|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
| View Poll Results: do you know flugwerk company a her real one fockewulf a8? | |||
| yes |
   
|
2 | 33.33% |
| no |
  
|
4 | 66.67% |
| Voters: 6. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
11-16-2012, 05:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Thank you Herra!
I like stall speed as an aggregate measure of a number of factors when the plane is in flight at critical angle. I can predict that in a 4 G turn it will reach stall at 2x stall speed if piloted perfectly. And I think the neat part is that would be 2x clean stall or 2x dirty stall depending on configuration. Of course piloting can change that but never for the better. One thing though. In the turn where the smaller wing version of our plane is experiencing higher drag and slowing down at a greater rate, the very act of slowing down does tend to reduce turn radius so there's some ratio of lost lift widening the turn to lost speed tightening the turn, the path is not simply the rate so in my view... If both start -above- corner speed then for a time the ratio might benefit the higher wing loaded variant. And I think that's where high speed turn performance maybe delivers a bit more. As you say, it gets complicated.  IMO the place the higher wingload plane will get the biggest advantage is combining high speed and the vertical. That's where the FW's have been best for me. Last edited by MaxGunz; 11-16-2012 at 11:09 PM. Reason: add 1 more thot |
|
#2
11-20-2012, 08:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
So nobody has come up with prop fighter wing bending data during turns so far... Why am I not surprised?
Nobody has come up either with one example of Spitfire out-turning the FW-190A in low speed sustained turns: There is quite a few accounts clearly demonstrating the opposite, with one pilot stating this was a general fact... Quite a discrete 60% advantage let me tell you! "Il-2 confirms with great satisfaction" But what about the satisfaction of a real wartime FW-190A-8 Western Front ace? The only time I ever heard a real WWII German ace directly opining on a simulation forum was through a relative on the Aces High "vehicles forum" around 2005, a Western Front FW-190A ace who unfortunately was not identified by the relative posting his replies to queries, because I suppose there were P-51s being shot down in his accounts, (a rotten deal for making my case at any rate)... A lot of about the way the posting relative presented his comments made it clear he was in contact with the real deal... He mentionned 3 separate types of aileron chords being available as an offered pilot "option" on the A-8, the widest chord being picked by the ace in question to help "catch" the wingdrop during low-speed turns... He described increasing further the "chord" of the ailerons by adding field-mounted "spacers" on the aileron hinges to increase their effectiveness at "catching" the wing drop, riding the turn on deflected ailerons (He describes precisely relaxing the pull on the stick just as the ailerons are deflected to catch the wing drop)... He described reversed a tailing P-51D in this manner using just two 360° turns flat on the ground (the P-51 straining very near its stall all the way)... He described the huge advantage of the broad wood prop, but also the risk of hitting the ground with it on landing (not clear if that was much greater than with the narrow metal prop)... He described using the FW-190A-8 exclusively as a low-speed turnfighter, reducing the throttle and dropping the flaps before a merge with faster P-51s... He did not care about their greater speed because he could turn to go head-to-head with them if they did not stay with him... Head-to-head was apparently a big advantage for the FW-190A, so the P-51 was presumably just as well off dropping the throttle and turning as well... The remarkable thing is, I have never heard of such details anywhere else, and yet nothing of the aileron details and other issues has ever been challenged as being false... I have asked years later of the site owner, surnamed Hitech, to tell me where to find this thread, titled "FW-190A veteran experience" (it went on for about 4 pages the last time I saw it): He actually claimed not to remember it... It is of course deleted from the archives, and he knows nothing about it... I guess everything the "real deal" had to say just exposed too harshly how current simulations, his and others, were a big pile of claptrap... But apparently, after all my threads, the Aces high FW-190A got quite a bit better...  Gaston |
|
#3
11-20-2012, 09:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another 2c worth as we're on a roll.
The Spit wing is narrow in thickness and long in chord, designed for speed. Take this to low speeds If you rotate the spit the chord length now presents a larger area for drag (but producing momentary better lift) compared to the shorter chord of the FW, which has a thicker wing producing better lift and less(or equal) drag than the spit for the same rotation over longer time. Not forgetting the FW weight, but it's further from it's takeoff weight (Yes.. we're now in this region as I hinted before) than the spit, so it can probably be pulled harder. The thing in the spits advantage is it's power-to-weight ratio which could help it in the climbing turn, but is an inline engine more advantaged against a radial at low speeds. From what I can see and have read, the inline is a bugger to control at low speeds. I'm willing to take a bet that the Spit had very little advantage (if any) over the FW and such low speeds, which would account for Gastons 'research results' Your turn 
__________________
Last edited by K_Freddie; 11-20-2012 at 09:30 PM. |
|
#4
11-20-2012, 10:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
 Just for giggles: "I...stall-turned to port to attack the rear two Fw 190's. They broke and turned with me but I could easily out-turn them..." Spit IX vs. Fw 190. I actually looked for two minutes, found more than you in fifteen years. |
|
#6
11-20-2012, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
FYI, a doesn't make posting nonsense any more bearable. You'd be better of asking questions.Quote:
|
|
#8
11-20-2012, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Your 'givens' about the Spitfire are wrong. Why not just say the Spitfire won because it bestowed 'gifts' upon the British pilots, or some other statement made from denial? |
|
#9
11-20-2012, 10:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Please keep going Gaston, I've never laughed so hard about an FM girlie fight in my entire time with IL2.
Just remember, if you keep repeating untruths enough people will grow tired and leave the discussion and you can claim a "win". It's called the "big lie", and it was invented by the Germans as well...
__________________
 Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943. ~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov |
|
#10
11-20-2012, 10:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
