CoD flight test data vs. Real World flight test data

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Sutts

Great idea AoA, well done. This is something we really need.

Thanks!

It is something I have been doing offline for.. gee some 10+ years with IL-2 data.

But I wanted to make it a real time process that the user can select what data they want to look at and compare to.. Which is the goal of this website.

Originally Posted by Sutts

I like the way you've designed the utility to easily compare one aircraft with another. I also like the fact we can access notes from the real life test.

Thanks!

Yes, hopefully this will also help put a lot of forum arguments to rest.. When the can see the actual real world data that was used as a comparison.

Originally Posted by Sutts

I realize it's still early days but I'm a bit puzzled by the erratic ROC data of the CoD Hurricane (for example). The data sample seems to contain lots of zero values which makes the line spike back and forth - is this something you can iron out in the final product? A bit alarming too that the CoD machine can achieve 6000 fpm climb performance!

Ah, that is that confusing part I made a reference too

See.. right now there are only two test types.. Top Speed per Altitude (TSPA) and Rate of Climb (ROC)

The Real World Data (RWD) files I have uploaded typically contain both.. So both can be graphed at the same time. I just uploaded three RWD Spitfire tests +6, +12, and +16 that ONLY contain the TSPA data.

Where as the in-game test data files are only one or the other..

Both the TAS and ROC data is in every CoD test flight log.. But the 'WAY' the test is performed for TSPA or ROC is very different

Right now there is nothing in the pull down menu or text info box to say if the test is an ROC or a TSPA test.

So, what you did was select a CoD TSPA test I did..

So the TSPA test data is valid, but the ROC data from a TSPA test is NOT valid..

In that the way I fly a TSPA test (using real world methods) is to fly as fast as a can at a set altitude for a period of time..

Than I climb to the next altitude..

During that climb I am traveling at a much higher speed that the best climb speed for a ROC test..

Which results in a ZOOM climb between altitudes..

Which is why the ROC values are so high and NOT valid..

An ROC test is peformed differently, basically climbing at the best climb speed and keeping the accelerations during speed transitions as close to zero as posable..

I think I only have one CoD ROC test uploaded right now.. A Spitifre if I remember right? Just remember, when you are using a CoD ROC data file the TSPA values will NOT be valid!!

My plan is to add a TEST TYPE selection that will FILTER the CoD data such that you can only compare TSPA CoD tests to TSPA RWD tests, and ROC CoD tests to ROC RWD tests.

Originally Posted by Sutts

On a more positive note the TAS comparison looks like a pretty good fit - even better if the anomaly at 17000ft is made good.

Yes I am amazed at how well some of the CoD data matches the RWD

Originally Posted by Sutts

Thanks for the great work.

My pleasure!

Originally Posted by Sutts

Will be watching this with interest.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Thanks for your efforts - great work!

S!