Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:27 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Crummp I think you shld stop answering to them. It goes nowhere. Either this thread shld be locked now if you have finished exposing your point or you might switch to the next step in your argumentation.

Don't take me wrong, I found your point really interesting as many other does.
  #2  
Old 07-21-2012, 06:43 PM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

Part of the problem is that Crumpp doesn't awnser the questions, he quotes the papers which is fair enough but doesn't support it with pilots comments. He said the test pilot reports support his. So let him show any test pilot who said it was difficult or dangerous or uncomfortable to fly, or any test establishment. No one is denying that it didn't have perfect stability but then again whats perfect.

The paper that was posted should be read from beginning to end, after all the man who wrote it had 58 years practical hands on experience. Another important section is as follows:-

I published reports on the Hawker Hurricane (April 1942) (ref. 4.5) followed shortly by one on the Spitfire. The data obtained in these tests served to confirm most of the requirements previously proposed by Gilruth. Other reports followed comparing these results with published data on the German fighter Me109 and with U.S. fighter airplanes. During the war, pilots' lives depended on small differences in performance between the first-line fighters, and continual detailed improvements were made in these fighters. Several research studies were made on improvements, usually on control systems, and close contact was kept with the manufacturers through conferences and preliminary reports.

The tests on the high-speed fighters confirmed the findings of Gilruth that though all the airplanes exhibited instability in the spiral and phugoid modes of motion, these [26] modes did not concern the pilot because his normal control actions prevented the modes from developing to a point that they were noticeable. That is, the airplanes were spirally unstable, but the rate of divergence was small enough that it was not discernible to the pilots. Also, the long-period longitudinal mode might have been a slow divergence or a poorly damped or unstable phugoid oscillation, but the divergence was so slow or the oscillation had such a long period that it was not noticeable in normal flight. The short-period lateral oscillatory mode, the Dutch roll, was noticeable but adequately damped and the short-period longitudinal mode was so well damped that it could not be detected by the pilots. In general, these results applied to most airplanes of this period and explain why successful airplanes could be built without the need to consider theoretical predictions of dynamic stability. On the other hand, Gilruth had found that many of the quantities that could be determined without the need for complex theories, such as control deflections and control forces required in straight flight and maneuvers, trim changes due to power and flap setting, limits of rolling moment due to sideslip, and adequacy of the control effectiveness in maneuvers, were extremely important to the pilot. The tests on the fighter airplanes showed that the longitudinal control force gradient in maneuvers, known as the force per g, was a very important quantity, whereas the control force and position variation with speed in straight flight was of less importance and mainly influenced pilot fatigue on long flights. These airplanes were found to be quite satisfactory in most respects, though the aileron effectiveness at high speeds was low because of the large control force required to deflect the ailerons, which was an adverse characteristic in air combat. The detailed improvements mentioned previously were mainly directed at this aileron effectiveness problem.


Or to put it another way. The imperfections were small enough to be either not noticed or easily dealt with.

Last edited by Glider; 07-21-2012 at 06:47 PM.
  #3  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:02 PM
taildraggernut taildraggernut is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 334
Default

  #4  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:07 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
Crummp I think you shld stop answering to them. It goes nowhere. Either this thread shld be locked now if you have finished exposing your point or you might switch to the next step in your argumentation.

Don't take me wrong, I found your point really interesting as many other does.
I agree. There are no more measureable or definable characteristics to discuss. The only counterpoints are now based on emotion and feelings.
__________________
  #5  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:10 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
The tests on the high-speed fighters confirmed the findings of Gilruth that though all the airplanes exhibited instability in the spiral and phugoid modes of motion, these [26] modes did not concern the pilot because his normal control actions prevented the modes from developing to a point that they were noticeable. That is, the airplanes were spirally unstable, but the rate of divergence was small enough that it was not discernible to the pilots. Also, the long-period longitudinal mode might have been a slow divergence or a poorly damped or unstable phugoid oscillation, but the divergence was so slow or the oscillation had such a long period that it was not noticeable in normal flight. The short-period lateral oscillatory mode, the Dutch roll, was noticeable but adequately damped and the short-period longitudinal mode was so well damped that it could not be detected by the pilots. In general, these results applied to most airplanes of this period and explain why successful airplanes could be built without the need to consider theoretical predictions of dynamic stability. On the other hand, Gilruth had found that many of the quantities that could be determined without the need for complex theories, such as control deflections and control forces required in straight flight and maneuvers, trim changes due to power and flap setting, limits of rolling moment due to sideslip, and adequacy of the control effectiveness in maneuvers, were extremely important to the pilot. The tests on the fighter airplanes showed that the longitudinal control force gradient in maneuvers, known as the force per g, was a very important quantity, whereas the control force and position variation with speed in straight flight was of less importance and mainly influenced pilot fatigue on long flights. These airplanes were found to be quite satisfactory in most respects, though the aileron effectiveness at high speeds was low because of the large control force required to deflect the ailerons, which was an adverse characteristic in air combat. The detailed improvements mentioned previously were mainly directed at this aileron effectiveness problem.
All generality that is not dealing with the Spitfire. The NACA results are published, measured, and available for all to see.

I think the thread has run its course.
__________________
  #6  
Old 07-21-2012, 07:20 PM
taildraggernut taildraggernut is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
All generality that is not dealing with the Spitfire. The NACA results are published, measured, and available for all to see.

I think the thread has run its course.
Yes, it ran it's course a while ago....anyway looking forward to the 109 debate, is is coming soon?
  #7  
Old 07-22-2012, 01:51 AM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by taildraggernut View Post
Yes, it ran it's course a while ago....anyway looking forward to the 109 debate, is is coming soon?
There won't be one as the 109 was perfection personified as it is German.
  #8  
Old 07-21-2012, 08:17 PM
winny winny is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 1,508
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
All generality that is not dealing with the Spitfire. The NACA results are published, measured, and available for all to see.
.
For a MK V
  #9  
Old 07-21-2012, 09:45 PM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
All generality that is not dealing with the Spitfire. The NACA results are published, measured, and available for all to see.

I think the thread has run its course.
I think you forgot this part

I published reports on the Hawker Hurricane (April 1942) (ref. 4.5) followed shortly by one on the Spitfire. The data obtained in these tests served to confirm most of the requirements previously proposed by Gilruth. Other reports followed comparing these results with published data on the German fighter Me109 and with U.S. fighter airplanes. During the war, pilots' lives depended on small differences in performance between the first-line fighters, and continual detailed improvements were made in these fighters. Several research studies were made on improvements, usually on control systems, and close contact was kept with the manufacturers through conferences and preliminary reports.

I think you also forgot this part posted earlier

FIGURE 4.5. Supermarine Spitfire airplane. A high-performance fighter noted for its role in the Battle of Britain and throughout WW II, the Spitfire had desirably light elevator control forces in maneuvers and near neutral longitudinal stability. Its greatest deficiency from the combat standpoint was heavy aileron forces and sluggish roll response at high speeds.

Last edited by Glider; 07-21-2012 at 10:15 PM.
  #10  
Old 07-22-2012, 12:35 AM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
I agree. The only counterpoints are now based on emotion and feelings.
I am sorry to disgree with you but the counterpoints, are requests for the Test Pilot reports that you said you had, to support statements, that you made.

Your inability to do so speaks volumes
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.