Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Then what am I going to do with this box of Purina Groundhog Chow?FOLKS, LET'S NOT FEED THE TROLL WITH HIS P-39 BS. HE WAS SHOWN HE WAS WRONG BY SEVERAL PEOPLE ON HERE BUT CONTINUES TO SPAM THIS FORUM. I THINK THIS HAS RUN IT'S COURSE!
View attachment 653814
Take it back to Costco!Then what am I going to do with this box of Purina Groundhog Chow?
Set it out on the back porch - raccoons like that stuff (so I've been told)...Then what am I going to do with this box of Purina Groundhog Chow?
The directions for figuring out the "ball park" combat radius of action as used by the USAAF are as follows
A, Warm up and take off equivalent to 5 minutes at normal rated power.
B, Climb to 25,000ft at normal rate of power. (distance covered in the climb not included in the radius.)
C, Cruise out at 25,000ft and 210 I.A.S.
D, Drop external tanks and/or bombs before entering combat.
E, Combat at 5 minutes at war emergency rating and 15 minutes at military rating.
F, Cruise back at 25,000ft and 210 I.A.S.
G, No account is taken of decreased fuel consumption during decent
H. allowance is made for 30 minutes reserve at minimum cruise power.
I, no allowance is made for formation flight or for evasion action other than 20 minutes combat.
The charts shown are in 25 miles increments.
These are not flight plans.
But they are useful comparison tools between planes or between planes with different tank systems.
Original poster wants to see how the F4U compared, then figure out the steps above (as best you can) and compare to P-38, P-47, P-51 with the tank set up of your choice.
Or trying using a Spitfire with rear tank and/or drop tank.
Or try using a P-40F ( probably won't make 210 IAS at 25,000ft at less than max cruise speed? )
Actual missions would have zig zag patterns, would include wind for a given day and a few other details. and actual mission distance would be shorter than the chart shows.
However once a proponent of a certain aircraft starts fiddling with the numbers (Using climb to attitude as part of the radius or using shorter than specified reserve for "landing" ) then you aren't comparing apples to apples anymore.
Also using planes that will not make a decent amount of combat power at 25,000ft (over and above 'cruise' power) is not going to end for the pilots.
He's still more pleasant to read than The All Knowing Knower Of All Things Knowable.
it is about 315mph. This depends on some assumptions like actual air pressure (and/or temperature) and if there is any correction curve.What is the TAS of 210mph IAS at 25,000ft?
Interesting question. VIII FC Air Tech Services reported issues from early 1943 regarding P-38/F4 and P-47C. The manufacturers responded, but Wright Field was sluggish to non-concerned aboutt beefing up Test processes. In this case 'army brass' was focused on Gen. Oliver Echols CO Materiel Command. The OP flight test was 100% absorbed by Eglin Air Proving Ground with much better results.And here I thought that the problem that submariners had with their torpedoes was unique.
Although, to be sure, the admins at the torpedo factory were busy rejecting the reports of the submarine captains in actual combat. telling them that there was nothing wrong with the torpedoes, they were just being used incorrectly. Did the pilots in the war zone have that same problem, or did the army brass listen to reason when they heard it?
What is the TAS of 210mph IAS at 25,000ft?
WTH? I didn't write this.AND IN MY OPINION YOU'RE NOW NOTHING MORE THAN A SPAMMER! THIS WILL BE THE LAST THREAD YOU WILL HIJACK WITH YOUR BS!
Yep, you didn't!WTH? I didn't write this.
Being able to read has it's benefits.WTH? I didn't write this.
Ya know - I do owe you an apology - when I deleted your gibberish I meant to have the statement as a response. So with that said -WTH? I didn't write this.