Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Kurfürst on January 03, 2006, 06:50:22 AM
-
From " History of aircraft manufacture in USSR", p256, noting turn radius of various fighters :
All At 1000m altitude
Spitfire IXLF - 235m
Yak 1 - 275m
Yak 9? - 290m
La-5 : 310m
La-5FN : 295m
Me109G-2 : 290m
FW190A : 340m
P-39 : 253-280m
Turn times :
Allison P-51 : 23 sec
P-47D-10 : 26 sec
P-39D-2 : 17.7-18.7 sec
P-39Q-15 : 20-21
P-63A-10 : 21 sec
Spit VB : 18.8
Spit IXLF : 18.5sec
Hurri IIA : 19-20
P-40C : 18 sec
P-40E : 19.2
109F-4 : 19.6-20.5
109G-2 : 20-21.5 (clean)
109G-2 : 22.6 (with gondolas)
Yak9 : 17-18
La5 : 19
Yak 1 : 17-19
Lagg3 : 18-19
Yak3 : 17 sec
FW 190A-8 : 21-22 (lightened w/o external cannons, at 3986kg)
Fw190A-4 : 22-23sec
FW 190A-5 : 22-23
FW 190D-9 : 22-23 (at 1780 HP)
-
Looks good to me.
Do they list weights? Do they have the turn radius for the American A/C?
-
Yes they list weights, but since these were usually at the normal t-o weight, I wanted to spare some time. The only one with the varying weight is the FW 190 series, but I noted that. Also, some (typicall LW becuase of their many boosts) aircraft vary with engine power.
Re turn radius, I find that on the page that deals with the Spitfire (pretty general, but there as some info as well). The book is some 450+ pages, cyrillic Russian text, dozens of tables and graphs of all sorts of things... I have to OCR and translate it. Checking through it, I did not find much more, they note though the 'climb in battle turn' for most planes.
No F4U specs at all, sorry. Just the ones the Russians came accross, Mustangs, P-39, P-63, P-47, Spit, Hurri, Mosquito.
-
Yeah,
I didn't think they would have any F4U information, but the P-47, P-63 and Allison Mustang are interesting. I know the Germans captured an F4U but I have never seen any test data from them. Wouldn't that be a fun read.
I have a turn rate/radius calculator that does acceleration, calculates drag etc. I have been playing with the 190A5 based on the data from the Navy test and it is amazingly accurate when compared to the VVS test.
If I put in 2.5G's the turn time is right at 23 seconds with a radius of about 950ft or roughly 300meters. It also builds an EM diagram for the A/C with a thrust to weight graph. It was done by Zigrat formally from these boards. You can vary the G load to find the best rate and radius or you can leave it at 1G to check climb and acceleration.
I swear you could sell it. It is in Excel if you want a copy.
-
Hi,
I think I already got that spreadsheet a long ago from your(?) site. Pretty good, though I did not manage to find out the turn time calculator back then. I guess I will try out again.
The thing I wonder about is the turn performance of VVS planes... their turn radius is quite big, otoh the turn times are amongst the lowest... why? They are underpowered?
The other thing I noticed is the effect of gondolas on the 109G. Sure they hurt turn rate, but given the spec of these things, you'd expect something like 30+secs...
OH, I forgot, when you see something like "17-19 secs" it means the turn in one direction is better.
-
Buh bye Kurfie.
-
ah... Skuzzy took out the trash.:aok
-
Who put the "persona non grata" beneath Kuffie's name?
Pyro?
-
LOL we just lost a guy who could provide us a ton of information about 109s
are there any people still alive in this BBS who can provide us more info about 109s like Kurfie (minus his attitide)?
if i remember this correctly kurfie pointed that 109 flaps was manually controlled by a wheel and its flaps can be used beyond 700km/h @ 10 degrees down. he also pointed out that late 109s (such as 109K) were aerodynamically cleaner than late spitfires (BUT the controls are STIFF as usual like the 109Gs)
-
He is still around I belive.
-
Originally posted by Angus
He is still around I belive.
Maybe he's :rofl at us this time:(
-
Originally posted by 1K3
LOL we just lost a guy who could provide us a ton of information about 109s
and?
-
LOL we just lost a guy who could provide us a ton of information about 109s
Not to worry. He has 3 other accounts that he uses to post here, and I'm sure he'll be in shortly to drown us in his vast sea of knowledge.
-
Actually there are some here that have about the same info as he does, on the 109 I mean.
And as for history, and not just technical stuff, the forum prompts many a fine researcher, both on allied and axis terms.
As for technical stuff, the forum has some members with excellent knowledge and experience.
Wouldn't be much of a loss, now would it?
-
Widewing
Bodhi
Karnak
Kweassa
Dan/Corky
Pyro
Just to name a few.
We dont need him. And are better off without him.
-
There are many folks here with in depth knowledge about the technical aspects of WW2 fighters. I may disagree with them on some things, but I can have a reasonable conversation with them most of the time (when im sober and the voices in my head stop yelling).
...and if that fails I get a BOOK. Where we all get our info anyways, since none of us own or flew real WW2 fighters.
Nobody here has some special corner on the truth, or ever did. Look it up for yourself and decide, relying on others to dispense knowledge is a sure way to get drowned in BS and politics.
And thats all I have to say on that.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
LOL we just lost a guy who could provide us a ton of information about 109s
We dont need him. I hope they banned his IP address too so his other BBS names (VO101_Isegrim, others?) cant be used either
-
Er, I must humbly deny being on the list - I'm just a 'look up the internet, think about it a little, and copy and post' guy. I can only comment on what everyone already talked about, and mush up all the info in conclusion. Nothing original out of me, nor do I have any kind of firsthand info.
As for the turn time/radius info from Soviet sources, here's how our AH info compares. I'm not sure how the Soviets tested it.. but the AH2 values are for all planes at under 500ft altitude using WEP settings for throttle and turning as tightly as possible without consideration for turn rate, only turn radius:
Soviet Source
All At 1,000m(3,000ft) altitude
Spitfire IXLF - 235m
Yak 1 - 275m
Yak 9? - 290m
La-5 : 310m
La-5FN : 295m
Me109G-2 : 290m
FW190A : 340m
P-39 : 253-280m
AH2
All at 500ft altitude
Spit Mk.8: 170.7m
Yak1: plane not available
Yak-9T: 205.0m
Yak-9U: 205.5m
La-5: plane not available
La-5FN: 199.8m
Bf109G-2: 214.0m
Fw190A-5: 269.0m
Fw190A-8: 296.3m
P-39: plane not available
All our AH planes has about 30~50m smaller radius than the real life figures universally. No doubt the real life figures were using different test perimeters.
-
Why was he banned? I don't see anything offensive in his posts.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
All our AH planes has about 30~50m smaller radius than the real life figures universally. No doubt the real life figures were using different test perimeters.
Given the Russian data seem to be given at least partially for military power (or similar setting) and the altitude is a bit higher, the agreement between AH and Russian data seem to be pretty good.
gripen
-
Congratz! Your campaign finally succeeded.
So... who will be smoked out next?
-
Originally posted by BlauK
Congratz! Your campaign finally succeeded.
So... who will be smoked out next?
Kurfursts own words got him banned, all I and others did was send his words to HTC so they would not miss what vile things he posted. He got what he deserved.
-
Me thinks he got mobbed. 10 guys each taking turn to pick on him, and when he retaliates make sure the teacher sees it. This BBS can be so juvenile at times.
-
Originally posted by Harry
Why was he banned? I don't see anything offensive in his posts.
:rolleyes:
-
Could you please point them out to me?
-
Originally posted by Harry
Could you please point them out to me?
Checkout towards the end of this thread -
http://www.flyaceshigh.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=167559
-
His posts seem to have been censured, and also those of many other posters.
-
Then guess what?
You're just going to have to feel confident that Skuzzy made a fair and justified decision to ban him.
If you dont, oh well, he still aint coming back.
You obviously didnt pay attention or didnt even read that thread while it took a turn for the worse.... Which was all thanks to your friend.
-
Given that he has been banned at least three times before IIRC, what makes you think he’ll stay away this time? He isn’t my friend, nor are you for that matter.
-
THE BEATINGS MUST CONTINUE UNTIL RESULTS ARE ACHIEVED!
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
they note though the 'climb in battle turn' for most planes.
(http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/combat_t.JPG)
I do find this annoying.............. VVS / Tsagi recorded the combat turn performance of every ac they find yet fail to even look at stuff like roll rate!
-
Originally posted by Harry
Me thinks he got mobbed. 10 guys each taking turn to pick on him, and when he retaliates make sure the teacher sees it. This BBS can be so juvenile at times.
They fed the "troll" then ratted him out for being full.
Kinda funny if you ask me... assists stats for all who participated, Skuzzy gets the kill.
-
See Rule #4
-
This forum and attending discussions, have a specific purpose. Imparting information about the various aircraft/vehicles used in WW2. Please get it back on track.
-
Well, there are numbers posted from the Russians, and numbers from AH II.
Makes an interesting comparison anyway. Even if the diameters don't match, there is always the percentage and rank calculations, and from a brief look, they don't look too far apart.
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
See Rule #4
LOL you havent see Kurfie attack people.
When i started "Is Spitfire V still the dominant mark in mid-war" kurfie went "free-for-all Tony Montana style" personal attacks on kurfie.
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
See Rule #4
DID you read that thread before it was edited????
-
See Rule #4
-
The P-39 was actually a fairly manueverable plane. The Soviets used it as an air superiority fighter, they felt that it held a marked advantage in the horizontal below I want to say 15,000 ft (not certain on that).
It got a bad rap in the Pacific because it was rather a dog vs the Zeke... the P-63 (P-39 part duex) is the last plane I think that could be introduced into AH that would see any significant use.
-
Yeah, the P63 was very agile, rather fast and packed a punch.
They have one at Duxford and they say it is a delight to fly.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
The P-39 was actually a fairly manueverable plane. The Soviets used it as an air superiority fighter, they felt that it held a marked advantage in the horizontal below I want to say 15,000 ft (not certain on that).
It got a bad rap in the Pacific because it was rather a dog vs the Zeke... the P-63 (P-39 part duex) is the last plane I think that could be introduced into AH that would see any significant use.
Did the P-63's use the 37mm too?
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
See Rule #4
You can really smell him in FInland?:eek:
-
SOVIET LIES I SAY LIES LIES LIES!!!
Sorry, I had to say it. :)
Hey, dig that Yak-3.
-
See Rule #6, #4
-
There is really so much difference between VVS-Tsagi and AH2 turning radius?
Off Topic: I'd like to see the same banning/censoring attitude towards the picking crowd.
-
There is really so much difference between VVS-Tsagi and AH2 turning radius?
Yup... and I'm a bit confident in the objectivity of my testings, too.
But like gripen said, I'm not sure what kind of condtionss the Soviets used to test the turn radius. If I know it, perhaps I can do a few more quick testings with matching conditions to offer more accurate comparison... (if I get off my lazy butt, that is)
So what exactly was the conditions the Russians used in the mentioned testings anyway? Anybody know?
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
So what exactly was the conditions the Russians used in the mentioned testings anyway? Anybody know?
Full up weight typically..............well they took off at that weight.
eg turn trials on 3 gun La 7 #38100869 were at 3310 kg take off weight.
at 1000m Mil power (1000mmpt @ 2400rpm)
Speed 320>340Km/h
Turn time> 21 secs@ 305-335m
Bank angle >71
a 2 gun model La7 serial No.452132-76 weighing in at 3240 kg
Speed 340
Turn time>19.5L/18.5R
No radius or bank angle given for that trial
-
Originally posted by Slash27
Did the P-63's use the 37mm too?
Yea. the P-63's had a 37mm in the nose, that was an improved version of the 37mm in the P-39. IIRC, it jammed less and had more ammo. It could also pack 2-4 .50's, IIRC. I haven't really looked at any of my books in a while. I do remember that the P-63 had a .50 under each wing in a "gondola" type arrangement, and that the Soviets usually took those off. So probably 1x37mm, 2x.50 would be standard.
-
Any idea what the ROF was for it? My buddy has a cool book with all the equipment the U.S. used in WW2 and it has detailed info on all the weapons. I need to go steal it:D