Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Kev367th on August 08, 2005, 02:27:26 AM
-
What Spit would be a good matchup for it, as its more than likely it will be in the new lineup?
I.e. model boost etc.
I assume the model would be a IX or XVI?
-
Depends on the engine.
G-14 with AM engine does 352mph at s/l, 413mph at 16,400ft. These speeds are on par with a +25lbs Merlin 66 Spitfire(approx. 360mph@s/l, 405mph@14,000ft). Spitfire would be a bit faster at low altitudes up to about 3,000ft, the G-14 would hold a small advantage at altitudes above this, increasing over about 15,000ft altitude.
The (more common in RL) high-altitude ASM engine gives the G-14 348mph at s/l & 423mph at 24,600ft. A +25lbs Merlin Spitfire would hold a slight edge in speed below about 16,000ft - above which the G-14 would gain a speed advantage of 30mph+
-
Thanks, shame we'll never see a 25lbs spit, already been poo-poo'd by Pyro as too good for the MA.
-
Too good for the MA? Isn't that what perk points are for? LOL we have the 262, but a +25 spit is "too good".
I'd love to see a +25 spit and a +21 P-51 or perhaps a +25 Mustang IV. All appropriately perked of course.
-
Originally posted by FalconSix
Too good for the MA? Isn't that what perk points are for? LOL we have the 262, but a +25 spit is "too good".
I'd love to see a +25 spit and a +21 P-51 or perhaps a +25 Mustang IV. All appropriately perked of course.
Apparently, yes it is.
-
Wow, must be one sweet ride! :)
-
Originally posted by justin_g
Depends on the engine.
G-14 with AM engine does 352mph at s/l, 413mph at 16,400ft. These speeds are on par with a +25lbs Merlin 66 Spitfire(approx. 360mph@s/l, 405mph@14,000ft). Spitfire would be a bit faster at low altitudes up to about 3,000ft, the G-14 would hold a small advantage at altitudes above this, increasing over about 15,000ft altitude.
The (more common in RL) high-altitude ASM engine gives the G-14 348mph at s/l & 423mph at 24,600ft. A +25lbs Merlin Spitfire would hold a slight edge in speed below about 16,000ft - above which the G-14 would gain a speed advantage of 30mph+
So 25lbs Spit is good matchup, when it actually does everything better than G-14? Sure it is good choice, if you fly Spit....
-
G-14 versus a +18lbs Merlin 66 Spitfire:
G-14(AM) - from 10 to 25mph faster than Spitfire up to 20,000ft - smaller advantage above this height.
G-14(ASM) - about 10mph faster than Spitfire up to 20,000ft - above this height 30mph+ advantage.
-
The G-14/AS was not the most numerous of the G-14s...
5500 G-14s were produced, only about 1000 were G-14/AS's...
The reason it would be a good idea in AH to keep the G-10 and add a standard G-14 is the large SC on the AS engine doesn't produce as much power at low alt...
The whole reason for wanting a G-14 is better speed below FTH...
If they re-do the G-10 to reflect real G-10 numbers (not the 452 mph the G-10/K-4 hybrid does now) is that you still get a better high alt performing 109 like the AS's and you get a faster 109 (well faster then the G-6 using MW-50).
best of both worlds...
-
Pyro "quote"- There will be no G-10 it is being removed from the lineup.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Pyro "quote"- There will be no G-10 it is being removed from the lineup.
Wow, that would be a first... Keep the G10, but at a lower speed like 425-430mph.
If they dont tere might be a huge performance gap metween the 415mph G14 and the 450mph K4.
-
Yeah, its in a thread about the 109 makeover, wish I could find it for you.
All he said was - There will be no G-10, it is being removed from the lineup.
The general feeling is that it is being turned into the K4, and a G-14 added.
Don't think he is worried so much about performance gaps, more what would be usefull for TOD and CM's.
Would think that as TOD expands in timeframe and location (2 weeks maybe :) ), there will be more models added for all sides at a later date.
Most people feel TOD won't go as far as D-Day in its 1st incarnation, so maybe this is part of it.
Who knows, do what I did, call and ask him, but he does seem focussed on whats useful for TOD and CMs, with the occassional rare bird as a treat (not saying the G10 is rare before someone takes it the wrong way, meant generally).
-
Originally posted by Wotan
The G-14/AS was not the most numerous of the G-14s...
5500 G-14s were produced, only about 1000 were G-14/AS's...
I read somewhere there were 1830 G-14/AS out of estimated 3-4000 G-14 built, guess that was wrong...:o
-
f they dont tere might be a huge performance gap metween the 415mph G14 and the 450mph K4.
Thats what I have been alone in arguing since reading that...
Hopefully Pyro will re-consider.. A 425 mph or so G-10 could fill in for the AS engined 109s.
Performance is close enough not to be an issue...
So you would have a 415 mph G-14, a 425 mph G-10 (but a higher FTH) and the ultimate K-4 at 450 mph...
That will fill out the 43 - 45 109s...
Unless Pyro has decided to do a G-14/AS
It could fill in for a G-10 but the only thing is that at low alt, especially at mil power its not quite as fast as a standard G-14... Its only a few mph so it would have more of an effect in main usage rather then ToD or events...
-
Here's a *rough* graph of the relative performance of G-14 & K-4.
Notes:
1. Thin blue line estimates G-10 speeds.
2. Thin black line estimates K-4 at 1.98ata(377mph @ s/l, 444mph @ 19,600ft).
3. Curves show 109 speed with "perfect" supercharger drive(as currently modelled in AH).
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b311/qwejibo/g14as_k4-level.gif)[
-
I posted grapphs from Il2/FBs G-6 / G-14 / G-6/AS (really a G-14/AS), G-10, K-4 in this thread...
Of course these were just to give a general idea of each of those 109s...
Spits anounced, what about the 109s? (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=156808)
scroll about 2/3rds the way down...
I don't know why these guys start 10 threads all about the same thing...
-
How about I asked a specific question in the original post?
i.e. what is a good Spit matchup for a G14
Since then the thread has wandered a little into why they should keep the G10.
-
Unfortunately IL2:FB has the critical altitudes wrong, with all of the 109's reaching top speed at 6km?! :confused:
-
Only those planes running at MAX (110% + MW-50) show a critical alt at 6k. While this maybe arbitrary the SC (depending on the plane) is already losing power anywhere from 5500-6000m.
At normal power you see there are differences in FTH.
As I said I posted these only to give a general idea of relative performance between those types. IL2 compare (where those charts come from) isn't 100% accurate as well and are simplified to reflect AI behavior rather actual in game performance...
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
How about I asked a specific question in the original post?
i.e. what is a good Spit matchup for a G14
Since then the thread has wandered a little into why they should keep the G10.
Same graph, with a couple of Merlin 66 Spitfires flight tested at +25lbs shown also.
Notes:
1. Lime Green line for LF.VIII JF.275 @ +18lbs, is very close to "official" LF.VIII top speed of 404mph @ 21,000ft.
2. Purple line for LF.IX JL.165 @ +25lbs - this particular aircraft was noted during flight testing to have lower performance than other LF.IX previously tested at the same facility.
(http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b311/qwejibo/spit_g14as_k4-level.gif)
-
Wierd,
Why would a heavier LF VIII with the same motor (Merlin 66) and boost as an LF IX be so much faster.
Surely a retractible tailwheel didn't make that much difference (15mph+ @ 20k)?
-
IMO, it's because JL.165 was a dog! :D
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Wierd,
Why would a heavier LF VIII with the same motor (Merlin 66) and boost as an LF IX be so much faster.
Surely a retractible tailwheel didn't make that much difference (15mph+ @ 20k)?
Take a castered wheel about the same size, get going down the freeway at about 100+ if your car can do it. Then stick the wheel and strut out the window and see how much force is required to keep it in your hands.
Waxing a plane after a good wash was rumored to yeild a few extra knots in the air, so I can well imagine sticking such a drag on the very rear of the plane would slow it a lot.
Btw, You might want to buy a bit more insurance before you attempt this experiment... :)
I am not responsible for any injuries you may incur or cause. :)
Dan.
-
Originally posted by 2Hawks
Take a castered wheel about the same size, get going down the freeway at about 100+ if your car can do it. Then stick the wheel and strut out the window and see how much force is required to keep it in your hands.
Waxing a plane after a good wash was rumored to yeild a few extra knots in the air, so I can well imagine sticking such a drag on the very rear of the plane would slow it a lot.
Btw, You might want to buy a bit more insurance before you attempt this experiment... :)
I am not responsible for any injuries you may incur or cause. :)
Dan.
Lol just as well you got the disclaimer in, was hunting around for a castered wheel, I'll give it a miss now.
Oh, I understand drag etc, but to use your example.
Take the same car make it heavier by adding 30% more fuel and see how much it goes
Will have to dig into this further.
-
Originally posted by Kev367th
Lol just as well you got the disclaimer in, was hunting around for a castered wheel, I'll give it a miss now.
Oh, I understand drag etc, but to use your example.
Take the same car make it heavier by adding 30% more fuel and see how much it goes
Will have to dig into this further.
KEV wouldn't the car just take longer to get to speed not go slower ?
Bronk
-
Heavier car will take longer to get to its maximum speed yes.
Lets take the weight thing to the extreme -
What would have a higher top speed?
a) A 2litre Ford weighing 200lbs
or
b) A 2 litre Ford weighing 200000lbs
Granted extreme, but shows the gist of what I'm saying.
Think of Formula 1 - Always trying to reduce weight to gain not only acceleration but increased top speed.
-
OK but you said 30%. Say you take a 3200 lb ford add the 30%[960lbs] I'd bet you would not see a big diff in top speed. BEcause that would just be the diff of one passenger and 5 with a trunk full of luggage.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
OK but you said 30%. Say you take a 3200 lb ford add the 30%[960lbs] I'd bet you would not see a big diff in top speed. BEcause that would just be the diff of one passenger and 5 with a trunk full of luggage.
Bronk
Ask a semi driver what he can do with no load and what he can do with a full load.
-
I know, I did say it was an extreme example :)
Would depend I suppose on what give more advantage -
Spit IX with 35 less gallons and a fixed tailwheel
or
Spit VIII with 35 more gallons and a retractible tail wheel.
Think of it this way at equal weights the VIII should be a little faster due to less drag.
Maybe the retractible tailwheel makes more of a difference that I thought it would.
-
I'll tke the VIII i can always take less fuel.
Bronk
-
75% and drops, can always dump them :).
-
Kev check your messages for a chuckle. I swear it realy happened.
-
Originally posted by justin_g
IMO, it's because JL.165 was a dog! :D
Read note 2. above the graph.
-
For aircraft parasitic drag is mostly the limiting factor for top speed. For cars it is usually form drag and road friction (lots of variables of course). In either case weight difference only plays a minor role unless it is excessive. In F1 cars they reduce weight primarily to improve cornering and acceleration not top speed. For a semi load will play a big part since they don't go too fast anyhow, and road friction from 18 big wheels becomes a big factor.
-
Yeah was a clumsy attempt to describe a more complex problem, maybe should have added theoretical no friction etc, but it gets silly.
Side benefit of lightening F1 cars is a slight increase in speed, although as you correctly said accelration is primary benefactor.
luckily enough what I worked on (Helis) drag wasn't a factor, just getting them in the air was hard enough.
-
For aircraft, parasitic drag is the MAJOR factor for top speed. If you take two identical P-51s except one has its surfaces polished and filled while the other has a shoddy paintjob. Add 2000 lbs of led weight to the polished one (internally), odds are that it will still be faster than the other lighter P-51. Its climb rate and acceleration would be worse of course.
It's almost a classic P-51D vs. 109G-10 match up. Pony is heavier and has better aerodynamics, but less power. 109 is lighter and has more power, but also more drag. Both are almost equal in speed, but the 109 climbs better and accelerate better.
-
Well yeah, this was the main reason they highly polished the Spits that were chasing down V1's.
Like I said I used a clumsy example.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OH DUH - From the graph
2. Purple line for LF.IX JL.165 @ +25lbs - this particular aircraft was noted during flight testing to have lower performance than other LF.IX previously tested at the same facility.
I'm either drinking too much or not enough to miss that.
:o
-
Ok, I am a student pilot I confess, But here's what I know. (I think)
A slower plane must have a higher Angle of Attack to maintain it's altitude than an identical plane. This greater AOA causes more Drag which must me compensated with more power to achieve a higher speed and lower AOA. With a positive AOA you are really sticking that wheel out there in the air. Lets not forget about the open space through which the wheel protrudes. This will also catch air and create turbulence which creates more drag.
And as far as 30% more fuel on a car... Gas Tanks on a Car Pale in comparison to the capacities of gas tanks on planes. -- much more Weight AFAIK.
Dan.
-
2Hawks, at high speeds AoA is minimal, perhaps even negative on some aircraft. Induced drag only makes up a tiny part of total drag at high speeds.