The Basket
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,712
- Jun 27, 2007
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
There is a performance trial between the Gloster F.5/34 (which looks so much like a Zero), and the Hawk 75 and Spitfire Mk1 over in the Technical section.
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/at...iss-h.75-spitfire-gloster-f5-aileron-test.pdf
Interesting document.
Claidemore
Hi Koolkitty,
That 1480 HP are achieved both at sea level and at full throttle height is an indication that the early-war US rating system is used which assumes a power that is independend of altitude. You'd have to increase boost pressure at low altitude to actually achieve this.
With the typical boost regulators controlling to a constant boost pressure, the engine would actually lose some power below full throttle height.
>And also the 10,400 ft figure for the 1710-81's 1,480 hp was only during high level speed for "additional ram air" otherwise crit alt was ~7,500 ft. (the lower figure for climb, the higher figure for level flight)
I hadn't thought about the exact altitudes you gave, but you're of course correct that ram effect is important when comparing the fast P-51 to the slower P-40.
>But this info on power at low alt an overboost (cleared 60" max) for the P-40E/K would be very interesting to bring over to the P-40 vs 109 thread. (which has been languishing)
Indeed! But where did you find the information on 60" Hg? I'm afraid I can't find that bit at the moment ...