Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: ML52 on August 19, 2012, 02:36:30 PM
-
Is the a turn chart similar to the speed comparison chart?
-
Yes. http://gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php
But it hasn't been updated in years. While the data presented is still valid, there are newer fighters missing, like for example P-47M, P-39s, Me 410.
-
Thank you Lusche. Even dated its a help. :salute
-
Also, remember that aircraft turn at different rates are different speeds. The P47 and 190 are good examples of aircraft that turn very well at high speeds but are very sluggish at slow speeds, the A6Mx is just the opposite.
-
Ok that's why I keep getting smoked by the 190s! And I thought they didn't turn very well. (Any excuse I can get you see ....)
-
Ok, let me ask this from any plane info expert. I would assume that the P47M will turn virtually the same as a P47D-25 or 47D-40. Correct?
-
Yes. http://gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php
But it hasn't been updated in years. While the data presented is still valid, there are newer fighters missing, like for example P-47M, P-39s, Me 410.
I don't think it takes into account the new airflow recoding. It's that old. It's based on really ancient data collected by Mosq way back, and it was just a new way of presenting the old data at the time the website was released for public use.
-
Ok, let me ask this from any plane info expert. I would assume that the P47M will turn virtually the same as a P47D-25 or 47D-40. Correct?
I would think not. Horsepower makes a difference, and the M has a ton more with WEP.
-
I don't think it takes into account the new airflow recoding. It's that old. It's based on really ancient data collected by Mosq way back, and it was just a new way of presenting the old data at the time the website was released for public use.
Numbers are post FM change, which happened in March 06. The numbers used on that site are from Mosq revised turn comparison list, May 06
-
Ok that's why I keep getting smoked by the 190s! And I thought they didn't turn very well. (Any excuse I can get you see ....)
It's a good time to familiarise yourself with the (vast) differences and common strengths between the many aircraft designed, engineered and produced by Mr. Willy Messerschmitt's and Prof. Kurt Tank.
Most people wouldn't know/understand the differences between a 109 or 190 if they were parked right next to each other on a ramp.
You seem to be utilising the 109's tendancy to compress and loose authority with its control surfaces at higher speeds against a plane that just _LOVES_ to go fast and faster.
Ok, let me ask this from any plane info expert. I would assume that the P47M will turn virtually the same as a P47D-25 or 47D-40. Correct?
Are the thrust/power/acceleration, weights and wingloading equal or about the same between each one? I think you can answer your own question with a little better understanding/research of each aircraft varient's subtle differences.
If the forum search feature is working today, try a search for one of the many detailed threads created in the past explaining the differences between "turn radius" and "sustained turn rate(s)". You will learn some new technial understanding/terminology, but primarily gain a much broader understanding to "turning" aircraft.
-
Ok, let me ask this from any plane info expert. I would assume that the P47M will turn virtually the same as a P47D-25 or 47D-40. Correct?
I only know from fighting them but I would say no. It seems what you gain in speed with P47M, you lose in turn performance.
-
I only know from fighting them but I would say no. It seems what you gain in speed with P47M, you lose in turn performance.
The excess power is important for sustained turns. So, if you are talking about going round and round at 180 mph, flaps out, then yes, the P47M turns better - on WEP. Without the WEP it is similar to the D40/25 models.
For cutting a corner at speeds where you can pull into the blackout, excess power makes your turn worse. The P47 is one of the best planes for cutting a 90 degree corner at high speeds because it looses its speed very fast, thus it also makes the corner "sharper" (i.e smaller radius). The bad news is that this kind of turning cannot last, so going round and round in P47s is a bad idea. The excess power helps by allowing one to accelerate between corners, build some E just to dump it again in the next corner.
190s are also quite good at cutting corners. They have more excess power than the 47, but also higher stall speeds (especially if flaps are used on both) and are less stable near the stall. The 47 can sustain a smaller circle, but the 190s can sustain a higher turn rate. Both are no where near what a Spit or Ki84 can do in sustained turns.
-
I only know from fighting them but I would say no. It seems what you gain in speed with P47M, you lose in turn performance.
Which is typical of most aircraft, yes?
-
Ok, let me ask this from any plane info expert. I would assume that the P47M will turn virtually the same as a P47D-25 or 47D-40. Correct?
Assuming you are asking about the aircraft performance in the game, the P47 series of fighters can be compared as shown below.
In this first diagram you can see how the instantaneous turns compare. The P-47D-40 being the best, with the P-47D-11 a very close second. The worst, in terms of instantaneous turn radius and turn rate can be seen to be the P-47D-25, with the P-47N only slightly better.
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/P47sInst.png)
In the next diagram you can see how the sustained turns compare and best performer is the P-47M, which can also be seen from the previous diagram to compare well in terms of its instantaneous turns.
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/P47sSust.png)
The configuration used for these diagrams is 25% fuel, no flaps and the 8 x 50s with 425rpg, and the situation will vary as those loadings vary.
However, in that configuration the overall, the best choice for a turning engagement is the P-47M, and the worst is the P-47D-25.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
-
Badboy, I suppose this is without flaps? With flaps included, I expect the extra horses of the M to give an even more pronounced advantage.
-
I haven't ran into any Jug pilots that left an impression. The few times I flew it, if the initial overshoot/tailslide doesn't work, you're pretty much screwed against almost all of the other planes.
-
Badboy, I suppose this is without flaps? With flaps included, I expect the extra horses of the M to give an even more pronounced advantage.
Hi Bozon
Yes, that was without flaps. The turning performance of the P-47M across the full range of flaps for both instantaneous and sustained turns is shown in the diagrams below.
For most of the P-47 series of aircraft, while the turn radius gets smaller as flaps are lowered, the sustained turn rate deteriorates. However, the P-47M is the exception, and in the configuration analysed below, you can see that there is an improvement in both radius and instantaneous turn rate upto 2 notches of flaps. The maximum sustained turn occurs with 1 notch of flaps, but with 2 notches of flaps the sustained turn rate is only slightly worse, but with a significant improvement in radius, so overall the optimum turning configuration for the P-47M is with 2 notches of flaps.
You can see in this first diagram that the maximum instantaneous turn rate occurs with 2 notches of flaps, however it is important to remember that the benefit of instantaneous turn performance is only short lived because speed will drop rapidly to the sustained turning situation illustrated in the second diagram.
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/P47MInstFlaps2.png)
In the second diagram below you can see that the maximum sustained turn actually occurs with one notch of flaps, but at two notches the radius is better for only a slight loss in rate, which is why I said before that 2 notches are the optimal configuration for a two circle fight... in a one circle fight of course you would go full flaps.
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/P47MSustFlaps2.png)
The bottom line here is that if you are trying maximise your turn rate and radius in a two circle fight (that is turning nose to tail) then you want to be between 1 and 2 notches of flaps, while if you are in a one circle fight (that is turning nose to nose) you should go full flaps.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
-
Good stuff as always Badboy. :aok
-
I haven't ran into any Jug pilots that left an impression. The few times I flew it, if the initial overshoot/tailslide doesn't work, you're pretty much screwed against almost all of the other planes.
Hi Titanic,
The P-47s were not designed with the typical Aces High combat environment in mind. That's not to say that they can't perform well in that scenario, they can, just not for long. I've known Jug pilots who can make a big impression on any other aircraft in the game, and will always leave you amazed if you actually survive the first 60 seconds of the fight.
The problem here is that when some people think of aircraft comparison, they think exclusively of the 1v1 angles fight and in that respect the P-47 and the P-51 for example are way down the list of top performers. But the P-47 and P-51 have attributes that make them excel in a combat environment that while rare in Aces High, was the norm in real life. These aircraft were intended to be flown in multi ship environments with flights fighting in pairs with a wingman providing mutual support. The P-47M and P-51D for example, are ideally suited to wing tactics because their flying qualities and performance lend themselves perfectly to that type of fight combined with a bias towards energy rather than angles fighting.
So while those aircraft may struggle in a pure 1v1 angles fight, they were never intended to be flown that way. On the other hand two good Jug pilots in Aces High, well versed in wing tactics can decimate a horde of better turning aircraft and land many kills each on a regular basis, provided they fly it as it was intended to be flown.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
-
The bottom line here is that if you are trying maximise your turn rate and radius in a two circle fight (that is turning nose to tail) then you want to be between 1 and 2 notches of flaps, while if you are in a one circle fight (that is turning nose to nose) you should go full flaps.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
Nicely laid out, thanks. That's something even I can remember.
Did you transpose the terminology though? I always thought nose to nose was two circles and nose to tail was one circle. I may be completely mistaken but it seems to make more sense that way.
-
Did you transpose the terminology though? I always thought nose to nose was two circles and nose to tail was one circle. I may be completely mistaken but it seems to make more sense that way.
The terminology usually refers to the pattern that the plane draw in the sky if they had smoke trail after them. If the two planes fly past each other HO and then both break to their respective "right", they will be drawing a "figure 8". They are both in a right hand turn, but they are not flying around the same circle, but rather around two circles whose center is displaced - a two circles fight.
If one plane turns right and the other to its left after the merge, they will be flying roughly around the same circle, but circling it in opposite directions, nose-to-nose. A one circle fight.
Of course the reality is more complicated than that. Planes don't fly in circles, but usually in ellipses or spirals till the speed drops near the minimal sustained turning speed. Different planes will also have different turning properties. By then, even if they started in opposite direction (nose to nose), their respective circle centers will be displaced and they are in a nose to nose situation but flying two overlapping circles. This is usually still considered a variation of the "one circle" fight.
Then there is the 3rd dimension...
-
Ah, thank you Bozon.
-
I always thought nose to nose was two circles and nose to tail was one circle.
Hi Shiv, here are a couple of images...
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/OneCircle.png)
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/TwoCircle.png)
The important thing to remember is that a two circle fight benefits the fighter with a turn rate advantage, and the one circle fight benefits the fighter with a turn radius advantage.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
-
Interestingly enough within AH, I observe the two-circle much more and often in instances of one of the agressors having an extremely high E state and the other plane is trying to gain/keep his E going into the fight against the high-E hostile (while still accepting the merge/challenge/opportunity head-on) - it's a very wide/large two-circle but they don't use flaps if maybe one or two notches at most.
The single circle though you see all the time in the knife fights, where speeds are often much slower and where full flaps can (and will be) utilised for an advantage.
Baboy just crit this thread with some of his knowledge.
-
Hi,
Regarding the turning diagrams I've been posting, If anyone wants to know how to do this for themselves you can download the tool here:
Download Badboy's BootStrap Calculator (http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/Files/AH_BootStrap.zip)
You just need to do the flight tests yourself and you can compare any aircraft you wish.
For comparisons, just paste the data to the top of the list and charts will show the turn circles.
Hope that helps.
Badboy
-
This is really good information! Will this make me an ace in the LWA? Nooooo.... not with my newbie skills. But it's nice to know you didn't pick the wrong plane for the job. Hate to go into a knife fight with a toothpick! Plus I have been an airplane fan since I was about 8 years old. I have about 100 books on WWII and most related to aircraft/airpower. I've read most of Martin Caidin's books about WWII aircraft. But still didn't know which P47 model could turn the best. I do remember that Robert Johnson said the paddle blade propellor made a huge difference in performance.
Thanks a bunch! :cheers: