is a clearly logical statement. However the reality is not that logical.
Here is a great graph showing the relationship of AoA to airspeed. You can make some huge angle changes that really don't effect your airspeed much at all past the first few degrees.
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/aoa.html#fig-ias-cl-aoa
Crumpp
-
Crumpp: Please answere the one question. Why is the excess power curve (yes it has to be exccess other wise how could it drop to 0 power) on the spit never above the fw, when you agree the max climb rate on the spit is higher than the fw.
Because the Spits curve is closer to the origin. It's stall speed is much less than the 190's.
Here is the explaination of the Power Curve.
The three regions:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-power-curve-regimes
Various Power settings:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-three-power
Pulling the Yoke from Cruise:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-pull-yoke-cruise
Pulling the yoke form slow flight:
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-pull-yoke-slow
Crumpp
-
Somebody throwing co-efficients around to me, in aerodyamics, is a clear statement of their inability to grasp what they really mean.
Let me caveat that by saying "at our level on this BBS".
Crumpp
-
Crump look at those power curves in the first link you posted. Notice how the Y axis is labeled?
Man it is right before your eyes. Your power curve shows the fw as having the beter max climb rate.
HiTech
-
I don't see it.
All I see is the engine at idle on that curve.
The Spitfires curve will be closer to the origin since it's stall speed is below the 190's.
-
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-three-power
Check how throttle changes effect the curve.
-
What it boils down to is that you're demanding to much of a degradation in the Spitfire's performance over too narrow a band of the performance spectrum.
-
http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/energy.html#fig-power-curve-regimes
Figure 1.13: Power curve/speed/climb rate
Note Y axis is climb rate, is how it should be labled on yours.
Then look at your spit and fw's max climb rates per your chart.
-
Crumpp your theory is all very well and good but how about some hard numbers for speed, at various RoCs for the Spit IX.
-
atm they aren't aruguing the legitimacy of the numbers. They're just argueing about the labeling of it hehe.
geek fight!
:)
-
I should preface this by saying I have little aero engineering experience (but i do have a physics degree).
Could the problem be solved by finding the aircrafts "effective power" at a given angle? If we assume that the 2 aircrafts drag coeffs are equal enough to not worry about them at lowish speeds (under 300 mph) we can find how the total power output of the 2 aircraft become equal at a certain angle if we factor in mass (i.e. we are just worrying about power and weight).
i.e. Force output by engine - mg sin theta
theta = angle of climb.
if we say F(spit) - m(spit)g sin theta = F(spit) - m(spit)g sin theta
Unkown is theta (and is the same for both sides)
This should be a rough and ready calculation for above what angle the spit will be able to match trajectories and hunt down FW.
If it were to be above the angle at which the FW has its maximum climb rate crumpp has some ammunition. However i suspect it will be at a shallower angle where both aircraft would have a speed, as suggested before, of around 250mph.
On the other hand it might give you garbage :)
-
I see how your saying it adjusts Hitech.
Due to the shape of the power curve:
I do think that at the front side of the power curve their will be a zone the 190 can climb faster on the same vector. Definately if it has a level speed advantage. Maybe at the same speed and probably not if the Spitfire has a level speed advantage. This certainly will not hold true up to Best Climb angle.
Crumpp
-
Looking at this again:
For the Merlin 61 that we have in AH it definately holds true. If the merlin 61 directly follows an FW-190 in the climb it will be left behind.
At higher altitudes were the climbing discrepancy is not as pronounced it's not so definate.
And of course any altitude the 190 has a level speed advantage it also holds true but at much shallower angles.
Crumpp
-
That's ok Karnack. I teach some pretty difficult concepts to grasp at work.
Please don't take my inability to get this point across an indication of my teaching ability!
I see people all the time who can "parrot". There products will look exactly like the examples provided but in reality they have no understanding of the underlying concepts. Somebody throwing co-efficients around to me, in aerodyamics, is a clear statement of their inability to grasp what they really mean.
Was I the only one who found this hilarious?
-
Crumpp: The spit could stay with the fw, unitill some were above the 260 mph range.
The problem with your chart is the chart is simply incorect. See below for the basic problem.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/hitech/ClimbAngles.jpeg)
Here is justin_g excess power chart. It is more representive of the real performance of poth planes.
(http://users.tpg.com.au/adslec4m/powercurves.JPG)
On aside note a plane can fly in a steady state as long as it is under the power curve line.
It just needs to reduce throttle.
The other item you can read from these charts is acceleration. Until the spit read line crosses the Fw line, it will out accelerate the fw.
HiTech
-
Even with the Merlin 61 (+16) there will be large portions of the curve the FW-190 can climb at and get away.
With the (+12) the Spitfire will be left behind.
So according to that chart, Below 10 the FW 190 can leave the spit.
Correct?
BTW almost done with the calcs for the "other" thread.
Crumpp
-
No not Below 10.
It could get away if above 280 MPH per the 2nd chart.
HiTech
-
Ahh,
Thanks. So there is a critical speed you must maintain.
Crumpp
-
Now your getting it.
-
HiTech's chart is very much like I imagined it would look.
-
lol, thats my chart from the first page! ;)
-
Has Crumpp abandoned this thread? Or is he just away?
-
HiTech Rocks!
-
LOL
He what I said still hold true. The FW-190 just has to maintain an airspeed of 250 IAS or above in order to do it.
Crumpp
-
He what I said still hold true.
Hey what I said still holds true.
-
250 miles is a long way from 170.
-
It still occurs though. It just doesn't go all the say up to best climb speed and angle.
If the 190 is going fast than 250 mph and starts to climb, the spitfire pilot cannot directly follow and will be left behind.
Crumpp
-
I wonder by how much, that's all.
If the 190 wants to escape upwards, the difference at say 250 mph would have to be quite a bit.
-
I wonder by how much, that's all.
It's not big difference in speed bro. Whenever the the FW-190 is going 250 mph or faster he can climb at a shallow angle and the spitfire cannot follow. The faster he goes the steeper the angle up to a point.
Crumpp
-
Now if someone comes out with the real tested evidence that the Fw 190 was signifiqantly faster than the Spitfire IX.
gripen
-
It doesn't have to be significantly faster.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
He what I said still hold true. The FW-190 just has to maintain an airspeed of 250 IAS or above in order to do it.
Holy crap.
I believe that's spelt, "Well looks like I was wrong guys, thanks for patiently taking all that time to educate me. "
-
lol, thats my chart from the first page!
Yes it is. And here is my reply from the first page. It doesn't occur at all the points I thought it did.
Thanks for the effort you put into that graph. The Spits and 190's in Ah have the same Best Climb Speed. It still illustrates the point though.
Thrawn wrote:
Holy crap. I believe that's spelt, "Well looks like I was wrong guys, thanks for patiently taking all that time to educate me. "
I believe it's called "read the thread, you might learn something".
Crumpp
Crumpp
-
If you are in FW trying to escape you would dive, not go into sustained climb at 250 mph. Most spit pilots would just lose ground and climb at a higher rate then dive at the FW.
Plus any speed advantage held by the FW in level flight will diminish as you start climbing. Any attempt to climb away from a spit is stupid. The point is that around 250 mph sustained climb the planes should be evenly mathched.
That is not to say a FW with superior energy would not zoom climb away to take the intiative in a fight.
-
niknak: How you would use that as an advantge is.
1. Get speration to make sure you are out of guns range.
2. Hold speed to around 300 in a sustained climb.
3. When alt / E advantage has been gained reverse over the top and rope the spit.
4. If spit choose to go into a max rate climb (the correct counter manuver) just leave and find another fight.
Hitech
-
Crump,
I don't know. I'd been maintaining the whole time that the Fw190 would outclimb the Spit at higher speeds with 250mph to 260mph as my guestimated crossover point and you'd been maintaining that I was wrong and the Fw190 would outclimb it at 182mph.
It was never about wether or not there was a point at which it would, it was about the point at which it would.
-
I don't know. I'd been maintaining the whole time that the Fw190 would outclimb the Spit at higher speeds with 250mph to 260mph as my guestimated crossover point and you'd been maintaining that I was wrong and the Fw190 would outclimb it at 182mph.
I was definately wrong in that I thought it would outclimb it at 182mph. You were correct on the speeds you guessed for sure.
When I started the thread I knew the higher climb speed was an advantage. I just didn't know how much of one or when it came into play. When I researched it, I misunderstood the graphics and how the curve is adjusted to represent climb, it is a different shaped power curve than what is my "Fundamentals of Flight" textbook (getting a pilots certification) and what HTC uses. With that misunderstanding and the correct definitions lead me to the wrong conclusion of all the way to best climb speed and angle.
1. Get speration to make sure you are out of guns range. [2. Hold speed to around 300 in a sustained climb.
3. When alt / E advantage has been gained reverse over the top and rope the spit.
4. If spit choose to go into a max rate climb (the correct counter manuver) just leave and find another fight.
Hitech
Exactly. Most pilots will follow directly in the chase too.
Thanks Hitech.
-
I would argue that no experienced spit pilot would follow a FW in a sustained climb at 300mph for long enough to lose angles. The spit pilot would quickly see the FW increasing seperation and accept that he will not be able to catch the FW and climb so if the FW pilot was to reverse he would be in the superior position.
I will concede though it allows the FW to run away without gaining to much extra seperation, giving the spit pilot the oppertunity to make a mistake and get himself killed. The FW chooses to disengage while still giving himself the oppertunity of the kill.
I would add finally that the speed difference would not be significant so the FW pilot would need to sure of the 2 planes respective energy levels and also have a good seperation intially.
I will add finally that i have never won or lost a fight in a scenario similar to the one outlined.
-
Does anyone have a graph where this analyzed data shows where the lines cross?
-
Nobody has done anything like that here(calculating a graph based on real data). My graph was a rough guide based on measured performance in AH which was then adjusted to match known performance figures from the real thing.
-
I'm pretty sure HTC's archives are fat with real data, and somewhat processed.
-
Problem is that the FW-190A's equal or exceed the Merlin 61 Spitfire Mk IX climb rate at almost all speeds.
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/bf274climb.gif
Only when using combat rating does the Spitfire have a climb advantage and it does not last throughtout the flight envelope.
It is only a 5 min rating.
Even with combat boost the climbs are much closer than the Merlin 66 (+25).
FW-190A8 which has a 10 minute rating W/O C3 "emergency power" and unlimited with it. This FW-190A8 is also the heaviest fighter version complete with the removeable 115 liter tank.
http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190-1.jpg
FW-190A5 @ 1.32ata (it can use 1.42ata for 3 minutes and I suspect it was cleared for 30 minutes at 1.42ata but I don't have the paperwork to prove it yet)
http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190_A5_climb_s.gif
Crumpp
-
Climb to 6km(19,686ft) took 7.5 minutes @ 2700rpm, 1.42ata for the 190.
The Merlin 61 Mk IX took 6.5 mins to 20,000 ft.(nominal power)
For 2700rpm, 1.58/1.65, the 190 took 6.8min to reach 6km.
The 61 engined Spit IX took 5.6 mins to 20,000 ft.(combat rating)
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit9.html
-
Climb to 6km(19,686ft) took 7.5 minutes @ 2700rpm, 1.42ata for the 190.
Which FW-190?
And
You need to examine the curves. The climb rates are very close. Expecially when you factor in the Spits boost restrictions.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Which FW-190?
The A-8.
Do you not know what is on the A-8 graph you link to?
-
Can you add the climb times for the A-8 for comparison?
Standard Height(feet) - Time from start mins
Sea level - 0
2,000 - 0.6
5,000 - 1.6
6,500 - 2.0
10,000 - 3.1
13,500 - 4.2
15,000 - 4.7
16,500 - 5.2
18,000 - 5.8
20,000 - 6.5
23,000 - 7.7
25,900 - 8.9
28,000 - 9.7
30,000 - 10.7
33,000 - 12.4
36,000 - 14.7
38,000 - 16.9
40,000 - 20.2
These are for Normal rating
-
The A-8.
Yeah and there are TWO graphs posted. I suppose in your little mind that was bad question huh?
The FW-190 equals the Spitfire in some altitude bands and in some outclimbs the Spitfire Merlin 61. In other the Spitfire outclimbs the FW-190.
Start plotting some individual climb rates and you will see.
The rates only a vary a little bit.
The Merlin 61 was not an outstanding climber like it's older brother the Merlin 66 (+25). It was just average.
Crumpp
-
Here you can see it here.
http://www.netaces.org/ahmain/siteframe.html#title
Just overlay the graphs.
Especially with FW-190A5 which has a very large area.
Crumpp
-
Heres a graph combining all 3 graphs Crummp linked to at the continuous ratings mentioned.
(http://www2.freepichosting.com/Images/421553093/0.jpg)
Btw, there is a USN Fw 190G-3(A-5) test with climb and speed graphs for 1.42ata, I d/l it once but I dont have it anymore. Anyone got it?
EDIT: the climbrate data on netaces is from the HTC charts, which are for AH1 performance. IIRC, in AH1 the Fw 190A-5 climb & speed performance was spot on the aforementioned USN test.
-
I have a US Navy test of the FW-190A5/U4 (which became the G series). It includes climb trials vs Hellcat and F4U4 but no graph.
They had lots of engine trouble with the FW-190A5 in it. Seems the BMW-801D did not like USAVGAS.
Crumpp
-
In the NetAces graph the FW-190A5 uses 1.42 ata at WEP which is accurate. I just can't find anything on the FW-190A5 being able to use it for more than 3 minutes (jagd-einsatz's).
I suspect though that it was cleared for 30 minutes and attempting to confirm this.
Crumpp
-
I think it was the same aircraft - they refer to it as a G-3 but it was weighted to A-5 spec. The test im after is a different one - not comparitive, it only deals with the Fw 190.
Btw, the graph above should have a blue line for the A-5, for some reason a file I uploaded previously with a mistake in the climbrate for the Spitfire still shows up for me(A-5 line is grey on that one). Refreshing the page seems to alternate between the two, lol. :confused:
-
Btw, the graph above should have a blue line for the A-5, for some reason a file I uploaded previously with a mistake in the climbrate for the Spitfire still shows up for me(A-5 line is grey on that one).
It's easy to read. Point is the gap is not that large.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Yeah and there are TWO graphs posted. I suppose in your little mind that was bad question huh?
The FW-190 equals the Spitfire in some altitude bands and in some outclimbs the Spitfire Merlin 61. In other the Spitfire outclimbs the FW-190.
Start plotting some individual climb rates and you will see.
The rates only a vary a little bit.
The Merlin 61 was not an outstanding climber like it's older brother the Merlin 66 (+25). It was just average.
Crumpp
I took the best numbers for the A-8. :eek:
-
Milo,
You are so blinded by your absolute fandom. You and Izzy are cut from the same cloth on opposite sides of the coin.
Shame too. You probably have some good things to contribute that your crappy personality just covers up.
Obviously you have no clue what I am refering too in this.
Let me spell it out.
At all times if the FW-190 stays at 250mph it can Leave the Spitfire behind in the climb.
The angle and speed vary with altitude, the closer the gap the higher an angle and lower speed the FW can climb. For some altitudes the FW-190 can simply just outclimb the Spitfire at its best speed/angle.
;)
Crumpp
-
Crumpp :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :(
Just for the RECORD and read real carefully:
Not in any particular order, my favourite a/c are those of Kurt Tank, the Tempest and the F4U Corsair. :p
Oh, and Justin's graph has the A-8 with the use of 1.58ata only out-climbing the Spitfire below ~2500ft.