|
|
#61
07-10-2010, 04:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Haha, is he still comparing a poor low-speed turnfighter with no high-lift devices to the 109 as a turnfighter and concluding that its poor performance at said speeds makes the 109's best turn speed really low? Booooring! If you're turn-fighting in the sense of just flying circles you don't necessarily fly at your best turn speed, but the speed which maximises your advantage relative to the opponent. Against the laminar-wing Mustang's poor low-speed turn rate and lack of leading edge slats and so on, the 109's advantage probably IS maximised at much lower speeds than you'd expect. That doesn't make this situation universal, though, does it? Mainly since the whole tactic still relies on the Mustang pilot committing to the turn instead of just pulling high and laughing at the 109 pilot's inability to follow because he's now going at a hair over walking pace.
|
|
#62
07-10-2010, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote Erki: "EDIT: by the way, 250kmph IAS is well below 109's speed for best rate of turn."
Yes, the best UNsustained turn rate (Corner Speed) for the Me-109G, especially if trimmed tail-heavy, is probably in line with what was found by the only modern-instrument test ever made of WWII fighters, for the P-51D, F4U, F6F and P-47D, as found by "The Society of Experimental test pilots" in 1989: "VERY close to the maximum level speed"... Which confirms that Karhila is NOT talking about that: He is talking about the best SUSTAINED turn rate, and since 160 MPH is well below some of the highest sustained turn speeds the Me-109G can pull (it can probably sustain quite tight turns up to 280 mph at least, if not more) it demonstrates, as he intends to say in the clearest way possible, that the fastest speed the engine will allow in sustained turns is not the best way to go... In other words, this demonstrates that being as close as possible to the 320?-400 MPH "Corner Speed", while sustaining level turns, is NOT helpful to the cause of sustaining the highest possible sustained turn rate, or at least the best sustained turn rate/radius combination. Therefore full power is NOT helpful, and he contrasts very clearly his method to that of fellow pilots: "I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well." In WWII combat "turning" typically lasted at least 2-3 full 360° circles, AT A MINIMUM, and 45(!) full 360°s not being unheard of (15 minutes + of continuous turning to one side), but that sounds unfamiliar to simmers who are obsessed with unsustained turns that were meaningless in real-life WWII combat with real, non-magical guns... This is why he felt the need to emphasize the need for downthrottling in SUSTAINED turns, quite apart from the issue of brief overrun avoidance that was mostly a preoccupation of some of the faster US fighters while in dives... In any case, the REAL best UNsustained turn rate (Corner Speed), is so high in most WWII fighter types, that downthrottling to it would practically be limited to being in a dive... So again, downthrottling is obviously not meant here for a quicker turn while in a dive or in a high-speed overrun, despite the best efforts here of those who would muddy up everything with imaginative fiction... Poor Karhila tried to be clear about what he was saying, and his general purpose is perfectly obvious, but then he is up against quite valiant efforts to confuse everything he says into a pile of mush... I greatly admire this argument that says the quotes I made are taken out of context, but then doesn't ellaborate on what the intended context is... I'll give it a try...; Get this: The intended context here is that when Karhila is at 400 MPH while in combat (typical in-combat speed when you light up the twin JE after-burners you know...), then this COMMON situation requires that he downthrottles to his "Corner Speed" of 350 MPH where he will THEN throttle back up to maintain speed as close as possible to this best unsustained turn speed... Oh, he forgot to mention anything about throttling back up? Well it's understandable: Old age you know... But throttling back up IS part of the "context" you know, when you reach the "right" speed: It's just that this "context" is invisible in this particular case... Trust them... Not! Gaston
|
|
#64
07-10-2010, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gaston, if you want to know what I think of that, re-read my posts at the ubizoo.
I'm not going to translate the interview one more time. Perhaps if you find 10-20 more quotes that support your opinion.  Meanwhile, have fun in the fantasy land. EDIT, by the way, dont you have anything else to do? How come only one single ill-quoted veteran "supports" your view? Get a life. Last edited by Erkki; 07-10-2010 at 10:57 PM.
|
|
#65
07-11-2010, 03:41 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#66
07-11-2010, 05:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote, TheGrunch: "Originally Posted by Gaston
Therefore full power is NOT helpful, and he contrasts very clearly his method to that of fellow pilots: "I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well." He was fighting P-51s HEWASFIGHTINGP-51SHEWASFIGHTINGP-51S!! --------------------------------------------------------------------- No he wasn't: He had ONE doubtfull P-51 encounter that was likely with similar-looking (and maybe performing in sustained turns) P-40s... Nearly ALL his encounters were with Soviet-built fighters, and that was certainly the intended context... Soviet types are NOT poor low-speed fighters... (Neither is the P-51, compared to the Me-109G, when the "trick" of downthrottling, coarse prop pitch and dropped flaps is used) Quote, The Grunch: "How is sticking near corner speed ever going to be relevant in sustaining level turns? Who said that? That's because it's not the best sustained turn speed. Sticking near corner speed as an entry speed to a turning fight is useful because it's the best instantaneous turn speed, AND the best sustained turn speed is just a slightly more lengthy yank of the stick away" -------------------------------------------------------------------- -How about reading what Karhila actually said? : "I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well." Decrease power as a preparation to ENTER the turn: Otherwise he would say he reduced the engine throttle DURING the turn, not waste speed BEFORE the turn even started... ("In the same situation" means: Also before the start of the turn) Same with the FW-190A ace on "Aces High": Downthrottling took place before the merge even began.... In any case, getting back to stalwart math advocates (who think applying pathetically presumptive math formulas to real-world complexities has more validity than obvious reality-based conclusions), IF their warped view of WWII turn-fighting had any validity, then the necessity to UPTHROTTLE after downthrottling would be equally emphasized by those pilots involved... This is because the "math presumptive supremacy" mantra is: Best sustained turn rate is only available at full power... You would think then that UPTHROTTLING is equally important when the needed result of DOWNTHROTTLING has been achieved... Well Karhila peeps not a word about UPTHROTTLING... Neither does the "Aces High" FW-190A Western ace... And finally the most obvious case of P-51 downthrottling I have found (if that one doesn't do it nothing will..): It mentions Downthrottling TWICE. Upthrottling ? A big fat zero... http://www.spitfireperformance.com/m...an-24may44.jpg So let's see all those numerous downthrottling accounts that are followed by life-saving UPTHROTTLING to INCREASE the turn rate... If you want to get an idea of the likelyhood of THAT... Consider these sentences following several hard 360s on the deck...: "Every time I got to the edge of the airdrome they opened up with light AA guns. Gradually I worked the Me-109 away from the field and commenced to turn inside of him as I decreased throttle settings" That was the Second mention of downthrottling, first was: "At first he began to turn inside me. Then he stopped cutting me off as I cut throttle, dropped 20 degrees of flaps and increased prop pitch" Jeez, this thing is just crawling with mentions of throttling back UP, is it not?!? He obviously felt throttling UP was an important factor to his success in sustained turns... He just conveys the info in this report by hiding the meaning BETWEEN THE LINES you know... You guys are too much fun... Gaston
|
|
#67
07-11-2010, 09:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hope that you guys notice that I mentioned 'throttle variation' to get a better turn to the right to out-turn an opponent.
The FW performs better in yoyo type turns (ie: the vertical) and can outturn a spit, if you're not careful.
|
|
#68
07-12-2010, 04:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
As for your favourite quote: "I found that when fighter pilots got in a battle, they usually applied full power and then began to turn. In the same situation I used to decrease power, and with lower speed was able to turn equally well." Does it say that he could turn better? No. It says "equally well". No doubt he could, if the enemy aircraft took the bait and decided to follow him into a really low-speed turn rather than using any kind of vertical aspect. Not many rookie pilots would have considered air-fighting in a very 3-dimensional manner, I'd imagine. All that you seem to have achieved via Karhila's quote is to highlight the utility of the high-lift devices the 109 was fitted with, which was not in question to begin with. If that was what maximised his turn-rate advantage, he'd use it. At the end of the day, why do you think he says "they usually applied full power and then began to turn"? Essentially it comes down to a question: Do you think that every other pilot apart from Karhila is a moron? The only way you can draw a universal trend from your one explicit anecdote about throttle settings during turns (that turning at super-low throttle settings is GRRRRRREAT!) is if you answer this question with 'Yes'. Quote:
I notice you didn't reply to the section of my post about pulling Gs and pulling against control forces for extended periods of time, like you never do on any occasion when you can't answer a point. The annoying thing is, you'll bring up the same load of tripe in a later post as if no one has ever answered it before.
|
|
#69
07-12-2010, 10:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Even funnier is, that Karhila wrote a diary through the war. You can find a lot about his career and many combat stories in Tuomo Soiri's book Iskulaivue (unfortunately not translated.
In July 43, some 10km North of Lavansaari(Moshnay) Island where the Soviet 3. GvIAP was, he was surprised by an La-5, that stuck right in his tail. He made a "Hartmann escape" and then outturned the La-5 in nearly pure vertical fight, using full power, and no flaps - La-5 turned too tight initially, lost his energy and found itself in the 109's bravure area, low speed turn/climb and acceleration. Karhila's first burst cut the La-5 in half, and the kill had 2 confirmers. La-5 pilot bailed out and was picked up from the sea by a torpedo boat. And yes, after I-16 and I-153 none of the Soviet fighters is really good at low speed, they dont have very good power-to-weight-to-wing area ratios. Jak-9 was considered even more dangerous than La-5 thanks to its high speed turn and especially roll. It could also follow the 109s longer in the dive, unlike La-5s that had to either break or fly to the sea, as happened a couple of times.
|
|
#70
07-12-2010, 11:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Let me guess, you're getting your ass handed to you regularly whilst employing what you see as 'real' tactics and it's getting to you? Combat reports are exactly that, reports of combat, as remembered by men who were desperatley trying not to die at the time.. You can't use them to 'prove' anything because they are incomplete, you don't know the condition of the aircraft or pilots or weather or wind speed at the time. They are narritives. By the way I'm a BoP PS3 player (feel free to laugh) but this thread was annoying me! I'll go back to my arcade game now.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
