|
|
|||||||
| Technical threads All discussions about technical issues |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
10-26-2011, 04:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Update...
I've done some calculations today... From the blueprints of the planes and the help of some tool here's what I got. Sadly some weren't really detailed (he 111 was a image of 1400 x 1000) so there could be some marginal errors. squared meters squared feet Plane front side belly front side belly bf109g6 7,9 9,9 23 85,03 106,56 247,56 spit mk1 8 11,3 28 86,11 121,63 301,38 He 111 17,2 36,5 124 185,13 392,88 1334,72 Our engineer has drawn a mathematical function for the graph: y = 1,833 + 0,0167x (100<x<190) y = 0,011x + 2,9 (200<x<300) y = 0,009x + 3,5 (400<x<500) y = 0,007x + 4,6 (600<x<700) y = 0,007x + 4,5 (800<x<900) y = 0,006x + 5,3(1000<x<1100) y = 0,005x + 5,8(1200<x<1300) Here is the new graph with meters and the new planes:  FV = front view SV = side view BV = belly view
__________________
 A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria. Last edited by 6S.Manu; 10-27-2011 at 02:21 PM. 
|
|
|
Threaded Mode