Jump to content

Mitthrawnuruodo

Members
  • Content Count

    1399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

716 Excellent

About Mitthrawnuruodo

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2434 profile views
  1. Torque is trivial to model. If you know the engine power and RPM, you know the torque. I very much doubt that it is incorrect unless it has been intentionally reduced. I suspect that aerodynamic characteristics like slipstream, asymmetric propeller thrust, and airfoil stall and post-stall behaviour are the real challenge..
  2. This anecdote conflicts with data from several studies, which all indicate a much smaller crater diameter. Take it with a grain of salt. Edit: Ninja'd
  3. The manual says that two thousand rpm is needed for full hydraulic pressure. There's also a hydraulic pressure accumulator and even an optional hand pump (plus a vast number of rather complicated fittings), so the conditions aren't necessarily the same for every engine start. Seems that the results could vary.
  4. It's not an "argument" - I'm simply describing the model chosen by the developers. See the official explanation here.
  5. Nothing wrong with videos. However, like any self-published work, they should be examined carefully, especially if the author isn't an established expert in a relevant field. As with forum posts, blogs, and enthusiast websites, there is zero oversight. Traditional books aren't infallible either, but ideally someone reviews them before deciding that publication is worth the risk.
  6. That's quite similar to the experience in many real aircraft. Some gauges are so inaccurate that they're little more than a warning of unusually high or unusually low parameters. Even today, pilots of small planes typically train to never rely on gauges for fuel quantities. Exact measurements aren't necessarily more realistic.
  7. It is intended to vary. The pilot physiology model takes into account backrest angle. Pilots in aircraft with reclined seats benefit slightly from reduced acceleration along the heart-head axis.
  8. Yes - the SB 1000/410 looks like the ultimate bomb carried by the 410. At 80% explosive filling by weight, it should have a very nice blast! Nick Beale's website lists Me 410s of KG 51 carrying SB 1000/410 bombs in a May 1944 raid over Bristol , confirming that it was deployed at least once (if accurate). He cites a few books, but unfortunately I don't have them.
  9. That's true. My intention was to say that external mounting is a possible explanation when sources don't specify that a bomb was carried internally (although it seems unlikely in this case). I wouldn't expect these variants modeled in the game. I'm going to keep looking for info about the SC 1000 over Britain.
  10. @=FB=VikS Here are some images and a description of the SB 1000/410 from a 1944 civil defence pamphlet: "The latest addition to the range is a Parachute Bomb, consisting of a cylinder of sheet steel ⅛ in. thick, and oval in cross-section, 2 ft. 7 in. across at the widest and 1 ft. 4½ in. at the narrowest part. The straight sides are 4 ft. long, and in front is a tapered portion terminating in a flat nose and extending overall length to about 6 ft. A square sheet metal box 1 ft. 4 in. wide and 7 in. deep, which has a four-piece canvas cover, which contains the parachute
  11. If you start in Spain, you have to survive until the end of the war and through the first two years of the next war to outlive the I-16.
  12. Induced drag depends on span loading, giving most of the thrust/power required in a best rate sustained turn using the basic lift/drag model. Di = q S CDi = q S CL^2 / (pi AR e) = q S [n W / (q S)]^2 / (pi e b^2 / S) = n^2 / (pi e q) (W / b)^2
  13. It takes 40 seconds to cycle the flaps on the Bf 109 in Il-2 GB, which is close to the time required in the video. I'm not sure what it's supposed to prove. One could argue that we should have anthropomorphic controls that prevent inputs requiring more than two hands, but that's not specific to the 109.
  14. Yes, it is a strange way to write it. Typically I only see the "^-1" notation in certain scientific literature. Don't recall ever seeing it in the case of km/h.
×
×
  • Create New...