190A5 vs 190A8

[Charge]

Interesting read about Bearcat's relation and FW190:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_199808/ai_n8826530/

-C+

PS. "Do I need to post that 38J-10 with the 500 pounders still attached out turning the 109G on the deck dogfight again?"  Sounds like an anecdote. Shouldn't you do the math and show how that is possible? 

[PJ_Godzilla]

You have to be carefull here, because when we are discussing corner velocity, it isn't related to sustained turning theory as described by the equation for excess power cited above. Maximum rate turns at corner velocity are not sustainable, and you can see that more clearly by looking at the diagram below. It shows you where in the envelope sustained turns are possible, and everywhere else, only instantaneous turns can be achieved. Infact, if you are at the peak of that diagram, and therefore performing a maximum rate turn at corner velocity, you will also be bleeding energy at the maximum rate, that is you will have the maximum negative excess power as described by the equation you posted.   
However, you will notice that at the higher altitude, the corner velocity gets closer to top speed, and that trend continues and is more pronounced for aircraft that don't have such a high critical altitude as the P-51 to the extent that some aircraft in that situation can not generate enough lift at their top speed to reach 6G. In that case, their envelope is defined by their top speed and the lift limit. Then they have a corner velocity defined by the point where those two lines intersect.

However, I should point out that EM diagrams produced by the military often use a placard limit and not the top speed to define the right hand side of the envelope, after all fighters often go much faster than their top speed.

Hope that helps...

Badboy

It does. I keep confusing corner speed with max sustained turn speed. It looks like the former is the intersection of the stall speed curve and the max g curve while the latter is th eintersection of the stall speed curve and the max sustained g curve. Apparently, at any g above this last, power is insufficent to maintain the sustained turn and has to be "made up for" in alt loss.

As for the second point, it looks as though that right vertical VMax line'd just shift left for a lesser ac. The critical alt of which you speak would be (mem's not good enough to recall) I'm thinking, the alt at which the VMax TAS intersects the stall speed curve - i.e., you can fly at this alt, but only at VMax and on the verge of stall.

Gracias, chico malo... er, ungezogener junge...

[PJ_Godzilla]

And I'm assuming that Badboy's last counter to Gaston regarding the test conditions has met with Gaston's and Thor's critical approval and this issue is settled?

I'm assuming they've read it, understood it, have no counter for it, and are ready to sign a document that says, "the AH F-dub FM looks to be of pretty sound composition, based on logical and time-honored theory, compatible with test data, and is otherwsie pretty good scheisse"???

Gaston?

C'mon, now. Part of adulthood is making a decision, understanding its consequences, then acknowledging acceptance of said decision and consequences...

[hitech]

It does. I keep confusing corner speed with max sustained turn speed. It looks like the former is the intersection of the stall speed curve and the max g curve while the latter is th eintersection of the stall speed curve and the max sustained g curve. Apparently, at any g above this last, power is insufficent to maintain the sustained turn and has to be "made up for" in alt loss.

As for the second point, it looks as though that right vertical VMax line'd just shift left for a lesser ac. The critical alt of which you speak would be (mem's not good enough to recall) I'm thinking, the alt at which the VMax TAS intersects the stall speed curve - i.e., you can fly at this alt, but only at VMax and on the verge of stall.

Gracias, chico malo... er, ungezogener junge...

By jov I tink he's got it.

Actually you put it very well put, and an it is easy way to think of it.

HiTech

[Guppy35]

Interesting read about Bearcat's relation and FW190:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_199808/ai_n8826530/

-C+

PS. "Do I need to post that 38J-10 with the 500 pounders still attached out turning the 109G on the deck dogfight again?"  Sounds like an anecdote. Shouldn't you do the math and show how that is possible? 

Math was never my strong suit

I just pretend in my pretend airplane

[Charge]

Anybody read the article I posted? After all it sort of.. um.. "on topic" and all.

What was that that impressed Grumman designers so much? In all the tests that were run the FW failed to impress the test pilots but why did it impress an aircraft manufacturer?

-C+

[Guppy35]

Anybody read the article I posted? After all it sort of.. um.. "on topic" and all.

What was that that impressed Grumman designers so much? In all the tests that were run the FW failed to impress the test pilots but why did it impress an aircraft manufacturer?

-C+

I always thought it had to do with the way they got so much engine into such a small place.  The Bearcat following suit

[Stoney]

Anybody read the article I posted? After all it sort of.. um.. "on topic" and all.

What was that that impressed Grumman designers so much? In all the tests that were run the FW failed to impress the test pilots but why did it impress an aircraft manufacturer?

-C+

I think the FW-190 was an awesome design.  Had it, IMO, been afforded an engine that allowed it to achieve the same levels of high altitude performance as the Jug, Pony, or later Spits, it would have been a monster.  The thing that a lot of folks forget is that back during the war, having the ability to drop 3 notches of flaps and turn inside a 400 foot radius wasn't that important.  Most people marveled at its roll rate.  Obviously, Grumman liked its geometry.

That's the thing I've hated the most about this discussion is that some of these guys think we're slagging on the aircraft when really, all we've been decrying is its sustained turn rate.  Sustained turn rate matters a lot more in Aces High than it did during the war.

[FLS]

Charge that's fascinating article you linked. I don't quite understand your question because the 3 people mentioned that were inspired to design the Bearcat by the FW190 were all test pilots. I think the FW190 impressed everybody but that doesn't mean that everyone preferred it to other aircraft that also impressed them.

[PJ_Godzilla]

I think the FW-190 was an awesome design.  Had it, IMO, been afforded an engine that allowed it to achieve the same levels of high altitude performance as the Jug, Pony, or later Spits, it would have been a monster.  The thing that a lot of folks forget is that back during the war, having the ability to drop 3 notches of flaps and turn inside a 400 foot radius wasn't that important.  Most people marveled at its roll rate.  Obviously, Grumman liked its geometry.

That's the thing I've hated the most about this discussion is that some of these guys think we're slagging on the aircraft when really, all we've been decrying is its sustained turn rate.  Sustained turn rate matters a lot more in Aces High than it did during the war.

I think that's entirely correct. I blame the icon, in large part, on this. I think that the most common kill in WWII was likely accomplished by an enemy who was undetected by the victim, else why the signal importance of seeing the enemy before he sees you? For this role the F-dub is undeniably well-suited: do unto others then get the hell out.

Also, and I meant to mention this before, hats off to Josef Pips Priller, Spitfire Killer. He had 68 Spit kills, 101 total victories, and survived the war.   It looks like about half of his kills came for JG26.

[Angus]

An estimate is 80% of fighters not knowing that there was somebody on their 6.
Which makes the 190 a diabolically good "jumper", with it's firepower and good platform.
And then, - reasonably good diving charecteristics, with a quick entry into a dive, and having optimal engine power at lower altitudes, - all good for jumping Spitties over home ground.
It got worse at high alt though. Spitfire domain. Would have been hard to jump Duncan "Smithy" Smith who lead his Spit IX's in battle formation at 43K already in 1942.....
In that case though, the 190 pilot had a good view upwards 

[Charge]

"In that case though, the 190 pilot had a good view upwards"

And rear mind you.

It's also good that towards the end of the war even those überfast Spitties got bubble canopies and they could check their 6's so that Herr Priller could not shoot them down in his leadsled A8.   

-C+

[save]

Herr Priller didnt have to fly much after 1/1 1945
He spent most of his time with ground duties in the 1945 war.

[MiloMorai]

More incredible is all his claims were on the Western front. Considering that Spitfires were the main opposition for most of the war, it is natural that Spitfires would make up the greater number of his claims.

list of claims, http://www.luftwaffe.cz/priller.html

[PJ_Godzilla]

He's lucky he wasn't flying after 1/1. I think things got pretty hairy. For example, Johannes Steinhof had his 262 accident in April of that year: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Steinhoff

That's why he spent the rest of his life as a reconstructed crispy critter.

Galland was also shot down - four times. At least one of those was due to a Spitfire (Drobinski of 303 in 1941). I should add, here, that the reason I cited Priller the Spit Killer is that he was the Number One Spit Killer in the Luftwaffe.

I believe "Dolfo" was flying a 109F at the time - and it probably looked like this (note the murderous "MickeyMaus" below the cockpit, a bit more fun than, e.g. Hartmann's "bleeding heart" Karaya or Priller's rather mundane Ace of Hearts):


Galland had a close brush in '45 in his 262, getting shot up by a 47 and having to land the crippled jet at an airfield under attack. I don't know if the vulch light was on.

Anyway, all that's probative of is, even with a great pilot at the controls, both 262s and 109s were very vulnerable - doubtless F-dubs were too. Galland was wounded numerous times. Rall had a thumb shot off and had his spine broken in 3 places. Molders, of course, was killed. Marseille was MIA. The list goes on. Hartmann's expereince was pretty unusual, I think.