Recent content by badger45

Hi again. 1] Right. Change in propeller efficiency is really not in the formula and it may be a factor degrading sustained turn times. Varying eta from 0.8 to 0.65 can cause 7 percent increase in sustained turn time and even greater 12 percent increase in time to perform max g sustained turn...

Attached is complete table from that book. I found no mention about conditions of test in the text around. The aircraft is standard Spitfire MkVB with Merlin 46. In the spreadsheet you can find calculation of all turn times and comparison to Russian data. Some data fit well within 5 percent...

I can read Russian quite well, if you have the name of the book, I can see, whether I can find it. From what I see in my books they were Spitfire MkVB with unclipped wings. One of books also mentioned the problems with 100 octane fuel. I will try to look for more Russian sources, as I am almost...

From what can be seen in "P-40 vs A6M2" comparison, the climb data are computed from 1-g SEP (specific excess power) curves. So they are indeed for full power and could not be safely used for prolonged climb without overheating the engine. Regards, badger45 P.S. Thank you Krieghund for this...

Ta-152H, 1750HP@SL, 530km/h@SL, 14.44m, 23.5m2, 4625kg: 19.98 seconds (formula) and 20.17 seconds (full model) for best sustained turn time and 20.03 seconds (formula) and 20.45 seconds (full model) for sustained turn at maximum load factor. Thanks for idea for extreme example! Data used are...

For best time sustained turn you have to use the second set of formulas and because of the 1000 meters height (instead of SL), there must be a slightly higher constant: instead of 2.35 (for SL), use 2.47 (1000 meters). Input can be taken form SL figures (SL max speed and SL power), as these...

Still no proofs and only more offenses? Well then our conversation is over. I have too little time to waste it on idiots. Regards, badger45

I have only one coaching advice for you: stop coaching me. I don't like it. I told you once, now it is the second time. I am not some teenage enthusiast who read one book on airfoils, so please lay aside your arrogance or quit discussion with me. I will not repeat myself for the third time...

One further thing comes to my mind: what is the simplified approach good for and why and when to use it? Basically I use them in two different circumstances. First, when I read about some less well known aircraft, perhaps a prototype or even just a design, the formulas enable me to to quickly...

You still don't understand, what my formula calulates. It DOES NOT calculate best sustained turn time. It estimates turn conditions for the peak load in sustained turn. See attached page from Hale, Aircraft Performance. My formula estimates the nmax point. As you can see from the graph, minimum...

Thank you for your reply! One thing I want to make a bit more clear, as I realize, it may confuse other people. The equations above are meant for best load sustained turn time, not for the fastest or tightest sustained turn. Thus it is possible, the aircraft in question will turn faster in...

Thank you for your reply! First, I would like to clarify one thing, which is probable source of misunderstanding. The equations above are to be used as quick estimates, not fine analysis. It is obvious, that the best method would be to do finite element analysis, or even better, to build 1:1...

Hi All, since I noticed that there are not only many fans of WWII aircraft, but also many people actually interested in calculation of basic performance indicators, I would like to post some useful equations. I have found the exact approach of aerodynamics engineers quite bothersome to use...