View Single Post
  #158  
Old 10-29-2011, 11:24 PM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Wink

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
However there is no good reason to believe it is anything other than what Mtt says, the mean performance. They knew much more about their aircraft design than any of us and were being paid to deliver those aircraft. Misrepresenting the mean would have been quickly noticed by the customer.
There is a very good reason to take their own graphs with pinch of salt just like the tests of captured Emils etc. Just because they're the manufacturers! This is exactly the same all over the world, at anytime, even in 1940's Germany as long there are human beings involved in the process.

It is just matter of opinion if you decide to take Mtt numbers as granted and sacred OR if you take more critical and suspicious approach just like I happen to have taken. I actually believe these Mtt numbers completely if they reflect the Aa at 1.45ata 2500RPM, which is due to be confirmed. It's weird how some of you guys started jumping up and down just because I dared to challenge the Mtt chart (calculated theoretical stuff, pretty much correct, but still not real life data and it has got massive space for variations...)

Interestingly, this discussion keeps revolving around these unlucky Mtt files, but no one contributes anything to the actual topic - E-4 performance in the sim and how to get it 'right'. What is this topic in here for, then?

Last edited by Robo.; 10-29-2011 at 11:43 PM.
Reply With Quote