Dora stall speed

I do not agree, in the Dora everything changes compared to the previous series of 190, size, weight, center of gravity, etc ..., you can not take the parameters of one as valid for the other.

 

If you want to support your thesis you have to bring documentation referring exclusively to Dora, the rest in the context of the speech is irrelevant.

 

:thumbup:

The weight hardly changed compared to the Fw190G, and the difference in CG will not have an effect on the turn performance. The only factors that would effect turn performance are weight, lift, drag & thrust, and it all went toward the better with the Dora except for weight which pretty much remained the same +- 100 kg.

Yeah, but you're still talking about a different subtype and drawing comparisons from that. And that is not applicable.

Mods, how about moving this thread to Chit-Chat? Because this all is just idle talk and nothing more.

The weight hardly changed compared to the Fw190G, and the difference in CG will not have an effect on the turn performance. The only factors that would effect turn performance are weight, lift, drag & thrust, and it all went toward the better with the Dora except for weight which pretty much remained the same +- 100 kg.

Continue to support your thesis by bringing the data of a different airplane than the Dora, I do not care if the 190G is similar, it is not the Dora and you can not, in fact, support your thesis on the basis of similar data, it takes those of the airplane in question.

When you bring data related to the Dora that will prove that that ED is wrong I will give you reason, but until then your considerations do not have an objective value but are only subjective.

:thumbup:

Yeah, but you're still talking about a different subtype and drawing comparisons from that. And that is not applicable.

 

Mods, how about moving this thread to Chit-Chat? Because this all is just idle talk and nothing more.

They are definitely in agreement :thumbup:

Continue to support your thesis by bringing the data of a different airplane than the Dora, I do not care if the 190G is similar, it is not the Dora and you can not, in fact, support your thesis on the basis of similar data, it takes those of the airplane in question.

 

When you bring data related to the Dora that will prove that that ED is wrong I will give you reason, but until then your considerations do not have an objective value but are only subjective.

 

:thumbup:

I would've liked it if you used abit more of your logical thinking on this, but I guess that's asking too much.

Comparison between the Dora & Anton by Lt. Heinz Ossenkop, JG 26:

"Takeoff and climb were rather better than the A-8. It was possible to make tighter turns before the onset of flow seperation. In a dive, the D-9 was far superior to the A-8 with its drag producing radial engine."

Vladimir Ulyich Lenin wrote in on of his letters: "Never use fighter pilots opinion without careful comparison with accurate instrumental results!"

Then I do not see the logic in your statements: earlier you stated that A and D have EXACTLY THE SAME WINGS. Now you fortified your position with an opinion that D wing is much better than A, so better that it can be discovered without any instrument...

What? No, the statement was to show that the Dora was considered a better turning aircraft than the Anton, not that "it had a better wing". The Dora performed better in the turn due to more thrust and a less draggy airframe, not because it gained lift, except maybe a little from the occlusion of the outboard cannons on the Anton. (NACA WT tests show a marked decrease in CL over areas of a wing where the LE has gunports for example)

Said it was better turning in some instances didnt it? Even you quote shows that.

It was possible to make tighter turns before the onset of flow seperation.

The pilot knows flow seperation is occuring only through buffeting, which means stall is imminent. If the Anton turned better than the D-9 after flow seperation, that would be quite the feature wouldnt it? :megalol:

Hummingbird,

Do we really have to go through this on every model? If is not the AJS-37, is the Mirage. Not the Mirage the SU-27 and on and on. Just have fun man, you are overthinking this.

The YouTube vids are ok at times, but then we have to decide what kind of pilot is flying in these YouTube vids, not to offend anyone,

Not really a problem for me SITh... I always pick the same pilot:

His videos give a lot of feedback on the FDM, all aspects, from lift coef, to drag, ground effect, propwash/p-factor/gyro effects.... only lacking the sophisticated compressibility effects...

BTW: When does ED come up with one of these Cubs ?

Hummingbird,

Do we really have to go through this on every model? If is not the AJS-37, is the Mirage. Not the Mirage the SU-27 and on and on. Just have fun man, you are overthinking this.

Yes, he did the same thing in the section dedicated to 109 then came into this bringing the same doubts on the FM, and on the one hand there is also, but the speech is still the same, must bring Dora documentation that certifies that that asserts, I do not think ED is not willing to change something when supported in a valid and irrefutable way.

:thumbup:

BTW: When does ED come up with one of these Cubs ?

+1 , it was always my favorite airplane on which I have flown in real time many times :thumbup:

Why not, if the Anton is more stable through buffeting? Is that not reasonable?

Well, at least to me it is not. But I am not sure what more stable through buffeting is supposed to mean anyway. The aoa zone of flow seperation is dependent on airfoil profile. We all agree Anton and Doras have the same 230 type profile, which has a rather quick onset of flow seperation. So respectively we are talking maybe a perceivable 5% envelope here, which is hard to control and compare.

So which other factors do we wanna look at? Body lift? Form drag? Weight compared to a coexisting A type? Thrust? If anything the Dora should be buffeting rather stable then. ;)

The pilots werent lying and the numbers arent lying either, a Dora should handle better in all regimes than an A type. Well, maybe it rolls a tad worse due to the inline engine, but grass doesnt grow silently either.

I guess we need a flyable Anton to compare.... :)

Hummingbird,

Do we really have to go through this on every model? If is not the AJS-37, is the Mirage. Not the Mirage the SU-27 and on and on. Just have fun man, you are overthinking this.

Erm.. are you saying I've been wrong in my concerns? AFAIK I've only ever listed actual inconsistencies, I've never been "overthinking" anything. Remember HB themselves confirmed the issues with the AJS-37, and RAZBAM the ones with the Mirage where I also did extensive testing to help improve the FM. Had I not reported these then it's quite likely they would still be present. So if anything all my "overthinking" is doing is making sure the FM is as close to real thing as possible.

As a result isn't it a bit harsh if I need to be criticised for simply trying to provide as much and as accurate feedback that I can? esp. when it's all constructive and in the hopes of improving upon the product.

Remember this is a simulator, thus any percieved inaccuracies should be most welcome to the devs, esp. if they can be backed up with documentation pertaining to the real aircraft.

I cant imagine that is right then, I cant imagine every aircraft handles every situation the same. That some feel less comfortable in a buffet than other, I mean you get that in DCS with different aircraft, least I do. But anyways... now we have two virtual pilots with differing opinions, weird huh...

 

What was this thread about again? :)

The Fw190D & A8 were also flight tested against each other, it's mentioned in Dietmar Hermann's book on the Dora. The tests concluded Dora was much superior in turn performance compared to the A8.

But this was brought up before, and Yo-Yo addressed all concerns. I am not sure that you brought anything new to the table...

 

By the way, I merged the threads...

I don't believe it was ever addressed, Yo Yo simply dismissed the documentation we provided IIRC.