Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
When I was 16, myself and many of my friends had Yamaha mopeds. 50cc and all "new" as in less than a year old. The difference from fastest to slowest was 5MPH which is 10%. Yamaha did a race series where they provided the bikes and invited riders competed with riders just being given the keys. Despite all bikes being run on a dyno to be nominally the same output, that is only peak output on one day, come race day the difference between fastest and slowest bike was over a second per lap. On an aircraft a difference of 3MPH or 50 ft/min is no difference at all, a week or two later the difference could be reversed.Not all airplanes are the same. Two On an aircraft a difference of a/c off the assembly line will have different performances. They all must be within a certain performance tolerance, of say +/-5%. P-39 Expert, I will let you do the math.
What I meant was in a week or two, one plane gets cleaned, has an overhaul, new paint job, filled all the tanks etc etc etc. 3MPH is less than 1%Reversed? Does that chang the meaning?
Let's see: A man a plan a canal panama.
Go ahead and reverse it!
How about: racecar?
See post #881 waaaaaaay back in the thread...I think all would be clear if we had a colour picture of a p-39 in flight.
Wait, are you actually trying to contradict and then instruct a real pilot with more hours behind the stick than Carter's got pills?Absolutely nothing wrong with a symmetrical airfoil. The A6M2 will be gasping for air just like the P-39K at 27000'. Sure it has a much lower wing loading, and will be more maneuverable at 27000' just like it is at 10000'. But it won't climb any better and it sure won't dive any better.
You miss the point, this is an ideas supermarket thread, "I don't buy it" is some sort of technical argument, I have two pounds, three shillings and four penny three farthings, so I am unsure of what technical information I can take from a discussion.Wait, are you actually trying to contradict and then instruct a real pilot with more hours behind the stick than Carter's got pills?
You know, if X XBe02Drvr orFLYBOYJ or GregP or BiffF15 or DerAdlerIstGelandet just to name five (5) guys that did or do fly ACTUAL airplanes, work in the industry and have backed up everything they've told you with actual data... I'd listen.
You've been trying to contradict I Ivan1GFP andnuuumannn as well, even though they too have shown you facts and figures to illuminate the error of your ways.
I now believe that you're just a time wasting troll with no desire to learn and even when you're wrong you won't admit it, if others want to continue a discourse (to no useful end) that's fine. Harsh words perhaps but I'll risk a "vacation" for speaking my mind on this, I mean, did you not learn anything whendrgondog took you to task last year on this subject?
But please, go ahead an argue thy book knowledge with fellows that are in the industry, there's no popcorn shortage at my house.
I'm sure glad I went to Great Britain after the currency change-overYou miss the point, this is an ideas supermarket thread, "I don't buy it" is some sort of technical argument, I have two pounds, three shillings and four penny three farthings, so I am unsure of what technical information I can take from a discussion.
Your wish is my command.
View attachment 601126
It is in flight, fleeing the water, a task at which it seems moderately successful, much like it's success as an interceptor.
I take it you do know the longest running joke on this forum? It is not post 881.See post #881 waaaaaaay back in the thread...
I just remember the old currency but my experience of "farthings" was we had them all over the place and they were worthless. There is something magnificently comic about it all, and I didn't even venture into "guineas".I'm sure glad I went to Great Britain after the currency change-over
You need to use THP not BHP. During climb, I got a prop eff of 0.81, which drops 1150 BHP to 931.5 THP.Let's look at the P-39C. At 10,000 feet, the rate of climb is 3,720 fpm. An Allison V-1710-35 makes 1,150 hp at 12,000 feet and the airplane is at a weight of 6,689 lbs. It just so happens we have data for 10,000 feet. Rate of climb is 3,720 fpm. Calculating backwards, the power required for level flight at that altitude is 396 hp. Personally, I'd expect the power required for level flight to go up as the altitude goes up becasue there is less air density, so the wing has to "work harder." By work harder, I mean a slightly higher angle of attack, and that creates more induced drag, requiring more power.