Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 01:20:01 AM

Title: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 01:20:01 AM
I've read a lot of military history, and I still come across things that, while possible in AH, I previously thought were impossible in real WWII planes -- yet amazingly did happened in WWII.

For example, it's possible in some AH planes to stay in the air with half a wing missing, but I figured it was probably not possible in a real WWII airplane.  Then I saw this in TBF/TBM Avenger units of World War 2, by Barret Tillman (great book) -- a TBM making it back towards its carrier:

(http://www.electraforge.com/brooke/misc/aces_high/tbmHalfWing.jpg)

The other day, I ran across another such item.  In AH, it is possible for a plane to take off from a CV while it is turning.  I figured that was an example of something that likely could not be done in a real WWII aircraft.  Then in Intrepid, by White and Gandt, I ran across this passage.

Paraphrasing the lead in to the story:  Charlie Mallory was a Hellcat pilot on Intrepid.  On one mission, when he was to take off with his squadron, his engine developed problems during his run up, and he got pulled off the launch.  He hurried down to the hangar deck to get in the ready spare for his squadron, but after he got strapped in and was ready to go up on the elevator, kamikazes started to come in.  Intrepid's crew of course started to focus on that -- and this is where we pick up the tale.

"Raise the damned elevator!" Charlie Mallory yelled over the noise of his idling engine.

No one on the hangar deck seemed interested in getting Mallory's Hellcat lifted up to the flight deck.  The chief petty officer standing on Mallory's wing just shook his head and climbed down.  Finally Mallory got another petty officer's attention and motioned that he wanted to go topside.  The petty officer nodded, then he too walked away.

Mallory stewed in his cockpit.  The sound of the anti-aircraft guns topside ws increasing in intensity.  Then he felt the deck tilting as the carrier heeled over in a hard turn.   Through the open hangar bay door he could see the other ships in Intrepid's formation.  Their guns were all firing.  The sky was filled with roiling black puffs of anti-aircraft fire.

Then he felt the elevator move.  Finally, he was going up.  Mallory tightened his straps and checked his switches.  When the elevator reached the flight deck, Malory gazed around and saw that the deck was mostly empty.  The strike aircraft had all been launched.  No one was paying any attention to him because they were pre-occupied with incoming kamikazes.  Even the launch officer was gone.

Mallory saw that from his position he had a clear run down the deck.  He considered his options for a moment, then made up his mind.  He shoved the throttle up, and the Hellcat headed down the flight deck.

The problem was that the deck was heeling over at a severe angle becasue the ship was in a hard turn to starboard.  he had to stomp hard on the right rudder to keep the fighter aimed for the bow, which was swinging to the right.

He almost made it to the bow.  Skidding and skittering, clawing for speed, the Hellcat drifted toward the left edge of the deck.  Seventy feet short of the bow, praying that he had enough airspeed, he yanked the fighter into the air.  The Hellcat sailed out over the left deck edge, hovered a few precarious seconds over the open water -- then flew away.

Few on Intrepid's deck noticed the unauthorized launch.  Nor did they care.  Every pair of eyes was now focused aft, on the two dark objects bearing down on Intrepid's stern.

[Moments later]

. . . The Zero and its 550-pound bomb smashed into Intrepid's flight deck behind the island, between number two and three elevators.  A plume of smoke and fire erupted from the deck.  The explosion pierced the flight deck, penetrated the gallery deck beneath, then spewed flame and shrapnel into the hangar deck below.

Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 03:39:38 AM
By the way, the plane in the picture above is White 113, from VT-82 off the USS Benington (CV-20) in 1945.  He was hit by flak (losing a lot of the wing and 5 ft off the top of the aft fuselage) and was able to keep flying and make a water landing.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: guncrasher on August 03, 2010, 03:46:20 AM
yeah but was he still flying at full speed like it happens in AH?

semp
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 03:52:45 AM
With half a wing on a plane in AH, I don't think you will be able to go as fast as if you had a full wing.  The extra drag of aileron and rudder needed to stay straight and level will slow you down some.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 04:10:35 AM
To be clear, I don't think it's the cutting off of some of the end of the wing that would cause slowing down (unless it's very messy and draggy, with a lot of panels hanging out at odd angles, say).  For example, there are clipped wing versions of some planes (like clippped-wing Spitfires) that can be faster.  I think it's the extra control input creating drag.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: druski85 on August 03, 2010, 09:43:53 AM
That's a crazy story Brooke, particularly the end.  Thanks for sharing.  :aok
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Knite on August 03, 2010, 09:56:43 AM
Should we add to the wishlist that CVs and other ships tilt and list as they turn? I think so!

Thanks for the story and picture Brooke. Always find it facinating how things happened back then. Different time with different people, that's for sure.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: SHawk on August 03, 2010, 10:04:11 AM
Looks to me like the right elevator of the plane in the picture is also missing. :O
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Krupinski on August 03, 2010, 10:05:25 AM
By the way, the plane in the picture above is White 113, from VT-82 off the USS Benington (CV-20) in 1945.  He was hit by flak (losing a lot of the wing and 5 ft off the top of the aft fuselage) and was able to keep flying and make a water landing.

I saw this somehwhere else too, only I read that it was caused by a collision with another TBM or TBF whatever you want to call it.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: fbWldcat on August 03, 2010, 10:09:06 AM
Is flying with 1 1/2 wings called "knifing?" Or do you have to be flying the plane vertical?
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: CAP1 on August 03, 2010, 10:40:27 AM
yeah but was he still flying at full speed like it happens in AH?

semp

i know my p-38 isn't capable of top speed missing half of a wing.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: ImADot on August 03, 2010, 11:11:10 AM
Looks to me like the right elevator of the plane in the picture is also missing. :O

I think it's just the contrast (or lack of it) that's making it look like it's not there.  When I look close, it appears to be intact. I looked close with Photoshop and adjusted the contrast a bit:
(http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll239/ViperDriver/AcesHighII/TBM_Touchup.jpg)
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: MutleyBR on August 03, 2010, 11:59:52 AM
Hi all!

Here's picture of a P-47, of the Brazilian Air Force, which hit a factory chimney doing ground attack in Italy and returned to base. :aok  :x

Mutley.  :salute

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3158/2772784512_c94e7781af.jpg)


Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 12:52:59 PM
I saw this somehwhere else too, only I read that it was caused by a collision with another TBM or TBF whatever you want to call it.

The book lists it as flak damage, but it sure does *look* like collision damage to me, and that's what I thought it was looking at it.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 12:54:26 PM
Hi all!

Here's picture of a P-47, of the Brazilian Air Force, which hit a factory chimney doing ground attack in Italy and returned to base. :aok  :x

Mutley.  :salute

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3158/2772784512_c94e7781af.jpg)




Thanks for posting that!  That's another great pic! <S>
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: mbailey on August 03, 2010, 02:26:06 PM
Great post and great read Brooke, TY sir  :aok
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Krupinski on August 03, 2010, 02:57:24 PM
The book lists it as flak damage, but it sure does *look* like collision damage to me, and that's what I thought it was looking at it.

I remember reading that it was a collision in the book "Flyboys"

The aircraft was flown by Lt. King

"On February 18,1945 his squadron was to attack shipping and waterfront installations at Chi Chi Jima.

As they were approaching the waterfront installations they came under heavy anti-aircraft fire. The pilot in the flight behind Robert's, Jesse Naul, saw Robert's plane get hit by the anti-aircraft fire and his right wing was blown off. He said Robert's plane went into a spin and crashed into Lt. King's plane. The propeller on Robert's plane took off about four feet of the left wing and damaged the fuselage on Lt. King's plane. Jesse said he saw no parachutes from Robert's plane as it went down and crashed into the sea. He said Robert's crew John Louis Gerig and Gilbert Reynolds were presumed lost and later listed as Killed in Action.

Starting to lose control of his plane, Lt . King ordered his crew to bail out. As he started to lose altitude he was able to regain some control of his plane and was able to make it back to the task force and made a water landing and was rescued. His crew Grady Alvah and James Wesley were captured by the Japanese and never heard from again. The Japanese on Chi Chi Jima executed any airmen they captured. After the war the commanding officer and members of his staff paid for their crimes.

There is a memorial at the Punch Bowl National Cemetery in Hawaii to honor all those lost at sea during World War Two. On it you can find Robert's name. May he rest in peace with all the others."
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 05:43:00 PM
Wow -- thanks for posting that.  I did read the book Flyboys (a great book -- actually, I listened to it as an audiobook, so no pics) but didn't associate that story with the pic I posted.  It is great to know the full story of that pic.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: maus92 on August 03, 2010, 07:31:44 PM

 As he started to lose altitude he was able to regain some control of his plane ......

Denser air?
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: oakranger on August 03, 2010, 08:01:17 PM
Brook, look at the hunderts' of bombers photo that got torn apart.  Some you be like,  :O, and "how the hell did they make it".   
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 08:09:19 PM
Denser air?

Probably gaining more airspeed and/or just getting a handle on what control inputs were needed in the instant after collision.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 03, 2010, 08:10:02 PM
Brook, look at the hunderts' of bombers photo that got torn apart.  Some you be like,  :O, and "how the hell did they make it".   

Indeed!
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Buzzard7 on August 03, 2010, 10:38:11 PM
JB42 needs to read this. Someone needs to explain the use of flaps in combat. Full flaps and gear should be a last resort but it may help a pile-it win the fight.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Chalenge on August 04, 2010, 12:16:58 AM
To be clear, I don't think it's the cutting off of some of the end of the wing that would cause slowing down (unless it's very messy and draggy, with a lot of panels hanging out at odd angles, say).  For example, there are clipped wing versions of some planes (like clippped-wing Spitfires) that can be faster.  I think it's the extra control input creating drag.

No and they go faster actually. The force of drag is calculated by taking 1/2 of the density times the frontal area times velocity squared times a function of the reynolds number. If you look at that closely you will see that the only thing that changes with an airplane that loses part of its wing is the total frontal area... so it speeds up due to less drag. If you want to argue trim drag then consider that the AOA could be less due to less of the motive thrust going to generate lift (less weight).
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Tupac on August 04, 2010, 12:58:59 AM
(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/body/torn-in2.gif)
The B-17 "All American" (414th Squadron, 97BG) flown by Lieutenant Kenneth R. Bragg, its tail section almost severed by a collision with an enemy fighter, flew 90 minutes back to its home base, landed safely and broke in two after landing.

(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/nose/Recall_B-17.jpg)
1st Lt. Lawrence DeLancey managed to get his B-17 back to England after a direct hit by flak killed two of his crew over Cologne, Germany.

(http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/photos/tail/tail1.gif)
Hang the Expense Again III" was seen heavily damaged, going down over France. The pilot, however, was able to bring  it out of a dive and struggled back to his home field.  The blast damage blew the tail gunner out of the aircraft but he survived the incident.

(http://www.strangemilitary.com/images/content/126116.jpg)
All i could find on this picture was that a spitfire was involved.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: SHawk on August 04, 2010, 01:17:59 AM
I think it's just the contrast (or lack of it) that's making it look like it's not there.  When I look close, it appears to be intact. I looked close with Photoshop and adjusted the contrast a bit:
(http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll239/ViperDriver/AcesHighII/TBM_Touchup.jpg)

You sound like my wife, "when I look real close it's there." :aok
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 04, 2010, 02:02:44 AM
No and they go faster actually. The force of drag is calculated by taking 1/2 of the density times the frontal area times velocity squared times a function of the reynolds number. If you look at that closely you will see that the only thing that changes with an airplane that loses part of its wing is the total frontal area... so it speeds up due to less drag. If you want to argue trim drag then consider that the AOA could be less due to less of the motive thrust going to generate lift (less weight).

There are two factors at work:  (1) less drag from the portion of the wing that is gone and (2) more induced drag from the remainder of the wing that is generating more lift than it would need to otherwise, more drag from any less-aerodynamicly efficient shape to the end of the wing, more drag from the deflected aileron, and more drag from the deflected rudder.  Whether the combined effect results in a faster or slower airplane depends on whether (1) or (2) is the greater effect.  For clean clipping of wingtips at lower alts, where the extra lift of the wingtips is not needed, the plane will be faster.  For most planes, clipping a good portion of one wing would, I suspect, result in reduced speed with the combined reductions from (2) being greater than the benefit from (1).

From flying planes in AH with a portion of one wing missing, my recollection is that they have all been slower.  Perhaps I am misremembering, as I don't do it all that often, but that's what I recall.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 04, 2010, 03:14:48 AM
The bomber story about the tailgunner who survived reminds me of a story I heard from a bomber pilot who gave a talk at the Museum of Flight in Seattle.

He was in a B-17 that took an 88 mm flak hit in the radio compartment (right behind the cockpit).  The explosion filled the cockpit with condensation (like when you see bomb explosions and the concensation vapor ring expanding).  He couldn't see for a while.  In addition, the explosion knocked the bomber up into a hammerhead-like stall, after which it entered a spin.  Once the pilot got his senses back and could see again, he got the bomber out of the spin and flying again.  This was all with a full bomb load still!  He looked and saw that all the engines were still running and that the bomber seemed still willing to stay in the air, so he pressed on to the target and dropped bombs.

After that, he went back to check damage.  The radio comparment was completely blown open -- had no walls left.  How the plane stayed together, he didn't know.  There was blood and meat all over the place -- the remains of the radioman and of the engineer/top gunner who had been in that compartment.  Aft from there, the other crew was OK.

They continued toward home, now well out of formation and alone.  On the way, they got attacked by three 109's.  The 109's shot them up and pressed their attacks, probably until they were out of ammo.  The bomber, despite lots more damage and now more wounded crew, stayed in the air.  They made it back to England.

After a month, they got a letter from Germany.  The radioman was in a prison camp.  Amazingly, this is what happened to him.  At the moment the flak shell blew up in the radio compartment, the radioman had just grabbed his parachute to put on.  The explosion knocked him unconscious and blew him out of the aircraft.  He woke up on his way down, still clutching the parachute strap.  While falling, he put on the chute, pulled the rip cord, then floated down into a farmer's field, and got stuck in a tree.  The farmer came out and stabbed him in the rear with a pitchfork, but he was otherwise OK.

The Museum of Flight has these amazing panel discussions by such pilots periodically.  Some of the stories I've heard there are amazing.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: guncrasher on August 04, 2010, 03:56:45 AM


From flying planes in AH with a portion of one wing missing, my recollection is that they have all been slower.  Perhaps I am misremembering, as I don't do it all that often, but that's what I recall.

but it isnt.  airplanes in ah will fly at full speed.  when a portion of the wing is missing it created more drag on one side (the one with the longer wing) which will cause the plane to turn in the direction of the Longer wing, to compensate you must use rudders, which by itself will create more drag, slowing the airplane down. airplanes with 1/2 a wing have been known to fly for extended periods of time, but not at full speed.

semp
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 04, 2010, 04:19:37 AM
Yes, that's what I just have been saying:  planes with half a wing are slower than planes with no such damage.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: jamdive on August 04, 2010, 07:46:24 AM
but it isnt.  airplanes in ah will fly at full speed.  when a portion of the wing is missing it created more drag on one side (the one with the longer wing) which will cause the plane to turn in the direction of the Longer wing, to compensate you must use rudders, which by itself will create more drag, slowing the airplane down. airplanes with 1/2 a wing have been known to fly for extended periods of time, but not at full speed.

semp

I was thinking that damage would slow the plane down. Not sure if its because of more rudder and aileron usage. I wonder if using the rudder would just cancel out the drag you would have from the missing wing. On the other hand, it makes sense though that missing wingtips would be less of an issue at high speeds. Does anyone know how much drag is created by the vortex from a boxed end wing tip?
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Chalenge on August 04, 2010, 09:52:21 AM
I was thinking that damage would slow the plane down. Not sure if its because of more rudder and aileron usage. I wonder if using the rudder would just cancel out the drag you would have from the missing wing. On the other hand, it makes sense though that missing wingtips would be less of an issue at high speeds. Does anyone know how much drag is created by the vortex from a boxed end wing tip?


Less than the missing frontal area creates.
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Chalenge on August 04, 2010, 10:11:28 AM
There are two factors at work:  (1) less drag from the portion of the wing that is gone and (2) more induced drag from the remainder of the wing that is generating more lift than it would need to otherwise, more drag from any less-aerodynamicly efficient shape to the end of the wing, more drag from the deflected aileron, and more drag from the deflected rudder.  Whether the combined effect results in a faster or slower airplane depends on whether (1) or (2) is the greater effect.  For clean clipping of wingtips at lower alts, where the extra lift of the wingtips is not needed, the plane will be faster.  For most planes, clipping a good portion of one wing would, I suspect, result in reduced speed with the combined reductions from (2) being greater than the benefit from (1).

From flying planes in AH with a portion of one wing missing, my recollection is that they have all been slower.  Perhaps I am misremembering, as I don't do it all that often, but that's what I recall.

Ordinarily an offset rudder (constant rudder that is) would create a great deal of "aerodynamic braking" action (and thus drag) but dont confuse that with vortex drag (your "induced drag").

Your premise that the wing creates more lift "because it needs to" is incorrect. What you are calling "induced drag" is actually vortex drag (which is often incorrectly referred to as "induced drag" - so its not your fault) which is the result of creating lift to begin with. The angle of attack (AOA) does not necessarily increase just because the wing is cut off and I would suggest it does not in fact. Just remember that for the case of an aircraft in equilibrium (not accelerating in any direction) that the lift vector equals the weight vector and the thrust vector equals the drag vector. These action-reaction pairs are well known. So in the case of less wing you can see that the loss of drag from the missing wingtip only effects speed and so the plane will accelerate until drag once again equals thrust. As far is lift is concerned the decrease in weight means that less lift needs to be generated and so less AOA is required. Less AOA equals more available thrust.

The formula I gave holds in all cases and as you can see the velocity is squared which means that the drag from frontal area increases greatly with velocity. All other factors being equal the plane will accelerate to a faster velocity. I have experienced this in AH where I shot the wing off of a P-51D while I was flying a P-51D and since I was almost out of fuel completely I was surprised that I could not accelerate with my opponent... but that is consistent with the law of physics.

While I was in Germany I saw new experimental sailplanes with a new (to me) wingtip design. The new tips were like five fingers projecting above and below the wing at various angles (like a vultures turbulator feathers). The desired effect is to reduce wingtip vortices and thus vortex drag which it is reported they do to some degree. Im not suggesting that jagged wing fragments reduce drag but instead that they do not significantly increase drag especially when compared with frontal area drag (the "A" of the drag formula).
Title: Re: As I read more, the more I see amazing realism in AH
Post by: Brooke on August 06, 2010, 03:39:35 AM
What you are calling "induced drag" is actually vortex drag (which is often incorrectly referred to as "induced drag" - so its not your fault)

Lots of books on aerodynamics use the term "induced drag".  It isn't incorrect to use that term when using the simpler, approximate models of drag of a wing as a function of lift, things like C_D = C_D_0 + C_L^2 / (e * pi * A) sort of approximation.

Quote
The angle of attack (AOA) does not necessarily increase just because the wing is cut off and I would suggest it does not in fact. [and other explanation]

It does if you want to remain flying straight and level.

Let's take a plane flying along straight and level -- call this the original situation.  In that case L = W, and (as an OK level of approximation sufficient for what we're talking about here) L = L_leftwing + L_rightwing, L_left approx. = L_right, and  L_left = 0.5 * W, and L_right = 0.5 * W.

Let's assume you are flying at a speed where there is lift being generated on the whole wing span.  What happens if you remove half the left wing?  The lift that that portion of the wing is also removed.  If you don't change any control inputs, the plane will roll left and start to descend because L_left is now less than 0.5 * W and L is less than W.

If you want the plane to remain in steady-state level flight (and not roll to the left and descend), you need to increase L_left to be 0.5 * W again, which means you must increase its angle of attack.  As WWII planes are fixed wing, increasing angle of attack of left wing also increases the angle of attack of the right wing.  The right wing would now have more lift than 0.5 * W, and the plane would again roll left, but start to ascend some.  To compensate for this, you apply some airleron to reduce lift of the right wing (i.e., right aileron).

Now, the plane is not rolling to the left or right or ascending or descending -- we have L_left = 0.5 * W and L_right = 0.5 * W again.  However, there are some important secondary effects.  The left wing is missing a portion.  The missing portion has no drag, so that part of the left wing's drag is reduced compared to the original situation.  However, we had to increase AoA to increase lift on the remaining portion of the wing, to get that wing's lift back up to 0.5 * W, which increases induced drag (or vortex drag or drag due to lift or whatever standard term you care to call it).  Perhaps overall, there is either no net change to the drag of the left wing, or maybe even a decreased drag from the left wing (like a clipped wing).  If there is a decrease in drag from the left wing, left rudder will need to be applied to compensate, or the plane will yaw right.  Also, we have right aileron applied -- generally that will result in some extra drag due to aileron being deflected.  So, some left rudder might need to be applied for that, too.  The end result is that there needs to be left rudder applied to keep the plane from yawing.

So, to keep in a steady-state level flight with half the left wing missing, compared to the orginal situation, you have a tiny bit more elevator applied, more right aileron applied, and more left rudder applied.  We have less drag from the portion of the missing wing.  We have a little more drag on the portion of the wing that is not missing (as lift there must be increased a little to make up for the lift lost on the missing part -- but this is probably quite minor).  But we have more drag from the control surfaces (especially the aileron and rudder) that are being held in a more-deflected state compared to the original situation.  Overall, I'd think that this is likely to give a net increase in drag.

If you clipped both wings, then you would likely have a net decrease in drag (as you don't have to keep control surfaces deflected to keep in steady, level flight), which is why clipped-wing planes are faster (until they reach situations where they need the extra lift from the portion of the wing that was clipped, like at high altitude).

This is all testable in AH, but I haven't done it.  I'm just recalling that my top level speed in planes where I've lost half a wing seems a lot lower than when I am undamaged, and I'm recalling that I have had to keep aileron applied, or I'll roll into the damaged wing, and some rudder to keep the ball centered, all as I'd expect.