Rollrates

[Zigrat]

also this da supports alot of anecdotal stuff you read about

it would make the typhoon unsuited to a2a combat (moreso than it is now) because of poor rollrate. This would make sense since it was typically used as a ground attack fighter, i believe the tempest would have better rollrate? (not sure)

spitfire would roll worse at high speed, but performs correctly at low speeds

zeke would roll worse


anyways if anyone can find some other info on other airplanes or corroberating info would be great! especially any 109 data? i heard it only managed 15 degrees/second at 400 knots.

[Jekyll]

Yup you're right Pyro.  For some strange reason I was thinking that the props rotated counter clockwise from the POV of the cockpit.

I must have been flying too many Yaks in H2H recently  

Any other thoughts on the above charts though?  

[funked]

Hey good job guys!

Some thoughts:

1.  Jekyll are you timing 5 individual rolls and averaging the times, or are you timing 5 consecutive rolls and computing average roll rate from (total degrees / total time)?  The latter method will be more accurate if you can hold the airspeed constant (not a trivial task).  However I doubt it will change the curves much.

2.  We don't know that AH has a 50 lb force limit.  A different force limit will change high speed roll performance greatly.

3.  Pyro made an important comment about different data sets.  He may have other data for these planes.  This NACA chart is great but it's not Gospel.    

4.  I'd love to see the high speed roll deficiencies of the Spitfires.  This would seperate the men from the boys among Spit pilots.  And it would also create a reason to have the cropped wing versions.

   

5.  America's Hundred Thousand has an F4U-1D roll rate chart which shows roll rate between 225 and 300 mph.  It ranges linearly from about 72 degrees per second to about 90 degrees per second.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Karnak]

Zigrat,

I think you missed this:

 

Originally posted by Jekyll:
(2) The Spitfire averages 11 deg/sec too slow below 225mph, and 15 deg/sec too fast above 225mph

The Spitfire appears to roll too slow at low speed and too fast at high speed not, as you claimed, correctly at low speed and too fast at high speed.

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Sisu
-Karnak

[M.C.202]

RAM said:
> What strikes me is the Zeke. I knew that at high speeds it was hard to roll...but didnt
> had a clue on it having such bad low speed roll performance.


Yep, the Type 0 sucked at roll rate. The A.V.G. knew it. See what Eric Shilling said at :
 http://www.johnco.cc.ks.us/~droberts/p40/p40a.html  
 


------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno

[Jigster]

Under 200mph however, the Zero had a very high roll rate.

[Jekyll]

Funked, I'm performing 10 individual rolls (5 to the left and 5 to the right) and timing each roll, then taking the average.

Trying to axial roll an AH aircraft 5 times in a row leads to the a/c burying its nose.  You end up finishing the 5 rolls 50 mph faster than you began them, which introduces errors of its own.

 

Pyro made an important comment about different data sets. He may have other data for these planes. This NACA chart is great but it's not Gospel.

I can understand minor inconsistencies between data sets, BUT

take a look at the Typhoon data.  37 degrees per second too fast on average?  I find it hard to accept that ANY real data set for the Tiffie would support AH rollrates.  The Zero, 19 degrees, F6F-5 at 14 degrees.

I can understand trying to narrow the rollrate gap for playability reasons, but why can't they just tell us that?  (if that is indeed the reason)

Don't expect any of this changed any time soon.  Funny thing is, the 190 back in 0.36 or so was closer to the NACA rollrate than it is at present.  In the early days of AH I did a heap of flight testing of AH aircraft, which included rollrates.  The 190A8 used to roll at about 150 degrees/sec at 250mph.

But no longer.

[Karnak]

Jekyll,
He also said that something was off on the Tiffie and that he'd look into it.

------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother

Sisu
-Karnak

[M.C.202]

Jigster said:
> Under 200mph however, the Zero had a very high roll rate.

At all times and speeds less than any model P-40. I think the reason for the type 0's record
was more poor Alied pilot training early in the war than anything else. A.V.G. did well
against IJN and IJA aircraft with the P-40B. Yes I know, but their Hawk was closer to a P-40B than anything else.

Anyone have any Italian aircraft roll rates?
M.C.200/202/205, Re2000/2001/2002/2005, FIAT 32/42/50/55, etc.



------------------
M.C.202
Dino in Reno

[Buzzbait]

S! all

What everyone seems to be missing is the roll rates of the P-51b and P-47 at very high speeds.  At IAS over 360mph the P-51b is BETTER than the 190.  At IAS over 400, the P-47 is BETTER than the 190.  Which goes to show, these two aircraft, when flown correctly (high speed, low g) should be more than capable of outmaneuvering anything.

[Jigster]

 

Originally posted by M.C.202:
Jigster said:
> Under 200mph however, the Zero had a very high roll rate.

At all times and speeds less than any model P-40. I think the reason for the type 0's record
was more poor Alied pilot training early in the war than anything else. A.V.G. did well
against IJN and IJA aircraft with the P-40B. Yes I know, but their Hawk was closer to a P-40B than anything else.

Anyone have any Italian aircraft roll rates?
M.C.200/202/205, Re2000/2001/2002/2005, FIAT 32/42/50/55, etc.

Posting a response under a new thread. I believe this might be why the NACA report and the AH Zero are different...the NACA Zero was probably A6M2 (and probably Koga's) which had alieron lock-up over 200 mph. The A6M5 fixed some of these problems, along with dive speed.

[Jekyll]

I acknowledge what you're saying Karnak, but my reply was directed more towards funked's comment that Pyro may have 'other data for these planes'.  Hard to imagine ANY data which provided the model for the AH Typhoon rollrate.

Oh wait, what do I see here on the back of this breakfast cereal box?

[StSanta]

190 rolls too slow

Anti LW conpsiracy, once again  

All because we're superior pilots

------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"

"I am the light at the end of your sorry little tunnel." - A. Eldricht

[Jekyll]

No apparent change to aircraft rollrates in 1.05 Rev 5.

Must be more important to have vodka bottles in the La5 cockpit than have the aircraft perform correctly  

[Graywolf]

 

Originally posted by Jekyll:

take a look at the Typhoon data.  37 degrees per second too fast on average?  I find it hard to accept that ANY real data set for the Tiffie would support AH rollrates.  The Zero, 19 degrees, F6F-5 at 14 degrees.

The original chart posted was for roll rates at stick forces of 50lbs]

I'd expect data like that to shed more light on how heavy the controls of a particular aircraft were than its maximum roll-rate. For the latter you really wont rolll-rate at full (or as full as hunmanly possible) stick deflection....

I'm not trying to say the Typhoon roll-rate isn't too high, just that you have to make sure you understand the data you're reading...



------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>