Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: -lazs- on May 20, 2000, 09:18:00 AM
-
AH gives some pretty good speed and climb data for the planes but...
In you guys opinion, what is the ranking, best to worst of the (fighter)planes in AH, turn wise? Best 360 degree turn with or without flaps to worst.
lazs
-
This type of thing shouldn't be left to opinions, someone should do some reasonable scientific tests.
ra
-
ra is correct for a definitive answer.
But here is what my impression of best to worse, from playing, for horizontal flat turns at corner speeds, assuming turning left.
Spit V
C.202
Spit IX
N1K2
C.205
Bf109F
Bf109G2
P-38
Bf109G6
F4U (both models)
P-51
Fw190A8
Bf109G10
Typhoon
Again these are just my impression, and as you get farther down the list, the differences become smaller and smaller, and pilot skill and response time becomes more critical.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
I've never liked the "turn rate" comparisons. It is good to know how your particular plane turns, but this should be more through experience than reading numbers.
It seems most lessons learned in WWII involved gun footage and eye-witness accounts as opposed to hard-core data. Sure, we captured planes and tested them out... but that was with our pilots flying them.. not theirs. Our test pilots weren't green... they weren't fighting for their lives when they tested them... they didn't test enemy tactics. They only tested the aircraft.
I guess it just takes away from the whole WWII immersion if people sit around and talk about precise climb-rates and turn-rates. It just seems the lectures in the ready-room would have involved "don't try to turn with a zeke" or "don't try to out-climb a Spit" or "Don't try to out-run a mustang".... Less of it would have been "a mustang is capable of 409 IAS at 20k and a 109 is only capable of 404... so if you get co-alt and co-speed you will be able to extend at with a 5 mph difference in velocity".
In this sim you can get a feel for how every aircraft flies. I strongly encourage everyone to do it.
AKDejaVu
-
For sustained turns at sea level with full internal fuel, I measured the following:
N1K2: ~24s @ 130 mph
SpitV: ~24s @ 105 mph
Spit IX: ~25s @ 125 mph
C202: ~25s @ 150 mph
C205: ~26s @ 175 mph
109f4 & La5: ~ 28s @ 150 mph
109G2 & G6: ~ 29s @ 160 mph
P-38L: ~29s @ 175 mph
109G10: ~30s @ 170 mph
P-51D: ~31s @ 150 mph
190A8: ~ 31s @ 175 mph
F4u-1C: ~32s @ 150 mph
F4u-1D: ~33s @ 140 mph
Typhoon: ~34s @ 130 mph
-
Nice work Wells, but we need to know how flap settings effect the turns. I often crank down full flaps in a P-51, it seems to work better than just the manuever setting. I'm not sure what the best flap settings are for other planes.
ra
-
I just played around with flap settings and the only planes that seem to benefit are
F4u - 2 notches
La5 - 2 notches
N1K2 - 1 notch
P-38L - 1 notch
P-51D - 2 notches
The rest should not use any flaps at all. It looks like this would be most important when fighting 109s as they tend to be in the same range as the 38, 51 and La5, but do not benefit from flaps. The f4u doesn't appear to be able to overcome any other aircraft by using them and the George should use them against Spitfires.
-
Great stuff Wells.
popeye
-
Thanks Wells!
That agrees with what I have observed qualitatively.
-
wells what fuel setting did you use for the test?
I would be quite interested to see a comparison between the fighters at 25% fuel and the comparison at 100% fuel.
I think this might be more beneficial for arena play so that we could get an idea of worst and best turn performance for each plane.
[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 05-20-2000).]
-
From my experience in a treetop-flat-turn-fight with a P-51 I think the 109-G10 does benefit very well from flaps.
I was turning behind a P-51 on the deck at lowest speed possible; stall horn bloating; inner wing just touching the ground. I was losing angles and control over the plane. In my desperation I dropped 2 notches of flaps: and -oh wonder- the plane stabilized itself and I was gaining angles again. I could almost feel the additional lift the flaps were producing. So, if you ever get into a flat turn fight at low altitude in a G10(not very advisable) drop 2 notches of flaps - could save your day...
------------------
~Kirin~
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/kirin.jpg)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/home.htm)
[This message has been edited by Kirin (edited 05-20-2000).]
-
I think alot of folks underestimate the turning capability of the ME-109F. I'd rate it right under the Spit V. But I've not tried the 202 yet either.
-Westy
-
well at that slow speed flaps will not increase turn rate...
but they will make your turn radius smaller due to the flaps providing the same amount of lift at a lower airspeed thus making the stall speed lower.
turn rate will be lower than at higher speed
I believe wells presented us with turn performance of aircraft at corner airspeed which I believe is the same as best climbspeed?
-
Good point AK... A captured A5 was tested against a -1D and a F6F.... Does our Hog gain one turn in three against even the chubby AH 190A8 like theirs did against the A5?
Looking at arena observations or wells data... doesn't anyone think that the Hog turn performance is way off? Is it to compensate for the evil and invincible "cannon Hog"?
lazs
-
UH-OH,I sense the "f4u is porked" campaign coming to Aces High soon. <snicker>
-
*looks at weazel and nods his head*
INCOMING !!!!
*dives in a handy bunker*
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
hi laz,
What I really found interesting was the difference between the 1C and 1D in a sustained turn. The 1D definitely turned slower for some reason. I think airframe drag is way overdone (both pitch and yaw) and the sustained turn speeds are about 50 mph slow as a result. For example, there are tests that show a Spitfire IX has a sustained turn speed of 180 mph, a 109; 200 mph, the La5 can turn some 20 deg/sec sustained. It's only about 13 in AH. The turn rate threads are around here somewhere...
-
If you want to see how this thread is likely to turn out, go here
http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw/Forum3/HTML/012193.html (http://agw.dogfighter.com/agw/Forum3/HTML/012193.html)
You've got AH and Warbirds covered lazs, is there still a forum for Air Warrior?
------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/phoenix
'feel the heat .......'
-
NO, Jekyl (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Hehee weaz and verm... of course, if it wasn't obvious... I wouldn't notice it. I did want the answer tho and it is as bad as i suspected.
Wells, how can they be so complete on the climb and speed stuff and get this kind of turn rate figures? Does the airframe drag affect the planes in some lopsided way or is there some other reason that causes these odd results?
lazs
-
I dunno lazs, I'm trying to figure that out! 150 mph should give about 2G's in the turn, whereby the radius would be 215m (90 degree bank) or 250m for 60 degree bank (2G). I'm getting 340-350m, which only corresponds to about 1.4 G. There's 2 things I can think of...
1.4 just happens to be the square root of 2, so maybe there's something wrong with the math code, or...
They are subtracting lift produced by the tail. While this is ok, it only really applies when the elevator is first deflected. As the angle of attack increases, the tail approaches it's zero-lift angle, so this effect may be way overdone and is probably the reason for the 'handles like a truck' comments.
-
Wells a few things you might not be considering.
1. Thrust portion due to aoa helping you around the turn goes down with increase in speed.
2. Lift on horz stab debends on where the cg as to which direction and how much of the tail helps the turn.
3. Prop was % over wing changes with speed.
HiTech
-
1. Thrust portion due to aoa helping you around the turn goes down with
increase in speed.
Ok, but speed isn't changing, it's constant in a sustained turn. If anything, the G force should be higher from the propwash as compared to the power off stall speed.
2. Lift on horz stab debends on where the cg as to which direction and
how much of the tail helps the turn.
I realize that. How can a tail that's only 18% of the wing area, account for a 30% loss in lift? The tail doesn't appear to be helping at all and what it takes away is WAY too much, even for the most stable of planes.
-
Well's Im confused what your trying to figure out based on what numbers. Can you outline your numbers for me?
HiTech
-
Hitech,
Use the F4u for example:
Clean stall = 102 mph
Sustained turn (stall) = 145 mph
G-force in turn should be about 2.0, right?
(145/102)^2
The turn radius for such a turn works out to 215m (for 90 degree bank) and about 250 m for 60 degree bank (2G).
I"m measuring a whopping 340-350m turn radius at 200', which is a corresponding 1.4 G's. So basically, I guess I'm trying to figure out why the G force is so low and why the radius is so large?
-
I just compared sustained turn values between AH and WB (from Hoof's site) and here are the results.
Plane........AH......WB...... .......Diff %
Spit V.......24......15.3......... ..156
Spit IX......25......16.3......... ..153
109F-4.......28......17.9...........156
109G-6.......29......20.............145
P-38L........29......15.9.(P-38F)...314
P-51D........31......20.5...........151
109A-8.......31......23.1...........134
F4U-1D.......33......20.............165
Fw 190A-8 is the winner and P-38 is the loser in this lottery.
WB results are with 10 internal fuel while Wells did run his AH tests with 100% internal fuel I guess?
Somehow almost systematical 150 % percent difference in most cases feels odd. Are WB planes too good in sustained turning or AH planes too poor in sustained turning? The truth is out there... What we realle need is accurate sustained turn data or calculations.
Wells, Hitech, do you guys have any ideas?
------------------
jochen Jagdflieger JG 2 'Richthofen' Aces High
jochen Geschwaderkommodore (on leave) Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) Warbirds
Thanks for the Fw 190A-5 HTC!
Ladysmith wants you forthwith to come to her relief
Burn your briefs you leave for France tonight
Carefully cut the straps of the booby-traps and set the captives free
But don't shoot 'til you see her big blue eyes
[This message has been edited by Jochen (edited 05-25-2000).]
-
Jochen, to compare the two they would have to be done with the same amount of fuel.
And this is exceptionally hard too do, because in WB's, they include drop tanks as "internal fuel".
Here is an example, just working the numbers in my head, but if Im counting right, the difference in 10% fuel in a P-51 and 100% fuel (no drop tanks) in a P-51 is something like 1,000lbs-1,500lbs of weight. This would definitely effect turning performance.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 05-25-2000).]
-
Shouldn't a lighter plane turn even better?
lazs
-
Here's the thread with turn time data. It's mostly for 109's and Russian planes.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000402.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000402.html)
On average, I got 120% better results in WB (100 fuel). The exceptions are also the 190a8 (only 7% better in WB) and the P-38L (35% better). Relatively, the 190 has gotten better in AH and the 38L worse, compared to the other planes.
[This message has been edited by wells (edited 05-25-2000).]