Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It's great fun talking and reminiscing about muscle car and hotrod engines, but let's not forget, they're a whole different animal in a whole different ecosystem from a fighter engine. Let's not draw too many parallels, as their performance demands and operating profiles are so radically different, especially if the aircraft is constant speed equipped.
No automotive engine, even a Ferrari or Alfa at Le Mans, is required to run continuously at such a high percentage of its peak output as a fighter engine. OTOH, instantaneous revving response is nowhere near as critical in a fighter as in a race car.
Cheers,
Wes
True enough, but there sure were times I wished that old T34 had a few more ponies under her hood!Agreed.
There can be a direct comparison between combat aircraft engines and "hotrod" engines, because no one ever worried about WEP or RoC in their 172...
True enough, but there sure were times I wished that old T34 had a few more ponies under her hood!
Those guys didn't have the energy to burn that you superjocks have. Once the surly bonds of earth were loosed, dancing the sky on laughter silvered wings bled off energy faster than it could be replenished. Adrenalated and imbued with "speed is life", a low time combat pilot would likely find it counter intuitive to deliberately sacrifice some in the middle of a furball. A lesson that the overweight, underpowered T34 taught me. It's a blast to fly, but hemorrhages energy like a slashed carotid in aerobatics. There's an STC to bolt a 285 HP IO520 on in place of the stock 225 HP O470, and that's what the airshow performer T34s have. Those extra 60 ponies are something to salivate over.I haven't flown a T34 but have heard they are fun!
Previously you made a comment on about rev response in a fighter wasn't as critical. The thing I'm leery of is how much throttle jockeying actually went on.
SR6, thanks for the lucid clarification of prop/engine behavior in dynamic energy situations. In discussing this I tend to assume some things are self evident, and fail to explain in sufficient detail.If the pilot is bounced while in economical cruise all bets are off. however getting that 400lb prop to rev up from 1000rpm to 1500rpm (assuming a 2:1 reduction gear) is a bigger problem than the rotating/reciprocating masses inside the engine.
Those guys didn't have the energy to burn that you superjocks have. Once the surly bonds of earth were loosed, dancing the sky on laughter silvered wings bled off energy faster than it could be replenished. Adrenalated and imbued with "speed is life", a low time combat pilot would likely find it counter intuitive to deliberately sacrifice some in the middle of a furball. A lesson that the overweight, underpowered T34 taught me. It's a blast to fly, but hemorrhages energy like a slashed carotid in aerobatics. There's an STC to bolt a 285 HP IO520 on in place of the stock 225 HP O470, and that's what the airshow performer T34s have. Those extra 60 ponies are something to salivate over.
Cheers,
Wes
In the case of the surprise bounce, the adrenalated young pilot's first response is likely to be "balls to the walls", bending throttle, prop, and mixture levers over their forward stops, while the engineers back at Alison and Pratt and Wright cringe at their drafting tables.
So what happens?
This is the big difference between modern and WWII fighters, the huge amount of excess power today's jets have. Quick recovery makes yielding a little energy to gain a tactical advantage a little less dangerous.Excess power allows you to make / regain energy faster (fighting an F16 this is very apparent).
BINGO! Chuck Yeager: "In fighter combat, the pilot with the most experience will win."The biggest shortfall those guys had in WW2 was, in my opinion, proper combat training. As the war went on things like Clobber College was introduced as well as combat experience flowing back into the fighter training units.
Everyone says the P38 was a complex difficult aircraft for a tyro pilot to handle in battle. I don't know the details, but I'm guessing this is one bird that required a little restraint in its throttle jockeying, a difficult thing for a low timer to handle in the scramble of a surprise bounce.In the case of a P-38 Lightning on a high altitude escort mission, there was a pretty fair chance there would be the sound of detonation, a bit of clanking, perhaps a connecting rod out the side or some other catastrophic failure as the fuel that had fallen out of suspension suddenly reached the engine.
=^(
This is the big difference between modern and WWII fighters, the huge amount of excess power today's jets have. Quick recovery makes yielding a little energy to gain a tactical advantage a little less dangerous.
BINGO! Chuck Yeager: "In fighter combat, the pilot with the most experience will win."
Everyone says the P38 was a complex difficult aircraft for a tyro pilot to handle in battle. I don't know the details, but I'm guessing this is one bird that required a little restraint in its throttle jockeying, a difficult thing for a low timer to handle in the scramble of a surprise bounce.
In a Lightning you're not likely to hear the detonation or the clanking of a failing engine over the wind and propeller noise and through the muffling effect of the turbocharger. You will certainly feel it in the form of vibration and asymmetric thrust.
Cheers,
Wes
If I were going to go out and do ACM in an RV or any other homebuilt, it would only be one in which I had personally cut every piece of metal, made every weld, and driven every rivet. And I would be wearing a chute I had personally jumped before and had personally packed under the supervision of the local skydive club's professional rigger.We were talking and he and a Eagle bud both had RV type planes and were regularly doing BFM.
Newbie alert.
What are: BFM
IP
ACM
RV?
Your patience is appreciated.
Except, I still keep hearing tailhookers calling it ACM.Swampyankee is completely correct. BFM is dogfighting's modern name.
Except, I still keep hearing tailhookers calling it ACM.
Cheers,
Wes
You guys just don't get it. You don't seem to understand decks and overheads, and ladders and bulkheads and port and starboard either.when you pass someone going in the opposite direction on a two lane road it's referred to as passing someone 180 out. Or 18 aspect. Except in the USN it's called zero aspect. Makes sense to me, said no one EVER!