Acceleration comparisons

[horseback]

Originally Posted by RPS69

I'am much more impressed by the LaGG66 acceleration, and having higher final speed. I think that some of this must be rechecked, and it would be a healthy thing to do.

Horseback, since you were on the WW view, you weren't checking the slip ball by chance? The higher the engine power, the more important it is.

Actually, I fly the test in cockpit mode and depend upon the depictions of the instruments to keep straight and level. I then watch the track in Wonder Woman because it allows me to obtain the precise altitude and TAS data which I record.

Part of what I'm trying to do is find the best way to fly accurately or get the best out of the aircraft as the average player with TIR and the usual array of controllers would, which is (partly) why I fly the tests in cockpit. In a lot of cases, there appears to be a sort of forced parallax, where the indicators don't align, particularly in the US type artificial horizons (and all of my photos and source material show no such parallax visible, either from the pilot's seat or even from shots taken just outside the cockpit). This tends to make it harder to keep your wings level when you're trying to hold the nose down until the elevator trim can be dialed in. Generally, the in-cockpit slip ball (or T&B needle in the case of British fighters) is at least slightly in conflict with the vector much of the time and the in-cockpit 'ball' is almost always in error versus the WW vector ball during any kind of change in direction or sudden power surges.

About the LaGG, I think that we have to take the altitude (approx 3000m) into account, as well as the fact that in-line engines are both more aerodynamically friendly and seem to 'rev up' more quickly. We also have to think about reputations; the later LaGGs were quite improved over the early models, but the pilots of the VVS appear to have lost faith in it the same way USAAF pilots in the Southwest Pacific lost faith in the Airacobra. At 3000m, the LaGG (66) may be closer to its best performance height than the La-5F and FN, as well as being a bit more aerodynamically refined.

I think that the results at 100m and 1500m will be quite different.

cheers

horseback