Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Hangtime on June 23, 2000, 12:43:00 AM
-
Ran an accel and flat level speed checks against the AH published numbers.. and ran level speed checks against the published data thru 20k. Good news; they appear to check out on both planes with a very very slim margin of error.
The eye opener was the accel tests. Speed and accel comparisons were done at 150 feet agl, clean; half a tank of fuel.
Pony does 365 level wepped; the FWa5 about 345.
Pony gets from 150 to 365 wepped in 2 min 15 seconds. The a5 gets from 150 to 340 in 1 min 15 seconds.
Ran it three times.. takes a full minute longer for the pony to reach her top speed than it does for the FWa5.. methinks the FW is fine; and the pony's accel is porked.
Still, I think we need some comparitive turn rate tests done; from what I've seen in the main; the A5 is a deadly little bastidge when it gets to turnin on the deck.
Congrats Luftwobbles on yer 'new' mid war competitive ride. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(Hang wants his Mustang III)
FWIW>> Hangtime has 17 kills and has been killed 3 times against the Fw 190A-5.<<
Just doin what I can to help stamp out the 190 menace... and killin 'em wherever I find 'em. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hang
-
Thanks for taking the time and doing this Hang. Numbers sure beat some of the rhetoric that gets tossed about here on occasion.
So if I understand you right... you found that in level flight, the A-5 adds up?
I guess some turn numbers are needed now.
-
IF THE P-51 TURN AND ACCEL IS PORKED WTF IS UP WITH THE P-38?!?!!!!?
btw the yak9 rocks
-
AFAIK horizontal acceleration in P38 is better than in P51. It seems that A5 accelerates horizontaly better than any of them. After doing some offline tests (50% fuel, 2x20 guns A5, 4x20 guns A8, 6x12 P51), A5 is slower than A8 on the deck (about 10 mph) and slower than P51 (about 20 mph). But A5 acceleration seems much better than P51 and even better than A8 (at least 0 - 300). Even with 20 mph advantage for P51, Mustang will have serious problems to catch any A5 on the deck with so noticeable difference in acceleration.
-
Ok Hang, what do you mean here?...A5 SHOULD have that acceleration compared to a P51D...if you dont believe me check the powerloading numbers and you'll see what I mean.
REmember,too,that 190A can hold WEP for 10 minutes. P51 only 5.
Where did you measure 345mph? on the deck?...wich wsa the loadout? I ask it because the charts on HTC web show a speed of some 330 mph on the deck, while A8 is near 350.
Citabria, dunno about P38...But I think its acceleration is GREAT up to 250mph. Over that it is VERY poor. But that is like it should be historically isnt it?
as I say I dont know that mmuch about p38 so I'll reamain silent until someone tells here about it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Didn't it occur to you that someone fights the A-5 the way he should not fight it ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Pony is a great plane for high speed dogfight. A-8 shines in this category too.
Speed is the key to success in multi plane combat. Counting on other things will get you killed sooner or later.
P 51D against mid war 190 in a knifefight ? Hmmm....
-
Ran it three times.. takes a full minute longer for the pony to reach her top speed than it does for the FWa5.. methinks the FW is fine; and the pony's accel is porked.
You're looking at it the wrong way. How fast was the Mustang after 1:15?
The P-51D is at least 1000lbs heavier than the Fw 190A-5, with the same horsepower coming from its engine. It should be significantly slower in level acceleration.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 06-23-2000).]
-
Hang,
That's amazing, 1 full minute better than the P-51D. Funny I don't remember reading in Chuck Yeager's autobiography how he was unable to catch 190's at low altitude in his Mustang LOL. Lets see the Mustang accelerates to 365Mph in 2min 15secs and the FW190 in 1min 15 secs. That is almost twice as fast. Lets see is the drag in the FW-190 twice as low as the Mustang? No, in fact it is higher. Does anyone have the actual critical mach nuber of the Fw190A series?
Is the power to weight twice as good? Lets see.
FW-190A5 weight 8690lbs power 1755HP
Power loading=4.95
P51D Weight 9500lbs Power 1720hp
Power loading=5.52
Better, yes. Twice as good? No way. And with the increased drag of the 190 the difference is even less.
Wells, do you have an airfoil analysis of the 190 drag coefficient. Or anybody else?
Funked? Anyway the P-38L has even better power loading so go figure. Citabria definitly has something to complain about. Originally I thought it was unbelievable e-retention but know it just may be that the accelleration is wacked. Fix that and get rid of the warp roll and we are back to reality.
If anyone wants to do some online testing just message me in the main arena.
Thanks
F4UDOA
-
You guys are too much.
Fw 190A-5 150-340mph in 1:15.
P-51D 150 to 365mph in 2:15. <-- DIFFERENT SPEED!!!
Get the numbers for acceleration over equal time or equal speed, then you have something to compare.
-
Last night I read some anecdotal evidence on the acceleration of FW190s. I.Kennedy wrote of a low altitude encounter just off the Italian coast with 3 Fw190 jabos in 1943. Thay had bombed some allied shipping and were vectoring home at 3k feet. He intercepted from their level starboard beam in his spitV. They didn't see him. He hit the right hand 190 with a burst that he said would have knocked down a 109G and then he said all three started pouring black smoke as they cobbed the throttle. They pulled away from him before he could get another burst off. He was making 300 knots indicated flat out. He later caught the damaged 190 and finished it, as it eventually started slowing. He chased them 70 miles. He had several more low level 190 encounters while flying spit8s and 9s. His spit9 was the only one in 111 Squadron that could catch a 190 on the deck within a reasonable distance (40 mile chase).
His spit9 could quickly outturn a 190 in a low circle fight. He was impressed by the 190 and described the tactics of a good pilot as a shallow dive followed by a short climb and 'flick' turn when fighting a spit.
For spit pilots he gives interesting details of the rpms, speeds, clim speeds and other performance details of the planes he flew. His book is 'Black Crosses Off My Wingtip'.
As far as p51 accel versus 190 - don't forget that the p51 needs just a shallow dive to pickup speed very quickly. Allied pilots usually had altitude when over Europe. At high altitude the FW190A series didn't accel too great at all. The low altitude level acceleration difference between these aircraft would have been largely inconsequential due to these factors, but there is no need to doubt that it was there.
Fluf
-
Thanks Hang I got close to the same thing. Try the Hog... It SHOULD have exactly the same accel as the A5. riiight...
LOL guys... The dominoes are beginning to fall. The A5 had to be better than the A8... The A8 accelerated and turned better than it should against other planes in AH... Now the A5 is so bad (comparitively) that everyone notices.
The Corsair with 5.4lbs/hp and with real life side by side comparissons, should accelrate and roll exactly like an A5 and turn an easy 30% better. If they fix the corsair compared to the A5 then a lot of the other planes will be exposed as accelerating and turning too poorly.
I get 1-2 sec better turn for the A5 than the mustang and 3-4 better for the A5 over the Hogs.
I don't say change the A5... Leave it as is It's probly about right...I say fix the others comparitively. Of course, that will make a faster game with more action tho.
lazs
-
Hangtime-
I for one would like to state that I saw no accusations in your post. I see that you are trying to run objective tests (and thank you for that effort), and every camp with an agenda is jumping in here taking that effort out of context. You never placed a personal opinion on the data- you simply said "here it is".
BTW, the test Hangtime was running was to see how fast each a/c accelerated to its sea level top speed. It doesn't matter what that respective top speed is. If you want to be objective, notice that the time it takes for the 51 to gain that extra 25mph is a long time.
-
Originally posted by -lazs-:
Thanks Hang I got close to the same thing. Try the Hog... It SHOULD have exactly the same accel as the A5. riiight...
Wrong
LOL guys... The dominoes are beginning to fall. The A5 had to be better than the A8... The A8 accelerated and turned better than it should against other planes in AH... Now the A5 is so bad (comparitively) that everyone notices.
[/b]
You never flew an A8 online. Dunno why do you insist it outturns anything. Unless you have no idea of how to turn and you do flat and the other does a yoyo. LOL!
The Corsair with 5.4lbs/hp and with real life side by side comparissons, should accelrate and roll exactly like an A5 and turn an easy 30% better. If they fix the corsair compared to the A5 then a lot of the other planes will be exposed as accelerating and turning too poorly.
Can you explain me how a 5.4 lbs/hp can accelerate with a 4.95lbs/hp one? it would be helpful.
And again, F4U best turning speed is 130, Fw190's is 185-190. So 190's turnrate is much better than F4U's, Hog will turn closer but not faster. A lag pursuit is all a 190 needs to keep with a F4U and beat it. Rant all you want, facts are facts. And 190s are 190s (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I get 1-2 sec better turn for the A5 than the mustang and 3-4 better for the A5 over the Hogs.
Oh great magicial lord Lazs,You've flown NO fw190A5 online, so how come you can outturn a P51 if you have fought none?
Tsk tsk tsk tsk tsk (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-23-2000).]
-
Ram, another thread of your sporting life in the Officers Club! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Ram, another thread of your sporting life in the Officers Club! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
With its appropiate answer (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
hehehehe
-
Pounds per Horsepower isn't the sole determining factor, now is it?
If you put a 2000 HP motor on a 4,000 LB square chunk of concrete you'd have 2 lb/hp right? So it would then be a better accelerating machine than Ram's beloved FW's right?
Like most things in aviation, it just isn't that simple.
Have a nice day! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Some further obsevations..
The Pony has some real problems with accel, even when the nose is dropped; she 'gathers way' rather poorly. (sucks might be a better decriptive) Now; it's entirely possible that the pony was crippled with this in real life (tm) tho I've found no hard refrences to this being a handicap of the type.
Since I spend very little time in other a/c it's entirely possible that this condition is present in the other types; but my impressions last night of the A5 during the tests was that the a5 was "out-ponying a pony" so to speak. The accel IN the turns for the a5 was smooth and fast; and the a5 was easily turning better at all speed ranges, from flapped near stall at about 105mph (no snap present) right on up to 250mph.. and she did it like the 'old un-gelded' pony did back in beta. To keep the 190 turning slow you have to FORCE it to do so with significant throttle chop. The same turn in the pony has you hanging onto the wep to keep it moving at all.. and any throttle chop hands you a snap/stall when hanging on tight in the turn.
To clairify, the pony's sustainted turn is best when flapped 40 degrees; flat out wepped, and she can only just hang on. Bring the throttle back any and you'll have to let the nose down to keep from stalling out.
The 190a5 does the same turn at 70% throttle with one flap set and if held at full throttle accellerates into a larger diameter turn with a better rate than the pony. Gent's don't even think of turning the pony against this FW on the deck.. it'll eat yah fer breakfast.
NOW; DAMMIT: DON'T OVEREACT!! It may supposed to BE that way.. I dunno; and I'll bet only a few others have noted it yet. I know Zigrat is aware.. he used that 190's smooth flat turn and accel to run right around a larger circle and saddle up.. This shocked the hell outta me as it has always been my impression that there was NO FW model that could turn with a pony on the deck.
Further.. the A5 exibits the same ability to loop over at near stall airspeeds as the P38 does.. and be aware that the FW's best escape in a furball is to run up and over on you... had DMF demonstrate this trick to me on release night, and there was no doubt we were both 'outta e' at the time... the diffrence was; he could reach deeper into the 'e' well on the verts than the pony could, and climbed right up and over, pulling consecutive loops at airspeeds that we routinely achieve in rush hour on the freeways. I kicked out on the verts to the side; and went for him at the bottoms of the loops; dodgin like hell his dives on me 5 seconds later. Surviving in a low furball against this new A5 is gonna be tuff indeedy.
IF there IS a problem, I suspect it to be in the E states.. it's hard to pin down what's going on. The A5 was by all accounts a competent fighter, and so far thats what we are seeing here. Surely, I'd like the turn/e retention charterestics looked at again; but they may be what they are supposed to be.. I dunno.
More testing needed!
Hang
-
Hang, I think after reading all this we can safely make a summary of both A/C similiarity as such:
"With an experienced hand at the controls, both can be extremely deadly..."
I've seen guys who never flew the FW up until the A5 came out, and they sucked, shot down multiple times....the same can be said for the 51.
-
Fieseler Storch would be the acceleration king by those standards. I'm sure it can hit its top speed way ahead of those two.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
Most plans are just inaccurate predictions.
-
In acceleration tests have you guys ever watched drag racing?
A car with a lower E.T. in the 1/4 mile might even have a slower speed than a car with a higher E.T.
e.g. car A 1/4 mile time 14.2 at 124mph
car B 1/4 mile 14.8 at 130mph
*note these are arbitrary times used only for example.
Seems to me it would be hard to judge unless
you you could have an efficient way of judging time to distance.
-
Does anyone actually HAVE any documented, verified acceleration tests on the P-51? The A-5?
If so, please post. If not........
-
Toad,
I have test reports on F4U-1 vrs P51B(faster than D model) and F4U-1D versus FW-190A5. The A5 data in the report corresponds to actual flight data in the game. In fact the A5 tested by the Navy was faster than the AH A5. But you can see the sharp contrast in the turning abilties compared to the FM we have here. The pilots state in the report that the A5 is clearly at a disadvantage with A/C built for the purpose of "infighting" and that it cannot fllow the F4U or F6F in tight turns or loops. The report is very specific. Also I do have a report of a FW-190A-3 vrs a P-51A with 4 cannon and an allison engine. It states that the FW-190 isless manueverable in turning circles and is slightly better in accelleration than the early model mustang. It could out climb the Mustang but was equal in a dive. To my knowledge the A-3 was lighter and faster than the A5. In speed the 190 was 2mph faster on deck but 5 MpH slower at 5K. It did not become faster again until 20k where the difference was again 5mph. At 10K it was 10mph slower than the allison mustang 1A. And just incase you missed it here is the F4UvrsFw190A5. You tell me if this is an accurate representation.
http://members.home.net/markw4/index.html (http://members.home.net/markw4/index.html)
There is no reason not to believe this report as the weights and engine ratings are accurate. In fact the 190 appears to be faster at 25k than in AH, and the F4U slower.
But accelleration and turning ability are clearly not represented in the AH flight model. Even the pilots comments on the wingloading of the 190 are enough to make you question the current flight model.
F4UDOA
-
ram.... i asked you before... is the offline performance different than the online? The planes perform for me as i have stated, offline. Not interested in flying good turning LW planes against live players. Starting to feel the same about poor turning American planes and live players.
toad, there is more to acceleration than lbs/hp... The side by side comparisson test that the LW guys keep glossing over shows the Corsair to accelerate equally with the A5 and "easily" outturn it at any speed. Other side by sid tests put the acceleration above the P51 at low alt. The corsair had a ver efficient wing root to fuselage juncture (90 degree) compared to the FW and a different prop. It also had a superior supercharger for higher alts.
If you want a game that makes LW planes useful in an arena type setting then keep defending the turn rates and acceleration in AH. Just don't tell me the real planes were wrong and the AH model is right.
lazs
-
F4UDOA,
I read that report you posted a while ago. I think it's pretty good data overall.
It doesn't specifically address the acceleration issues that Hang raised, however, and that's what this topic is about. Before this topic degenerates into strident, unsupported claims for the respective "favorite" planes yet again, I thought I'd put in a plea for fact rather than opinion. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I'm sure you've discussed the F4 with Pyro and I hope, if there is validity to this report and perhaps some other supporting documentation, that any appropriate changes will eventually be made.
Bottom line though, this is a GAME, not a SIMULATOR. No one has to take a checkride in the actual airplane based on their experience here. So, it doesn't have to be 100% absolutely historically accurate and fully realistic in order to be a great, fun game.
If the FW is a bit too fast, adjust your tactics to the enemy's capabilities.
If the F4 guns were a bit too strong, adjust your tactics to the enemy's capabilities.
If the P38 doesn't...adjust!
If the Spit is too...adjust!
It's great to have realism and historical accuracy as the ultimate goal. But it's foolish to expect it right away in a relatively young program.
It may never happen but that won't change the fact that this is a good game.
-
In the P-51B/F4U comparison, that was not a late model B as it had the V-1650-3 instead of the V-1650-7 of the late model B's and the D that we have. Max HP for a -3 is 1600 compared to 1720 for a -7.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
Most plans are just inaccurate predictions.
-
LOL you mean my F4U is unda modelled. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Guess one can't be ledge edge in a field or product without such debates.Kewl stuff.
The Fw 190A-5 has 5 kills and has been killed 19 times against Torque in the F4U-1C.
(http://members.home.net/torqss/torquelogo.jpg)
-
ROFLMAO!!
Ok.. ran some more tests.. dunno why; just tryin to chip away at the problem (if there is a problem) and get a feel for whats going on and I found 2 more little tidbits.
1.. The AH pony and the a5 can run a dead heat race to about 290 mph from 150.. both dead equal. The 190a5 then pulls ahead slightly up to it's top speed of about 340 (3 plane lengths) then the pony catches up. It takes a full minute more for the pony to get from 340 to 370 mph.. and at that time it is still in guns range of the FW. Scary, hunh? I'm wondering how that beautifly clean low drag design managed to justify itself with these kinds of dismal performance numbers. Again; I wonder if the AH FWa5 ain't right and the pony is the one with the problem??
2. The AH published climb characteristics of the two planes has the FWa5 with a 200ft per minute edge up to about 5k. Above that the Pony is supposed to have the edge thru 20k..
.........0-5k 5-10 10-15 15-20
P51D 3100 3200 2800 2500
FWa5 3300 2300 2500 2500
Note the significant edge the pony is supposed to have at 5-10k.
Gents.. I have a hard time equating these numbers to the FW's amazing vertical dance ability.. a 200 foot per MINUTE edge at 0-5k means I should be able to hold him in guns range and follow him up a heluva lot better than I seem to be able to in the sim as it is now, and to make it worse; I sure as hell can't reverse the tables at 10k and loop over him with impunity as he does to me at 3k.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm... am I missing something?
Hang
[This message has been edited by Hangtime (edited 06-23-2000).]
-
But accelleration and turning ability are clearly not represented in
the AH flight model
Acceleration is directly related to climb rate, so unless you can disprove the climb rate of the plane, you have no case for acceleration.
A = (Thrust - Drag) / mass
Climb = Velocity * (Thrust - Drag) / weight
For example: A plane climbs at 3600 fpm (60 fps) @ 150 mph (220 fps)
To convert climb rate to instantaneous accleration, divide the climb rate by the velocity and multiply by gravity constant (32 .2 ft/sec^2)
A climb rate of 60 fps converts to accleration of 8.7 ft/sec^2 or 5.9 mph/s at 150 mph.
A good way to measure acceleration is to measure the climb rate at various speeds, say 125, 150, 175, 200 etc... and then convert them. That way you can see where one plane might start to outclimb or out-accelerate another. A P-51 *will* outclimb a 190a5, but at higher speeds.
For turning, it depends on the maximum lift coefficient (stall speed) and drag (mostly induced). If you can disprove the stall speed, you have a good case for turning ability. The best, most common source for stall speed data is from the pilot manual, which was issued to every pilot (I think). So, if you were to ask a pilot of one of these planes what the stall speed was, he'd probably quote the manual having memorized most of it. I'll do some more test flying this weekend using the above method and see what happens. If someone else wanted to measure the time it took to go from say 150 mph to 300 mph, I could compare my results using the different method.
-
The 190 A5 should have pretty hot acceleration in level flight according to the RAE the (A3) should outaccelerate the spit 9 merlin 61 in level flight under 5000 ft and between 15 and 20 k ft (situation is reversed at other altitudes).
Early 190's accelerate like spits not like most BnZ planes. I thimk most people think of the 190 as a pure BnZer as such it should accellerate like other BnZers.
-
Hey RAM i'm not one to gloat but i will make a special exception for you.
Quote me :
===================================
i believe climb rate is very closley linked to acceleration. I reserve the right to be wrong though (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
===================================
Quote RAM
===================================
So the Fw190 should climb great! lol...
nope climbrate and acceleration are liked but not closely
===================================
Quote Wells (the man with the knowledge):
===================================
Acceleration is directly related to climb rate, so unless you can disprove the climb rate of the plane, you have no case for acceleration.
===================================
Obviously i am a childish person who remebers every conversation only to bring people's comments back to haunt them.
So finally i would like to say ner ner ner ner neeer
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
<punt>
Anybody get any testing in over the weekend?
-
All tests at 10,000ft(A1), 100% fuel, 6 guns, WEP.
250mph IAS climbrate.
P-51D: 2150fpm
Fw 190A-5: 1750fpm
P-38L: 2000fpm
Starting at 250mph IAS, 30 second speed.
P-51D: 285mph
Fw 190A-5: 277mph
P-38L: 280mph
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 06-26-2000).]
-
Sorry lephturn...didnt intend to make this as an offense.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-26-2000).]
-
Ram, Stop wasting screen space with drivel. If you are going to say nothing, at least have the decency not to quote the entire previous post for no good reason. If you really are "learning", the best way to do it is to open ears and close mouth.
Hangtime:
You seem to be talking about low-speed zoom and airframe stability at low speed. I don't think these will necessarily be reflected in the normal climb rate. With it's excellent accelleration characteristics at low speed, I would expect the FW to be a great low-speed zoomer. However, I wouldn't expect it to be so stable at low airspeeds. I have nothing to compare it with though. I do remember that the Hog was too stable at low speed early on, but that got fixed. If there is an issue with the FW-A5, I'm sure Pyro will examine it and do the right thing.
More data! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I'll try to get time to do some tests as well. Some accelleration figures from low speeds I think would be much more applicable to the situation you describe Hang. Something from 110 mph to 200 would be an interesting test. I'll bet the A5 kicks bellybutton in this department, but we'll see.
------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs
Visit Lephturn's Aerodrome for AH news, resources, and training data.
http://users.andara.com/~sconrad/ (http://users.andara.com/~sconrad/)
(http://tuweb.ucis.dal.ca/~dconrad/ahf/lepht.gif)
"MY P-47 is a pretty good ship
And she took a round coming 'cross the Channel last trip
I was thinking 'bout my baby and lettin' her rip
Always got me through so far
Well they can ship me all over this great big world
But I'll never find nothing like my North End girl
I'm taking her home with me one day, sir
Soon as we win this war"
- Steve Earl
-
Hey man you've got to gloat (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Ok, go here for climb/acceleration comparisons.
http://www.iaw.com/~general6/ah_climb.htm (http://www.iaw.com/~general6/ah_climb.htm)
It's not a complete set of data yet, but the 190a5 and P-51 are complete. It looks like 250 mph is the magic number where the 51 becomes superior.
-
Thanks Wells.! Bless you.. u get one 'get outta furball free' card.
The way the MA 1v1 fights are shaking down bear that out.. the FW can crawl right around the circle on the pony at low speed... and I can eat him fer breakfast if I stay faster and keep the E. I kill 'em like zekes. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
The question is now 'How does this compare with the historical data?' From both perspectives.. test data and the subjective observations from pilots of the period assigned to that task.
Lepth, I know if there is a problem Pyro will fix it.. damn it's all new stuff. And I ain't even convinced there is a problem... Lets see if somebody's got access to the RL data for comparison against Well's data. And yer too right.. platform stability at high AOA and close to stall speeds on the A4 is gonna be a question too.
WTG guys.. we on the right track.
Hang
-
One thing I don't like about the Fw 190 in AH is that you get way too much stall warning. From what I've read, the aircraft gave little to no warning at all before the aircraft dropped one wing suddenly in a stall. In AH when pulling a hard turn, you get more than a second of stall horn before the aircraft flips over. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
-
the fw190 should stall like the original AH p-38L lol!
now that was a nasty stall
heck its still nasty stall on p38 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
but the 190 is totally easy to recover from even worse stalls
190 should flip upside down in a stall in a heartbeat but that simply does not happen with AH 190s
-
Wells' data actually looks pretty much spot on. THe P-51D should suffer at low speed. (Which is does) and improve (relativly to other planes) at higher speeds.
Now..if we could only get the paddlebladed-prop for the P-47 <G>.
Daff
------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group
"This is Yardstick. Follow me"
-
What I remember from reading books and documents, it is told that P-51 was fairly slow accerlating, when Messers and Fockes were from top of the line in accerlating.
Focke weren't such fast accerlator as Bf, of course, but it did that faster than P-51, alot faster.
Note: Top speed is not related to accerlation or vice-versa.
-
Great data Wells!
One note. The Jug lives and dies on it's WEP. I'd bet that with WEP the Jug may actually move up a notch or two on the list compared to some of the others. It would be really interesting to re-do these tests with WEP, and with say 50% gas. Nobody in their right mind engages in a Jug with full fuel! Pony either for that matter. Fuel loads will make a big difference in the arena.
Just some more to think about. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs http://www.flyingpigs.com (http://www.flyingpigs.com)
(http://tuweb.ucis.dal.ca/~dconrad/ahf/lepht.gif)
"My P-47 is a pretty good ship, she took a round coming 'cross the Channel last trip.
Just thinking 'bout my baby and lettin' her rip, always got me through so far."
- Steve Earl
[This message has been edited by Lephturn (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
With full internal fuel, the P-51D is 2000 lb heavier than the Fw 190A-5. At sea-level, the horsepower is almost identical. It should be obvious to you people what is going to happen if these two drag race from a slow speed!
About the stalls, I've read it both ways. Some reports of a sudden wing drop, some guys saying the plane gave plenty of warning. One thing that seems consistent is that the 190 recovered by neutralizing the stick.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
"Fuel loads will make a big difference in the arena."
I gather that 100% fuel was used for these tests to be consistent with other published data. (?)
Seems like comparison testing for MA performance might be better done using equal range, or equal endurance, fuel loads rather than maximum. Then again, it might just get more complicated. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
popeye
-
Hey,
Put my money where my mouth is and did some calcs on accelleration of FW-190A5 vrs F4U-1D in real world physics model with the help of Wells (OK, he did the math). Take a look.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/004149.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum1/HTML/004149.html)
Thanx
F4UDOA
-
Hehe,
They said Mustang at slow speed turning Hehe Heh.
Death
Sharky