Author Topic: Glide ratio  (Read 3435 times)

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Glide ratio
« on: July 13, 2000, 12:03:00 PM »
Gents,

I was reading the previous post on P-47 performance when I read that in an offline test the P-47 had the best ability to glide at 150Mph without loosing altitude so I decided to do some testing myself. Behold this is an accurate statement. The P-47 with 75% Fuel (I used 75% for all test) will hold a glide better than the P-51, A6M-5, P-38L and F4U-1C. I used these A/C to test because they offer a variety of flight Characteristics. The P-51D because it has the lowest drag of any WW2 fighter and it sank like a brick loosing 4K a minute compared to 2800FPM to 3000Fpm for the P-47. The P-51 also has better wing loading than the P-47. So I tried the Zero low drag but no lower and the best wingloading in the game. Nope, she sank like a brick too at 4k a minute worse than the Mustang. So then I thought of gliders and how they fly, and I chose the A/C with the most glider like features the P-38. It also has the highest aspect ratio in the game(wing span devided by chord, a feature made to increase range but detracts from maneuvering) Nope, brick city even with flowler flaps deployed. All test with flaps made the glide steepen and loose altitude and an increased rate, even the P-47. So I tried the F4U, the A/C with the lowest aspect ratio but with better wing loading but slightly higher drag. And that is as close as I got. The F4U varies between 3K and 3500fpm lose of alt in a 150mph glide. So it would seem that low aspect ratio combined with low drag would be the answer to best glide characteristics.

Briefly
P-51D
Aspect ratio= 5.87
Profile Drag= .0176<==Lowest
Wing loading= 40.74

P-47D-30
Aspect Ratio= 5.56
Profile Drag= .0251
Wing loading= 47.66 <===High for fighter  

P-38L
Aspect Ratio= 8.26<==Highest
Profile drag= .0270<==Highest
Wingloading= 53.40<==Highest

F4U-1D
Aspect Ratio= 5.35<==Lowest
Profile drag=.0267
WingLoading= 38.21<==Lowest

I really don't know which factors have the greatest influence on glide but I would assume that they also affect zoom. Maybe Wells or Nikalas can explain what factors affect these characteristics as well as what other flight factors may be affected by it.

Later
F4UDOA

I do not have enough data on the Zero to be accurate. I will test the FW190 later.

Offline Creamo

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5976
      • http://www.fatchicksinpartyhats.com
Glide ratio
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2000, 12:18:00 PM »
"I really don't know which factors have the greatest influence on glide but I would assume that they also affect zoom."

The factor that effects glide the most it decreasing the prop RPM (minus key) which I assume "feathers" the prop. (although my prop never stops or feathers in the P-47)

It alters your glide figures 1000-1500 FPM.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Glide ratio
« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2000, 12:46:00 PM »
You cant alter prop RPM when engine is off..

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Glide ratio
« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2000, 01:15:00 PM »
I'm an aerospace engineering student, but i think the way pilots learn glide ratio is best (im a student glider pilot ..   )


your glide slope is determined by your L/D ratio... Lift over drag. For exacple, the Scweitzer (sp?) glider that i am learning in has a L/D ratio of 22:1 at 60 knots, which means that its wings are producing 22 pounds of lift for every pound of drag on the airplane. This can be translated into a glide slope, in that the airplane will glide 22 feet forward in the air for every foot of altitude it loses. So, if you are at an altitude of 1000 feet, you better be within 22,000 feet of landing or you ain't makin it home (unless you catch a thermal   )

The mustang actually doesn't have such a great drag coefficient at low speed F4UDOA. At slow speeds, induced drag is contributing more to drag then form drag, and since at low speed the wing must fly at higher AOA to maintain lift, the p51s laminar wing actualy produces MORE drag... the time when the p51 has its advantage is at high speed/low AOA when it is producing less drag because of its airfoil shape.

Offline Creamo

  • Parolee
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5976
      • http://www.fatchicksinpartyhats.com
Glide ratio
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2000, 01:29:00 PM »
Sure ya can Fishu. Feather the prop, it stops, unfeather the prop, the wind picks up the pitch of the blades, and away she turns.

Not sure about WWII props, but ya activate a oil pump that unfeathers the prop to restart a engine in flight.


My point was that I thought decreasing the RPM in this "game" simulated feathering of the prop, ala very little prop drag. Ya can't see it though with the graphics right now.

Just a guess, anyone know? It sure makes your glide better.




[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 07-13-2000).]

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Glide ratio
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2000, 01:29:00 PM »
Zigrat,

So which A/C should have the best GlideRatio?
It seems somewhat unreasonable that a 14000lbs airplane with such high wingloading would have a better glide ratio than any of the A/C that I used for comparison. But I am not sure how to calculate the factors involved. Anyone want to take a guess?

F4UDOA

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Glide ratio
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2000, 01:33:00 PM »
You need to figure out the lift force acting on the plane, and the drag force, that will give you the L/D or glide slope.. please note that prop drag has a large role to play in this and I have NO clue how to calculate prop drag.

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Glide ratio
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2000, 01:36:00 PM »
from your tests it would indicate the L/D was about 4/1 for the hog, about 3.5/1 for the stang, and about 5/1 for the jug (there are all in head calculations so dont take them as too accurate ;0 ) This seems low since i know the f16 las a L/D in a glide config of 7/1 and my glider has a 22/1 L/D but then again i have no real data on the airplanes so ..  

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Glide ratio
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2000, 03:17:00 PM »
Zigrat,

I seem to remember reading that the F4U had a glide ratio of 12:1. I am not saying that it is better or worse than any other fighter, it is just a number that I remember.
An F-16 is an Arodynamic brick at 4:1. And a sail plane quite a different story at 22:1 so 12:1 sounds reasonable for a WW2 fighter. The question I am pondering is how does this piece of the physics model affect the rest of the FM if it is wrong? Does it mean that all A/C are not aerodynamically "clean" enough and this is causing not only glide but but turning fights to degrade to quickly into slow speed maneuvering. Pyro said he was looking at some things in the FM's regarding sustained turn rates. I wonder if any changes were made in 1.04? It seems the more you look the more things point to the FM being a little to slow.

Later
F4UDOA

Offline fdiron

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 697
Glide ratio
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2000, 04:24:00 PM »
The C47 has a glide ratio of either 15 or 17:1.  In fact, its glide ratio was so good, it was better at gliding than the gliders used at D-Day.  The army performed test on the C47 after the war to be used a towed glider.  The test worked very well but gliders were just too slow by then.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Glide ratio
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2000, 04:35:00 PM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Creamo:
Sure ya can Fishu. Feather the prop, it stops, unfeather the prop, the wind picks up the pitch of the blades, and away she turns.

Wee, it actually does it now... couple times when I've ran out of gas, RPM havent move anywhere!

Offline wells

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Glide ratio
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2000, 07:37:00 PM »
The lift force is the weight of the aircraft.  The lowest drag point would be where the induced and form drag curves cross each other.  The induced drag coefficient (Cdi) is equal to the form drag coefficient (Cd0 in AHT).  If you use the coefficients in AHT, solve for CL, you can figure the glide speed and drag force (2 * Cd0) to get an estimate on glide performance.  

P-51D (9500 lbs, Aspect ratio = 5.8):  CL = 0.57, V = 168 mph, Drag ~ 593 lbs. L/D = 16.0

P-38J/L (17500 lbs, aspect ratio = 8.25):  CL = 0.84, V = 158 mph, Drag ~ 1129 lbs, L/D = 15.5

P-47D (14500 lbs, aspect ratio = 5.6):  CL = 0.61, V = 176 mph, Drag ~ 1012 lbs, L/D = 14.3

F4u-1 (12000 lbs, aspect ratio = 5.35):  CL = 0.67, V = 149 mph, Drag ~ 952 lbs, L/D = 12.6

F6f-3 (12500 lbs, aspect ratio = 5.5):  CL = 0.69, V = 146 mph, Drag ~ 990 lbs, L/D = 12.6

Based on those numbers, the P-51 should glide very well.  The above figures don't factor in the prop drag.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Glide ratio
« Reply #12 on: July 13, 2000, 08:49:00 PM »
Thank you, Wells.

But I doubt some of them will get it.  
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Glide ratio
« Reply #13 on: July 14, 2000, 08:57:00 AM »
Thanks Wells,

I thought that 12:1 figure sounded familier.
My question is now how would that affect the physics of the rest of Simm if the
E-retention is approx a 1/3 of what it should be? Does it slow turns as well? Does it affect accelleration? I think one side note that would come from changing any of these characteristics would be having to raise the G-force limits on the pilots to an increased time at high G. Otherwise high speed maneuvering will become impossible.

Later
F4UDOA  

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Glide ratio
« Reply #14 on: July 14, 2000, 09:37:00 AM »

Wells can you do the same calculation for the 109G10 please? I canīt believe that it has such a bad aerodynamics. thx

niklas

[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 07-14-2000).]