Quote:
It's not a promise it's a contract. I.e. if the aircraft doesn't meet the specifications laid out in the contract then the RLM does not accept the aircraft and it goes back to the factory.
I thought this would be a pretty straight forward idea?
|
Absolutely.
It is a legal binding document that the customer does not have to pay for the aircraft if it does not reach the stated performance. There is no guessing required. Once more as already stated, both Mtt and the Luftwaffe confirmed that performance before that aircraft left the factory.
Using a prototype, Bf-109EV15a from 1938 with a new type engine at the time, DB-601A. A new type engine that Daimler Benz is saying does not reach its rated power yet but will in the near future.
Bf-109EV15a is for a fact not representative of a front line fighter two years later.
It certainly is not proof of any form of "optimistic" manufacturer's performance.
Quote:
|
The Aa should behave slightly different down low and the EN rating was different, too.
|
There is a lot of debate in some very knowledgeable circles about the engine used. It was either a DB-601A1 or a DB-601Aa as the DB-601A was never an 1100hp engine.
The 5 minute rating is either 1.3ata (DB-601A1) or 1.35ata (DB-601Aa).
Quote:
|
Crumpp, give up, mate, obstinance trumps knowledge every time!
|
We will give him a chance. I make mistakes, especially when I rush or am not all that interested. I also think robo is trying to learn.
This particular debate over Bf-109E WNr 1304 has been ongoing for years among a much more knowledgeable crowd, no offense meant to the IL2 Sturmovik players.
Even lining up the original Baumeister Datum for WNr 1304 has not solved the issue. It was built at a time when both engines were being delivered to Mtt. Without the engine Werknummer, we may never know.
Quote:
|
Crumpp your calculation of 492 km/h is spot on, nice one!
|
It is not accurate without the pressure data.
Quote:
|
Although the top speed figures are within limits, what do you think about the radiator drag and overall climb performance (see my previous post?) Hard to explain...
|
I don't see anything wrong with the radiator drag. It seems typical for a liquid cooled engine installation.
The climb performance is also typical for a colder than standard day. They did get better climb results than Mtt but their climb power settings appear off. Their rpm is high, which makes a difference and so is their manifold pressure.
All of that is secondary to the fact they performed the climbs on a colder than standard day.