Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: mora on July 03, 2002, 11:13:58 PM

Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: mora on July 03, 2002, 11:13:58 PM: This is just a question and I dont have any data... I have thought that a6m2 climbed much better than a6m5 due to better power to weight ratio and have heard that it's initial climb rate was 4500 fpm. Now this a6m2 we have has initial climb of under 3000 fpm. Is this correct, does anyone have any performance data?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: flakbait on July 04, 2002, 12:10:29 AM: http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/a6m.html#RTFToC3

According to Joe Baugher, the initial climb rate was 4,517 fpm, and a climb to 19,685 ft was done in 7:27. Provided his figures are on, it's obviously too low.

-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/sig/unsuperv.gif)
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: Mitsu on July 04, 2002, 12:45:18 AM: i doubt it...
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: mora on July 04, 2002, 01:09:12 AM: According to this data model2 climbs to 19,685 in 7min27sec and model5 in 7min1sec. If these figures are right our model2 still climbs too slowly.
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/zerofacts.htm
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: flakbait on July 04, 2002, 02:44:59 AM: Then again, most of the fields in this new map are at least 7k. That could be the reason it seems too low; altitude degrading performance. Did you try this test from a carrier?

------------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta Six's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"I wanted to go back for another 50 missions, but they ruled it out
because I had a case of malaria that kept recurring. So I had to stay
in the States and teach combat flying. I was shot down by a mosquito!"
Frank Hurlbut, P-38 pilot
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/sig/whistle.gif)
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: mora on July 04, 2002, 03:00:22 AM: (http://www.hitechcreations.com/models/charts/a6m2climb.gif)

I tested it from a carrier and it climbed according to it's chart. I think HTC has been using the wrong data...
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: ra on July 04, 2002, 08:03:17 AM: My book shows the A6M2 with a power loading of 5.5lb/hp, higher than any of the other A6M's. Still, less than 3000 fpm seems low.

ra
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: GRUNHERZ on July 04, 2002, 09:18:15 AM: How does 5.5lb/hp compare to other 4500fpm climbers, or at least to other planes that do over 3000fpm?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: oboe on July 04, 2002, 09:31:08 AM: FYI -

Stewart Wilson's "Aircraft of World War II" puts the A6M2's climb rate at 3150 fpm.
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: butch2k on July 04, 2002, 09:40:47 AM: According to the ATAD document based on US and Australian tests and Japanese documents the rate of climb ingame is correct.
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: mora on July 04, 2002, 10:53:06 AM: You are right ra, a6m really has the worst power loading.
according to this:http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/zerofacts.htm

a6m2:
climb rate: 5min55sec to 16,400ft; 7min27sec to 19,685ft
power loading:3,90 lbs/hp

a6m3:
climb rate: 7min19sec to 19,685ft
power loading: 3,53 lbs/hp

a6m5
climb rate: 7min1sec to 19,685ft
power loading: 3,66 lbs/hp

However power loading doesn't seem to be the only thing that affects climb rate as we can see the a6m5 climbs better than the a6m3 despite it has better power loading. The climb rate in game game may very well be correct but the difference between a6m2 and a6m5 seems incorrect to me. Does wing loading play any part in climb rates?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: mora on July 04, 2002, 11:23:56 AM: I did some tests with 25% fuel and full ammo and got the following results:

a6m2 climb to 19,7k in 7min10sec
a6m5 climb to 19,7k in 6min2sec:eek:

So it appeas that model2 has the climb rate right on par and model5 has wayyy too good climb rate. They both seem to climb significantly better than HTC charts suggest, are those chart for fully fueled planes?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: Vermillion on July 04, 2002, 12:41:58 PM: My TAIC report says that

the A6M3 at 5,650lbs has a climb rate of
Rate @ SL = 2960 ft/min
Rate @ 19,700ft = 2640 ft/min
Time to 10k = 3.3 min
Time to 20k = 7.0 min

the A6M5 at 5,920 lbs has a climb rate of
Rate @ SL = 2800 ft/min
Rate @ 19,700ft = 2470 ft/min
Time to 10k = 3.4 min
Time to 20k = 7.4 min

But it doesn't have any data on the A6M2, except that its loaded weight was 5,400lbs. Plus, I'm not sure if this particular data sheet is from actual flight tests or estimates of performance.

But it certainly seems that the AH A6M2 is very close to this data and seems to be in the ballpark.
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: illo on July 04, 2002, 03:12:59 PM: Mora did you test with full fuel load?

All tests are generally made with full combat weight unless otherwise mentioned.
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: Wotan on July 04, 2002, 03:41:32 PM: i think butch answered the question
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: butch2k on July 04, 2002, 05:06:59 PM: Here is the ATAD chart
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: ra on July 04, 2002, 05:26:37 PM: Butch,

Which weight was used to get the figures, normal or overload?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: butch2k on July 04, 2002, 05:32:47 PM: Normal, only max speed was also tested at overweight (o'load on the chart)
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: Vermillion on July 06, 2002, 07:04:25 AM: Butch, where did you get your ATAD reports?
Title: a6m2 climb rate
Post by: Guppy on July 06, 2002, 07:52:50 AM: Quote
Originally posted by mora
However power loading doesn't seem to be the only thing that affects climb rate as we can see the a6m5 climbs better than the a6m3 despite it has better power loading. The climb rate in game game may very well be correct but the difference between a6m2 and a6m5 seems incorrect to me. Does wing loading play any part in climb rates?
One possible explanation is the introduction of ejector stubs on the A6M5 to produce exhaust thrust. That would give the Model 52 a bit more juice without improving its power loading on paper (although I'd think the additional thrust would matter more at high speeds than at best-climb speed).