Author Topic: Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance  (Read 1597 times)

Offline Grayarea

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 805
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #60 on: September 20, 2001, 09:08:00 AM »
I am going to use your description to show the drag issue.

BTW I don't know what figures to use for drag, so I will only illustrate my point.


Buff fires:

Buff's bullet speed in relation to surrounding air is 1000-250 ft/s=750 ft/s

Drag effect on bullet travelling at 750 10%

Fiter receiving speed= 250 ft/s

Net result (speed of the buff bullet relative to fiter speed)= 750 + 250 - 75=925 ft/s

Fiter fires:
Fiter's bullet speed in relation to earth is 1000+250 ft/s=1.250 ft/s

Drag effect on bullet at 1,250 15% (remeber it is relative to speed)

Buff receiving speed= -250 ft/s (he's getting away)

Net result (speed of the fiter bullet relative to buff speed)= 1.250 - 250 - 187.5=812.5 ft/s

Now I know my drag is an example, but the effect is correct, a bullet travelling at a higher speed will be slowed more by drag.

Grayarea.

PS, please someone with some good physics step in and save us all!

Offline Pepe

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1020
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #61 on: September 20, 2001, 09:27:00 AM »
The relation between drag and speed is not linear, but exponential. Drag is a function of speed, squared (sorry if my English is not good enough)and, thus, drag increases at a much greater pace than speed. Drag dissipates energy from a moving object by means of slowing it, and heat generation. It depends on the aerodynamic profile of such object. But it's all relative. Drag on a bullet, small frontal section, very massive object, often aerodynamically efficient, is relatively small, compared with it's kinetic energy. Especially when in guns range. Calculations are not as simple as with the uniform movement equations   ;)

Again, I second Grayarea request: Physics help needed!   :D

Offline keyapaha

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 561
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #62 on: September 20, 2001, 09:36:00 AM »
If you want realism know your bombers oper. celling and dont fly above it. When I fly B17 or others bombers I never go above 25k if I make it I make it if not will try again.

Offline Pyro

  • Administrator
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4020
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #63 on: September 20, 2001, 09:59:00 AM »
I've posted this before, it's from a P-51 manual and gives a good description of military power and time limits.  I doubt that many people ever break rental cars, but I wouldn't ever buy a used car from a rental place.

 

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #64 on: September 20, 2001, 10:03:00 AM »
Key, there are actual mission reports from various bomb groups bombing from 28K, some showing 29K.

Didn't say exactly what the CEP was though. Their BDA was fairly crude then.  :)

I'm sorry but I just think all this ultra microscopic examination of everything for "total realism" is a little overboard.

Why go through your limited time for  recreational opportunity with your shorts all twisted up in a knot?

It's a GREAT game. Play the Game. Have fun.
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 gatt

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2441
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #65 on: September 20, 2001, 10:04:00 AM »
Back to the topic, oh yeah, there are some characters that in order to avoid playing without radar for two hours are so silly to chase a Lancaster or B17 flying up to 35K ... incredible ... really incredible  :rolleyes:

<S> Buzzbait    ;)

[ 09-20-2001: Message edited by: gatt ]
"And one of the finest aircraft I ever flew was the Macchi C.205. Oh, beautiful. And here you had the perfect combination of italian styling and german engineering .... it really was a delight to fly ... and we did tests on it and were most impressed." - Captain Eric Brown

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #66 on: September 20, 2001, 10:12:00 AM »
Quote
There was something else the P-51's did- they destroyed planes on the ground getting ready for takeoff. This was hard to work out. The B17's would cross the enemy coast at an altitude of 36000 feet and an indicated air speed of 160 MPH and a true air speed of about 320 MPH. Often we would pick up a jet stream of perhaps of 50 MPH, and this would give us a ground speed of 370 MPH. The P-51's flew at an altitude of 200 feet and an indicated air speed of 270 MPH with a true air and ground speed of 270mph. We were flying 100 MPH faster than the P-51's and the P-51's needed to leave before we left. They would come in to a Luftwaffe air field in France or Germany, and all the fighters would have left to attack the bombers. They did not make this but mistake but once, and later they would come in low and line abreast with all guns blazing and did tremendous damage to the parked and taxiing fighters. They would not make a second attack immediately. However on one flight, a P-51 was crippled , and the pilot landed. A second pilot landed and taxied to the damaged plane. "Get in", the pilot of the good plane shouted, and the other pilot climbed in (right foot on left wheel, left foot on wing, right foot into cockpit). Don't get your head in the big four-blade propeller. All this time the other ten pilots were strafing everything that moved, and the Germans were firing cannons at everything that flew- a real little war going on. Back at Base the two pilots tried to repeat the two in one for the newsreel cameras but this was a complete failure. One pilot said "We didn't have any trouble when the Germans were firing those cannons at us."

 

p51 b17 story

apparently buffs operated at higher alts then I had thought and a little faster then I had thought as well.

However they seem (and again I maybe wrong) more manuverable at alt then some of the better alt fighters.

The more I look the more I prove my self wrong so I will just stick to.........

"buffs suk and their impact on gameplay is too great"


I rely on others to bail me out....... :)

Offline Buzzbait

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #67 on: September 20, 2001, 12:35:00 PM »
S! Wotan

Don't know where you got that quote from, but it isn't accurate.  I suspect it is by a fighter jock who doesn't know his bomber stuff.  

I will say this catagorically:

B17's did NOT bomb from 36,000 feet as a stardard procedure.

Their bombing altitude was between 20,000 and 30,000.  (highest I have seen for a report was 29,000)  Most of the time they bombed from 25,000.

B29's are a different story.  But we don't have them.  When we get them, then the whines will reach a creshendo.   ;)

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #68 on: September 20, 2001, 03:14:00 PM »
the link is right there

Offline Rude

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4609
Serious flaws in High Altitude Bomber Performance
« Reply #69 on: September 20, 2001, 03:31:00 PM »
Last night Rwy and myself in two P-51's flew a vector to intercept an HQ raid by six B-17's. We engaged at 32k and dispersed of 2 P-51 escorts and 4 B-17's with some help from another Bishop.

Was not hard to have success as long as you don't get hvy handed...yanking around on the stick produces trouble.


Take a look at the quote below my sig...repeat as many times as necessary to free yourselves of the obvious pain you have encountered flying this sim.

You're Welcome  :rolleyes: