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 09-27-2012, 06:13 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bongodriver View Post
Oh, have I misunderstood something?...
Some are drawing wrong conclusions from the chart, but that doesn't change the chart. Kurfürst said the 262 can sustain a better turn time than the Spitfire at 400 mph, which is true. This will not win it a sustained turn fight though, as the Spitfire doesn't need to match the 262's speed. It can't do it in straight and level flight, so why bother in turns. Like I said, there's the chart and there's what you make of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst View Post
My best guess is that there was a major difference between the Emil and Friedrich propellers...
OK, I can see that at altitude the F is at least faster than the E, even if still at more power. Do you have the propeller efficiencies somewhere so I could take a look at them? Regarding the Spits, the IX was quite a bit more dirty than the I, just like a G-6 was more dirty than an F. So I would expect it to need more power for the same speed. But the E-F issue is different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter View Post
Doesn't the V in a designation mean a prototype/test a/c?
Yes, 109E prototype.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder! View Post
Just a stab, Kurfürst is probably the man for this question but looking up the weight of the 109e and 109f and it appears the later is heavier when loaded which might help account for the lack of speed increase over the emil?
Weight certainly is a factor, but for top speed of high speed fighter aircraft the effect is rather small. It matters much more for climb and turn.

Last edited by JtD; 09-27-2012 at 06:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-28-2012, 12:57 AM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
Yes, 109E prototype.
Then why is prototype data being used and not data from a production Bf109E?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-28-2012, 01:52 AM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter View Post
Then why is prototype data being used and not data from a production Bf109E?
Based on past experience with Kurfürst.. My guess would be the prototype data has better results than the production data.. That is to say Kurfürst tends to go with the best of the best data for 109s and the worst of the worst data for anything allied.. Also known as cherry picking!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.

Last edited by ACE-OF-ACES; 09-28-2012 at 02:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-28-2012, 01:52 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter View Post
Then why is prototype data being used and not data from a production Bf109E?
Awww, why so serious? Anyway, Check out http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...09/me109e.html

Last edited by NZtyphoon; 09-28-2012 at 05:03 AM.
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 09:55 AM.


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