Author Topic: Lancs are Fast  (Read 1546 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #15 on: December 22, 2009, 01:07:23 PM »
I vaguely recall that for the WWII RAF service ceiling was defined as the point where an aircraft's climb rate drops below 500ft per minute.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #16 on: December 22, 2009, 04:01:02 PM »
You'd be correct there Karnak. My old great uncle from the RAF joked with this, saying that the service ceiling was the limit of climb that modern day aircraft(well Cessna etc) would consider as a normal ROC. 500 was then number.
He also observed a Lancaster doing a loop. At quite some altitude. Also said that they could turn incredibly well.

It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23888
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #17 on: December 22, 2009, 04:05:15 PM »
So 24-25k service ceiling @500ft/min sustained climb. Well, in my example above, I was doing 300ft/min only at 25...
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #18 on: December 22, 2009, 05:18:05 PM »
... because our lanc doesnt have the WEP it should :)
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Chalenge

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15179
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #19 on: December 22, 2009, 06:12:46 PM »
I vaguely recall that for the WWII RAF service ceiling was defined as the point where an aircraft's climb rate drops below 500ft per minute.

Strange the R.A.F. manual A.P. 22062A-P.N Pilots and Flight Engineers Notes - Lancaster states 100 ft/min.

If the R.A.F. and U.S.A.A.F used the same terminology for two different values it would get very confusing very quickly.
If you like the Sick Puppy Custom Sound Pack the please consider contributing for future updates by sending a months dues to Hitech Creations for account "Chalenge." Every little bit helps.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #20 on: December 22, 2009, 07:25:52 PM »
like the gallon or the ton? :D
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline Simba

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #21 on: December 22, 2009, 07:51:51 PM »
Absolutely. And the same applies to the calibration of ASIs, where the difference between knots (sea-miles per hour) and mph (statute miles per hour) led to the loss of an entire squadron of Hurricanes intended for Malta when the Admiral flew them off too soon and they ran out of fuel short of the island.

Whoops.

 :cool:
Simba
No.6 Squadron vRFC/RAF

Offline Jayhawk

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3909
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #22 on: December 23, 2009, 01:41:25 AM »
Sorry but your information is incorrect. Service ceiling for any aircraft is that at which an aircraft can no longer sustain a climb rate above 100 feet per minute. It does not mean that the aircraft is incapable of climbing further.
Anybody know the historical definition of "service ceiling"? I know today it's often "altitude where the plane is able to sustain a 100ft/min climb" - but is that the same definition that's being used for WWII bombers?
Just for the record, in AHII a Lanc that took off with 50% fuel and full bombload is getting a 300ft/min climbrate at 25k. It takes more than half an hour to get that high.

I actually had no idea that was the definition, don't worry, I've very aware of my ignorance on a lot of this stuff. :aok  I try my best to not pretend I know what I'm talking about though, everyone slips right?  You figure, ceiling, you know, the top.  Every time I hit my ceiling I just get a headache...

Thanks for the edumacation.
LOOK EVERYBODY!  I GOT MY NAME IN LIGHTS!

Folks, play nice.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #23 on: December 23, 2009, 02:51:59 AM »
Absolutely. And the same applies to the calibration of ASIs, where the difference between knots (sea-miles per hour) and mph (statute miles per hour) led to the loss of an entire squadron of Hurricanes intended for Malta when the Admiral flew them off too soon and they ran out of fuel short of the island.

Whoops.

 :cool:


I have that one in a book. 1.852m vs 1.609. If you guys want the account, I'll take the effort and post it ;)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #24 on: December 23, 2009, 08:41:38 AM »
Don't forget that "Service Ceiling" is computed at a certain weight.  I'd bet that, at that weight in game, the service ceiling of the Lancaster would conform almost exactly to the book value.

If the Lanc ups with 50% and has already dropped his bombs, my guess is he's a couple of thousand pounds (or more) under that weight. 

Weight is a killer at altitude.  If you do take a 190A8, don't take any of the extra guns.  On the other hand, Snailman's recommendation of a Jug, Ta, or other high-altitude performer is a good one.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #25 on: December 23, 2009, 09:23:10 AM »
Most are ignoring that the Lanc was doing 315mph in level flight.
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #26 on: December 23, 2009, 11:33:33 AM »
Most are ignoring that the Lanc was doing 315mph in level flight.
That information is assumed and not supplied anywhere in this thread.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #27 on: December 23, 2009, 11:40:55 AM »
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #28 on: December 23, 2009, 12:26:45 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)

I think Karnak meant that "level flight" was assumed, and not the 315mph speed.  Unfortunately, the film doesn't show vertical speed.
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Lancs are Fast
« Reply #29 on: December 23, 2009, 12:53:54 PM »
I think Karnak meant that "level flight" was assumed, and not the 315mph speed.  Unfortunately, the film doesn't show vertical speed.
That is correct.  We don't know that he isn't in a shallow dive, or had recently done a shallow dive, to reach that speed.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-