Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Cmustard on April 24, 2008, 11:37:10 AM
-
OK , I would just like to say that the mossi is undermodeled horribly. It should be doing 450 MPH on the deck and it wont even get to 360. I ask and hope that HTC will fix this and make known the true power of the moss.
-
....I"ll wait for Karnak to step in.....
-
I agree completely. Even though I have no real knowledge on the subject. I do love flying a Mossie though. :aok
-
check the aircraft and vehicules subforum...lots of threads about that.
-
OK , I would just like to say that the mossi is undermodeled horribly. It should be doing 450 MPH on the deck
Please state a source for that.
-
450 on the deck?
Your kidding of course, a Tempest in full WEP does 375 on the deck.
The FB VI did @ 380 tops clean, and @ 335ish on the deck. Its not a jet.
...I like the Mossie FB VI and have done a few tours in it as my main ride. For starters, dont roll it with too much fuel, 25 and DTs or 50 internal max, and pick your fights, keep your E up. Its not a single engined day fighter so dont expect too much out of it. It turns a nice corner, and it has awesome firepower, but like any type it has its drawbacks. Make sure you fly it at its best alts.
-
Mosquito FB.VI Series 2 with Merlin 25s at +18lbs boost, no flame dampers or ordnance did about 350-355mph on the deck. Ours has the flame dampers and does about 340 on the deck. These numbers are correct.
The problem is finding data to back up the undampered performance. So far as I can tell, looking at all the data I have managed to find, when Boscombe Downs wanted to test an undampered FB.VI they asked for one from and active squadron, which took it as an oportunity to get rid of a lemon. Both Boscombe Downs and de Haviland say it was significantly underperforming and the top deck speed they got was about 330mph on intial testing and about 340mph after de Haviland cleaned it up a bit.
Some pilots reported 370+mph on the deck, but de Haviland says there was an instrument error in some of them that reported speeds as 20mph faster than they were.
A couple of performance graphs:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/Mosquito6.jpg)
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/MosquitoVI.JPG)
-
OK , I would just like to say that the mossi is undermodeled horribly. It should be doing 450 MPH on the deck and it wont even get to 360. I ask and hope that HTC will fix this and make known the true power of the moss.
You still upset cause I caught you in my 262?.... :P
-
Another comment, I very strongly advise you to do some detailed research before claiming something in AH is wildly off. Some things are a bit off, but nothing is remotely as far off as you claimed the Mosquito was in your opening post.
You may be a bit confused from reading about Mosquitoes out running German fighters. The fact is, no Mosquito was going to be outrunning a Bf109K-4 or and Fw190D-9, but those were very late and in the Fw190D-9's case relatively rare. An undampered Mosquito 6 will hold a lead on a Bf109G or an Fw190A at lower altitudes. At higher altitudes the bomber and PR Mosquito's very high cruise speeds made them nearly uninterceptable. Sure, a Bf109K-4 can climb at 4,500fpm and has a top speed of ~450mph, but while it is climbing it is only going ~180mph over the ground. In the 6-8 minutes to climb to the correct altitude the Bf109 travels about 18-24 miles. The B or PR Mosquito cruising at 330mph does something more like 60 miles and by the time the Bf109 has matched speed is probably about 60-75 miles ahead.
-
Karnak,
Consider who started this thread and thats all the reason he needs. He is 16 years old you know! Didn't you get the memo that all squeekers know everything?
-
Karnak,
Consider who started this thread and thats all the reason he needs. He is 16 years old you know! Didn't you get the memo that all squeekers know everything?
Yes, but if those of us who actually do know something just point and laugh at them then they will never learn anything. If we post correct information therer is a chance that they, or others, will actually learn. Making a post that basically says "Squeaker, haha" is just as useless, if not more so, than the original post being laughed at.
-
Karnak,
Consider who started this thread and thats all the reason he needs. He is 16 years old you know! Didn't you get the memo that all squeekers know everything?
Wow, he's THAT old? I was aiming for 13-14.
-
Please state a source for that.
http://www.masportaviator.com/ntp/dehavillandmosquito.asp
-
http://www.masportaviator.com/ntp/dehavillandmosquito.asp
And where exactly does it claim that the VI is capable of doing 450mph on the deck?
"The Mk VI could make 379 mph at 13,000 ft., climb 2,000 ft. / min. fully loaded 3,000 lb. heavier than the Mk II and at 3,500 ft. / min. clean and fly more than 1,200 miles full loaded. The Mk VI had four .303 machine guns and four 20 mm cannon in the nose."
-
And where exactly does it claim that the VI is capable of doing 450mph on the deck?
"The Mk VI could make 379 mph at 13,000 ft., climb 2,000 ft. / min. fully loaded 3,000 lb. heavier than the Mk II and at 3,500 ft. / min. clean and fly more than 1,200 miles full loaded. The Mk VI had four .303 machine guns and four 20 mm cannon in the nose."
OK , the moss MK 6 was capable of 479mph and could carry 3K of ord. I fly mossies in AH almost every flight. Never , inless in a dive , have i been able to carry 3 k of ord , :+) , nor go 379 , tops out around 365MPH , spits out run me :(
-
where do you get 479mph?? the source you gave proves your wrong :lol.....admit your wrong so we can move on from this :pray
....Im not sure but does anything with a prop(and a stock engine) go over 460?.....I know the air race planes are fast but they are highly modified....
....September Fury won the 2006 Reno race at 481.619 mph, an F8F Bearcat 'Rare Bear' was fastest in 2007 at 478mph.....
-
where do you get 479mph?? the source you gave proves your wrong :lol.....admit your wrong so we can move on from this :pray
....Im not sure but does anything with a prop(and a stock engine) go over 460?.....I know the air race planes are fast but they are highly modified....
....September Fury won the 2006 Reno race at 481.619 mph, an F8F Bearcat 'Rare Bear' was fastest in 2007 at 478mph.....
379MPH , made a mistake on typing , edited it, but you saw it when it was incorrect.
-
OK , the moss MK 6 was capable of 479mph and could carry 3K of ord. I fly mossies in AH almost every flight. Never , inless in a dive , have i been able to carry 3 k of ord , :+) , nor go 379 , tops out around 365MPH , spits out run me :(
Actualy, according to the chart that Karnak posted, 365 is overpowered.
-
Faster airplanes, however, need propellers with adjustable blades, able to increase the angle ("pitch") at which they "bite" into the air as the flight speed increases, so that they always face into the combined velocity v due to their own motion and that of the airplane. One can not compensate by increasing the speed v1 of the blade, because as the propeller tips reach the speed of sound, their efficiency drops markedly (and the noise they produce rises!)
Adjustable blades ("variable pitch propellers"), more expensive and complicated than one-piece propellers, have long been standard equipment on the faster propeller airplanes. But even they hit a limit. Suppose the airplane moves at the same speed as the propeller tip, that is, v2 = v1. The tip of the blade then needs to be rotated into the direction of motion by 45 degrees into the direction of motion (bottom drawing). Two disturbing trends now become evident.
First of all, as seen from the "vector addition triangle" and the theorem of Pythagoras, the total velocity v sensed by the blade is considerably faster (by about 41%) than either of its two component velocities, pushing it closer to the speed of sound and its associated problems. And secondly, the lifting force L on the blade is also rotated by 45 degrees! Only the component L1 pulls the airplane forward--the other component, L2, actually opposes the rotation of the propeller and demands extra power from the motor, power that serves no useful purpose.
Because of such problems, propeller-driven airplanes have never even approached the speed of the jets. The faster propeller-driven fighter airplanes of World War II flew at about 370-400 mph. The speed record for a purely propeller-driven airplane, 463 mph, was attained in Germany before the war (in 1939) and stood for decades. The current record is 528.33 mph, attained in 1989 by the "Rare Bear", a WW-II US Navy 8F8 "Bearcat" fighter, modified for high-speed racing. The airplane had crashed in 1962 and was lying in an Indiana cornfield, next to a runway, before Lyle Shelton in 1969 found it and restored it. He later replaced its 2400 HP engine with one of 4000 HP (getting less than 1 mile per gallon gas at top speed), replaced its propeller, and trimmed its weight. It is still flying. (Thanks to Dr. Eddie Irani for this information).
-
Faster airplanes, however, need propellers with adjustable blades, able to increase the angle ("pitch") at which they "bite" into the air as the flight speed increases, so that they always face into the combined velocity v due to their own motion and that of the airplane. One can not compensate by increasing the speed v1 of the blade, because as the propeller tips reach the speed of sound, their efficiency drops markedly (and the noise they produce rises!)
Adjustable blades ("variable pitch propellers"), more expensive and complicated than one-piece propellers, have long been standard equipment on the faster propeller airplanes. But even they hit a limit. Suppose the airplane moves at the same speed as the propeller tip, that is, v2 = v1. The tip of the blade then needs to be rotated into the direction of motion by 45 degrees into the direction of motion (bottom drawing). Two disturbing trends now become evident.
First of all, as seen from the "vector addition triangle" and the theorem of Pythagoras, the total velocity v sensed by the blade is considerably faster (by about 41%) than either of its two component velocities, pushing it closer to the speed of sound and its associated problems. And secondly, the lifting force L on the blade is also rotated by 45 degrees! Only the component L1 pulls the airplane forward--the other component, L2, actually opposes the rotation of the propeller and demands extra power from the motor, power that serves no useful purpose.
Because of such problems, propeller-driven airplanes have never even approached the speed of the jets. The faster propeller-driven fighter airplanes of World War II flew at about 370-400 mph. The speed record for a purely propeller-driven airplane, 463 mph, was attained in Germany before the war (in 1939) and stood for decades. The current record is 528.33 mph, attained in 1989 by the "Rare Bear", a WW-II US Navy 8F8 "Bearcat" fighter, modified for high-speed racing. The airplane had crashed in 1962 and was lying in an Indiana cornfield, next to a runway, before Lyle Shelton in 1969 found it and restored it. He later replaced its 2400 HP engine with one of 4000 HP (getting less than 1 mile per gallon gas at top speed), replaced its propeller, and trimmed its weight. It is still flying. (Thanks to Dr. Eddie Irani for this information).
Odd , I though fastest prop plane would be a p51H , 550MPH which is prop plane. I think they used some p51s in vietnam , woulda probally used something like that
-
Yawn.... time to move on I think.
-
Odd , I though fastest prop plane would be a p51H , 550MPH which is prop plane. I think they used some p51s in vietnam , woulda probally used something like that
Again, no if the world record is 528.33mph, then the P51 didnt go 550mph.
-
Odd , I though fastest prop plane would be a p51H , 550MPH which is prop plane. I think they used some p51s in vietnam , woulda probally used something like that
Where do you get your information? If it's from a book, burn it.
P-51H speed listed in the specs show a top speed of 487 mph (784 km/h) at 25,000 ft. However, flight tests done in October of '46, serial number 44-64182, recorded a top speed of 451 mph with 90 inches Hg at 25,000ft. Another test dated May of '45 related to serial number 44-64161, which gives a top speed of 450 mph with just 67 in. Hg. Though, it should be noted that the top speed listed in the official specs of 487mph was done on with a clean wing (no bomb or rocket racks) while the flight tests in '45 and '46 were done in P-51Hs with racks mounted.
But in any case, the P-51H did not go the speed you stated nor did any see action during the Vietnam war. The United States retired the last Mustang, P-51D-30-NA Serial No. 44-74936, from the West Virginia ANG in 1957.
ack-ack
-
Oi!
Me thinks he has been hit in the head with to many arrows. Surrender C.Mustard, we have you surrounded!!
-
I thought it was with the candlestick in the library?
-
hmmm... you may have a point
-
I agree completely. Even though I have no real knowledge on the subject.
:rofl
-
:rofl
heheheh yalls is harsh ..... im done posting .... IM QUITING ACES HIGH !!!
see you all on 200 :D
-
:rock
-
(http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/database/aircraft/showimage.php?id=2413) :pray
-
OK , the moss MK 6 was capable of 479mph
Where are you getting this info from? Look at the speed chart above.
-
I thought it was with the candlestick in the library?
It certainly seems like most of these kids have never even been near a library, so we can rule that out.
-
Sad but too true.
How about a Candlestick in the :O
-
With the joystick is the computer room
-
OK , I would just like to say that the mossi is undermodeled horribly. It should be doing 450 MPH on the deck and it wont even get to 360. I ask and hope that HTC will fix this and make known the true power of the moss.
your thinkin the gun fighter version ,not sure of the model name though. the one we have is the light bomber version (or what ever you call it). hope that helps you understand it more. but the gun fighter would be nice, saw an episode on dogfights with it.
-
your thinkin the gun fighter version ,not sure of the model name though. the one we have is the light bomber version (or what ever you call it). hope that helps you understand it more. but the gun fighter would be nice, saw an episode on dogfights with it.
No, its not the bomber version. Its a fighter. Note the 4 hispanos in the nose. The bombers were unarmed.
-
No, its not the bomber version. Its a fighter. Note the 4 hispanos in the nose. The bombers were unarmed.
you sure mother? if your right then mustard is right, it is under modeled
-
you sure mother? if your right then mustard is right, it is under modeled
:furious...no its not....read the rest of the posts......
-
you sure mother? if your right then mustard is right, it is under modeled
Yes and no.
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/MosquitoVI.JPG)
(http://flyaceshigh.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6spd.gif)
It's actually a bit overmodeled as far as speed is concerned.
-
Yes and no.
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/MosquitoVI.JPG)
(http://flyaceshigh.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6spd.gif)
It's actually a bit overmodeled as far as speed is concerned.
you mean undermodled? the sped dont match up at 14,000 feet, the most productive speed alt that i saw.
-
you mean undermodled? the sped dont match up at 14,000 feet, the most productive speed alt that i saw.
The chart shows 379; the AH Mossi gets 374; the AH Mossi has exhaust dampeners that hamper performance for the advantage of not having.... erm, something, that gives away its position at night (not sure what).
-
The chart shows 379; the AH Mossi gets 374; the AH Mossi has exhaust dampeners that hamper performance for the advantage of not having.... erm, something, that gives away its position at night (not sure what).
hides the flames that shoot out the exhaust
-
Labelling an a/c over, or under modelled takes more than a measly 5 mph of a chart. Any a/c in AH that gets within that is close enough.
...Those charts do not indicate exact prop type, radio antenna type, intake snow guards? atmospherics, or any # of a dozen other factors not known, and thats not even getting into the flame damper issue. You need to know the exact details of the model in AH and compare it to an exact a/c in real life to comment on a difference of 5 mph, and even then, there could be reasons for a discrepancy, including the normal error range in any tests that were done.
The Mossie VI is as close to being modelled as its real life counterpart, as any a/c in the game. There is nothing I have seen that would make me beleive (so far) it needs any tweaking re: its speeds.
-
No, its not the bomber version. Its a fighter. Note the 4 hispanos in the nose. The bombers were unarmed.
Some general info:
Mk IV = most common Bomber
Mk VI = most common Fighter-Bomber
We have the Mk VI
-
Yes, with NF dampeners that slow it down.,,,15 mph?
-
If the Mossi VI is supposed to go faster then why doesnt it? If the dampeners are not supposed to be there then why are they??? Take the muzzle off the Mossi and let it be the attack aircraft is is supposed to be! ;)
The Mossi, at least IMO, is one of the aircraft that isnt living up to its WWII legend status. What the Mossi cant out-gun it should be able to out-run, and what it cant out-run it should be able to out-gun and neither seems to be happenin'.
EDIT: Oh, and I own page 4!
-
If the Mossi VI is supposed to go faster then why doesnt it? If the dampeners are not supposed to be there then why are they???
It ISN'T supposed to go faster, and the dampeners ARE supposed to be there. Read the thread ;)
The Mossi, at least IMO, is one of the aircraft that isnt living up to its WWII legend status. What the Mossi cant out-gun it should be able to out-run, and what it cant out-run it should be able to out-gun and neither seems to be happenin'.
Fly it against the 109G6 and earlier and the 190A5. You'll find it does exactly what it's supposed to.
-
Some general info:
Mk IV = most common Bomber
Mk VI = most common Fighter-Bomber
We have the Mk VI
thought so :D :salute
-
Fly it against the 109G6 and earlier and the 190A5. You'll find it does exactly what it's supposed to.
Actually, no, it doesn't. I have been run down in stern chases by both the Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6 and Fw190A-5 when they did not dive on me and the chase was long enough for any speed to have bled down to max sustained on my Mossie, and it bleeds speed slower than almost any other aircraft. There are numerous accounts of Mossie VIs holding distance or out running Bf109s and Fw190s on the deck.
As to this chart:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/MosquitoVI.JPG)
The undampered FB.Mk VI would perform very much like the Mk.33, at least at lower alts.
-
It certainly seems like most of these kids have never even been near a library, so we can rule that out.
Do not put us all in the same boat :).
-
Honestly, the only real problem with the Mossie is that in the MAs it is forced to compete against a fair number of aircraft that it really wasn't ever required to fight.
I really think that the Mossie would do a bit better if all it ever came up against were German craft.
-
Honestly, the only real problem with the Mossie is that in the MAs it is forced to compete against a fair number of aircraft that it really wasn't ever required to fight.
the same could be said about most of the planes.
:noid
-
Honestly, the only real problem with the Mossie is that in the MAs it is forced to compete against a fair number of aircraft that it really wasn't ever required to fight.
I really think that the Mossie would do a bit better if all it ever came up against were German craft.
I disagree.
-
It ISN'T supposed to go faster, and the dampeners ARE supposed to be there. Read the thread ;)Fly it against the 109G6 and earlier and the 190A5. You'll find it does exactly what it's supposed to.
Actually -
For the FB VI that could also carry rockets (batch 2) flame dampers were NOT fitted as standard from the factory.
The earlier ones (batch 1) did come from the factory with flame dampers fitted.
As ours is a batch 2 FB VI Mossie it shouldn't have flame dampers fitted.
-
There's enough pics at the Imperial War Museum site, assorted Coastal Command sites to make it clear that ejector exhausts were used for daylight ops.
However, 450 on the deck? "Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight".
Fellow I used to correspond with used to be with one of the MUs testing new airframes - said they dived them to 480 on tests. But then, they were wild young men in them days.
-
Here we go again with the "classic" exhaust dampener thread - a good one thougt
-
So now I guess the question begs this:
Can AH release the Mossi IV from its bonds and remove the dampeners for a few weeks?
If data shows a dramatic increase in success rate to the point of unbalancing whatever is in fear of being unbalanced... then AH can always place the "damned dampener hampers" back on and slow it down. ;)
I'm not familar enough with the "1st batch/2nd batch stuff" and dont have the sources on hand to look it up, but if that is true... then hopefully AH admins will at least consider allow the mod for a trial. :pray PLEASE!? :D
-
I think they used some p51s in vietnam
:huh Please show me some your proof that the pony served in Vietnam. Korea, yes. But I highly doubt it served in Vietnam.
-
:huh Please show me some your proof that the pony served in Vietnam. Korea, yes. But I highly doubt it served in Vietnam.
ontos is right. did a project on the 51 last year for school, it was retired in like '55. never served in nam.
-
:huh Please show me some your proof that the pony served in Vietnam. Korea, yes. But I highly doubt it served in Vietnam.
I think I already showed in my previous post in this thread, he was completely wrong about P-51s taking part in Vietnam.
ack-ack
-
Strangely, the French briefly had some Mossies in Vietnam, based in Saigon IIRC.
-
Strangely, the French briefly had some Mossies in Vietnam, based in Saigon IIRC.
Leave it to the French to spoil a cool airplane. I'll probably feel dirty/smelly(in a Body Odor way) everytime I up a Mossie now!
If you are French, read the above as: "The French are really cool".
-
Leave it to the French to spoil a cool airplane. I'll probably feel dirty/smelly(in a Body Odor way) everytime I up a Mossie now!
If you are French, read the above as: "The French are really cool".
Very smart.
I don't Fly P51's as the stick is all greasy with Hamburger sauce, and the pilot chair is deformed from overweight. Happy now ?