bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
the Polikarpov I-16 which the russians started the war with had one hellacous roll rate.
Roll rate
- Thread starter Francis marliere
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Interestingly enough the He-100 received an even higher VVS rating for aerilon effectiveness.
bobbysocks
Chief Master Sergeant
i would like to know what all criteria is covered under aileron effectiveness.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
So would I. Better yet, I would like to see actual He-100 flight test data that includes roll rate. Heinkel and RLM must have filed that information away somewhere.
Thanks for putting that table up Dave...It seems the only RLM data I have found relates to the He100 as it was being used as a chase plane at Reichlin for the jet aircraft flight testing. They have published the propeller efficiency curve and the speed and rate of climb at various altitudes plotted against the early jets.
A while back I got a hold of a TsAGI book circa 1941 about flight testing foreign aircraft unfortunately the He100 is not mentioned however, it may shed light on the testing criteria. It is written in Russian script so it is taking a while to sift through it. I used to have a Russian friend here but he has since moved on.
Computer modeling has the He100 rolling very similar to the P36/P-40. The computer model is validated against known roll values of a sampling of aircraft but I have found beyond 290-300 mph it does not accurate portray aileron stiffness due to q increasing. It of course is no substitute for real flight tests, it is just used for that "ball park" figure when no other data exists.
A while back I got a hold of a TsAGI book circa 1941 about flight testing foreign aircraft unfortunately the He100 is not mentioned however, it may shed light on the testing criteria. It is written in Russian script so it is taking a while to sift through it. I used to have a Russian friend here but he has since moved on.
Computer modeling has the He100 rolling very similar to the P36/P-40. The computer model is validated against known roll values of a sampling of aircraft but I have found beyond 290-300 mph it does not accurate portray aileron stiffness due to q increasing. It of course is no substitute for real flight tests, it is just used for that "ball park" figure when no other data exists.
I don't think the roll of 120 degrees a sec is that far off for the F4U, it may have been faster.
It may have reached peak roll velocity at a higher speed than what that test indicates.
There's a comparative between the Fw190 and F4U and they were said to roll the same.
Again, speed probably being the factor there.
Another big roller was the P-38J. (see mike williams site)
Shown to have rolled to about 90 degrees a second at 300IAS, but with hydraulics the P-38 rolled 90 degrees in 0.4 seconds.
This would give it a conservative roll rate of 180 degrees a second.
The bigger issue would be roll inertia. A heavier plane won't reverse roll as quickly as a lighter one, and may also encounter "mush" when reversing.
Its why some pilots would continue to roll in the same direction if their opponent chose to evade with a reversal, avoiding mush and following at the same angle.
Poster's Post...
Fine, thank you!
I won't be against a link to the original russain language version as well, if you don't mind...
Regards
on P-40 vs Spitfire roll, the Spit rolled better with 5lbs of force, while the P-40 rolled better beyond 10lbs at all speeds.
This would suggest that both throw (stick travel) and linkage have a lot to do with aileron effectiveness.
I'd imagine a Spit could be flown easily with one hand unless more extreme maneuvers were needed.
The P-40 test is found on Pearl's site.
On the topic of stick force of the P-40, there was a pull out test for a dive done at 90 degrees.
It required 80lbs of force to recover from the dive, resulting in a 4 G pull out.
The part i found interesting was the amount of time the pilot felt the full 80lbs.
It was charted over a 0.5 second period showing a spike to 80lbs, where basically the full amount of force would only be felt for a brief moment.
I'd imagine it would be like rowing a boat where initial pull is heavy, but would you really notice?
It wouldn't be the same as pulling 80lbs for half a second.
The reports address other issues concerning aileron effectiveness:
The elasticity felt when using the controls.
Rolls to the left and to the right were equal in velocity but rolls against torque required 10lbs more force.
Stick force at higher speeds was seen as beneficial because it gave the pilot a better indicator for aircraft limitations and
avoiding over G-ing the airframe.
This would suggest that both throw (stick travel) and linkage have a lot to do with aileron effectiveness.
I'd imagine a Spit could be flown easily with one hand unless more extreme maneuvers were needed.
The P-40 test is found on Pearl's site.
On the topic of stick force of the P-40, there was a pull out test for a dive done at 90 degrees.
It required 80lbs of force to recover from the dive, resulting in a 4 G pull out.
The part i found interesting was the amount of time the pilot felt the full 80lbs.
It was charted over a 0.5 second period showing a spike to 80lbs, where basically the full amount of force would only be felt for a brief moment.
I'd imagine it would be like rowing a boat where initial pull is heavy, but would you really notice?
It wouldn't be the same as pulling 80lbs for half a second.
The reports address other issues concerning aileron effectiveness:
The elasticity felt when using the controls.
Rolls to the left and to the right were equal in velocity but rolls against torque required 10lbs more force.
Stick force at higher speeds was seen as beneficial because it gave the pilot a better indicator for aircraft limitations and
avoiding over G-ing the airframe.
Last edited:
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Also from the Kurfurst site. I hope you read Russian better then I do. 
- Thread starter
- #30
Francis marliere
Airman
- 72
- Aug 9, 2004
Gentlemen,
thank you for your answers.
Francis
thank you for your answers.
Francis
- Thread starter
- #31
Francis marliere
Airman
- 72
- Aug 9, 2004
Gentlemen,
I have gathered from several sources (post on various forum, NACA documents, books and websites, etc.) some data and I rated some aircrafts :
Fw 190, Spitfire VIII : best roll rate is 150°/s and more
Spitifre VC, Spitifire IX, F4U-1, P-40, G50, MC200, MC 202 : +/- 100°/s
Spitfire VA, P-38L : 90 °/s
F2A-3, F4F-3/4, F6F-3, P-38J, P-39, Ki.61, Boomerang, Hurricane I II, Spitfire I : 60-70°/s
P-38F, Mosquitto, Me 110 : 40°/s
What do you think about ?
Unfortunately, the data I found for some aircrafts is not homogeneous :
Bf 109 : I have 45, 80 or 110°/s ;
A6M2 : I found 55 and 80°/s at slow speed ;
A6M3 : my sources say 80, 90 or even 110°/s
P-51 : from source to source, best roll rate comes from 60 to 100 °/s via 75 and 90°/s
P-47, which is known as a great roller is rated 70, 80, 100 or 120 °/s
Would you mind help me picking the 'good' number please ?
Last, I wonder about the best roll rate of biplane fighters such as Gladiator or CR42. Good or bad ? I know tey had very low WL but a good roller is not always a good roller.
Once again, thank you very much for your help.
Francis
I have gathered from several sources (post on various forum, NACA documents, books and websites, etc.) some data and I rated some aircrafts :
Fw 190, Spitfire VIII : best roll rate is 150°/s and more
Spitifre VC, Spitifire IX, F4U-1, P-40, G50, MC200, MC 202 : +/- 100°/s
Spitfire VA, P-38L : 90 °/s
F2A-3, F4F-3/4, F6F-3, P-38J, P-39, Ki.61, Boomerang, Hurricane I II, Spitfire I : 60-70°/s
P-38F, Mosquitto, Me 110 : 40°/s
What do you think about ?
Unfortunately, the data I found for some aircrafts is not homogeneous :
Bf 109 : I have 45, 80 or 110°/s ;
A6M2 : I found 55 and 80°/s at slow speed ;
A6M3 : my sources say 80, 90 or even 110°/s
P-51 : from source to source, best roll rate comes from 60 to 100 °/s via 75 and 90°/s
P-47, which is known as a great roller is rated 70, 80, 100 or 120 °/s
Would you mind help me picking the 'good' number please ?
Last, I wonder about the best roll rate of biplane fighters such as Gladiator or CR42. Good or bad ? I know tey had very low WL but a good roller is not always a good roller.
Once again, thank you very much for your help.
Francis
The data you have is of fairly limited in terms of comparisons as it stands because it is incomplete, we need to know at what speed the roll rate was measured since it varies dramatically between types at various speeds. In addition there is a big difference between and Bf 109E and an Me 109F.
There is a roll rate chart here.
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/naca868-rollchart.jpg
Of course all aircraft improved as the war progressed and I believe even FW 190 came with ailerons optimized for particular speeds.
- Thread starter
- #34
Francis marliere
Airman
- 72
- Aug 9, 2004
Hello Siegfried
Thanks for your post. However, I already know this document. I know that roll rate changes with speed, but I want to keep things simple and only take the best roll rate of the planes. It would be great to have the roll rate at different speed but I fera that the data is impossible to find for many planes.
Best,
Francis
Thanks for your post. However, I already know this document. I know that roll rate changes with speed, but I want to keep things simple and only take the best roll rate of the planes. It would be great to have the roll rate at different speed but I fera that the data is impossible to find for many planes.
Best,
Francis
GregP
Major
The roll rate changes with speed so it decreases from the best rate at 180 - 250 mph down to 15° to 50° per second at 440 mph+. At 500 mph, most WWII planes cannot roll much at all.
davebender
1st Lieutenant
That's hardly surprising since it's 100+ mph faster then most WWII aircraft could achieve in level flight.
GregP
Major
90% of all WWIII fighter roll rates start slow, build to a peak roll rate at 180 - 250 mph (not knots) ans taper off to 10° to 50° per second or less at 480+ mph. The 50° is maybe for the Fw 190's best rolling. The rest are under 30° per second at 480+ moh and it decreases with speed until comrpessibility ... then they just dive into the ground, as very many did, American, Grman, British, Italian, and Japanese.
Nobody had 500+ mph figured out until the Me 262, and it was placarded at 540 mph ... and STILL is when they fly one. If the pilots fly faster, and the CAN with modern engines, they become test pilots ... in an airframe that usually hits the ground if it goes faster.
Nobody had 500+ mph figured out until the Me 262, and it was placarded at 540 mph ... and STILL is when they fly one. If the pilots fly faster, and the CAN with modern engines, they become test pilots ... in an airframe that usually hits the ground if it goes faster.
Last edited:
GregP
Major
Some did. like the P-51.
Not many people realize it, but the P-51 had three aileron stops, at something like 9°, 11°, and 15°. the maximum roll rate depends on which stop your ailerons have.
At the Planes of Fame Museum, I believe "Wee Willy" is set to the middle stop, and I'm not too sure about "Spam Can," but will find out this weekend.
Anyway, the P-51 generally rolled better up until about 350 mph or so, and that was unusual in WWII fighters ... most were slowing down at that speed.
The Zero was very bad at rolling, but was almost unbeatable at pitch rate ... at lower speeds.
Not many people realize it, but the P-51 had three aileron stops, at something like 9°, 11°, and 15°. the maximum roll rate depends on which stop your ailerons have.
At the Planes of Fame Museum, I believe "Wee Willy" is set to the middle stop, and I'm not too sure about "Spam Can," but will find out this weekend.
Anyway, the P-51 generally rolled better up until about 350 mph or so, and that was unusual in WWII fighters ... most were slowing down at that speed.
The Zero was very bad at rolling, but was almost unbeatable at pitch rate ... at lower speeds.
