ACE-OF-ACES |
11-29-2011 08:04 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow
(Post 365540)
I agree that to some extend we will have to rely on some hypothesises wrt plane performance.
|
Not to some extent..
Actually in most cases we will have to rely on a calculated (what you call hypothesizes) value.
Because truth be told, they did NOT test every variant of every plane in WWII.. Add to that the fact that most tests in WWII were limited to '2' (ROC, TOP SPEED per Altitude) sometimes '3' (ROC, TOP SPEED per Altitude, Time to Climb) performance tests. And a lot of those were lost during or since the war.
As noted here, out of the hundreds upon thousands of plane types used during WWII we only have about '6' turn rate tests, and only at one altitude.
Now consider 'other' factors people love to whine about.. say roll rates.. There was very little testing done on that during WWII..
So with that said MOST of the data used in WWII flight sims is of the 'calculated' type (what you call hypothesizes)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow
(Post 365540)
However we should use any data that we can get imho
|
Yes all six or so turn rate test should be used along with the half dozen or so roll rate tests
Quote:
Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow
(Post 365540)
- and be it just to calibrate the calculated data.
|
I would call it more of a sanity check than a calibration
All in all the turn rate and roll rate data is very limited, because they just didn't bother or think those values were worth testing. Where 'they' did find ROC and Top Speed per Altitude worth testing.. So that data is much easier to find, but, they didn't always re-test a plane when a variant of said plane came out.
So, there is almost always going to be a calculation done, if not from scratch or to tweak existing data for a variant of the plane
|