|
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
12-07-2010, 05:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
|
|
#2
12-07-2010, 05:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I always look with suspicion at performances charts. In my old club, we had two planes of the same type (don’t ask me which type, I won’t tell you). If you look at the published performances a cruise speed of 137 knots is listed. Our examples cruised much more sedately at 115 and 110, the older one being faster and having also a better climb rate (1,000 fpm versus 800).
Another interesting example: most sources agree in saying that the F4U Corsair was faster than the F6F Hellcat. It’s surprising, if you consider that both planes had the same engine and prop, a similar weight and wing area with the same airfoil. US Navy was puzzled, to say the least, and delivered a Corsair to Grumman, asking to make the Hellcat equally fast. Grumman test pilot discovered that the two types had exactly the same combat performances, and maintained formation at all altitudes with similar power settings, with only slight advantages and disadvantages changing sides with altitudes. The Corsair airspeed indicator, however, was constantly reading 18 mph faster than the Hellcat. The reason was traced down to an incorrectly positioned static port on the Hellcat’s fuselage. The fault was remedied, but the Hellcat speed remained listed as slower forever (and the F6F in PF is accordingly “porked”). Who is telling this tale? Corky Meyer, Grumman test pilot who flew extensively both types (read in “Corky Meyer’s Flight Journal”, pages 68-69). Is this fact hard enough to ask TD a fix? Perhaps yes, but I don’t feel it’s so important. What matters, in my opinion, is that published performances can vary for a lot of reasons (including different testing standards) and that a general consensus is hard to reach. |
|
#3
12-07-2010, 07:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
German bombs was cast so they had a thick nose and a thick end, so the explosion would find the thinnest place to get out. The werry aloy of steel used was also a factor and the most important part is that aluminum powder adds gigantic to the power of the explosion. Its not about fragments alone, its about the structure of the bomb it self and what kind of explosive used.. If you go by the basics of the power of the explosive used, some German bombs(not fragmentet) was considered 80% more effetive as british fragmentet bombs....this was design and the chemestry the germans used in the bombs...... Please.....fragments dont meen better bomb as pr word........we are not talking about IED`s but highly effective aerial bombs.... werry fast example you have a 100KG fragmentet bomb, standard impact detonator in there you have TNT as explosive leathel radius would be around 250-300m then you have to add the depth of impact and the angle of the explosion, plus fragment mass and energy. You have a 100KG hole case cast bomb, standard impact detonator, in it you have a mix of TNT and aluminum powder.. The force alone from the explosive would make it atleast 50% more powerfull than the fragmentet. Bomb casing is thinner to the sides, so the angle of the explosion is not as steep as the fragmentet one, so you have a more directet explsosion to the sides with atleast 50% more power... It will move more soil in a greater area. The presure wave alone would cover the fagmentet bombs 250-300m A bomb IS NOT ABOUT grooves in the casing, a bomb is about design and explosives...... To make the best bomb you need the perfect combination between design and chemicals...... The Germans got more destructive power out of a solid casing using design and better explosives than the allied did with average explosives and a better casing..... a fun little example....(laying on the ground ) you can survive a handgrenade that is fragmentet in a distance of 3 m A hole casing handgrenade you need to be 5 m away you have a better kill zone with a fragmentet bomb, but a full casing bomb will take 15% away of lethality but add lethal distance so you loose 15% in outch but add 30% to the outch distance... Last edited by Ltbear; 12-07-2010 at 07:27 PM. |
|
#4
12-07-2010, 09:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Your standard hand grenade is built to limit the effective radius of the fragments or else it would kill the user too often.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m61.htm See that fragmentation coil there. It is limiting the fragment killing radius to few meters. Here is some calculation for the same grenade in ideal conditions without the fragmentation coil. 185g of Comp-B should be enough to give 2g fragment 480m/s speed at 100m. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/...s/Warheads.htm Flanker since you've calculate these before then could you perhaps calculate the same thing with 2500g and 300m If you still after calculating it say that 2500g of explosives cannot deliver deadly fragment to 300m, next step is to take this to Mythbusters.  Some more interesting reading: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/bombs.htm Blast is caused by tremendous dynamic overpressures generated by the detonation of a high explosive. Complete (high order) detonation of high-explosives can generate pressures up to 700 tons per square inch and temperatures in the range of 3,000 to 4,500º prior to bomb case fragmentation. It is essential that the bomb casing remain intact long enough after the detonation sequence begins to contain the hot gases and achieve a high order explosion. A consideration when striking hardened targets is that deformation of the weapon casing or fuze may cause the warhead to dud or experience a low order detonation. Approximately half of the total energy generated will be used in swelling the bomb casing to 1.5 times its normal size prior to fragmenting and then imparting velocity to those fragments. The remainder of this energy is expended in compression of the air surrounding the bomb and is responsible for the blast effect. This effect is most desirable for attacking walls, collapsing roofs, and destroying or damaging machinery. The effect of blast on personnel is confined to a relatively short distance (110 feet for a 2000 pound bomb). For surface targets blast is maximized by using a general purpose (GP) bomb with an instantaneous fuzing system that will produce a surface burst with little or no confinement of the overpressures generated by excessive burial. For buildings or bunkers the use of a delayed fuzing system allows the blast to occur within the structure maximizing the damage caused by the explosion. Fragmentation is caused by the break-up of the weapon casing upon detonation. Fragments of a bomb case can achieve velocities from 3,000 to 11,000 fps depending on the type of bomb (for example GP bomb fragments have velocities of 5,000 to 9,000 fps). Fragmentation is effective against troops, vehicles, aircraft and other soft targets. The fragmentation effects generated from the detonation of a high-explosive bomb have greater effective range than blast, usually up to approximately 3,000 feet regardless of bomb size. The fragmentation effect can be maximized by using a bomb specifically designed for this effect, or by using a GP bomb with an airburst functioning fuze. http://www.scribd.com/doc/35978019/T...-December-1943 "SC designates a thin wall high-explosive bomb, achieves its effect chiefly by blast."
__________________
|
|
#5
12-07-2010, 11:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
All this data is a smoke screen that doesn't explain the huge differences in the blast radius of relatively similar bombs, i.e Fab 1000 vs SC1000
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects  |
|
#6
12-07-2010, 11:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
This reminds me of the Iraqi military communication officer who denied the presence of the American forces having penetrated Baghdad when you could clearly see behind him the advancing America forces.
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck it is probably a duck. There have been numerous flight model error brought out by experienced individuals on many occasions. The most notable for me is a statement by a P-38 driver (in the book "Fork-Tailed Devil: The P-38" written by Martin Caidin) that states he could out turn a 109. No way you're going to do that in the game. I also find it rather ironic the condescending attitude towards "Moders". Consider the roots of TD. One needs to recognize the type of "Moder" that we have in IL-2 versus other arcade games. The Moder for IL-2 tends to be historically motivated and not out to simply create a "cheat". |
|
#7
12-08-2010, 01:40 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Fragments can kill if they hit, and if they are fast enough and heavy enough.
The probability of that for a bomb depends upon the size of the fragment and the range. If the fragment is very small, it will run out of kinetic energy before it gets too far from the bomb. If the fragment is large, then for a given size of bomb, there will be fewer fragments than with smaller fragments. A hand grenade can kill out to 60yards. With 36? fragments in one grenade, you have to be pretty unlucky to get hit at 60yards. |
|
#10
12-08-2010, 01:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Your link to the Gurney equation covers the fragmentation part of the picture theoretically but note that the calc is per fragment, and there are a lot of 2g fragments in a fragmentation coil. The 5m statistic is just that; it is probable that enough frags will hit you to kill you at under 5m, injure you badly at under 15m, but might injure you to some degree a lot further out than that. Last time I threw a hand grenade I put something solid between me and the bang. Much safer than statistics.. The Gurney equation doesn't cover blast effect. |
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
