Still got me confused.
Does that mean:
a) Auto-flap "SYSTEMS" not modelled
<meaning> the overall performance of the aircraft is correctly simulated
according to data HTC looked up... but in which case, it is
highly probable that this data on N1K2-J was according to test results where the automatic flap features were already working in action(since it is automatic, like, the data isn't from a plane where it's auto flaps were 'turned off', using only it's initial ability of performance .. turn.. roll .. etc..)... therefore, the plane's performance in AH -
'flight model' - already includes from the start
the efficiency of auto-flaps, as a 'part of the FM', but it is technically, not
'modelled in systematically' nor
'represented' in any sort of fashion...
or
b) Auto-flap "SYSTEMS PERFORMANCE" itself is not modelled
<meaning> The increased efficiency via the use of auto flaps itself is not modelled. In this case, it would mean the
whole performance of the N1K2-J would be according to how the plane would perform with the auto flap features -
theoretically - disabled. So, the advantages earned via auto flaps is from the start, not included in the N1K2-J 'FM', and the
seemingly astounding rate of turn and energy maintenance of the N1K2-J is its birthright.
If it were the case of a), it would explain a lot, especially concerning the remark "too much lift being generated by the wing". If it were the case of b)... gee.. if the N1K2 performs like that WITHOUT the auto flaps to aid and assist, I'd hate to see how it'd perform WITH the auto flaps.
..
My specualtion is with a). Though it is not 'systematically' modelled in(such as, auto flaps engaging with the loss of air flow), the advantages of auto flaps is already included within as a part of flight model. In this case, technically, HTC could say 'auto flap
systems' is not
seperately modelled (not modelled.. just 'included' within the FM...)
I think this is the case with 109s leading edge slats, too. People have told me the performance of these devices are included in the 109s FM, but not 'systematically' nor 'graphically'. If what those people told me is true, it would mean that 109's 'FM' includes the way how the slat devices would pop out at low speeds and let the plane perform those amazing 'hang on the prop' abilities. But since this slat device doesn't do much with low speed turn fights(hinderance rather than help), people rarely notice that it is there.. we can't see the edges pop out at low speed. It is a part of Bf-109 flight modelling, rather than a seperate system which is modelled in so it would affect the original FM in certain cases where these devices would begin to function.
If this speculation is correct, it would mean the N1K2-J would be flying as if the auto flaps were always functioning in tight situations(as a part of the 'FM').
Since it is not a seperately modelled systems device, (unlike the flaps on other planes.. compare the manually engaged combat flaps simulated in P-51 and P-38. These devices are not part of the initial P-51/P-38 'FM', but an outside device which alters the FM during battle... flap engagements can't be said that 'it's a part of the FM') ...
it would mean the N1K2-J enjoys all the advantages of combat flap engagement
WITHOUT any sort of disadvantages that would come with it (severe loss of energy.. we notice this when we engage manually the combat flaps in P-51 or P-38. Increases turn rate, but bleeds E severely).
The auto flap is NOT a 'modelled-in' system which activates and alters the plane's initial performing conditions - for a price(loss of E). Rather, it is just 'embedded' inside the N1K2 FM. You can't bleed E from a device that doesn't
systematically exist, can you?
I admit i don't understand in anyway how HTC worked out the FM in relation with 'outside devices' like flaps and slats. Just my 2 cents worth of speculation. I really belive my worthless theory explains a lot about the N1K2-J, how it seems to do all the things AH community just gapes at. High G turns.. Maintaining
severly tight turns for long periods of time.. pulling out from some weird conditions.. etc etc.
...
Long and boring speculation. I don't intend to prove anything here. Cheers
