Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
No it is NOT what the manufacturer would like, hope, might, or any other passive, obscure description.
As it is labeled, it is what the manufacturer guaranteed and what was accepted by the customer.
|
In perfect world: sure. In our world and especially during the war: no.
Again - 500 +- 5% means they tried to achieve 500 but it was more likely that most of the time, they made it closer to the -5% in so called real life. I am not saying that they were failing to stay within margins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
Sure it does. You do understand that these are complicated machines and they don't just roll off an assembly line into the squadron ready line.
|
Oh yes, please read again what I wrote before, thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp
A newly manufactured aircraft is one of the most dangerous things in aviation. It is unproven.
A very thorough inspection is completed before the first test flight. The manufacturer will put the aircraft thru a test flight period to ensure it reaches its numbers before turning it over to the customer who again goes thru their own prescribed regiment of test/inspections before accepting it.
When an airframe reaches the end of the assembly line, it was not uncommon for it to remain there for a month or so as it was tweaked and refined before being accepted.
|
Of course, I don't disagree at all, this is all well known facts and we can go as far as comparing the later 109 models leaving various factories. Of course there was a difference and variation in real life. The question is what data to use in order to have the a/c close to the real life performance. My opinion is that manufacturer's data should be considered as on the optimistic side.