109 e4 performance

[Crumpp]

we can not assume automatically that the actual performance of Aa Emils was always 500km/h.

Of course not, 500km/h is just the mean.

Just what I said, engine not quite ready

Right, we agree on it.

I was simply asking how do you think the Emils with both A-1 and Aa should be modelled in game including the limits of the ratings.

Ok, I might do that for you if I have the time.

The 50km/h difference is some 5-10km/h too big when compared to other test. I believe this is due to different ata setting during the two flights being compared at 5000m.

5-10Km/h is nothing. It could be bugs on the leading edge and windshield....

This is why I don't get too involved with these kind of discussion's. You claim I think I know everything. Well, I don't. I do know airplane performance and the science of flight.

It winds up being an argument over every little point.

They got worse climb results.

Ahh so they did. Interesting but I think if you check out their radiator settings and compare it to what the Germans used you might find your answer.

They flew a large part of that climb regiment with radiators fully open and an engine on the verge of overheating. I imagine the fuel metering system set up for synthetic fuels did not like the French fuel.

The climbing was done at the Center with the radiators open up to 4000 m. then progressively closed until 8300m. It is possible that the different components (1) used by the German tests could permit climbing with closed radiators.

Different components is the oil and coolant. Additionally the French though the speed range is the same as the climb range. It is not. The percentage error over mean for climb performance Mtt says is 8%.

Given that, even with radiators open, the climb performance is within 7 seconds of the German results at 1000M.

One thing about recording climb performance. It is one of the hardest areas of performance to nail down accurately because it depends on so much that changes.

The French instrument error is 3% too.