Quote:
Originally Posted by SEE
The technical theory FM arguments are way over my head but I appreciate everyones input. I just read Cambers post (excellent too!) and it refers to the Acusim modelling of the Spit.
I asked someone who has this installed how the Spit compared to the one in CloD regards handling? His opinion was that it was very similar (better in some aspects regards performance).
I appreciate that it has little significance in contributing to this discussion but I would be interested to know if there is a marked difference between the FM modelling given to us by MG and another such as Acusim both of whom I would imagine are researching and using the same data.
|
The A2A Spifire is sweet to fly and similar in handling to the CoD although to me it 'feels' nicer. The IIa seemed to me to have better acceleration but I haven't done any comparative tests. The A2A Spit Ia only comes with the fixed 20' pitch wooden prop or the DH5-20 2 position three bladed prop (like the DH5-20 in CoD). It does not come with a CSP. It is more sophisticated that CoD in that the engine is more prone to lasting damage through mishandling, e.g. overheating is not only hard to overcome but with Accusim modelling it causes lasting damage to the engine which stays with you on the next flight unless you put right 'in the hangar'. If looked after properly it is just fine.
I'll try to find time to compare level speeds and climb to height in the two DH5-20 versions.