Paddle blade P-47 and P-38J (1 Viewer)

...Limited drive space!!!

Bet ya five bucks the entire site is on a 500GIG drive or less; 349 at my local Comp USA .

Jon, it wasn't that long ago when hard drive space was a very real problem for servers. Can you now see why the characteristic you are asserting was never implemented in the past, and as a carryover, does not exist now?

Can you guys take this to PMs please? This has gotten really off-topic.

You got to be kidding...
Try this... Create a .pdf that says JJG sucks post the attachment to the fourm, as a link or a download.
Sign out and view your post, see that it is there, but do not download it.
Close WW2aircraft.net on your computer.
Deleate from your computer the JJG sucks .pdf.
Clean out your 'recycle' bin.
Reboot your computer.
Return to your JJG sucks post, and download the JJG sucks .pdf.
Let me know how it goes.

Sorry evangilder, Jank... No more from me on this.

Jank...

Though the paddle helped the '47 a great deal, it still could not climb with the '38 through most of their flight envelopes, as shown in the previous posts, especially below 25K. I still would rather a '47, as a sim (... I forgot to put the 'sim' in) pilot. As a sim (... that would be twice) commander, I need to know the roll you envision then I could (... so I decided to change this as well, to avoid yet another 'edit') decide.

FLYBOYJ said:

YEP!!!!

Folks - been reading this thread and observing interesting discussion, but I'm gonna throw my 2 cents in here...going to get 7 minutes to 20,000 feet at best rate of climb (Vx) - period. .......

Click to expand...

Just to make sure we have the correct $ .02, VX is best ANGLE of climb - best Rate of climb is Vy.


From WMAXT's post:

...This is true, the POH is designed to be achiveable by any aircraft on the line with an average pilot. BTW thats why I added the note on the graph it is almost identicle to the POH for the P-38J/L in military power. Remember to, the POH does not include WEP numbers probably because they can vary so much.


//Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ
If tests were done at places like Wright Patterson that got different data, someone felt it wasn't significant enough to place in the -1.....

Actualy, I belive, in many cases it was factored in to create the average for the POH. Something else that must be considered is air quality - density, moisture content ect. the chart above being performed by Lockheed will be on the west coast where ideal flying conditions exist. Many of the AAF tests were at Eglin Field where conditions vary wildly and humiditity is on the average higher than other locations. With the P-38 or other turbocharged aircraft this can affect turbo speeds and effectiveness greatly. // Endquote.

Shouldn't make a difference where tests are done. The chart posted doesn't take into account atmosphere, but shows altitude. This will be Density Altitude. The pilots should be calulating Density altitude and applying the charts as appropriate.

Cheers
Bruce.

the lancaster kicks ass said:

what's your point? does the spit's climb rate suddenly become void because the P-38's heavier? if the P-38 was the same weight as the spit would she climb the same? if the Queen had balls would she be the King?

Click to expand...

To compare the performance fairly, you'd have to look at what the maximum range of the Spitfire is with a max allowable fuel load...and then load the '38 with enough fuel to give it comparable range. Now I'd need to dig out some source material, but I'd speculate that a '38 L can go further on internal fuel (no 310 gallon drop tanks) than a Spit can with a full fuel load. Heck, the '38 might go about as far on the mains (not even using the wing leading edge tanks). I need to dig out Bodies book again.

IdahoRenegade said:

To compare the performance fairly, you'd have to look at what the maximum range of the Spitfire is with a max allowable fuel load...and then load the '38 with enough fuel to give it comparable range. Now I'd need to dig out some source material, but I'd speculate that a '38 L can go further on internal fuel (no 310 gallon drop tanks) than a Spit can with a full fuel load. Heck, the '38 might go about as far on the mains (not even using the wing leading edge tanks). I need to dig out Bodies book again.

Click to expand...

You do realize that he wrote that post 10 years ago?