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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-26-2012, 10:04 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
That was built for the Griffon engine but they had a ton of problems and dropped it. The Merlin XX wasn't used in the Spitfire, that's why Robo is rightly taking the mick out of you.
In this case Crumpp is right, just for once - the Spitfire III prototype was built with the Merlin XX, which had a single-stage two speed supercharger - it also had clipped wings, a revised undercarriage which was raked forward by 2 inches, and a revised windscreen with two straight side pieces and flat windscreen with internal glass (the undercarriage and windscreen were later used on the Spitfire VC) . When it was decided to reserve the XX for Hurricane IIs the Mk III was adapted to take the first Merlin 60 series engine, becoming a Mk IX prototype. The Mk IV was very similar to the Mk III but had the Griffon engine.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-26-2012, 10:39 AM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

OK so I may be a version out here lol Either way it's another case of running with it because there's a war on, not exactly the engineers style planning he expects in theory. Of course it's theory that engineers plan because where I work, which is a very successful global engineering firm, the engineers have virtually zero planning, all prototyping and wing their projects (plastering it with documentation on the fly). It's in software, my dept, which has far more planning than the engineers.

Last edited by Osprey; 09-26-2012 at 10:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-26-2012, 11:24 AM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NZtyphoon View Post
In this case Crumpp is right, just for once - the Spitfire III prototype was built with the Merlin XX, which had a single-stage two speed supercharger - it also had clipped wings, a revised undercarriage which was raked forward by 2 inches, and a revised windscreen with two straight side pieces and flat windscreen with internal glass (the undercarriage and windscreen were later used on the Spitfire VC) . When it was decided to reserve the XX for Hurricane IIs the Mk III was adapted to take the first Merlin 60 series engine, becoming a Mk IX prototype. The Mk IV was very similar to the Mk III but had the Griffon engine.
Very true, thanks for the details NZtyphoon. The key is the different (clipped) wings and therefore different wing load than the one we see at the top right corner of the above sheet.

Crumpp came up with the Merlin XX theory only to prove that the fan plot posted was for different engine with 2 stage supercharger. That is wrong just as was wrong his assumption that the chart posted previously by Banks (post 345) already included RAM effect.

No matter how I look at it, the post 345 makes perfect sense.
__________________
Bobika.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-26-2012, 12:00 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
All I said was that you were wrong in your statement that 400kph fixed trim setting was due to the 'good speed for dogfight' reason
Again, robo...

I asked you if you know how to determine the cruise speeds for an airplane. These are not random figures, pulled from a hat.

They are specific points on the power required and thrust required curves. The cruise speeds points of the thrust required and power required curves are fixed by the design and completely independent of engine settings.

Do you need me to talk you through how to determine them?

It is very easy to proved I am not wrong if you understand how the physics works.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-26-2012, 12:41 PM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Again, robo...

I asked you if you know how to determine the cruise speeds for an airplane. These are not random figures, pulled from a hat.

They are specific points on the power required and thrust required curves. The cruise speeds points of the thrust required and power required curves are fixed by the design and completely independent of engine settings.

Do you need me to talk you through how to determine them?

It is very easy to proved I am not wrong if you understand how the physics works.
No, thank you, that is not necessary at all. I already know you're completely wrong with your 'combat speed default trim setting' statement, no matter how hard you now try to prove that you were actually right.

As for the actual question (sorry I thought it was a rhetorical one) I don't know how exactly to calculate cruise speed for an aircraft, and I don't need it in order to see that you wrote 'combat speed' instead of 'cruise speed'. Now you will probably reply with another graph to prove that it's the same thing. Maybe you're even right, but essentially, you wrote nonsense, hence my reply. Consider my knowledge as limited if you wish, but then if I even can see that you're wrong and that you're bending facts to fit your bizarre theories (maintain rpm by changing it constantly, RAM effect, Merlin XX etc...), that says something about your activity here, not mine.

I am not too sure anymore about what are you trying to achieve on this game's forums, perhaps you enjoy the arguing for the sake of arguing, perhaps you enjoy the advantage you think you're having with your theoretical knowledge. I actually enjoy some of your technical posts and I have no problem to understand what you were saying, but when you're wrong you're wrong. And for some reason you never admit it, you just go on and on and every thread ends up to be about Crumpp vs. the 'sane world' rather than about the original topic. I fond that a bit frustrating to be honest.

Let me ask you a question you also omitted before - how exactly would a 400kph sustained turn in a Bf 109E be useful in actual turnfight vs. a Spitfire Mk.I?
__________________
Bobika.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:18 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
I already know you're completely wrong with your 'combat speed default trim setting' statement
In otherwords, forget any facts....

You are going to stick to your immature and emotional reaction.


Well, let's see how it pans out.

You can look in the Bf-109E3 Flugzeug Handbuch and see that the engine out instructions call for the pilot to pitch for 200kph IAS. This is best glide speed and corresponds to L/Dmax.

If our curves are correct, this will be the botton of the thrust required curve and tangent of the power required curve.

First the Thrust and Power Required curves:



200kph = 124mph +10 mph PEC = 134mph CAS * .869 = 117KCAS = 117KEAS at sea level.

Yep, best glide aligns perfectly with our curves so we know the curves are correct.

Using the curves, it is easy to find the other cruise speeds.

Maximum endurance will be at the point of minimum power required. Carson's speed is a modern innovation and is the best balance of fuel consumption and speed.

The trim speed of 400kph IAS does not align with any cruise point on the curves. That means the speed was chosen for a different reason.

Now it we look at the rate of turn, or how fast an airplane can bring the guns on target, we see that 206KEAS is a point the Bf-109E3 maintains a healthy rate of turn advantage and can sustain better maneuvering performance.



So, if it was not intentional, it certainly was a very fortunate turn of fate that the Germans choose 400kph to set the trim for the Bf-109E3.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:30 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
how exactly would a 400kph sustained turn in a Bf 109E be useful in actual turnfight vs. a Spitfire Mk.I?
Robo,

This is the key performance parameter for a fighter. It gives the aircraft which can sustain a higher load factor at a higher velocity the initiative in a dogfight.

This characteristic allows the Bf-109E3 to force the Spitfire to a lower airspeed in order to survive the fight.

The outcome of any dogfight is not predetermined. There are too many "what if's" and pilot skills are the determining factor.

What it tells Spitfire pilots is if you enter a sustained turn fight at high speed, the Bf-109 will win if you don't slow your speed down to the point you have a better sustained turn rate.

What it tells the Bf-109 pilot is you can maneuver against the Spitfire, just don't drop your IAS below 400 kph. If he breaks off and zooms at the point the Spitfire begins to out turn him, the Bf-109 will be above his opponent, out of reach, and able to engage/disengage at will.

400 kph is not a difficult point for the Bf-109 to maintain especially given the stability of the design. It is the trim speed and given the correct amount of power, where the airplane wants to be....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:57 PM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Robo,

This is the key performance parameter for a fighter. It gives the aircraft which can sustain a higher load factor at a higher velocity the initiative in a dogfight.

This characteristic allows the Bf-109E3 to force the Spitfire to a lower airspeed in order to survive the fight.

The outcome of any dogfight is not predetermined. There are too many "what if's" and pilot skills are the determining factor.

What it tells Spitfire pilots is if you enter a sustained turn fight at high speed, the Bf-109 will win if you don't slow your speed down to the point you have a better sustained turn rate.
Yes, I agree, you said that already before, and this is very well known to most virtual pilot on this forums. You're not saying anything new here. Yes, the 109 turns better at higher speeds, Spitfire wins at lower speeds. What I was trying to explain before was that in a TnB fight, it's usually lower speeds that matter and decide the fight.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what you're saying, it just doesn't make sense in regards to actual combat. If you keep the 109 in 400kph sustained turn, the Spitfire will be able to shoot at you for long enough to kill you, even being slower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
What it tells the Bf-109 pilot is you can maneuver against the Spitfire, just don't drop your IAS below 400 kph. If he breaks off and zooms at the point the Spitfire begins to out turn him, the Bf-109 will be above his opponent, out of reach, and able to engage/disengage at will.
If he breaks off and zooms we don't talk about sustained turn competition anymore. Everybody is well aware of 109s BnZ characteristics (if he extends vertically). Again, you're not saying anything new. It's the TnB that matter here. Pure TnB rarely happened because it would be a suicide for the 109 pilot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
400 kph is not a difficult point for the Bf-109 to maintain especially given the stability of the design. It is the trim speed and given the correct amount of power, where the airplane wants to be....
What you're saying with this whole post of yours is basically:

109 can win a turnfight against the Spitfire as long as it won't turn with it

Spitfire has had better sustained turn rate than 109 and it was generally a silly idea to turn with it. This is the case in the sim as well and all other sims.
__________________
Bobika.

Last edited by Robo.; 09-26-2012 at 03:03 PM. Reason: fpelling
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:39 PM
Robo.'s Avatar
Robo. Robo. is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
In otherwords, forget any facts....
Not at all! The fact is (still) that 400kph was NOT chosen by Mtt because of 'good speed for dogfight' reason, contrary to your statement. No matter how you try to re-pack your words, you were wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo. View Post
Now you will probably reply with another graph


I specifically told you that posting the cruise speed calculation and graph is not necessary and irrelevant, but thank you anyway, it was interesting.
__________________
Bobika.

Last edited by Robo.; 09-26-2012 at 03:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:43 PM
Osprey's Avatar
Osprey Osprey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 1,264
Default

Did he even read your post Robo? Your point just went whoosh over his head.

Reply With Quote
Reply


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 01:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.