Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Chris on August 31, 2002, 06:05:11 PM
-
Hi all , was playing with the a6m2 and a6m5 off line and it seems to me that at any given speed the -2 will roll faster than the -5. Not sure but that just don't fit with what I've read. Also the fm2 will roll faster than the a6m5 both at speeds above 350 mph (as it should) and at speeds down to 200mph. (which it should not)
Anyone else notice this? Comments? Again just subjective. Don't have a stop watch or the patience to do real testing.:D
See ya
Chris
-
Right. The A6M2 should roll worse than the A6M5 namely due to the larger wing that it has. I also didn't notice much of a difference in roll rates between the F4F-4 and A6M2 at high speeds.
-
I wonder D3A's roll rate is fast at high speed.
-
As far as I know the A6M2 should not roll at all above 300 mph.
I do not know about the A6M5, but from what I heard, the zeke's rollrate at high speeds was always a problem. Was it cured in A6M5, or is it just wrongly modelled in AH?
-
just went ofline fm2 vrs a6m2 in quick test
I didnt time it but fm2 seemed to roll faster.
Someone needs to do sometimes tests.
a6m2 vrs a6m6 I disnt notice much of a difference in either.
Dive speed, I used 10bears germany terrain and airstarted at 20k and the a6m2 out dived both the a6m5 and the fm2.
Compression was similiar between both zekes and the fm2 compressed at a higher speed.
I had to use trim above 400 on the zekes and 425 on the fm2. The a6m2 reached over 550 mph and creaked but suffered no structural failures. The a6m5 reached about 540 and the fm2 went over 550mph.
The a6m2 simply dives to fast and is structurally to strong compared to what I have read.
Some needs to set up some serious tests and post the results.
-
Happy Labor Day to all you who didnt have to labor today.
The a6m5 should be able to dive faster than the a6m2. It had increased wing skin thickness and also on the tail. It (the m5)should also roll faster than the m2 at any air speed. The m5 had a shorter wing with smaller ailerons. Those large ailerons being harder to move at high speeds(begining under 300mph) was why the zero did not roll fast.
Wonder what would hppen to the roll rate if the Japanese would have changed to metal ailerons like the British did when improveing the roll rate for the spit ? It also sucked at high speed rolls when it's ailerons were fabric.
-
The A6M2 should roll really lousy. The clipped wing A6M3 gained both speed and roll-rate over the A6M2 which didn't have much to do with the ailerons. The A6M5 has the rounded wing tip but a shorter and strengthened span wing and so naturally rolled better and could dive better than the A6M2. The A6M2 that we have rolls way too well from my understanding and shouldn't even be close with the Wildcat at high speeds. And, the A6M2 rolled even worse one way as opposed to the other and USA tactics took advantage of this deficit.
The following site has a pretty good write-up on the Zeke:
http://www.kotfsc.com/aircraft/zero.htm
To Quote:
"The type was placed in production as the Navy Type 0 Carrier Fighter Model 32. Beginning with the fourth aircraft, the ammunition supply for the wing-mounted 20-mm cannon was increased from 60 rpg to 100 rpg. Soon thereafter, in order to simplify production and maintenance, the folding wingtips and the tab balances were removed, reducing the wingspan to 36 feet 1 1/16 inches and wing area to 231.75 square feet. This resulted in a slight increase in the level speed with little adverse effect in the overall maneuverability. Japanese pilots did find that both the maneuverability and climb rate of the new clipped-wing Zero Fighter were slightly poorer than those of the earlier A6M2, but the aircraft was considerably faster in a dive, the ailerons were more effective, and the roll rate was better at high speed
Typical charactersitics:
"However, the maneuverability of the Zero deteriorated rapidly as the speed increased. At high speeds, the ailerons stiffened and became extremely difficult to move. In addition, tests revealed that the wings had structural problems which prevented the Zero from being dived at high speeds. In combat, a pursuing Zero could often be escaped by diving at the maximum possible speed and by rolling either right or left, the Zero being unable to follow. The rule for an Allied pilot was to keep his speed as high as possible during combat and never, never try to out-maneuver a Zero while at low speed. The Zero Fighter lacked any armor protection for the pilot, did not have any self-sealing fuel tanks, and had no onboard fire extinguishing equipment. A superficial hit would often cause the aircraft to catch fire."
-
yeah i know all the spcifics its a matter of getting some tests done to where the ah zekes fit.
I may have time tomorrow to test it.
No doudt thwe ah a6m2 dives weell beyond what I expected.
-
I second what Wotan said.
The AH A6M2 dives, way, way to fast. It should tear apart around 400mph.
-
The A6M5 could be dived at speeds up to 410 mph, the A6M2 significantly less.
I'll keep digging untill I find more about the A6M2...
-
wotan, 550mph indicated or true?
in the a6m2 in my quick test, the alierons and elevators snapped off at about 500mph.
-
this was from 20k
no damage at all pulled out out 560 true.
I have the film.
-
Ahhh, Any farther than that though and it starts to lose it.
Still much faster than any zero should be able to dive.
Hmm. Ever tried airstarting a ptboat? :D:D:D
-
About slow rolling zeros: They could outroll a P40 below 275mph, and the P40 was the fastest rolling aircraft of the USAAF and US-Navy for a long time.
"If you knew what you were doing, you could fight a Jap on even terms, but you had to make him fight your way. He could outturn you at slow speed. You could outturn him at high speed. When you got into a turning fight with him, you dropped your nose down so you kept your airspeed up, you could outturn him. At low speed he could outroll you because of those big ailerons. They looked like barn doors on the Zero. If your speed was up over 275, you could outroll it. His big ailerons didn't have the strength to make high speed rolls ... "
http://www.acepilots.com/planes/p40_warhawk.html
niklas
-
i can go faster then that in it. I just dont have time to climb alt.
Thats was 20k with 3k to pull out.
I had it as high as 575 or so no damage. You only damage parts when you pull your stick. Pull out with elevator trim nothing happens.
-
Niklas,
I believe the speed at which the Zero could out roll an American fighter was much lower. Closer to 200MPH. At 275MPH the Zero was locked in cement.
I have the NACA roll chart somewhere on my other machine. but at 275MPH the P-40 was around 100 degrees per second and the Zero was around 60 dps.
-
Well F4UDOA, hereīs an account of a pilot who fought against the japanese and says something positive about them (what makes it very trustworthy because noone would lie to make the enemy look better), thereīs a roll chart with "unknown stick forces" for the zero ....
btw noone knows the rollchart better than me, or did you already forgot who brought it up? ;)
niklas
-
CC Niklas,
Indeed an allied pilot would remember such a thing. In fact I can remeber at least one F4U pilot diving away from a Zero and remarking on how nimble the Zero seemed to roll at high speed.
However in these stories there are to unknowns.
A. What was the skill level of the NME pilot. How much stick pressure was used?
B. Was the offending A/C indeed a Zero?? It could have been a NIK1/2, KI-44, KI-84, KI-100. Who is to say in the heat of battle??
BTW, Niklas you didn't tell me about the F4U roll data on the other board. You sly dog. I thought you would post it by now.
-
did the zero have fabric ailerons? In his book, Douglas Bader says the early Spit Mk.I rolled very slowly at high speeds because the wind preasure would deform the fabric ailerons above ~275 MPH, killing the roll rate (there was a field upgrade to metal ailerons that fixed this).
-
I doubt it Whgates. The F4U also had Fabric ailerons as did many others and it rolled very well. However the size of the barn door ailerons was the more likely culprit.
-
I really donīt know about which board youīre talking, F4UDOA. :confused:
niklas
-
Really?
I swore I saw your name in thread on roll rates?
WW2 message boards (http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm31)
In the roll rate thread a while ago. Ever seen this chart??
-
Here is the thread Niklas.
roll thread Tempest F4U FW190 (http://pub131.ezboard.com/fallboutwarfarefrm31.showMessage?topicID=85.topic)
-
of course, butch2k forum. Iīm not very often there. If i remember myself correctly, i posted the same fw190 data a bit later here in this forum, what resulted very quickly in a 100+ replies topic hehe.
But why should post it here, itīs about Zeros. Who cares about Corsairs anyway ? :)
niklas