Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Crumpp on December 07, 2004, 09:09:25 PM
-
RAE 1231 is not the definitive report of the FW-190A's roll rate. The FW-190A's roll rate is much closer to its calculated maximums.
Here is the documentation proving this statement:
RAE 1231 Roll Rate results at 10,000 feet:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102470640_rollrates1231.jpg)
RAE 1231 Measured Stick Forces at 10,000 feet:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102470681_stickforces1231.jpg)
ADM Standard test results which factor in stick forces up to 50 lbs:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102470763_admstandard45.jpg)
The FW-190 did not make its calculated mark due to stick forces:
RAF test pilots comments in comparison to other FW-190A's he has flown.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102471753_pilotscomments.jpg)
Now the FW-190A had three different ailerons which allowed the pilot to "tune" his roll performance to a particular portion of the flight envelope he was most likely to use in combat:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102471621_alierontype1.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102471663_ailerontype2and3.jpg)
Further complicating the issue.
However, by checking the stick forces calibration chart, we can see that the FW-190A used in RAE 1231 had ailerons that were grossly out of adjustment.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102471708_lwstickforces.jpg)
The FW-190A's roll rate was much closer to it's calculated roll than RAE 1231 shows.
Crumpp
-
Can I have a clipped wing SpitV? :D
-
Can I have a clipped wing SpitV?
If it was up to me, of course!
It does bring another point showing RAE 1231 as being not representative of an FW-190A rolling ability.
Clipped Wing Spit pilots comments:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1102553685_spitpilotsopinions.jpg)
Crumpp
-
The fast roll rate of the 190 did not save 24 of them from the 17 P-38 aces (with 7 or more kills).
-
The fast roll rate of the 190 did not save 24 of them from the 17 P-38 aces (with 7 or more kills).
That's impressive.
Crumpp
-
Any reason why the results are so different in the case of the Typhoon ?
-
Crumpp, how many degrees of aileron deflection are achieved at 2 or 4 cm stick way?
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
The fast roll rate of the 190 did not save 24 of them from the 17 P-38 aces (with 7 or more kills).
WTF is that having to do with Fw's roll rates?
Congratulations stunninghunk; you just made it to my ignore list.
-
Takes one to know one, Staga.:D :D :p That is no problem for me, as you have been on my list for a long time.:) To use your colorerful words, WTF does your post have to do with roll rates? :rolleyes:
I can just see a 190 pilot saying to his mech, change my ailerons for I have a low level mission tomorrow. Then at least a couple of test flights to fine "tune". Yah right!!!
Crumpp has been commenting on the roll rate of the P-38 in another thread. A fast roll rate is not a be all, to end all. It was a defensive move that get an a/c out of harms way, but also put it out of the fight. Those 190s must have "tuned" their ailerons in-correctly. Adding, many of those kills were in 1943, using the un-improved P-38. Crumpp can rag on the Brit tests all he wants but would say it would be typical to what would be found on the 190 in LW service.
-
Crumpp, how many degrees of aileron deflection are achieved at 2 or 4 cm stick way?
Good question. I was waiting for someone to raise this question and frankly, I don't know. Depends on the adjustment of the control rods.
This is the only reason I did not post this sooner. Then I found documentation that states:
Properly adjust ailerons at high speeds over 500kph will begin to develop an imbalance of stick forces. The Stick forces in the center will drop to as low as 1 kg! The stick forces past this area of exceptionally light forces remain normal. At 500kph this "zone" is very small getting wider the faster you go. If the FW-190 in RAE 1231 had properly adjusted ailerons I am certain this would have been reflected or at least noted in the report. The Luftwaffe explains that the stick does not "buck" as some pilots were complaining, but rather the pilots are inadvertantly moving the control surfaces.
Eric Brown noted this imbalance in some of the evaluations of captured FW-190's he flew.
This is covered in the report you asked for a copy of in the other thread. I will send you it this evening.
A fast roll rate is not a be all, to end all.
I suggest you pick up a copy of Robert Shaws "Fighter Combat: Tactics and manuvering" and read the section on fighter agility. Roll rate represents the ability of the aircraft to change it's entire lift vector. This is the reason why the FW-190 is noted as "more manuverable" than the Spitfire in the tactical trials.
Only in flight sims where turn radius is overstated does roll rate become less important.
Crumpp
-
I can just see a 190 pilot saying to his mech, change my ailerons for I have a low level mission tomorrow. Then at least a couple of test flights to fine "tune". Yah right!!!
It was the pilots call as to which ailerons he used according to the Luftwaffe veterans. Many aircraft have "tunable" features. It is silly to think they were not used for their intended purpose.
As to the P38. That is another thread. I posted flight tested documentation to refute some of the claims made in that thread. So far I am the only one in that thread who has posted flight test documentation with the exception of one roll rate report. Facts are the effectiveness of the P38 as a fighter in the European Theater are a modern creation.
Crumpp
-
The reports were made on flyable veteran 190's right?
So one is better than the other, - one is worse than the other.
That would also be the case with planes in squadron service or what?
That was certainly the case with the Spitfire for instance.
Some aircraft were "rogue", so to say.
-
Yes Angus they were flyable veteran FW-190's and some variation is inherent.
RAE 1231 definately represents the low end of the scale on an out of adjustment aircraft.
Not surprising though. Focke Wulf had a problem with getting the JG's to properly adjust the ailerons, especially at first. It's silly to think the RAF did not.
Crumpp
-
I reiterate my question ,do you know the reason why the Typhoon got such low roll rate ?
-
One should note that the FW190 Pilots handbook clearly states that a proper ajustment of the ailerons and the aileron trim tabs is very important for the handling characteristics and the control forces.
Crumpp, as far as i know the control rods in the FW190 were very stiff and could wear out like the control cables in other fighters of that time.
And in the handbook it is described that you can adjust the control forces for the aileron at the ailerons linkings (dunno the right term in english, might add the german term here when i checked the Handbook at home) to the wing, i think the control rods were pretty much the same in all FW190.
So in case you could force someone to correctly ajust the ailerons on either "Yellow 10" or "White 1", you should be able to measure the aileron deflection at 2cm/4cm right. :)
-
That is what I was thinking, Naudet. :)
I have to call Steve at Gosshawk, anyway. I have a copy of the aileron adjustment regulations (translated). That is where I got the pictures of the different ailerons.
BTW. The members only section is up on the website. You should be getting a password soon.
reiterate my question ,do you know the reason why the Typhoon got such low roll rate ?
No Straffo, I don't. I can only speculate. Could be wing design, wing warp, wing torsion, aileron suface area, control surface movement, or excessive control forces. Lots of reason for an aircraft to have a bad roll rate.
I will scrub the report when tonight and post any findings on the Tiffie.
RAE 1231 states the Spitfire's was due to small ailerons and the warp of the wing severly reduced the effectiveness.
Crumpp
-
The Tempest rolled much betterthan a Tiffie, so I guess the engineers at Hawkers sorted it out in the end.
Wonder if Tiffy variants from the production line differed.
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
No Straffo, I don't. I can only speculate. Could be wing design, wing warp, wing torsion, aileron suface area, control surface movement, or excessive control forces. Lots of reason for an aircraft to have a bad roll rate.
Thanks,it would be very kind .
-
Hey Straffo,
Sorry but RAE 1231 is really not a help for the Tiffie. It simply says that the roll rates of the Typhoon matched an earlier roll rate test and that the aileron reversal speed matched the calculated speed.
If you live near the PRO I imagine you could find that roll rate test for the Typhoon. It might hold some answers.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Angus
The Tempest rolled much betterthan a Tiffie, so I guess the engineers at Hawkers sorted it out in the end.
Wonder if Tiffy variants from the production line differed.
Having an entirely different new type of wing design might just help that... :)
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Hey Straffo,
Sorry but RAE 1231 is really not a help for the Tiffie. It simply says that the roll rates of the Typhoon matched an earlier roll rate test and that the aileron reversal speed matched the calculated speed.
If you live near the PRO I imagine you could find that roll rate test for the Typhoon. It might hold some answers.
Crumpp
thanks , What is the "PRO" ?
-
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/
Here is the PRO, PROCAT, or catalog, whatever you want to call it.
http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/default.asp
Be advised. The National Archives are very expensive. It cost me almost 200 US Dollars for a copy of RAE 1231 BEFORE the weak US Dollar. Check the conversion between Euro's and Pounds Sterling.
You can also order reports from the Smithsonian Institute. They are cheap but time consuming to get by mail. 35 US cents a page. You have to write a letter to the Air Technical document section of the Garber Facility, NASM detailing the information your are looking for. Be specific. The more specific the better they can help you. The first time I wrote them about the FW-190A8, they came back with over 1500 documents. Just getting a listing of those documents cost me over 200 bucks at 35 cents a page. The description included is of dubious value as very few of the reports include exactly what you think they do. Once you get the list, fill out the request form, estimate for cost, and sign the release and mail all that in with a check, money order, or credit card. In about 6-8 weeks your report will arrive. All the Axis stuff is untranslated. I just travel to the archives, myself. You get more done and the expense is roughly the same.
Hope that helps!
Crumpp
-
Thanks :)
Look like I've found what I want : Avia 18/709 (http://www.catalogue.nationalarchives.gov.uk/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=5007612&SearchInit=4&CATREF=AVIA+18%2F709)
-
straffo, this site supplies many of the PRO docs for free.
http://prodocs.netfirms.com/
-
I don't think Ring has the roll report your looking for Straffo. Looks like you did find the performance trials that are on Rings site though.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
straffo, this site supplies many of the PRO docs for free.
http://prodocs.netfirms.com/
Strange I can't display any Typhoon document ??
Crumpp if you search in this BBS you will see that there was a controversy about the roll rate of the typhoon.
And roll rate was lowered compared to when her was introduced in the game.
-
I did a search and could not find the exact thread, Straffo. Post a link to it. If I can help I will.
Crumpp
-
It's pretty old it was in 2000/2001
The "correction" was in patch 1.07 :
announce by pyro (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14632&highlight=typhoon)
So far I've been unable to get any source other than your 1st pict.
Granted I don't live in Uk and can't acces the PRO directly .
I perturbed by the difference between measured data and ADM data,can it be because of a bad plane ?
-
Not necessarily. It could be any number of things including, as was the case of the Spitfire, a design flaw.
When they changed wings in the Tempest the roll rate definately improved.
Crumpp
-
http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/typhoon.zip
Try that link and see if has anything helpful in there, Straffo.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Not necessarily. It could be any number of things including, as was the case of the Spitfire, a design flaw.
When they changed wings in the Tempest the roll rate definately improved.
Crumpp
And they were basing it on something similar to the thin wings of the Spitfire when they did the Tempest :)
Dan/Slack
-
Just a reminder. As important as maximum roll rate is roll acceleration/inertia. As far as I remember, from level flight and at any speed, 190s reached their maximum roll rate per speed instantanously.
-
And they were basing it on something similar to the thin wings of the Spitfire when they did the Tempest
Yep. I think you are right.
It was the twist that destroyed the aileron effectiveness of the Spitfire according to RAE 1231, not the thickness.
Crumpp