View Single Post
  #1  
Old 10-13-2010, 01:55 PM
Azimech's Avatar
Azimech Azimech is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Leerdam, The Netherlands
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sternjaeger View Post
As much as I would love to, I have no time or interest to go into the finest details really. To sum it up let's say that when you lay down such researches on such extensive subjects you might want to take into account more variables, but then you'll end up generating a whole manual on the subject (and probably a set of manuals for different engines as well). A lot of self proclaimed experts like passing their times posting diagrams and what not on the internet, they're the kinda loners that spend a lot of their time with the heads in the engine bay of their aeroplane more than in the air.. But then again, each to their own really..
Did you even read the whole article? I strongly doubt that! It involves LOGIC, and that's the glue in that whole damn reading. Using my own brain, I found it perfectly plausible.

Quote:
oh u'd be surprised to see what they managed to cram in an aeroplane back then. People have a simplistic and somehow naive view of WW2 era fighters, but the complexity of the systems is surprising, especially on aeroplanes which used a lot of radio or electronic navigation devices in WW2. It wasnt all about fighter boys and bombers, electronic warfare had an impressive development in very few years.
B17 is a very good example, but that's no fighter. Anyway, the way A2A simulations has implemented the features into FSX is a nice guide how the complexity of military simulation could become.

Quote:
because they're very hard do scan, considering that most of them come in folding sheets as long as the plane! I tried to google for some basic ones, but couldn't find much, only ancillaries (which are quite complex per se).
You need to find maintenance manuals to get some wiring diagrams, I'm sure that the ones of a FW190 would keep you busy for a bit
I read them at breakfast for my entertainment. Don't bother, i've got enough lying around.

The FW190 itself is not very interesting. The only thing that's worth to me is the internal operation and structure of the Kommandogerät, although I've got a very good hunch how it operates.

Quote:
I think this is where the misunderstanding started.
but you might want to reconsider some of your sentences on the importance of magnetos in the early posts you made and I referred to. Again I'm just trying to explain where I think you expressed yourself improperly.
You seem to be the only one having a problem with how i'm expressing myself.

Quote:
Very standard tech for that period? Seriously?
A high energy performance, laminar flow, low consumption, propeller fighter which could deliver punch and fight hard at all levels all the way over Germany and back is a bit more than very standard to me man..
Just the aerodynamic research in the development of the radiator scoop and wings is a good 10 years ahead of its contemporaries.
I've never cared for aerodynamics. I've always been interested in hydraulics, electrics and internal reciprocating engines. In those ways the Mustang is a very standard beast. Give a stone brick a big enough engine and it will fly. Do I like the engine? Then I'll like the brick. I don't really like the carburetted V12, it's all injected radials for me.


Quote:
...aaaand that's why there are breakers on aviation circuits..
Yes, and the point was/is YOU DON'T DISCONNECT YOUR BATTERY FROM YOUR SYSTEM WHILE FLYING UNLESS YOU REALLY NEED TO!

Quote:
I'm sorry man, but the impression I got here is that you are doing a lot of copy/paste to show that you know on the subject, while I'm addressing other points that you don't seem (or want?) to see..
Man, you're a joke. I've confronted you with a lot of errors in your statements, often with material from the era, and you twist & turn the whole time and ultimately insult me with copy & paste work, while I write using my own friggin' brain.

I don't give a Flying F*$^ whatever plane you've driven, that doesn't make you a technical expert all of a sudden and it shows. You think you're smart while you ignore evidence I place under your nose and suggest that I am trying to avoid the subject? Get lost.

Now go fly your plane and don't waste any more of my time.
Reply With Quote