Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: MOSQ on December 18, 2012, 12:30:50 AM
-
In 2006 I published Mosq's Sustained Turn list the first time. Some folks found it helpful. The last couple of years I pretty much stopped playing AH, and now on coming back I see a lot of changes to the plane set so I thought I should update the list. I *think* I have all the new planes, plus I went thru the News section and anywhere HTC mentioned a flight modelling update I re-tested those planes. However I may have missed an announcement so if you come across a plane that you are sure has had it's fight model changed please post up here.
You can download the file as PDF here:
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4f7912f19b484b3b&id=4F7912F19B484B3B%21724 (https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=4f7912f19b484b3b&id=4F7912F19B484B3B%21724)
Hope this helps the new folks, and some of the old timers too.
:salute
-
Can't download, it needs a log-in :old:
-
Can't download, it needs a log-in :old:
Hmm I click the link and it auto opens the file where you can use the PDF reader commands to save it. It's permissions are set to allow anyone to download it....
Is anyone else having a problem?
-
I just tried it and it required a login.
-
Dang, Ok let's try this one:
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4F7912F19B484B3B!725&authkey=!AH41epN2ncdKKcg (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4F7912F19B484B3B!725&authkey=!AH41epN2ncdKKcg)
-
Fantastic! :rock
-
Fantastic! :rock
So it's working now, the last link?
-
Yes :)
-
Me 410 turns better then a 109F with flaps up?
-
If the 109F has 75% fuel and the 410 is 25%.
That's one of the sources of "How did I get outturned by XXX plane!?!"
The 109F with 25% is up at #24....
-
I'm still not convinced (no offense). The 410 turns worse with flaps? You haven't mistakenly swapped the with/without flaps numbers?
-
I'm still not convinced (no offense). The 410 turns worse with flaps? You haven't mistakenly swapped the with/without flaps numbers?
Don't think so. With Full Flaps it's a dog, look at the DPS. With 1 less notch it might be a lot better, some planes do that. Take it up and and record your flights. Do 3 turns at 500' after it settles down. Send me the footage and I'll be glad to modify the results.
-
No no I believe you. It's pretty unbelievable though that the 410 should have 50% worse turning radius with flaps. Is there any other aircraft that behave this way?
-
No no I believe you. It's pretty unbelievable though that the 410 should have 50% worse turning radius with flaps. Is there any other aircraft that behave this way?
The P-38 used to, then HTC fixed the bug in the flaps, the 410 might have the same issue.
I'll retest it tonight to make sure.
-
Awesome! :aok
-
I am highly skeptical that the Me410 will out turn the Mossie, certainly not by the huge margin shown there. Every time I have test flown the Me410 it has strenuously objected to turning.
-
I've never tried the 410 with an empty weapons bay, maybe that's the secret
-
Ya'll are correct, I had a typo for the 410 No Flap time in my spreadsheet. I also retested the Full Flaps Radius
The correct figures are:
No Flaps: Radius 988.4, DPS 14.0 ( Only the 262 is worse, even a B-25 turns better!)
Full Flaps: Radius 920.1, DPS 12.1
I also retested the full flaps Mossie6 and it moved up 1 notch.
The list is updated to Mosq's Sustained Turn List 12-2012 rev 1. I hope I didn't break the link or make ya'll login to get it, if so I will work on the Skydrive permissions again.
Thanks everyone for pointing out the anomaly in the data!!
:salute
-
Check the Spitfire Mk IX again as well.
I can never remember which is the better turn direction for each aircraft, but there are a few that turn better the other way. La-5FN, Spitfire Mk XIV and Yak-9s as I recall.
-
:aok
Check the Spitfire Mk IX again as well.
I can never remember which is the better turn direction for each aircraft, but there are a few that turn better the other way. La-5FN, Spitfire Mk XIV and Yak-9s as I recall.
I thought the IX might be off too.
As to right turners add the Typh/Temp to that list but I don't remember the La-5 being on it.
In other anomolies the 109K-4 and the Spit XIV might actually turn better at a reduced throttle settings but that opens a whole new can of worms.
-
Check the Spitfire Mk IX again as well.
I can never remember which is the better turn direction for each aircraft, but there are a few that turn better the other way. La-5FN, Spitfire Mk XIV and Yak-9s as I recall.
Good Spot on the Spit 9, it was not right. Corrected in Rev 2. I also checked the 5, 8, and 16, they all had minor changes but were very close to the old data, probably within experimental error. They are also changed in Rev2.
As far as Left vs Right turns, there's no way I'm going to test all the planes in both directions! I did some testing in 2006 on a couple of planes that folks said turned better one way but I could never get them to have a significant difference. They may be easier to turn Left vs Right because of Torque control issues, but that doesn't mean that actually turn faster, just easier to hold at the stall limit in one direction.
I may be wrong, and I invite anyone to film tests of planes that you think turn better, send me the film, and I will be glad to change the data and note what direction it was turning. And you'll get credit for doing the tests in the notes section.
-
Nice list !!!
Something that would interest me, is to see how much 25% of fuel would change a particular plane type.
-
Thanks for posting. This is great! :salute
-
Too good to be true... :)
-
MOSQ,
Yeah, I wasn't suggesting testing them all in both directions. Just maybe testing in their best direction. Typhoon and Tempest also have props spinning the opposite way.
-
Nice list !!!
Something that would interest me, is to see how much 25% of fuel would change a particular plane type.
Thanks for the kudo Save.
I'm not sure what you are asking here. Do you mean testing all the planes at all fuel loads? I tested a few planes at 25,50,75, and 99% to see how much the change makes and they are in the list. Doing all the planes is beyond my personal time allotment. Then when you add in various weapons packages it becomes a mind boggling number of combinations.
Karnak, I'll re-test the the Typhoon and Spit 14 to see if it makes a difference.
Again, if anyone wants to help with the testing I'm happy to add your tests to the list. All I need is a film of your test. One hint on testing, do it over water far enough out so that you can see nothing but the water horizon, then as you do circles you'll find it easier to hold the horizon at some place in the canopy frame and keep it there. It works a lot better than trying to watch the Climb/Descent gauge.
-
I have a spreadsheet I have been gradually adding performance numbers into for fighter bombers in AH. Turn testing is an area I have been unsure of how to determine radius or rate. I fear mathematics is not my strong point.
-
What's neat is that this is all sustained, so no high Gs or high speeds to muddle the easily muddled...
Early P-47Ds and late FW-190As range from 3 to 5 DPS behind Spitfire Mk IXs and Me-109G-6/14... :rolleyes:
For more historical accuracy, fly the formers as if they were the latters... :old:
Gaston
-
What's neat is that this is all sustained, so no high Gs or high speeds to muddle the easily muddled...
Early P-47Ds and late FW-190As range from 3 to 5 DPS behind Spitfire Mk IXs and Me-109G-6/14... :rolleyes:
For more historical accuracy, fly the formers as if they were the latters... :old:
Gaston
Still going on about your alternate physics? Want to share some of the "math" yet?
-
Thanks! :aok
Why am I such a geek for this stuff. It's the Indian and not the arrow, right? :uhoh
-
Still going on about your alternate physics? Want to share some of the "math" yet?
Karnak,
Maybe,just maybe if we ignore him he'll go away! :rofl :rofl Next thing you know he'll start saying something about G load and how in a 3g turn the planes wing will exert 5g's and thats what makes a 47 or 190 outturn a spit....... :rolleyes:
:salute
PS: thx for the hard work updating the list Mosq,once you have the site sorted I'll keep a copy to send players to. :aok
-
I retested the Spit 14 in both directions. I didn't do as well as I did in 2006, the No Flaps turn was slightly worse and moved a few places down the list. It could be me, or the flight model, it wasn't a radical change. I'll post up a new revision once we have a few more checks done.
But in regards to Left Turn vs Right Turn, it makes no difference as far as ultimate radius/rate goes. As I learned the last time, people think planes turn better one way or the other because it's easier one way than the other. In the Spit, when you kick in WEP it's really hard to ride the edge of a stall when turning Left, I had to make a heck of a lot of turns before I had three good ones in a row. The nose wants to jump up or down like a banshee. Turning Right, it's much easier to control , (but still not easy). The speed and time measurements were the same in both directions.
But yes, given a choice, turn Right if you are in the 14.
Since the Spit 14 probably has the most overpowering torque/massive prop for plane weight, I didn't recheck the Tempest, Typhoon, or others. I'm glad to review/add your tests though!
-
I retested the Spit 14 in both directions. I didn't do as well as I did in 2006, the No Flaps turn was slightly worse and moved a few places down the list. It could be me, or the flight model, it wasn't a radical change. I'll post up a new revision once we have a few more checks done.
But in regards to Left Turn vs Right Turn, it makes no difference as far as ultimate radius/rate goes. As I learned the last time, people think planes turn better one way or the other because it's easier one way than the other. In the Spit, when you kick in WEP it's really hard to ride the edge of a stall when turning Left, I had to make a heck of a lot of turns before I had three good ones in a row. The nose wants to jump up or down like a banshee. Turning Right, it's much easier to control , (but still not easy). The speed and time measurements were the same in both directions.
But yes, given a choice, turn Right if you are in the 14.
Since the Spit 14 probably has the most overpowering torque/massive prop for plane weight, I didn't recheck the Tempest, Typhoon, or others. I'm glad to review/add your tests though!
Oh, I dunno 'bout that. I "feel" a lot more adverse torque in the Typhoon than I do the Spit 14 (or the Tempest for that matter). I certainly wouldn't be afraid to test the Typhoon again, it certainly "feels" better taking everything right than left. Roll and turn both.
-
Great info Mosq, Thanks :aok
:salute
BigRat
-
Not able to see it.
-
Not able to see it.
When you click this link there should be a Red Box. Click the box and the file should open. You can download it from there.
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4F7912F19B484B3B!725&authkey=!AH41epN2ncdKKcg (https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=4F7912F19B484B3B!725&authkey=!AH41epN2ncdKKcg)
-
Great info Mosq, Thanks :aok
:salute
BigRat
Thanks! :cheers:
-
Thanks! :cheers:
Mosq, this kind of stuff is what sets AH and its player base apart from the raft of MMOs available.
Absolutely amazing work, thank you for dedicating the time to this!! :salute
-
Thanks for the kudos everyone! :aok
I've uploaded Rev 3 to the list, the same link above should work.
Changes in Rev 3:
Added the B-25 C.
The TBM no flaps data was missing. The full flaps was on the older versions so I tested and added the No Flaps. The TBM turns very well, but unlike most of the planes, almost as soon as the stall shake starts it becomes very unstable. If you fly the TBM into the stall shake like you do other planes it departs controlled flight very quickly. I learned to keep it just on the edge of the slightest shake, or no shake at all. Prior to the shake stage it is very docile and easy to turn.
-
Outstanding info here, ty for the hard work. This is exactly the data I've been trying to get my hands on for better understanding of AH's plane set.
:banana:
:salute
-
I was asked to provide 1 flap data for the P-51. So for the heck of it I did 1 flap data on several of the planes that have high speed maneuvering flaps, defined as being able to drop the first flap at or above 220 mph:
Niki2J; 572 ft, 23.5 dps
F4U1A; 655 ft, 19.4 dps
P-47D40 742 ft, 17.9 dps
P-47D11 742 ft, 17.3 dps
P-51D 760 ft, 18.9 dps
P-38L 804 ft, 19.9 dps
I didn't add this to the downloadable list, if you think it's useful you can pencil it in. I will probably add it the next time I revise the list.
:airplane:
-
Am I missing something, or is it not relevant? Speed(s) used in performing these tests, both the extensive list and the recent high-speed list. I'm sure I can calculate it from the figures you've provided but... I'm lazy.
If the speeds used weren't constant across the tests, and even if they were, planes have varying best performance speeds? Did you just get to max level speed for each plane at 500 feet then start the turns?
Just not seeing anything about that in the write-up.
<edit: Also, #14 and 17 ranked are labeled "sea hurricane">
-
Am I missing something, or is it not relevant? Speed(s) used in performing these tests, both the extensive list and the recent high-speed list. I'm sure I can calculate it from the figures you've provided but... I'm lazy.
If the speeds used weren't constant across the tests, and even if they were, planes have varying best performance speeds? Did you just get to max level speed for each plane at 500 feet then start the turns?
Just not seeing anything about that in the write-up.
<edit: Also, #14 and 17 ranked are labeled "sea hurricane">
The 1 flap turns really aren't relevant except if you are able to drop flaps at 225mph and the Ki-84 or Spit you are fighting can't drop till 160- 170mph. It's useful to know if you can or can't out turn the Spit even if it's only for a short period of time till both planes can deploy more flaps.
The speeds are at the edge of a stall, how the test was conducted is t the end of the write up. Basically take an LA-7 out, keep it at 500' and pull until the plane slows down to the point where it's shaking and almost in a stall. You can pull no harder without departing controlled flight or losing altitude. Keep it level for 3 turns, record speed and time. From that we calculate the radius and rate. If you are familiar with Badboy's charts you know the point where the plane has it's Sustained Turn. Low wing loaded planes like the Zeros and Val will have very slow sustained turn speeds, high wing load planes like a FW-190D have very high speed turns to keep from stalling, around 185 mph with no flaps.
#14 is the Sea Hurri with 8 303's, #17 is the Sea Hurri with 4 Hispano Cannons. You do know we have the Sea Hurri now? It's a Hurri 1 with CV landing gear. http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,342673.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,342673.0.html)
-
Thx for the reply.
I did do a search on sea hurricane as I was wondering if it had been added at some point - nothing came up except some scenario substitution back in '02... I probably inadvertently had my search too narrow. I didn't see it on the list of planes from the home page link, either.
I should have known better when sustained was mentioned as to the speeds. Might not hurt to clarify that, tho' for those who check it out with even less knowledge.
-
Mosq it sounds like you're doing minimum speed turns instead of best sustained speed turns. You can see on the EM diagrams that flying slower than your best sustained turn speed is possible but gives you a slower rate and larger radius. Your best sustained turn is typically at 2.5 - 3 G for AH aircraft.
-
MOSQ,
Thanks for posting the 1 flap data sir. :salute
-
Mosq it sounds like you're doing minimum speed turns instead of best sustained speed turns. You can see on the EM diagrams that flying slower than your best sustained turn speed is possible but gives you a slower rate and larger radius. Your best sustained turn is typically at 2.5 - 3 G for AH aircraft.
I'm doing the turns exactly the way Badboy does them in "Badboy's Bootstrap Method v1.01, August 2009." And I use his Bootstrap Calculator to come up with the Radius and Rate. We worked together on a custom version of it so I can keep all my other data on the same spreadsheet: See http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,233819.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,233819.0.html) .
And to clarify, all planes turn a tighter radius, and MUCH higher Rate, at their Corner Velocity speed, which in AH is always the slowest speed that you can turn a 6G turn, than they can turn in a Sustained Turn with No Flaps. But it's impossible to maintain a 6G turn for more than an instant, which is why it's called instantaneous turn.
And ALL planes turn a tighter radius with Full Flaps than they can turn at 6Gs in an instantaneous turn!
There lots of threads and explanations on EM digrams here and SimHQ, http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_011a.html (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_011a.html)
And finally, I'm no Aerospace Engineer, I'm just trying to provide helpful information. I've been reading Badboy's articles and helping the AH Training corps with data for several years, but as always YMMV!
-
MOSQ,
Thanks for posting the 1 flap data sir. :salute
:aok
-
Thanks Mosq. I didn't mean to imply you weren't doing it right. I probably should have just asked how do you know you're at Ps=0? It seems like I'm stabilizing at a higher speed but I tend to avoid the buffet so I'm probably just not deep enough into the stall to stabilize at Clmax.
-
Thanks Mosq. I didn't mean to imply you weren't doing it right. I probably should have just asked how do you know you're at Ps=0? It seems like I'm stabilizing at a higher speed but I tend to avoid the buffet so I'm probably just not deep enough into the stall to stabilize at Clmax.
No Problem FLS. Yes, you have to go into stall buffet, or at least in and out of it. I try to get into the buffet and if I visually see the horizon is slowing down I let up a tiny fraction so that I'm still just in or out of buffet and the horizon is spinning by at it's fastest rate. WideWing usually beats me at this testing by a few feet and I think it's because he has a better feel for the buffet.
That's why I'm always open to anyone sending me a film of the test of their favorite plane, and once I verify their test I will modify the listing with their more accurate data. No Film, it didn't happen!
:cheers:
-
If anyone wants to know how we do the testing, or better yet do their own testing, I've uploaded two documents to the Skydrive link, Badboy's Bootstrap 3 pdf explanation of the How and Why, and Bootstrap 8L which is the actual Excel Speadsheet calculator. The calculator not only displays Radius/Rate/Corner Velocity/Stall Speed....it will create one and two circle charts for you.
He's posted both of these here on the AH BBS in the past.
-
Thanks for the work here.
Mosq, in your sustained turn list what is DPS?
Also, I don't understand how corner velocity varies, can someone direct to more detailed information on CV? If there is more than one CV then I don't understand it. The Bootstrap xls document shows 6 varying CV's for the K-4.
Finally, what is the number in sustained turn rate representing, feet or seconds...?
TIA,
Rot
-
Thanks for the work here.
Mosq, in your sustained turn list what is DPS?
Also, I don't understand how corner velocity varies, can someone direct to more detailed information on CV? If there is more than one CV then I don't understand it. The Bootstrap xls document shows 6 varying CV's for the K-4.
Finally, what is the number in sustained turn rate representing, feet or seconds...?
TIA,
Rot
Good questions....
DPS = Degrees Per Second = the rate in degrees of a circle you turn each second.
The different CVs in the bootstrap spreadsheet are for each flap setting. Notice the column Flap Notch.
If you do a search of the BBS you will see lots of discussions on Corner Velocity, and the linked SimHQ article by Badboy has a good explanation:
http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_011a.html (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_011a.html)
Sustained Turn Rate in the Spreadsheet is the same as DPS on my list, Degrees per Second. On the spreadsheet Turn Rate at Corner (meaning at CV) is also Degrees per Second. Just different term for the same thing.
Glad to see you are playing with the spreadsheet, now do some testing and film them! :aok
-
How do you go about calculating the radius in feet?
-
How do you go about calculating the radius in feet?
Suppose you carry out a flight test and you use a stopwatch to time how long it takes to turn in a circle under some set of conditions. You can fly the test under any conditions you wish, providing you keep the speed and altitude constant. But lets say you fly in a circle at a constant speed of 160mph and it takes 18 seconds. From that you can calculate the radius as follows:
1) calculate the speed of the aircraft in feet per second 160*5280/3600 = 234.667 ft/s
2) calculate the distance you travel around the circle in one turn = 234.667 ft/s * 18 seconds = 4224 ft
3) That's the circumference of your turn circle, now find the diameter by dividing by Pi = 4224/3.14159 = 1344.5 ft
4) Now divide that by two to get the radius 1344.5/2 = 672 ft
Therefore if you turn at 160mph and it takes 18 seconds to complete one 360 degree turn, your radius must have been 672ft
Also because you turned 360 degrees in 18 seconds your turn rate was 360/18 = 20 dps
So your flight test gives you a turn rate of 20 dps with a turn radius of 672 ft.
Hope that helps.
Badboy
PS, or you could just use my Bootstrap Calculator :)
-
That's very useful thank you. I was actually hoping there was some way to calculate rates and radii when speed is not a constant.
-
That's very useful thank you. I was actually hoping there was some way to calculate rates and radii when speed is not a constant.
Yes there is, but the best way to see the rate and radius at various speeds is to use an EM diagram such as the one shown below that I produced for a real P-51D:
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/EM7.gif)
Using diagrams like that you can see the turn radius and turn rate at every point in the envelope and of course overlaying the diagrams for different aircraft provides very useful comparisons.
Hope that helps
Badboy
-
That's very useful thank you. I was actually hoping there was some way to calculate rates and radii when speed is not a constant.
Ok, on second thoughts you probably wanted a formula to do the calculation yourself.
You can calculate the radius in a flat turn given the aircraft speed and load factor. To be precise I should say the body axis normal load factor, that is the force pushing the pilot into his seat which is different from the force doing the turning, but this calculation takes that into account by leaving 1g vertically so that the aircraft doesn't lose altitude during the turn.
So, let's do the same calculation as before but this time we need the speed and load factor so we have 160mph and 2.735g.
You still need to convert the speed to ft/s as before so we now get 234.667ft/s
The formula and calculation are as follows:
r = radius
v = speed in ft/s
g = gravity (32.2ft/s^2)
n = load factor
Giving...
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/radius.png)
which gives you 672ft as before.
The difference is that now you aren't doing a flight test, you are using a speed and a load factor to determine what radius that would give you in a flat turn. That's assuming of course that the speed and g are both possible at the same time, but if so, you are good to go.
Was that closer to what you wanted?
Badboy
-
Ok, on second thoughts you probably wanted a formula to do the calculation yourself.
Aha! Yes thank you that's perfect. I see your formula even works if the load factor is negative.
I find the EM diagrams to be of limited use because speed is seldom a constant in ACM and they are too static to be practically helpful. I thought it would be an interesting insight to compare rates and radii of a flat turn and a chandelle or a high Yo-Yo. Obviously the BFM which include the vertical element would have a compound curve compared to the simple curve of the flat turn.
-
Aha! Yes thank you that's perfect. I see your formula even works if the load factor is negative.
Glad I could help, but that formula is specifically for a flat turn holding one vertical g to maintain altitude. It can be easily modified for turning in the vertical or any other attitude but then you need to do the more involved calculations required to determine how the speed and g will vary during the maneuver.
I find the EM diagrams to be of limited use because speed is seldom a constant in ACM and they are too static to be practically helpful.
It sounds as though you might not be seeing the potential of those diagrams. That's not to say they don't have weaknesses, they do, but they are invaluable to anyone who has any prospect of dissimilar air combat, real or simulated.
For example, the diagram below is for the Spit9 and includes Ps curve at 25ft/s intervals.
(http://www.badz.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/images/Spit9.jpg)
If you look at this diagram, you can see that if you pull a 5g turn at 225mph, you will have a turn rate of 27.4 dps with a radius of 691ft and a negative excess power of -75ft/s which means that if you want to hold that turn you will either need to descend at a rate of 75ft/s or decelerate at just under 9mph/s. Those figures are giving you rates of climb or descent and decelerations, some very dynamic change! You can see how quickly you would need to descend to maintain the turn, or how quickly your aircraft will lose speed, and you can compare that with any other aircraft, for any other speed or load factor... that's hardly static.
Indeed, diagrams like that are valuable enough to be required ground school material for fighter pilots in the most enlightened military services around the world.
I thought it would be an interesting insight to compare rates and radii of a flat turn and a chandelle or a high Yo-Yo. Obviously the BFM which include the vertical element would have a compound curve compared to the simple curve of the flat turn.
Yes, in a flat turn it is easier to hold the speed and load factor steady and so the turns are close to circular, in steady climbing or descending turns they form a helix. In vertical turns the speed and load factor varies and the curve is more egg shaped, and if you take all the curves together at once the 3D shape formed is referred to by fighter pilots with various names, I prefer to call it the energy egg and it defines the turning environment. I've attached a drawing from a US Navy document.
(http://www.leonbadboysmith.com/images/egg2.png)
Calculating those curves will certainly be interesting for you, and possibly challenging, so good luck with that.
Badboy
-
It sounds as though you might not be seeing the potential of those diagrams.
Those Ps curves are useful. That's the energy part of the diagram I've been missing out on. Can you estimate the plus and minus curves once you have the Ps = 0?
That's not to say they don't have weaknesses,
Of course the curves vary with fuel load, usually something you don't know when you face an opponent. Also altitude. I'd like to see a combined flap curve on the same graph with the same scales, like with your Ki-84 / Spit16 comparison. Also with those you have a flap curves for speeds above which the flaps retract, so I gather you have extrapolated those? I would try to make a set myself just out of interest but I can't find a nice blank colour template :old:
Indeed, diagrams like that are valuable enough to be required ground school material for fighter pilots in the most enlightened military services around the world.
Unfortunately they are not required reading at the 'nrshida seat of the pants try to manoeuvre with everything and evaluate afterwards in your parachute' school of air combat. I'm afraid my brain is more artistic / visual than mathematical. I can usually follow the mathematics if I have an intuitive feel for what it is describing in the first place but not the other way around.
Ah the energy egg. Again that would be a lot more useful with a 'centre of weight' position marked, also since we have relatively low thrust isn't ours less egg-shaped and more a procession of raindrop-shaped loops?
Calculating those curves will certainly be interesting for you, and possibly challenging, so good luck with that.
I detect true sadism here :rofl
-
I'm just trying to check the flat turning data for the Ki-84 for my own curiosity. On page 4 of Badboy's Bootstrap instructions it says do not use rudder to co-ordinate your turn. May I ask why that is?
-
Safe to assume the Ki-43 is at the very top? Among fighter it would be #2, correct?
-
Safe to assume the Ki-43 is at the very top? Among fighter it would be #2, correct?
I haven't tested it yet, but I'm sure it will right up there.