Author Topic: The Complete Aces High2 Fighter Turn Performance (Read 6941 times)

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 20, 2005, 12:21:25 PM »

Quote

I don't blame you for thinking that the P-38 results are something that has to do with my lacking skills. Frankly, I was quite shocked when I measured the P-38s, too.

sorry i was blaming i am shocked too but just forget the results.

coz im gonna fight em as i can.

bozon · « **Reply #16 on:** July 20, 2005, 01:19:55 PM »

kweassa for putting so much effort into this.
This clearly shows that in term of sustained flat turning P51 and P47 are the worst in the set (together with some 190 models) as expected, and not as some people claimed.

Stability IS an extremely important factor in a real life pilot's willing to push the plane to the limit. Only a few aces were confident enough to push their planes and that's why there was such a great difference between "aces" and cannon fodder. Not the plane - how much the pilot was able to take out of it was what's important.

With a spit or P38 most pilots were very confident with and felt they have superior preformance. 190/109 were experts planes where a talented few were vicious with and the rest could not / feared to use it to their full potential.

Robert Johnson states that he loved the jug from the 1st flight because he felt confident that the plane will stand to any abuse he submitted it to. P38s on the other hand CAN dive very well, but pilots were initially fearing the misterious compression, so most did not push it in dives, but DID push it in turns/stalls (even though we see it's not that great a turner).

Bozon

Karnak · « **Reply #17 on:** July 20, 2005, 02:39:29 PM »

I just want to say that you are insane Kweassa.

Thanks for all the work.

straffo · « **Reply #18 on:** July 20, 2005, 02:47:01 PM »

Kweassa

Holy geekness !

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #19 on:** July 20, 2005, 03:10:23 PM »

Bozon, what Kweassa is showing is a "Pull as hard on the stick as possible on the deck" chart.

A lot of planes perform differently at different speeds. I.E. A p51 will turn better then an A6m5 at 350.

So basically what this tells you is that you are a retard if you try to turn fight with a A6m2 if you're in a P51d.

But if you're in trouble you can try to turn fight with a P47d40.

But (no offense Kweassa), I believe these numbers really don't say anything. Every single plane carries different amount of fuels. A P47 on 100% is a lot different then an La7 on 100%.

The true equalizer (in my opinion) would have to either be "Distance able to be traveled" which itself would be hard to measure because of different speeds and fuel rates, or actual amount of fuel left.

FDutchmn · « **Reply #20 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:06:05 PM »

thanks Kweassa! Good job!

now that the patch is out... gotta add the P47N

Simaril · « **Reply #21 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:09:52 PM »

Kweassa, since you've been so meticulous in documenting these numbers -- could you comment on the relationship between the "average turn speed" and the optimal turn rate "corner speed"? Are they the same, within the test conditions as cited?

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #22 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:40:59 PM »

La7 with 3 guns turns better as one with 2 guns

SELECTOR · « **Reply #23 on:** July 20, 2005, 05:57:19 PM »

Kweassa you have way to much time on your hands...

goog job all the same

Kweassa · « **Reply #24 on:** July 20, 2005, 06:51:18 PM »

Simaril, the average turn speed listed is the speeds which the plane will sustain while pulling the turns. I've measured about 5 revolutions each for every plane, and came up with the average of the speed that these planes will pull.

As about it's relationship with corner speeds.. I frankly have no idea. You'd better ask the real experts about that one. I'm just a guy who does the boring stuff.

Kweassa · « **Reply #25 on:** July 20, 2005, 06:52:08 PM »

Speaking of which..

looks like I'm back to testing...

after 1 day of rest, new version with new planes pop up.. I'll have to test the P-47s and P-51s all over again... arrrrrrrgh

Soda · « **Reply #26 on:** July 21, 2005, 12:16:31 AM »

Kweassa, any way to calculate/include some of the other key EM diagram points in your work? Best instantaneous turn/radius/speed, 6G (for AH2 limits) radius/speed? Not sure if you can extrapolate some of those or calculate them based on what results you have tested.

Awesome work though, I don't know that anyone has spent the time to put something together like that before. Appreciate your efforts because I know how long it must have taken you.

hitech · « **Reply #27 on:** July 21, 2005, 09:11:35 AM »

Soda: You could use kweasas numbers to extrapolate gs/speed (you have time around circle and speed at max aoa), then just extend them to 6g and speed.

HiTech

Kweassa · « **Reply #28 on:** July 21, 2005, 03:47:15 PM »

If anyone wishes to use my work as basis to calculate more useful stuff to share with people, please, feel free to do so.

I would have done it myself, but I'm a dunce in physics. All I remember from when I was a student is the Newtonian W=ma .. and maybe something like k=1/2 x mv^2...

Soda · « **Reply #29 on:** July 21, 2005, 05:27:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by hitech
Soda: You could use kweasas numbers to extrapolate gs/speed (you have time around circle and speed at max aoa), then just extend them to 6g and speed.

HiTech

Any more specific hints or forumla

Obviously Kweassa isn't the only non-physics major here.

I think I might have the right idea in my mind but an example would be great.

Thanks,