Countering the Rolling Scissors

[boomerlu]

After all, you'd likely be closer to corner-speed, so should have an improved turn rate at that point.  Sure, your radius would be larger, but that could be outweighed by your improved turn rate...  I guess it would depend on the situation.

According to Badboy's bootstrap, all our planes turn tighter at corner velocity than at sustained. Keep that in mind.

As for the rolling scissors itself.. the lag/lead relationship of the lift vector is important, possibly more important than which "phase" of the scissors you're in. If I'm on offense (assuming same planes), I can stay with my opponent in the rolling scissors so long as I'm using lag pursuit - it doesn't matter if he's going up and I'm going down at any given moment, it's the net accumulated effect of me lagging.

[mtnman]

According to Badboy's bootstrap, all our planes turn tighter at corner velocity than at sustained. Keep that in mind.

As for the rolling scissors itself.. the lag/lead relationship of the lift vector is important, possibly more important than which "phase" of the scissors you're in. If I'm on offense (assuming same planes), I can stay with my opponent in the rolling scissors so long as I'm using lag pursuit - it doesn't matter if he's going up and I'm going down at any given moment, it's the net accumulated effect of me lagging.

Not so much "tighter", as being able to came around the circle in less time, even if the circle may be a bit larger.  Rate, rather than radius.

Back to thorsims question on what a WWII plane could do as far as AoA change between 100-150, I'd leave that to the mathematicians, but... I bet the one at 150mph could do more than the one at 100mph... 

How those numbers tie to the rolling scissors, though, may still be surprising.  Look at my film again.  My speed is much higher than that, for all but a brief moment.  Most of the time it's between 150 and 325, and I'm at least as fast as the guy behind me, if not faster at some points.  The rolling scissors isn't about being slow...

[boomerlu]

Not so much "tighter", as being able to came around the circle in less time, even if the circle may be a bit larger.  Rate, rather than radius.

I fully understand the difference. What I am saying is that according to his numbers/calculation methodology, turn rate is higher AND turn radius is smaller at corner velocity than at sustained turn. Many people do not seem to realize this.

Edit: I understand that the main diff is that turn rate's higher, but the radius issue is still there.

[TequilaChaser]

Corner Velocity is a fleeting moment........ now one might be able to keep themselves in that "Fleeting Moment" for a small fraction of time, but they can not sustain it.....and this will not be much benefit in a rolling scissors....except perhaps in the 1st 1 or 2 twists ( rolls )

Sustained lasts for a while...... and will come into play even more so the further down the rolling scissors ya go.......

[TequilaChaser]

What I am saying is that according to his numbers/calculation methodology, turn rate is higher AND turn radius is smaller at corner velocity than at sustained turn.
Many people do not seem to realize this.

This is so very True.......

[Redd]

EDIT : addendum, mind you this is just an example of things that make players say WTF, and is one that particularly bothers me.  i fly and have flown with both long time simmers and long time real world pilots even long time combat pilots and to a man they all have their WTF moments in the games.
now are they all examples of a game that does not completely accurately represent reality? i am sure not. 
are some of them actually things that would be impossible in the real world? i am sure they are. 

that is all i was saying since the beginning.
 

Does it really matter ?

Are the 1000's of hours you have spent learning the flight model in real world ww2 planes, compromising your ability to learn the flight model in AH ?


Instead of questioning the validity of the flight model when someone does something you consider not possible in the real world - why dont you just ask them what they did and how they did it ? Its a game , a simulation , it has a relativity to the "real world" most likely , but the most important thing to learn are the flight rules/model of AH , not be worrying all the time about whether the flight model is "real world" perfection . It is what is . Learn it , have fun with it.

[thorsim]

i do all those things ...

i did not mean to sound like i was trying to burn down the castle, i just every one in a while come across things that do not seem to be the way they should be, i like to talk about possibilities and probabilities and stuff and things that is all.  there really is nothing tragic here, it is just a conversation ...

Does it really matter ?

Are the 1000's of hours you have spent learning the flight model in real world ww2 planes, compromising your ability to learn the flight model in AH ?


Instead of questioning the validity of the flight model when someone does something you consider not possible in the real world - why dont you just ask them what they did and how they did it ? Its a game , a simulation , it has a relativity to the "real world" most likely , but the most important thing to learn are the flight rules/model of AH , not be worrying all the time about whether the flight model is "real world" perfection . It is what is . Learn it , have fun with it.

[Ardy123]

I fully understand the difference. What I am saying is that according to his numbers/calculation methodology, turn rate is higher AND turn radius is smaller at corner velocity than at sustained turn. Many people do not seem to realize this.

Edit: I understand that the main diff is that turn rate's higher, but the radius issue is still there.

I tried to go to the ta to test this with vertical turns. I was not able to tell precisely but it still felt like that the the slower you were(up to a point, and well below corner speed), the 'tighter the radius, but the slower the dps the turn. If you are trying to prevent an overshoot and you are in the rolling scissors, the larger radius turn will mean you have more forward motion and thus cause you to overshoot correct?  I don't quite understand how the faster you are up to corner velocity, the tighter the turn?

[Badboy]

What I am saying is that according to his numbers/calculation methodology, turn rate is higher AND turn radius is smaller at corner velocity than at sustained turn.

Yep, because that's the way it really works and the calculations reflect that. But that's in a horizontal turn, when you add in a vertical component to the turn things are different. In the rolling scissors, when you are going over the top you have the addition of God's G, and on the underside of the maneuver, even though you may be closer to corner velocity, you have less G available than you would in a horizontal turn and the radius is therefore larger in that situation.

Badboy

[boomerlu]

I don't quite understand how the faster you are up to corner velocity, the tighter the turn?

I'll address this, but only for horizontal turns.

(1) Compare two planes, both going the same speed, but plane A is turning more DPS than plane B. Then plane A should obviously have a tighter turn radius.

(2) Compare another two planes, both having the same DPS but plane A is faster than plane B. Then obviously plane A should have a bigger turn radius.

Up to corner velocity, the faster you are, the more DPS you get. The DPS boost is big enough that it outweighs the effect of going faster on turn radius. In other words the effect of (1) is greater than the effect of (2).

[Badboy]

I don't quite understand how the faster you are up to corner velocity, the tighter the turn?

Because the turn radius doesn't just depend on speed, it also depends on the radial G. At lower speed a greater proportion of the total lift being generated by the wings is needed to counteract gravity so that the aircraft can maintain the horizontal turn, so less is available for turning. In effect the pilot needs to reduce the bank angle as the speed drops in order to keep the aircraft in the air, so less lift is being used to turn and consequently the turn widens.

As your aircraft gets faster the reverse process occurs. As the speed increases, the total lift increases and so a smaller proportion of it is needed to maintain horizontal flight. The bank angle can therefore be increased so the radial G doing the turning will be a greater proportion of the total lift, so even though the speed is greater the turn will tighten. This will continue all the way up to the G limit, and so the tightest turn will occur at corner.

The catch is that the maximum coefficient of lift for an aircraft isn't really constant, it is influenced by Reynolds and Mach effects and so things are a tad more complicated, particularly as the speed and altitude range for fighters increases. When those factors are taken into account for modern fighters it is possible to see EM diagrams where the best turn radius occurs at corner under certain conditions but where it doesn't occur at corner under other conditions. All you really need is a full set of EM diagrams.

That's the simple explanation, and the good news is that real WWII fighters had a much smaller operating range and the best turn radius in a horizontal turn was at corner.

Hope that helps...

Badboy