Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Wotan on February 08, 2005, 09:40:02 AM
-
bf 109F-4 Performance Analysis (http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=21&L=1)
Data collected and presented by Michael "ireg" Rausch.
660-670 kmh @ 1.42 ata / 2700 rpm ...?
-
AH 2 Bf 109F-4 100% fuel 1 x 20mm / MG 151 200 rpg, fuel mod set to lowest value.
SL
Military Power – SL 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 310 MPH
Emergency Power – SL 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 332 MPH
5k
Military Power – 5000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 328 MPH
Emergency Power – 5000FT 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 350 MPH
10k
Military Power – 10000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 347 MPH
Emergency Power – 10000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 365 MPH
15k
Military Power – 15000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 364 MPH
Emergency Power – 15000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 381 MPH
20k
Military Power – 20000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 382 MPH
Emergency Power – 20000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 394 MPH
22.5k
Military Power – 22500 FT 38.9 MP @ 2500 RPM = 383 MPH
Emergency Power – 22500 FT 42.2 MP @ 2700 RPM = 387 MPH
-
At what altitude is the 109F4 getting this 416mph top speed?
-
6200m (20341 ft)
-
FYI
The 670 kph top speed for the Bf 109 F-4 was confirmed by the flight trials (not calculation) done by JG 26 using standard combat planes with full combat loadout.
Just get that out of the way before folks suggest specially treated aircraft or that the data is from calculations...
-
What are the commonly 'accepted' top speed figures for a 109F?
-
Luftwaffe got one set of performance figures, Messerschmitt got another. Which one should we use?
IIRC, HTC tends to use manufacturers' data to model aircraft.
The link provided some interesting reading, thanks for the link, Wotan.
-
Mtts dataset is for 1,3ata, the Rechlin figures of 670 kph are with full power 1,42ata authorized in February 1942 the latest. Hence the difference. It may be the Rechlin figures are not corrected for compressibilty (which would chop down to about ca655kph), but thats purely a guess.. Given the similiar power of the 605A and the performance of the 109G at 1,3ata (649kph) to the F-4 at 1,42ata, the results seem to be in good agreement.
-
Originally posted by eddiek
Luftwaffe got one set of performance figures, Messerschmitt got another. Which one should we use?
IIRC, HTC tends to use manufacturers' data to model aircraft.
The link provided some interesting reading, thanks for the link, Wotan.
I believe that HTC uses the American F4 'evaluation' which is just a summary of the British test.
It can be found here:
http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/aircraft/lw/109f_evaluation.pdf
The data in original link I provided (thanks to ireg) is from flight trials done by JG 26 using standard combat planes with full combat loadout.
As Kurfürst points out the Mtt data is for 1.3 ata. The 670 Kmh is derived from 1.42 ata.
-
The Americans had 2 F-4s sent to them by the Russians. These were a/c of 9./JG 3 which landed at a Russian airfield. One was given the number EB-1 and the other EB-100. EB-100 had 13 hrs of flight time by the Americans.
-
For what it's worth...
In Air Warrior it was a little known fact that the 109F-4 at 20K was very fast, just short of a Pony at the same alt. Not what you'd expect.
Magoo
-
how does that compare to the AH 109f?
-
Hi Wotan,
>660-670 kmh @ 1.42 ata / 2700 rpm ...?
Here's my analysis of Ireg's data:
http://hometown.aol.de/HoHunKhan/Me109FTopSpeed.gif
(Note that I restricted my analysis to the standard power settings.)
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Note that I restricted my analysis to the standard power settings
He amended or actually added a new page 8 showing the what he believes was the official clearance of the emergence power (1.42 ata) for the DB 601 E.
http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=38&L=1
-
Hi Magoo,
>In Air Warrior it was a little known fact that the 109F-4 at 20K was very fast, just short of a Pony at the same alt. Not what you'd expect.
Type - AW speed at 20000 ft - RL speed at 20000 ft
P-51D - 678 km/h - 655 km/h (Mustang III, V-1650-7, +15 lbs/sqin), 677 km/h (same, extrapolated to +18 lbs/sqin)
Me 109F - 654 km/h - 660 km/h (at 20340 ft, flight trials)
Spitfire IX - 650 km/h - 611 km/h (Merlin 61), 642 km/h (Merlin 66)
So you could make the point that Air Warrior wasn't that far off after all ;-)
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Hi Wotan,
>He amended or actually added a new page 8 showing the what he believes was the official clearance of the emergence power (1.42 ata) for the DB 601 E.
Oh, thanks, I hadn't seen that yet.
I can confirm that the page states quite clearly that 2700 rpm/1.42 ata are considered take-off/emergency power. There is no time limit given, but take-off/emergency usually was cleared for at least 3 - 5 min. (1 min power, which was rare, was called "increased short-duration power".)
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
i don't know all the "technical" aspects of all of this, but something just dawned on me.
if that rating of 1.42 or whatever was only allowed for 1 minute, what impact would that have on overall speed for such a short duration?
in AH when flying level at 25k, hitting the WEP for 1 minute does not do a whole ton. yes some, but not 40-50mph difference.
IF wep gives that mush of an overall speed boost, it take ALOT longer than 1 minute to reach that speed i have found.
so how is that anyway?
thanks
-
1.42ata 2700rpm is Start and Emergency power, so it's clearly our WEP and not some super limited type.
-
Hi JB73,
>if that rating of 1.42 or whatever was only allowed for 1 minute, what impact would that have on overall speed for such a short duration?
Due to the exact wording of the manual reproduced by Irmur, that's not very likely.
However, as you point out, 1 min of peak power does not allow the aircraft to reach its top speed. In fact, even 5 min of peak power might not be enough to reach top speed - the F-1/F-2 Kennblatt specifically points that out.
(Strictly speaking, the aircraft never reaches its top speed by accelerating in level flight, but it can get very, very close to it so that acceleration becomes imperceptible :-)
Of course, stabilized top speed can still be reached by approaching it from a dive.
High-altitude top speed can be very difficult to measure accurately due to the poor excess power and the limited possibilities for a dive. The GM-1 boosted Luftwaffe aircraft sometimes had 10 min of WEP or more, and yet ran out of WEP before reaching stabilized top speed!
So you're making an excellent point, even if in our special case, we can rule out the 1 min assumption with considerable confidence :-) But it was definitely an possibility that had to be checked!
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Just some perspective...
If 1.42 ata / 2700 (Start- und Notleistung; Take off and Emergency power) was available from Feb '42 it would provide a max speed of 660-670 km/h (410-415 mph)
In AH2 @ 20000ft the Bf 109F-4 does just 394 mph (635 kmh) at 1.42 ata / 2700 rpm.
If you look at Hohun's graph based on Ireg's data max speed at 1.30 ata / 2500rpm is 403 mph (648km/h) @ 6000m (19685 ft).
At 1.30 ata / 2500 rpm the AH2 F4 only does 382 mph (614 km./h)
The Spit Vb in AH2 runs at 16lbs boost and ws cleared in Aug '42.
If we believe this data then the AH2 Bf 109F-4 is 21 mph to slow at 1.30 ata / 2500 rpm @ 20k
and 16 to 20 mph to slow at 1.42 ata / 2700rpm @ 20k.
The 1.42 ata (AH WEP) on the F4 should be limited to 3 to 5 min. But even so the F4 would be 21 mph faster at what AH considers 'military power'...
-
what is 1.42 ata anyway LOL
im guessing some way to measure manifold pressure or something.
and if it is, how is it masured in game ie what guage and such.
-
ATA = Atmosphäre Absolutdruck
1.42 (ATA) * 28.96 = 41.12 inHG (manifold pressure)
Check this thread over my squad forum:
PS and ATA conversion equations (http://4jg53.netprism.net/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=18)
note AH conversions are off and Pyro is aware. He hasn't gotten around to fixing it.
in AH 42.2mp = 1.42 ata
-
ty
-
So why is that single 109 so much faster?
I mean, it's faster than a 190, and faster than early 109G's.
So no reason to upgrade ?!?!?!
-
So why is that single 109 so much faster?
It's faster than the FW-190 in this test because the FW-190 is using the BMW 801C motor.
The BMW 801 motor was still experiencing teething troubles at this point as well.
Crumpp
-
So why is that single 109 so much faster?
The question should not be why is this single 109F so much faster, but why is the single 109F tested by the RAE so much slower?
Speed tests at Rechlin and DB were done with different planes, JG26 had several 109F fielded during the tactical trials and the top speeds all those 109Fs reached were around 660-670km/h@2700rpm@1.42ata.
-
If that's true, then it's quite hard to understand the speed differences of the Friederich and Gustav...
If the F-4 could do 416mph, that's faster than the speeds listed for the G-2 and the G-6. So if the F-4 does 416mph, does that mean the G-2 and the G-6 should also be much faster than it is?
-
What about climb rates then?
The Gustav outclimbs the Friedrich, but yet only the latest Gustavs are faster.
Ah, well, of course maybe faster at other alt bands though.
Well, the Friedrich is cleaner (much prettier) and lighter, it was the favourite model of most of the pilots for agility.
So, climb comparison?
BTW, our AH 109G2 outclimbs the AH Spit XIV to 20K
-
The question should not be why is this single 109F so much faster, but why is the single 109F tested by the RAE so much slower?
Horsepower development? I know the loss of power the RAF experienced in BMW 801's was gasoline related. Could the DB601E have had a similar problem?
Anyone know the details of the how the RAE came into possesion of that 109? Was it a recovered crash and how versed were they on the technical details of the design?
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
If that's true, then it's quite hard to understand the speed differences of the Friederich and Gustav...
If the F-4 could do 416mph, that's faster than the speeds listed for the G-2 and the G-6. So if the F-4 does 416mph, does that mean the G-2 and the G-6 should also be much faster than it is?
In Finnish Air Force tests G-2 did 395mph at 19500ft with 1.3ata. This plane was taken out from standard squadron service. I was a fairly new plane though when the tests were done. It had a fixed-down tail wheel. So at with 1.42ata and reractable tail-wheel it would have been clearly faster.
Here's the much debated speed gained by the soviets for G-2. I remember a comment which was supposedly written in a flight test report regarding a captured 109G. It was something like "109 can achieve suprisingly fast speeds for short times". This comment referred to 109s radiators' cooling gills which can be fully shut for short times. Like I said I don't have the source for this line right now so take it as I wrote it...
The difference in speed was circa 30mph between the fully open and fully closed positions. This speed different of course reduces with alt. So my long shot theory is that maybe The Abbeville boys were also playing with the radiators like their russian 'buddies'. :)
Disclaimer: Once again, just an idea to keep me entertained. :)
(http://www.allaboutwarfare.com/files/pictures/aviation/ww2/russia/data/Aircraft-evaluation-21.jpg)
-
When the first Bf 109 G-2 were issued to units they were cleared for 1.42 ata with a top speed higher then 670km/h
Problems with the quality of the production DB605A engines resulted in a derating to 1.30 ata.
The top speed for the Bf 109G-2 at 1.30 ata is similiar to the 109F-4 when run at 1.42 ata / 2700 rpm.
The G is less clean then the F and was a bit heavier.
Bf 109G-2 Finnish test
636 kmh - 6200m - 1.3 ata
522 kmh - 0m - 1.3 ata
Bf 109G-1 Rechlin
649 kmh - 7000m - 1.3 ata
525 kmh - 0m - 1.3 ata
Bf 109G-2 Russian
666 kmh - 7000m - ?
525 kmh - 0m - ?
I don't know the power settings for the Russian tests...
-
The G was not much of an improvement in design over the F. The G was a simplification of the F that allowed for higher production numbers. The only reason any G is faster than the F would be because of a more powerful powerplant.
I don't think there are any other 109 that has such clean lines as the F.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_245_1078347009.jpg)
Well, at least if you remove that damn air filter ;)
-
Marseilles 109F ??
(Drool)
-
Yup :)
-
Actually I think the Bf109G2 is a cleaner design the Bf109F because of its more solid canopy structure.
-
Image saved to HD
BTW, AFAIK, the 109F trop filter design was way better than the early Vokes filter on their Spit V opponents. In regards of drag, that is.
Later Spits solved it better, not sure what the trick was.
But 109's in trop colours were some of the coolest...and the 109F in N-Africa was one heck of a performer compared to many of it's opponents.
-
The early 109G had virtually the same airframe as the 109F. You can barely tell the two apart, the most noticable external change being the front cocpit`s style. It was even an improvement in some regards, ie. the windshield armor was internal, and cost no drag unlike the one - sometimes - fitted to the 109F. Moreover the airframe was strenghtened, and the greatest importance being imho that all 109Gs were prepeared right in the factory to carry a large variety of easy-to-add field conversion kits (gunpods, GM-1, photorecon stuff etc.). 109Fs were just fighters. They were far less versatile. Moreover, the 605 had a lot of development potential over the 601s, a better high altitude engine even in its initial form. And mounting the 'new' engine (being little more than a upbored 601E) needed no modifications to the airframe... same dimensions.
Its just that due to delays in development, the 109G was not initially superior to the 109F in performance.
Ah, and the TSAGI graph posted shows the 109G-2 with five (gondolas) and 3 guns version, both at 1,42ata. 650 kph with gondolas, hmm... just compare to its main opponent Yak-3 or Spit V, both topping out at 600 kph max.
-
The G series added a lot of drag inducing modifications. Most of them small, but small things do add up in the end. Bigger oil cooler, wing bulges for the larger wheels, several small air intakes on the engine cowl etc. The G2 was also heavier.
All in all I'd bet the F-4 had less total drag than any G.
-
Well, Rall said that the 109G was "overdeveloped".
-
Originally posted by Wotan
When the first Bf 109 G-2 were issued to units they were cleared for 1.42 ata with a top speed higher then 670km/h
I don't recall seeing a single german document showing speeds that high even with 1.42ata. Do you have the document? If so, could you send it my way? :) The highest speed I've seen for the early G is 700km/h for a 109G-4 flown by the TsaGi.
I did some testing in AH. Here are the results:
I had 100% fuel with fuel consumption and wind disabled. I tried to find the altitude for the highest speed.
MIL (1.3ata):
6706m (22000ft)-----634km/h (394mph)
6858m (22500ft)-----636km/h (395mph)
6934m (22750ft)-----636km/h (395mph)
7010m (23000ft)-----637km/h (396mph)
WEP (1.42ata)
6858m (22500ft)-----647km/h (402mph)
6934m (22750ft)-----647km/h (402mph)
7010m (23000ft)-----645km/h (401mph)
The purpose of this test was mainly to look for the altitude where AH's 109G-2 achieves its highest speed and to demonstrate that it falls a bit short from the 670km/h. Interesting thing happened at 23000ft where MIL speed rose by 1 mph but the WEP speed dropped by 1 mph. That looks a bit dubious, I might test it again and test alts a bit higher than 23000ft...
-
AH 109s:
Bf 109G-2 100% fuel 1 x 20mm / MG 151 200 RPG, fuel mod set to lowest value.
SL
Military Power – SL 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 319 MPH
Emergency Power – SL 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 339 MPH
5k
Military Power – 5000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 349 MPH
Emergency Power – 5000FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 367 MPH
10K
Military Power – 10000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 366 MPH
Emergency Power – 10000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 378 MPH
15K
Military Power – 15000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 377 MPH
Emergency Power – 15000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 388 MPH
20K
Military Power – 20000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 388 MPH
Emergency Power – 20000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 399 MPH
22K
Military Power – 22500 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 394 MPH
Emergency Power – 22500 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 401 MPH
Bf 109G-6 100% fuel 1 x 20mm / MG 151, fuel mod set to lowest value.
SL
Military Power – SL 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 316 MPH
Emergency Power – SL 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 335 MPH
5k
Military Power – 5000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 341 MPH
Emergency Power – 5000FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 359 MPH
10K
Military Power – 10000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 356 MPH
Emergency Power – 10000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 368 MPH
15K
Military Power – 15000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 367 MPH
Emergency Power – 15000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 377 MPH
20K
Military Power – 20000 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 378 MPH
Emergency Power – 20000 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 388 MPH
22K
Military Power – 22500 FT 38.9 MP @ 2600 RPM = 380 MPH
Emergency Power – 22500 FT 42.2 MP @ 2800 RPM = 390 MPH
109E-4 100% fuel 2 x 20mm / MGFF 60 RPG, fuel mod set to lowest value.
SL
Military Power – SL 37.6 MP @ 2400 RPM = 285 MPH
Emergency Power – SL 40.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 292 MPH
5k
Military Power – 5000 FT 37.6 MP @ 2400 RPM = 304 MPH
Emergency Power – 5000FT 40.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 311 MPH
10K
Military Power – 10000 FT 37.6 MP @ 2400 RPM = 323 MPH
Emergency Power – 10000 FT 40.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 330 MPH
15K
Military Power – 15000 FT 37.6 MP @ 2400 RPM = 341 MPH
Emergency Power – 15000 FT 40.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 344 MPH
MP falls off drastically at 20k. WEP adds no MP boost but the E-4 gains about 3 mph.
20K
Military Power – 20000 FT 32 MP @ 2400 RPM = 329 MPH
Emergency Power – 20000 FT 32 MP @ 2400 RPM = 332 MPH
22.5K
Military Power – 22500 FT 28.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 320 MPH
Emergency Power – 22500 FT 28.5 MP @ 2400 RPM = 323 MPH
I don't recall seeing a single german document showing speeds that high even with 1.42ata. Do you have the document?
I don't own the documents so I can't post them but I have seen them referenced on Butch's forum. Maybe Kurfürst can provide some of the data.
-
No allied bashers here ?
:aok
-
The crowd suddenly went silent and slowly turned their heads toward Bug.
"Look ... an alliedweeb!"
;)
-
Get Him!!:mad:
:)
Crumpp
-
Him?
Woot?
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Angus
Him?
Woot?
:rolleyes:
Bug is a girl?
-
even if it is "undermodelled", the AH speed is still within 3.5% of that test.. which I'd say is a fair range in performance.. I'd imagine not *every* 109 topped out at 670 km/h.
-
U guys never run fast enough with ur leather suits.
Gawd i hear that village people song again
:D
BUG runs away
-
Originally posted by Urchin
even if it is "undermodelled", the AH speed is still within 3.5% of that test.. which I'd say is a fair range in performance.. I'd imagine not *every* 109 topped out at 670 km/h.
Like I said, personally, I haven't even seen a german flight test document that shows a result of over 670km/h in which Wotan referred to.
Pyro has said that with AH2 it is a lot easier to get the FM to hit the right numbers. The discussion about KI-84's top speed on the deck and how it got tweaked is a good example of that. Allready in AH the Dora hit the deck top speed within 1 mile compared to a flight test of a D-9 which used B4 fuel and MW-50 injection.
The fact that not every 109 topped out at 670km/h has nothing to do on how the planes are modelled in AH2 until AH2:ToD is here.
-
Like I said, personally, I haven't even seen a german flight test document that shows a result of over 670km/h in which Wotan referred to.
For the BF109F4 you can find the documents on the Webpage Wotan mentioned at the start of the thread. They are for different BF109Fs not a single "special" plane.
Allready in AH the Dora hit the deck top speed within 1 mile compared to a flight test of a D-9 which used B4 fuel and MW-50 injection.
This is wrong, simply because so far it seems that not a single flight test for a D9 using MW50 exists.
The 1st D9 that was modified to carry out flight test with the MW50 system crashed before any tests could be conducted and after that the evaluation and function of the MW50 system for the D9 series continued on the ground.
And as far as i know neither the USAAF nor the RAE did any performance measurements with a captured D9 using MW50 that survived up to this day.
In D. Hermann's Book "FW 190 Long Nose" there is an account of Lt. Ossenkop who stated that at tree top level he achieved 605km/h using MW50.
Known flight tests for FW190D9s with JUMO213A are those for Wk.-Nr. 002 & 006 at Rechlin and Wk.-Nr. 043 at DB.
Additionally there were some performance measurements with the FW190D prototypes, namely the V20 & V58 if i remember correctly.
And some of the very early production planes Wk.-Nr. 003 & 004 were also flown in at Rechlin.
But all those test were done with a max powersetting of 3250rpm@1,5ata.
None of the planes flown at Rechlin had the MW50 system installed nor were they equipped with the "Ladedrucksteigerungsrüstsatz für erhöhte Notleistung".
-
Originally posted by Naudet
For the BF109F4 you can find the documents on the Webpage Wotan mentioned at the start of the thread. They are for different BF109Fs not a single "special" plane.
Yep, I know. I just meant that I haven't seen one for G-2.
Originally posted by Naudet
This is wrong, simply because so far it seems that not a single flight test for a D9 using MW50 exists.
I based my comment on this page:
http://jagdhund.homestead.com/files/DoraData/horizontalgeschwindigkeiten.htm
Of course the data in the chart can be calculated data. Even so, the fourth column matches the speed you stated within 1km/h. When I tested Doras speed on the deck in AH1 the speed was 376mph. Therefore I said "within 1mph". So what is wrong here?
-
Originally posted by Urchin
even if it is "undermodelled", the AH speed is still within 3.5% of that test.. which I'd say is a fair range in performance.. I'd imagine not *every* 109 topped out at 670 km/h.
The 109F-4 in AH2 only hits 394 mph on wep (7 min limit).
Even if you don't except 660-670 km/h and are happy with 394 mph (635 km/h) then that speed would better match 1.30 ata (AH military power or unlimited).
Get rid of the emergency power setting for the F-4 all together and match 1.30 ata with 635km/h. Emergency power would be limited to 3 to 5 min any way.
My point is more about speed at AH military power which is:
At 1.30 ata / 2500 rpm the AH2 F4 only does 382 mph (614 km./h)
Same with the G-2 emergency power (1.42 ata) speed in AH better matches the 1.30 ata climb and combat setting.
Allready in AH the Dora hit the deck top speed within 1 mile compared to a flight test of a D-9 which used B4 fuel and MW-50 injection.
What flight test? Do you have one that shows the D9 speed/power settings with B4 and mw50?
EDIT, I see your reference know. I was posting at the time you did. I am sure Naudet will have a reply to that.
In AH the F-4 contemporary is the Spit Vb but the Vb runs at 16lbs boost (cleared for that Aug '42) If we are to believe the data in the link above the F-4 was cleared for 1.42 ata in Feb '42...
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The 109F-4 in AH2 only hits 394 mph on wep (7 min limit).
Even if you don't except 660-670 km/h and are happy with 394 mph (635 km/h) then that speed would better match 1.30 ata (AH military power or unlimited).
Get rid of the emergency power setting for the F-4 all together and match 1.30 ata with 635km/h. Emergency power would be limited to 3 to 5 min any way.
I more or less agree here. Like you mentioned Spit V has 16lbs boost currently. So to even these too planes up for events I would reduce Spit's boost back to 12lbs as well as match the 109F-4s speed to 635km/h at 1.3ata and remove the WEP.
-
Wmaker, i know the document very well on which Byran based his website, the numbers and curves from that document are calculated.
So it is right, AH's D9 matches the calculated data very well but not flight test data.
It is also conform with the statement of Lt. Ossenkop.
So what is wrong here?
To use the term "flight test" is misleading here, as to my knowledge there simply doesnt exist any flight test for a D9 with MW50.
And to differentiate between calculated and flight data is very important.
-
Originally posted by Naudet
To use the term "flight test" is misleading here, as to my knowledge there simply doesnt exist any flight test for a D9 with MW50.
And to differentiate between calculated and flight data is very important.
You are very much right that it was misleading. For that I'm sorry because I assumed it was from a flight test.
I do agree that it is important to make a difference between calculated data and numbers that are actually flown.
But the fact that the data is calculated doesn't have to mean that it's too inaccurate to be used. Like your example showed, when the plane was flown in unit it reached the speed very accurately. One would naturally assume that calculated data is usually too optimistic (and in many cases it has been) but there are also examples like VL Pyörremyrsky which was actually few km/h faster than the calculated data suggested. :)
The main point what I was trying make when I made the comment about the Dora was that HTC has proved that it can model the top speeds of these planes very accurately and that pyro has said that it can be done easier/more accurately in AH2 than in AH1. So if the speed is off it can be corrected if sufficient data is provided.
-
Remove a 3-5 min WEP? Why?
The Frank got a 1 minute WEP, and so does the 109E-4 IIRC. Fix the numbers if necessary, but there is no reason to remove WEP if the plane had it. No matter how short it was.
You guys are like "let's correct this inaccuracy here, but compensate with a new one over there". Idiocy.
Do it right or don't do anything at all.
-
1.42 power setting IS the WEP.
If it wasn't cleared until Feb -42 and we want to get F-4 vs Spit adversaries which represent the time frame before that date, then yes we do want to remove a power setting which wasn't in use at that time.
*edited for grammar/spelling, no idea what is wrong with my english today...*
-
Remove a 3-5 min WEP? Why?
Its not entirely clear that 1.42 ata was cleared in FEB '42 (at least according to Butch) even if it is 5 min it wouldn't be that important if the 109F-4 could hit 394 (wep now) at mil power (unlimted).
You end up with a 109F-4 @ 1.30 ata / 2500 rpm hitting 635km/H @ 20k.
as opposed to:
1.30 ata / 2500 rpm the AH2 F4 hitting 614km/h @ 20k.
That's still slower then what the linked webpage shows:
1.30 ata / 2500 rpm 648km/h @ 20k or so...
I doubt anything will be done but to me the more significant issue is max speed at mil.
-
Originally posted by Wmaker
1.42 power setting IS the WEP.
If it wasn't cleared until Feb -42 and we want to get F-4 vs Spit adversaries which represent the time frame before that date, then yes we do want to remove a power setting which wasn't in use at that time.
*edited for grammar/spelling, no idea what is wrong with my english today...*
I Guarantee you that it had a WEP back then too. I have yet to see a LW plane without a take-off and emergency setting above max continuous power.
I you want an early F-4 then why not model an early and a late version. We do have the F4F and the FM2.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I Guarantee you that it had a WEP back then too. I have yet to see a LW plane without a take-off and emergency setting above max continuous power.
For example in finnish 109s the use of the WEP (1.42ata setting)was prevented at least in two different ways. One was wire to prevent the throttle quardant's movement and the other was this bolt which was fastened on a bent metal plate which attached in the throttle quardant.
Before the power settings were cleared for use LW used same kind of methods to prevent the pilots from over boosting the engine.
So, at a point in time with certain engines and certain planes there were no WEP. Sure you can find take off and emergency settings listed in books but that doesn't mean they were always available because of engine problems.
When I moved the throttle I could bent it sightly and move it past the bolt to full throttle. And of course wire can be broken. So there were ways to go past these but if the engines weren't able to handle these settings the results weren't pleasant.
Originally posted by GScholz
I you want an early F-4 then why not model an early and a late version. We do have the F4F and the FM2.
I most definately would like to see so called early an late sub-variants for many planes we have in AH. IMO that would be the best way to handle this problem of differing boost pressures at different times during the war. Would be great for events and wouldn't require any new art work either. But until HTC makes a decision to implement variants like these I like the primary adversaries' performances to match.
-
So we're gonna have to fight SpitVs with +16 boost with F-4 using 1.30 ata?
God help us!
-
Originally posted by Wmaker
For example in finnish 109s the use of the WEP (1.42ata setting)was prevented at least in two different ways. One was wire to prevent the throttle quardant's movement and the other was this bolt which was fastened on a bent metal plate which attached in the throttle quardant.
Before the power settings were cleared for use LW used same kind of methods to prevent the pilots from over boosting the engine.
So, at a point in time with certain engines and certain planes there were no WEP. Sure you can find take off and emergency settings listed in books but that doesn't mean they were always available because of engine problems.
When I moved the throttle I could bent it sightly and move it past the bolt to full throttle. And of course wire can be broken. So there were ways to go past these but if the engines weren't able to handle these settings the results weren't pleasant.
I most definately would like to see so called early an late sub-variants for many planes we have in AH. IMO that would be the best way to handle this problem of differing boost pressures at different times during the war. Would be great for events and wouldn't require any new art work either. But until HTC makes a decision to implement variants like these I like the primary adversaries' performances to match.
Finland never used Bf109F.
-
"So we're gonna have to fight SpitVs with +16 boost with F-4 using 1.30 ata?
God help us!"
Hehe, just pray if there will be a boosted up Merlin 66/70 Spit.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Finland never used Bf109F.
And?
-
Finland had the 109G :D
-
And, might I add, there, exactly THERE, the 109 achieved their finest record.
The Fins knew their stuff ;)
-
Hi Kweassa,
>So we're gonna have to fight SpitVs with +16 boost with F-4 using 1.30 ata?
Well, I reckon the +16 lbs/sqin Spitfire V should be competitive below 4 km with a small speed advantage near the ground. Above 4 km, the 1.30 ata Messerschmitt would be clearly superior though.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)