Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Fester Adams on July 30, 2002, 06:04:03 AM
-
rules.
I want more versions of it
-
Yea.... I'll agree w/this. It'll be good for the early war set as well... get a version w/out dive breaks. I'm still not sure IF our version now has dive breaks that actualy do what they did in RL though.
xBAT
-
And while their at it, how about adding this to 1.11 too.....
(http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P-39d5.JPG)
Oh, by the way, the original Fester Addams spelled his name with two Ds. ;) Any explosions in the basement lately? :D
My regards,
Widewing
-
We have plenty of P38's. Lets see more versions of the 109.
-
*vomits on hblair*
P-38G good.
P-39D good.
Ki-84 good.
Ki-44 good.
J2M3 good.
109 BAD! VERY BAD!! *vomits again* I'd rather fly one of those bipes that cajun is sure to come in here and rave about. :D
-
Was it something I said? :p
-
yes
-
two 'D's in Addams...
-
Batdog your a sick puppy
-
I've got news for you:
P38 SUCKS!
-
Originally posted by Fester Adams
rules.
I want more versions of it
I'm all for that!!! :cool:
-
Originally posted by batdog
Yea.... I'll agree w/this. It'll be good for the early war set as well... get a version w/out dive breaks. I'm still not sure IF our version now has dive breaks that actualy do what they did in RL though.
xBAT
P-38 didn't have dive brakes but rather dive flaps and yes, at high speeds they will give you close to a 4 degree nose up lift.
Here's a picture that shows the dive flaps deployed, as well as the 'Fowler Flaps" (i.e. combat or maneuvering flaps). The P-38 in the photo has been painted to look like Bong's P-38J but actually is a P-38L.
(http://www.kazoku.org/xp-38n/walkaround/p38l-eaa06.jpg)
(http://www.hispanicvista.com/assets/479th_shield.jpg)
Ack-Ack
479th "Riddle's Raiders" FG
-
I can honestly say the P-38 is the most frustrating ride in AH for me. I would love to fly it and be good but its so not happening.( yeah i know i suck) I am absolutely baffled at how good some of you guys are in it. I think if you are good in a P-38 in here you are one of the best. I personaly think AKAK is the best I've seen in it. No offense Fester. Just one mans opinion.
to all you P-38 drivers. :D
AKAK, teach me how to fly it!:D
-
Originally posted by akak
The P-38 in the photo has been painted to look like Bong's P-38J but actually is a P-38L.
Just curious as to what gave her away as an L? I've read that the major change was in engines, along with the "Christmas Tree" rocket launcher, from the P-38J-25's. Of course, the launcher, like the earlier dive flap modification kits, were retrofitted to earlier J's. I understand that there were three Marge's, the first being P-38J-15 42-103993, lost March 24th, '44, when Lt. Malone bailed out after mechanical difficulties.
I love the P-38, it's a beautiful bird. I've picked up quite a few books & unit histories on her over the years, but my favorite would probably be Martin Caidin's "Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38", which I'm happy to see has been reprinted yet again. :)
I love her, my ride of choice, but alas I'm not very good either, Slash.
-
Lmao Xbat! :D
-
Gator, externally the L is very similar to the J-25. Easiest way to tell is the retractable landing light was moved to a fixed position in the leading edge of the port wing on the L.
-
NO MORE AMERICAN PLANES, we have enough
-
DblTrbl, thanks for the reply! However, while I've read the same in Martin Caidin's book, other sources have the landing light moved "during the block-25 production run" of the J ("P-38 Lightning in Action", p. 31). Warbird Tech, Vol. 2, "Lockheed P-38 Lightning", p. 32, has it that "Late in the P-38J production, beginning with Lockheed serial number 422-4563 (AAF 44-23559) the remaining landing light in the left wing was relocated to the wing leading edge, ..." (they cite a May 19, '44, Lockheed pub as their source).
I would agree that it's a good indication, tho, since the J-25's ran from Lockheed serials 4563-4772, giving 210 J-25's to over 4,000 L's. :)
-
NO MORE GERMAN OR AMERICAN PLANES, WE HAVE ENOUGH! :p
-
Brewster to AH :p
-
Originally posted by akak
P-38 didn't have dive brakes but rather dive flaps and yes, at high speeds they will give you close to a 4 degree nose up lift.
Here's a picture that shows the dive flaps deployed, as well as the 'Fowler Flaps" (i.e. combat or maneuvering flaps). The P-38 in the photo has been painted to look like Bong's P-38J but actually is a P-38L.
(http://www.kazoku.org/xp-38n/walkaround/p38l-eaa06.jpg)
(http://www.hispanicvista.com/assets/479th_shield.jpg)
Ack-Ack
479th "Riddle's Raiders" FG
Yea I know AKAK.... just a quick post w/out really thinking. Believe me...this topic has been run into the ground a 1000 times here... the fowler flaps and how they are suppose to work compared to in-game.
xBAT
-
I corresponded for a time with a WW2 P-38 veteran (who also flew p47 and p51 which he liked best of course). I do remember he was quick to correct me early on that those were not brakes but flaps.
-
I have to agree with Slash here. I can't seem to fly this thing well at all (haven't touched it in a long time).
How do you fly a p-38? I know it's strengths are in the vertical, does that mean to fly it B&Z? or is it T&B, but turn in the vertical? Need tips....
-
Originally posted by Greese
How do you fly a p-38? I know it's strengths are in the vertical, does that mean to fly it B&Z? or is it T&B, but turn in the vertical? Need tips....
My P38 tips:
1. Fly straight and level at all times
2. Ignore Check 6 calls
Ignore the .50cal pings you hear, they won't last too long if you follow steps 1 and 2
:p
-
Originally posted by MrLars
My P38 tips:
1. Fly straight and level at all times
2. Ignore Check 6 calls
Ignore the .50cal pings you hear, they won't last too long if you follow steps 1 and 2
:p
Hey!!!
That is exactly how I fly the 38
and it works just like you said... hehehe
-
Simple guideline for flying the P-38: Out run what you can't out turn; Out turn what you can't out run. Of course there are exceptions to that rule...the Yak9U comes to mind. I hate em more than Spits, N1Ks, and La-7s put together. :mad: Oh, and don't follow a bandit through a split S if your speed is near or above 400mph...unless you like making large divits in the turf.
The big Lockheed isn't the best at anything, but it is good at just about everything. The key is knowing where its advantages lie vs whatever you're fighting and using them, but that's true for any plane. If you want to get good in the P-38, fly it a lot and die in it a lot. You'll figure it out eventually. :)
-
I don't understand why there is a difference in the indicated airspeed for compression/buffet (100 mph difference between 18k and 28k for example) Being as how indicated airspeed already factors in atmospheric density. (i.e. stall speed (IAS) is stall speed regardless of alt etc etc.)
This is the one thing between WB and AH FM that I have always tried to reconcil - because they don't behave at all the same in this regard. Especially noticeable in the 38's
-
Originally posted by Gator
Just curious as to what gave her away as an L? I've read that the major change was in engines, along with the "Christmas Tree" rocket launcher, from the P-38J-25's. Of course, the launcher, like the earlier dive flap modification kits, were retrofitted to earlier J's. I understand that there were three Marge's, the first being P-38J-15 42-103993, lost March 24th, '44, when Lt. Malone bailed out after mechanical difficulties.
It's a P-38L-5-LO because of the fuel pump blisters (J models didn't have them). You can't see them in the photo I posted but you can find some pictures here (http://http://www.kazoku.org/xp-38n/walkaround/index.htm)
Ack-Ack
479th FG
-
Originally posted by Turbot
I don't understand why there is a difference in the indicated airspeed for compression/buffet (100 mph difference between 18k and 28k for example) Being as how indicated airspeed already factors in atmospheric density. (i.e. stall speed (IAS) is stall speed regardless of alt etc etc.)
This is the one thing between WB and AH FM that I have always tried to reconcil - because they don't behave at all the same in this regard. Especially noticeable in the 38's
Compression and buffeting aren't the same thing. At least in the P-38 (don't know about other WW2 aircraft), it would only enter a compression in high altitude dives started above 20,000ft and will not enter compression in dives started below that height.
Buffeting can happen at any altitude (those violent shaking of the plane at high speeds) and you still retain some control of the aircraft, even though the controls have stiffened from the buffeting. Usually just chopping throttle some or even rocking the wings will get you out of a buffet in AH. I tap on my rudders a little and rock the wings some and cut back my throttle some to get out of a buffet.
NACA Report 646 Effect of Compression on an airfoil 1939 (http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-report-646/)
NACA TN-543 The Compressibility bubble (http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1935/naca-tn-543/)
Compressibility Error (http://142.26.194.131/aerodynamics1/Basics/Page7.html)
Compression in P-38 (http://www.p-38online.com/cmprs.html)
Ack-Ack
479th FG
-
lol.. huh?:rolleyes: :D
-
And just for the record *fart*:cool:
-
A real airplane.
(http://home.satx.rr.com/pointblank/films/p47N.jpg)
(http://home.satx.rr.com/pointblank/films/p-47Na.jpg)
-
Originally posted by akak
It's a P-38L-5-LO because of the fuel pump blisters (J models didn't have them). You can't see them in the photo I posted but you can find some pictures here (http://http://www.kazoku.org/xp-38n/walkaround/index.htm)
Thanks for the feedback! Was hoping to get some secrets from you experienced plane spotters, and I always like the stuff you can learn on these boards from other enthusiasts. :cool:
And, thanks for the nifty site! Good shots, and I also checked it out in D&S vol. 58. :)
Captain Owen Fincher's P-38 Lightning, Arkansas Traveler, 392nd Squadron, 367th Fighter Group, 9th AF
-
Captain Owen Fincher's P-38 Lightning, Arkansas Traveler, 392nd Squadron, 367th Fighter Group, 9th AF
-
I fly the p38 coz all other suck
:p
-
Originally posted by akak
Compression and buffeting aren't the same thing. At least in the P-38 (don't know about other WW2 aircraft), it would only enter a compression in high altitude dives started above 20,000ft and will not enter compression in dives started below that height.
Buffeting can happen at any altitude (those violent shaking of the plane at high speeds) and you still retain some control of the aircraft, even though the controls have stiffened from the buffeting. Usually just chopping throttle some or even rocking the wings will get you out of a buffet in AH. I tap on my rudders a little and rock the wings some and cut back my throttle some to get out of a buffet.
NACA Report 646 Effect of Compression on an airfoil 1939 (http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-report-646/)
NACA TN-543 The Compressibility bubble (http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1935/naca-tn-543/)
Compressibility Error (http://142.26.194.131/aerodynamics1/Basics/Page7.html)
Compression in P-38 (http://www.p-38online.com/cmprs.html)
Ack-Ack
479th FG
Thanks for the links, this is something I wantr to become less ignorant about.
"Flight engineers wanted the test pilots to go past 300 mph above 30,000, which was not normally done. Mattern and Bircham declined to perform the tests because they thought the engineers were being too aggressive. "
"If the P-38 was traveling at 500 mph, the airflow over the wing was approaching the speed of sound"
"This problem created many rumors, especially in the ETO (where combat missions were normally above 20,000 ft., which is where compressibility is encountered)"
"The P-38 would be destined to encounter this problem because of the 1930's style of a thick wing to accommodate the amount of fuel needed. Johnson openly admired the Spitfire's wing design, but as good as it was as a fighter, it did not have the range for long-range escort duties like the P-38. "
"Lockheed designers developed a special kind of flap that would be incorporated into later P-38 designs. Tony LeVier was selected to perform initial testing of this new type of flap. The flaps were supposed to be deployed prior to entering a dive. The flap was not designed to slow the aircraft down, "
It certainly seems like HTC did their homework on this - better than anyone else so far at least in regard to this issue. It has been a long time since I flew AW or WB/WB3 but this effect was not modeled (to my knowledge and experience flying there) IN fact the dive flap behaves totally wrong in those other games as it is indeed very much a brake in both of those sims.
cudo's again to HTC for accuracy in flight model.
-
Originally posted by Turbot
It certainly seems like HTC did their homework on this - better than anyone else so far at least in regard to this issue. It has been a long time since I flew AW or WB/WB3 but this effect was not modeled (to my knowledge and experience flying there) IN fact the dive flap behaves totally wrong in those other games as it is indeed very much a brake in both of those sims.
cudo's again to HTC for accuracy in flight model.
It does seem HiTech and gang did a really good job of modeling both compressability and buffet instead of just modeling stick forces like AW did.
Ack-Ack
-
Originally posted by Turbot
Thanks for the links, this is something I wantr to become less ignorant about.
"Flight engineers wanted the test pilots to go past 300 mph above 30,000, which was not normally done. Mattern and Bircham declined to perform the tests because they thought the engineers were being too aggressive. "
"If the P-38 was traveling at 500 mph, the airflow over the wing was approaching the speed of sound"
"This problem created many rumors, especially in the ETO (where combat missions were normally above 20,000 ft., which is where compressibility is encountered)"
"The P-38 would be destined to encounter this problem because of the 1930's style of a thick wing to accommodate the amount of fuel needed. Johnson openly admired the Spitfire's wing design, but as good as it was as a fighter, it did not have the range for long-range escort duties like the P-38. "
"Lockheed designers developed a special kind of flap that would be incorporated into later P-38 designs. Tony LeVier was selected to perform initial testing of this new type of flap. The flaps were supposed to be deployed prior to entering a dive. The flap was not designed to slow the aircraft down, "
It certainly seems like HTC did their homework on this - better than anyone else so far at least in regard to this issue. It has been a long time since I flew AW or WB/WB3 but this effect was not modeled (to my knowledge and experience flying there) IN fact the dive flap behaves totally wrong in those other games as it is indeed very much a brake in both of those sims.
cudo's again to HTC for accuracy in flight model.
There are a few errors within the piece quoted. Those dive-recovery flaps DID generate drag, which DID slow the aircraft. BTW, Lockheed did not develop the flaps, NACA did. I can recommend other sources should anyone be interested.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
There are a few errors within the piece quoted. Those dive-recovery flaps DID generate drag, which DID slow the aircraft. BTW, Lockheed did not develop the flaps, NACA did. I can recommend other sources should anyone be interested.
My regards,
Widewing
Well of course they generate drag - all flaps do :) However that was not their designed function but of course instead a side-effect.
As for that other stuff you should get with the author and straighten him out, I am sure he would appreciate it and he even asks for input:
http://www.p-38online.com/bib.html
According to him: "Lockheed designers cannot be held accountable for the prolonged compressibility problems. Well known scientists of this time could not say what the solution was. In addition, the NACA blocked progress for months by not allowing Lockheed to use the wind tunnel at high speeds for fear that the tunnel would be damaged.