Quote:
Originally Posted by SadoMarxist
As far as the acceleration comparisons go, there was a nutter on WoP forums a few years ago who claimed that the ability of an aircraft to accelerate can be expressed and evaluated by something called Specific Excess Power (Ps). Furthermore, said person was audacious enough to claim that the information necessary to compare the acceleration performance of one airplane relative to another is contained within the IL- 2 Compare diagrams. I can't find the thread now, but never mind, it was long and boring anyway. However, I was able to find a document which explains Ps:
http://www.aviation.org.uk/docs/flig...-FTM108/c5.pdf |
Anybody can know that science is just opinion at best and lies straight from the Pits of Hell the rest of the time! Right?
LOL, thanks for the comedy! I couldn't resist adding a line!
IL2Compare is an approximation you can beat at very low speeds, but good for comparison purposes if not all in-game results. One other shortcoming is the single 1000m alt turn curves given. It's possible to look at the climb charts to get an idea of how one plane may gain or lose at some other alt but that's guesswork.
A set of Ps curves for many altitudes for every plane would be a real boon but the hard part is cleanly flying enough stretches to chart even one plane. With NTRKs of flight that conforms (full power always: steady alt straight and level or straight climb at steady speed, check for what else I probably forgot) it should be possible to make charts of some value if not perfect.
IMO steady TAS climb would serve best since it covers multiple altitudes per run.
Last time I was up for it I was asking about using segments of data where for X seconds the necessary variables were steady, and how long X seconds would need to be? That way data might be extracted from tests that are not perfect the whole way. X should not be small is as far as I got.
Anyhow I think that a good set of Ps curves would tell more about the game than we have so far.