Quote:
Ivank says:
Its the a similar but more detailed chart
|
It is not a more detailed chart. It is the same thing.
Only difference is the CLmax estimates. The RAE used a trailing rake to measure speed.
Those are very accurate when properly operated but are complex to operate. They measured the CLmax in flight. I see a problem with operating such a system at the edge of the envelope trying to stall a high performance fighter.
As for the weight of the Bf-109, my original estimate just used the one the RAE used for the test. Using the ladeplan does not change the relative performance significantly.
Quote:
|
The all-up weight was 5,580 lb. with the C.G. 24.8 in. aft of the leading edge at the root (h = 0.302). This loading agrees well with the value of 5,600 lb. quoted for the all-up weight by the Germans.
|
http://kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/...ls/Morgan.html
My calculated CLmax agrees with the RAE measurements for the Bf-109.
Speeds Dynamic pressure CL
82 22.79322034
1.433906325
My Spitfire CLmax agrees with the NACA findings and the calculations were made using standard data on the type with the weights and stall speed listed in the Operating Notes.
Quote:
Kurfust says:
RAE's calculation also using estimated/guessworked stall speeds, Clmax and rather questionable power values for both the Spit and 109 (the latter probably understood with the effect of engine thrust). That's the problem with these charts in general - there's such a margin of error with the base values, that the results are all over the place. (estimated) Propeller effiency can vary results by 5-10% alone, drag values are unknown, the wing's oswald effiency factor is unknown (directly shifts the results, since its a multiplier in the equation), Cl max is unknown.
|
That was my first thought. Gates was using high angle of attack theory to determine turn performance. High angle of attack theory is good for estimation but has to be based on measured data otherwise it is a complete crapshoot and guesswork.
The stumbling block to the assumption that Gates used high angle of attack theory is the fact he clearly list's the 1G stall CLmax for both aircraft.
That listed CLmax is clearly labeled on the chart as "assumed values of CLmax":
Spitfire 1G CLmax = 1.87
Bf-109E-3 1G CLmax = 1.95
The only way either aircraft can achieve such a CLmax at 1G is in landing configuration with full flaps and gear down.
The CLmax Gates used matches both aircraft in landing configuration.
It is definate proof Gates used the landing configuration CLmax for his estimate.