Do you have this in a spreadsheet you could post for download?
It would be interesting to see if it makes a difference with the stall limiter off. I'd be glad to run a sample like that and let you know.
Sorry, Mosq.. I don't know how to use MS Exel or other spreadsheet generating tools. I wouldn't mind if some kind, philanthropic gentleman would take my numbers and do it themselves
....
As for the stall limiter, the answer to your question lies in the SL angle listed next to the plane type.
The lower the number is, the more likely you will get the same results when actually flying that type in combat. (Although, its not always like that everytime)
For example, look at the following figures:
Bf109G-6: 208.8m
P-47D-11: 250.5m
When turning without flaps, it seems that the results are quite natural. The Bf109G-6 handily outturns the P-47D-11 in radius.
However, for a long time, many people such as myself, were quite baffled by the seemingly superior turning capabilities of the P-47 during actual combat. Quite often a P-47 would outturn a contemporary 109 at deck so very easily, even without an E advantage, at a sustained turn contest.
For this reason, I and a few others have complained that the P-47s seemed to be turning too well... until this test finally truly confirmed an alternate possibility that I was suspicious about.
The P-47s use a setting of "0.05" for testing - which means, that this plane is stable enough to pull a very tight turn upto 0.05 degrees before critical AoA.
On the other hand, the Bf109 uses "1.0", which means this plane, is stable upto 1 degrees before critical AoA, but very unstable when it comes closer to stall than that.
It means that when tested with 0.05 before stall AoA, this plane was so unstable that it was impossible to maintain a turn steady enough to measure an obective, constant turn radius. It would wobble, destabilize, lose alt, gain alt, speed up, speed down.. etc etc.. constant measurement was impossible.
As a matter of fact, even with a 1.0 setting it was farely difficult to get the 109 to turn stable enough to get a real measurement. A slightest mistake would throw off the stability in roll axis, make the plane droop a wing, and ruin the turn.
When testing 1 notch of flaps, it was damn frustrating because every time a very small mistake was made, the plane wobbles, droops wing, loses alt, gain speed, and the flaps would retract. All this, at 1.0 setting. For a moment, I had even thought that perhaps I should increase the setting to 1.2 or 1.5 to get an objective data.
One must take into consideration that this was, with a stall limiter setting. SL is intended for "ham-fisted" beginner pilots who can't consciously maintain a constant stick pressure. That's why it was used in a turn test, to minimize human errors. All I had to do was pull max deflection on my joystick, and the SL would make sure that it was a constant pressure maintained near X degrees before stall.
And all that, and I still couldn't stabilize the 109 enough!
So in actual combat, it is more than likely to expect that the P-47 would easily reach its tightest turn radius and stay their - while the 109 would struggle to maintain such status. In many cases, keeping a turn tight and slow enough to maintain 1 notch of flaps, is itself a grossly difficult task - while a P-47 would easily pull down one, two, or even full flaps and literally run circles around 109s.
...
Thus, if the test was made with the stall limiter turned off, a plane that can handle a lower SL setting(0.05 default) will show figures that match more closely to this test.
However, a plane that cannot handle 0.05, and had to use higher numbers, will be highly likely to show a significantly larger turn radius than recorded in this testing.
