Jump to content

30K Handling


Invisibull
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey Guys,

 

Just wondering if how the Jug handles at 30K and higher is anywhere close to release state.  Seems to me that the P-47's purpose, especially early on, was to dominate at high altitude against German fighters. That being the case, I simply can't imagine pilots spending hours on bomber escort missions in what, at this point in development, feels a lot like riding a piece of cork bobbing around in rough seas. 

 

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pmiceli said:

Any airplane flying above 30K handles like crap. Everything is relative so the other guys have having an equally difficult time of it.

 

 Thx for your reply.  Mustang handles way better up there imo.   As I said above, I can't imagine a premier high alt plane being quite that unstable flying where it was designed to fly.   I get that the air is thinner and that I should expect things to be a bit more bouncy, and that's fine, but it's the degree of instability that leaves me questioning the FM in that regimen.  Thx again.

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, pmiceli said:

Any airplane flying above 30K handles like crap. Everything is relative so the other guys have having an equally difficult time of it.

 

 

Not quite, I'd say. Other DCS warbirds, although they indeed become much less responsive as expected, they seem to retain most of their longitudinal, lateral and directional stability in my opinion. Thunderbolt, however, starts wobbling all over the place in pitch and yaw, especially with fuel in aux tank (which makes even trimming for level flight very difficult). So the question is, did lower IAS and high fuel quantity up there affect the handling of the real thing THAT much (I admit I don't remember test altitudes mentioned in that 1947 NACA report used by developers as a reference)?

 

@Invisibull - for the time being, just make sure to fly high with aux tank empty and fly fast. 


Edited by Art-J

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Art-J said:

 

@Invisibull - for the time being, just make sure to fly high with aux tank empty and fly fast. 

Hi Art, being doing both since Day 1. 

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Art-J said:

 

Not quite, I'd say. Other DCS warbirds, although they indeed become much less responsive as expected, they seem to retain most of their longitudinal, lateral and directional stability in my opinion. Thunderbolt, however, starts wobbling all over the place in pitch and yaw, especially with fuel in aux tank (which makes even trimming for level flight very difficult). So the question is, did lower IAS and high fuel quantity up there affect the handling of the real thing THAT much (I admit I don't remember test altitudes mentioned in that 1947 NACA report used by developers as a reference)?

 

@Invisibull - for the time being, just make sure to fly high with aux tank empty and fly fast. 

The P-47 was reported to have neutral stability characteristics in the lateral (pitch) axis. It also was reported to require constant attention to rudder trim or the aircraft could yaw violently if rudder control was poor. At altitude these characteristics will be amplified. 
 

Whether this is modeled correctly at present is an open question, but what you are describing does align with expectations. 

475th Fighter Group Discord https://discord.gg/xkKsApD

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading "Thunderbolt!: The P-47," Fighter Ace, Robert Johnson's autobiography, I'm more sure than ever that high altitude handling of the Jug is way off.  In his book, Johnson goes into detail about how the Jug flew when as high as Angels 35, and none of it squares with what we have right now.   


Edited by Invisibull
punctuation

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Invisibull said:

After reading "Thunderbolt!: The P-47," Fighter Ace, Robert Johnson's autobiography, I'm more sure than ever that high altitude handling of the Jug is way off.  In his book, Johnson goes into detail about how the Jug flew when as high as Angels 35, and none of it squares with what we have right now.   

Can you elaborate, can you put some examples.

What is exactly off ??


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi Grafspee,

 

In his book, Johnson (27 kill ACE) discusses in more than a few places how his P-47 handled at high altitude.  He specifically talks about how nothing rolls better and about how up there, he's able to maneuver sharply when it's required.  When I'm up at 30K, the Jug doesn't roll very well at all and seems to really struggle in the turn beyond what Johnson gives the sense of in his book. 

 

Then there's this:


 

Quote

 

K.   High Altitude Trials

       Several flights were made over 30,000 ft. and no objectionable characteristics were noticed. The airplane performs and handles very similar to the way it does at lower altitudes. Sufficient heat from the engine and heater keep the pilot comfortable.

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47-26167.html

 

This is obviously not the case with our Jug. Not yet anyway. 

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must test it by myself, but what i noticed that p-47 rolls better then 109, we cant expect that p-47 will win against fw190 in this regard.

Second thing, maybe P-47  fly exactly the same at high alt as at low alt, but you will have to take in to account that IAS  are very different.

At SL you can easily go past 400mph in shallow dive which gives you extreme aerobatics capabilities but above 30k those speeds are unavailable.  at Level flight you are looking at speeds 180-250mph which is good 100mph slower then at 7k ft for example.

P-47 maybe fly exactly the same at high alt but this not meant that you can do same things as at low alt.


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, grafspee said:

I must test it by myself, but what i noticed that p-47 rolls better then 109, we cant expect that p-47 will win against fw190 in this regard.

Second thing, maybe P-47  fly exactly the same at high alt as at low alt, but you will have to take in to account that IAS  are very different.

At SL you can easily go past 400mph in shallow dive which gives you extreme aerobatics capabilities but above 30k those speeds are unavailable.  at Level flight you are looking at speeds 180-250mph which is good 100mph slower then at 7k ft for example.

P-47 maybe fly exactly the same at high alt but this not meant that you can do same things as at low alt.

And you forgot to mention that even at the same IAS CLmax at low altitude is way more due to Mach number difference. So, the load factor available at low altitude and 9 km will be significantly different even at equal IAS.

  • Like 1

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think some one already said that but i will say it again.

Both sides play the same rules 🙂

18 minutes ago, Yo-Yo said:

And you forgot to mention that even at the same IAS CLmax at low altitude is way more due to Mach number difference. So, the load factor available at low altitude and 9 km will be significantly different even at equal IAS.

I noticed it when i tried to do loops in p-51 even when you get to 300 IAS at high alt, it is much harder to perform loop then at low alt.

If i had to choose which fighter pick up for high alt fight i would choose Spitfire, this thing fly like a champ at high alt. We just need Merlin70 engien for our spitfire 🙂


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Yo-Yo said:

And you forgot to mention that even at the same IAS CLmax at low altitude is way more due to Mach number difference. So, the load factor available at low altitude and 9 km will be significantly different even at equal IAS.

Hi Yo-Yo,  I'm definitely not trying to suggest that flight characteristics shouldn't change for the worse as altitude increases, because I know they do, no matter which air frame we're discussing.  What I'm arguing is that to my understanding, these characteristics, i.e., roll rate, handling in a turn, etc,  should not be degrading to the level they are in the current build  based on the flight testing data i've provided and anecdotal evidence (not as compelling I'd agree, but still worthy of examination).

 

Thx for your response.    

i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Invisibull said:

Hi Yo-Yo,  I'm definitely not trying to suggest that flight characteristics shouldn't change for the worse as altitude increases, because I know they do, no matter which air frame we're discussing.  What I'm arguing is that to my understanding, these characteristics, i.e., roll rate, handling in a turn, etc,  should not be degrading to the level they are in the current build  based on the flight testing data i've provided and anecdotal evidence (not as compelling I'd agree, but still worthy of examination).

 

Thx for your response.    

The roll rate is even better at altitude  for the same IAS, of course, as so called natural damping decreases with altitude. But handling in a turn is worsened - for any airplane, due to reasons we mentioned above.

  • Like 1

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Invisibull said:

Hi Yo-Yo,  I'm definitely not trying to suggest that flight characteristics shouldn't change for the worse as altitude increases, because I know they do, no matter which air frame we're discussing.  What I'm arguing is that to my understanding, these characteristics, i.e., roll rate, handling in a turn, etc,  should not be degrading to the level they are in the current build  based on the flight testing data i've provided and anecdotal evidence (not as compelling I'd agree, but still worthy of examination).

 

Thx for your response.    

At 30,000 feet, your best indicated airspeed is around 225, meaning, at best, you can pull 3-3.5 G. Its actually pretty simple math to see how much turn performance degrades at altitude

475th Fighter Group Discord https://discord.gg/xkKsApD

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pmiceli said:

At 30,000 feet, your best indicated airspeed is around 225, meaning, at best, you can pull 3-3.5 G. Its actually pretty simple math to see how much turn performance degrades at altitude

Nor very simple. As it was written before the result will be worse because of higher Mach corresponding the same IAS at high altitude. And, finally, the turn rate will be lower at same IAS and at the same load factor.

  • Like 1

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Yo-Yo said:

Nor very simple. As it was written before the result will be worse because of higher Mach corresponding the same IAS at high altitude. And, finally, the turn rate will be lower at same IAS and at the same load factor.

And i assume that p-51, spitfire,bf109 etc. handle higher Mach different. I mean that some planes loose less performance with increase Mach number then others. 

I9 9900KF @5.0, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, Thrustmaster Pendular Pedals, OLED 48" 120Hz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, grafspee said:

And i assume that p-51, spitfire,bf109 etc. handle higher Mach different. I mean that some planes loose less performance with increase Mach number then others. 

Yes, P-51 has a shelf at 0.5-0.55M, and Spitfire (as far as I remember) can have less steep CL slope.

  • Like 1

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Yo-Yo said:

Nor very simple. As it was written before the result will be worse because of higher Mach corresponding the same IAS at high altitude. And, finally, the turn rate will be lower at same IAS and at the same load factor.

You are quibbling about numbers. You are too wrapped up in yourself to see when someone is agreeing with you. Yes, a very precise determination of the performance loss is a complex calculation. However, the simple fact that IAS is what the plane “feels” easily demonstrates the large drop in performance at altitude.
 

Fly high, IAS lower, plane fly bad.

 

Happens in all of them.

 

”Coffin Corner” is an illustrative term for the effect that modern avionics present to the pilot in vivid graphics. Up at 51,000 feet the red line indicating the 1 G stall speed and the red line indicating critical Mach get very uncomfortably close together. Here is an idea of how it looks, although 35 knots isn’t all that tight unless its pretty bumpy.Coffin_Corner-1024x750.png

475th Fighter Group Discord https://discord.gg/xkKsApD

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...