|
|
#31
10-31-2011, 04:00 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
i dont have rudder pedals yet, so therefore i have the rudder set on a hatswitch on my joystick, which is not really precise, because its devided into steps. but without changing anything during flight, except opening the water rads, the speed will not decrease.and i zoomed into the gauges to look if it makes a minor difference.but i just couldnt find any in speed. oh and ace i will not argue with you...you dont have to believe me...you can try it by yourself if you want to, and if you want you can call it pilot error,...i dont care.
__________________
|
|
#32
10-31-2011, 04:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Providing a track is usually the best way to observe bugs claimed by pilots.
Also "usually" some one will try to replicate your observations and confirm it. looks like this threads all about standing around puffing on pipes drinking tea and generally hmming and ahhhing.  Bring forth a chart monkey please............... .
|
|
#33
10-31-2011, 04:32 PM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
First thing to note..
Tom does notice a difference David does NOT notice a difference So who should we belive? Answer, neither!  Why? For all the reasons I have already stated, and the fact that some are seeing a difference and some are not only reinforces the need to log your data during flight Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I am not agreeing with you or disagreeing with you. I am simply pointing out the FACT that the error your looking for may be in your nearest mirror Quote:
Oh, and I am still waiting on your 'data' as in how much are we talking about here? 10? 20? 30? 40? If you don't know in advance how big of a difference you are suppose to see, than how will you know it when you see it! And you should take pause here and consider the fact that Tom 'is' seeing a difference.. So with that said.. Are you calling Tom a liar?
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#35
10-31-2011, 04:36 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#36
10-31-2011, 04:54 PM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
This place never ceases to entertain me …
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
“The duct for the radiator was designed to slow the incoming air down. The air could then absorb more heat from the radiator, but the radiator needed to be made larger because of the slower air velocity, which meant installation in the rear fuselage. After the air passed through the radiator, it expanded due to the heat and was accelerated out the back, producing some thrust to counter the drag the radiator caused.” I don't have the time or energy to do the research the 109’s cooling but here’s some cool (pun intended) data about the pesky little 109 I did find. Instead of beating up the devs … research it and present the data to the devs. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...09g-14026.html Last edited by BP_Tailspin; 10-31-2011 at 04:56 PM.
|
|
#37
10-31-2011, 05:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
S!
Addman, try to find the book called Lentäjän Näkökulma II (Pilot's Point of View II freely translated). Written by Jukka Raunio. ISBN 951-96866-0-6
|
|
#38
10-31-2011, 05:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Since David was unable, or unwilling to provide the real 'data' his claim is based on, I figured I would give it a quick look.
To see what all the fuss is about, ie are we talking about 10? 20? 30? 40? In doing so I found some 109G data but not E data, here is the sorce http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...9/14026pg9.jpg Now it is really hard to read the speed axis, but it 'looks' like it goes 520 530 540 550 560 If that is the case, than the 'difference' in speed between open and closed is.. 5 kph Which is well within the pilot error noise Thus, IMHO, the only way to detect this small change is to log the data and account for the pilot errors PS correct me if I am wrong, but the rads on the 109 changed alot from the E to the G, so, assuming Jerry did a better job on the new rads, we can only assume that the older E rads caused more drag, and thus impacted speed more. But, even if the change was doulbe this, say 10kph, it is still well within the pilot error noise
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on. Last edited by ACE-OF-ACES; 10-31-2011 at 05:17 PM.
|
|
#39
10-31-2011, 05:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
#40
10-31-2011, 05:14 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
