davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Certainly that could be the case. He has forgotten a considerable amount of information.
Look. I am really trying not to insult anyone in this or make any personal attacks.
We are having some stumbling blocks over some very basic concepts. I will try not to put it in terms of credibility.
I know some folks on these boards who have worked in the aerospace industry some time ago and have forgotten things. However the conversations are still on an entirely different level. Every case is different.
Absolutely! Power available to Power required IS the fundamental relationship that determines aircraft performance.
Over the same altitude, there is no need to convert to TAS. The relative performance remains the same as TAS is soley a function of the properties of the atmosphere.
Merry Christmas All!
All the best,
Crumpp
You still have refuse to answer my inquiry on the following examples
Crumpp, you have taken a specific altitude and a specific airspeed for a Bf-109K4 and compared that with a specific altitude and specific airspeed for a P-47M an stated that the K is faster than the M. I have shown that you can take other specific airspeed and altitudes and, using your logic, come up with a completely different conclusions. You have ignored commenting about that. Instead of addressing these descripancies, you have become abusive.
Two more examples I would like you to explain:
F-15 flying at 600 mph TAS at 55,000 ft. Using your calculations the F-15 EAS is 209 mph. Using your logic, the F-15 is flying at 70% of the speed of the Bf-109K4. This is not logical nor aerodynamically true.
SR-71 flying at Mach 3 at 100,000 ft. Using all the appropiate formulas for calculating TAS and EAS for supersonic flow we get a TAS of 2048 mph and a EAS of 238 mph. You may say that both the P-47M and Bf-109K4 is going faster than the SR-71 because their EAS is higher but I bet you a bottom dollar that the SR-71 would make it from LA to NY in a whole lot less time than the other two aircraft.
So here is a list of the plane discussed in descending EAS values , and according to you, the fastest one is at the top and the slowest one is at the bottom.
Bf-109K4, at 24k ft, TAS = 440mph, EAS = 299 mph
P-47M, at 32.5k ft, TAS = 467mph, EAS = 272 mph
SR-71, at Mach 3, 100k ft, TAS = 2048 mph, EAS = 238 mph
F-15, at 55k ft, TAS = 600 mph, EAS = 209 mph
It seems intuitively obvious to me that EAS is not an accurate way to compare aircraft airspeed.
Crumpp please address these items:
1. 440mph / 1.4678<SMOE FL24> = 299 mph EAS
467mph / 1.71295<SMOE FL325 = 272mph EAS
440mph / 1.4678<SMOE FL24> = 299 mph EAS
451mph / 1.4678<SMOE FL24> = 307mph EAS
430mph / 1.71295<SMOE FL325> = 249 mph EAS
467mph / 1.71295<SMOE FL325> = 272mph EAS
Why does the first equations make the Bf-109K4 faster than the P-47M ("The Bf-109K4 is the faster of the two aircraft according to this data") and the other two do not make the P-47M faster than the Bf-109?
2. If EAS represent the true (verses true airspeed) airspeed of an aircraft, would you say that the two piston power planes are faster than the F-15 and SR-71?