Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Here it is. It is as proper as a flight test can get. In fact, its the most detailed performance test I have seen so far. http://kurfurst.org/Performance_test...w_109V15a.html

Hmmm, this isn't an original document, it's some html from your website. All of the RAE stuff and other docs are originals (except the 12lbs which is measured in test then calculated/translated/projected onto the graph)

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

You see the problem with this kind of thought is that after Willie would have won that big fat order, he would also have to deliver some 4000 aircraft and each will be tested by the German Air Ministry for specs. If they are not capable being withing plus/minus five percent of the figures Willie promised, Willie won't get a single Pfenning, which doesn't sound like a very good deal.

Don't be silly Kurfurst. Willy is an old pal of Goering and a few keys of Colombian marching powder and some bonus wraps he'd have been on the hotline to Herr Hitler. We've all seen how Oscar Schindler did it.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Osprey

Hmmm, this isn't an original document, it's some html from your website. All of the RAE stuff and other docs are originals (except the 12lbs which is measured in test then calculated/translated/projected onto the graph)

You want the original document, Osprey?

Originally Posted by Osprey

Don't be silly Kurfurst. Willy is an old pal of Goering and a few keys of Colombian marching powder and some bonus wraps he'd have been on the hotline to Herr Hitler. We've all seen how Oscar Schindler did it.

Except it just didn't work that way. BAL (the Luftwaffe's QC group) was rejecting Me 262 if they did not do at least 830 kph.. They had a bit of reason and allowed planes even with 825, but no less was accepted.

Again. We are talking 262s. In 1945.

[pstyle]

Thanks Kurfurst, I’d not seen the V15 trials information before, the test-report is quite nice. Although I’d much rather have all of the pgaes in their originals, not just a few, and not have to rely on transcribed text into your html page.

The above aside, can you help me with a couple of questions:
1) What can we take from the apparent inability of any subsequent tests of the E1s or E3s (that I can find at least) to get anywhere near the “sea-level” (see question 4 below) speed of 493kmh or 498kmh? How do we explain that the prototype was able to record speeds that no subsequent 109 testing seems to have been able to achieve? I see testing data of 109E3 Nr1972, and 109E1s Nr1774 and Nr1791 (all of which are German tests, not British tests), none of which achieve above 485kmh at their lowest altitude of “0” (average is around 470)

2) Can you provide Blatt 3 of the testing documentation, the full-pressure altitude (Volldruckhohen) results – which I cannot find on your page?

3) Your tabulated summary of Blatt 5 indicates that the achieved speed (with the supposedly suboptimal engine pressures) was 493kpm at 0 altitude relative to the ground. Why does Blatt 6 indicate however that only 485 was obtained? is that because Blatt6 projects the speed down to sea level, whereas the tests were carried out at 0 altitude above ground, at a location (Augsburg?) already elevated (~440m) above MSL? If so, according to the test graph, do we get a sea-level speed of 485(490), not 493(49 for the V15?

4) the tests often make corrections for air pressure of a standard (Augsburg?) day "normaltag". Do we know what that pressure was?

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

You want the original document, Osprey?

No need, just making the point. I am happy to liase with pstyle on it though, I would like to just make sure that the 109 is correct in HSFX, of course would seek necessary approval from 109 jockeys who have a similar historically accuracy first agenda to me.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Osprey

No need, just making the point. I am happy to liase with pstyle on it though, I would like to just make sure that the 109 is correct in HSFX, of course would seek necessary approval from 109 jockeys who have a similar historically accuracy first agenda to me.

I can post the paper for you when I get home, though you have already seen it in full (transcribed) on my site. The Blatt 3 part pstyle was missing is actually there, its the 3rd page that covers the second part of point three and the rest of point four (the typed text part spread through multiple pages), but for reasons of convinience I have ommitted the header for the rest of the pages, which would break the text flow and would say just the same, well, except for "Blatt 3" instead of "Blatt 1" and "Blatt 2" in the right upper corner.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

The Blatt 3 part pstyle was missing is actually there, its the 3rd page that covers the second part of point three and the rest of point four (the typed text part spread through multiple pages), but for reasons of convinience I have ommitted the header for the rest of the pages, which would break the text flow and would say just the same, well, except for "Blatt 3" instead of "Blatt 1" and "Blatt 2" in the right upper corner.

cheers Kurfurst.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by pstyle

cheers Kurfurst.

... and here it is. But don't expect anything new...

[Al Schlageter]

Why do you continually show V15 data and not data for the E-1,3 Kurfurst?

[Varrattu]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

... and here it is. But don't expect anything new...

Referring "Blatt 2" important results concerning speed etc. are reported on "Blatt 6".

Please can you provide "Blatt 6", too?

Regards Varrattu