Jump to content

III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson

Members
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

42 Excellent

About III./JG7-MarkWilhelmsson

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. https://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/XP-51_Mustang The wing design was a great improvement over previous models but not necessarily because of laminar airflow.
  2. If you put a bar under a car with a fulcrum and use it as a lever, its highly unlikely you will lift the car. But if you put a jackscrew lift under it, you can almost lift the car by rotating the screw with your bare hand; it just takes a lot longer.
  3. We all know you fly a Lagg-3 with 23mm HE at 7-8K and nothing else. hahaha. As far as engines randomly breaking when being run above their stated limits I've seen it happen; albeit not on aircraft; I previously did some work for a machine shop that was running a 1/4 mile drag car, it was a 1992 Honda Civic. They were taking small 4-cylinder Honda motors completely rebuilt and running two turbos alongside other mods and making 1200hp at 12,000rpm. Sometimes it ran two or three races without issue; sometimes it spun a bearing, or threw a rod, or twisted the crank in twain halfway through the first race on a freshly built motor. When you are exceeding what the engine was originally designed to handle, you could get lucky and it runs great; or you could have one single plug burn out and have a piston start dragging because of zero detonation in the cylinder. Or have a small spot on a piston heat to melt and blow through. Or get some oil starvation because you were inverted or pulling Gs too long. Etc. I think the devs have done well with what they have to work with as far as simulating engine mechanics.
  4. I'm sure the stabilator and elevator were used in tandem. I think because it is changing the angle of incidence of the entire stabilizer by pushing or pulling on its trailing edge, there is no hinge moment as there is from a hinged control surface that is constantly trying to align itself with the airfoil in front of it.
  5. You may jest with me as much as you like; doesn't bother me one bit.
  6. Buy the book "JG7: The World's First Jet Fighter Unit 1944/1945" by Manfred Boehme. In the back it has a concordance of most sorties flown in 262s by this unit along with their kill claims and losses for each mission.
  7. I think it's simply hilarious that folks point a finger and make a comment in this manner because you disagree with how I characterized the Mustang. Referencing information that I've gleaned through research, plane versus plane the Mustang was not the greatest thing on earth in my opinion; don't like that? Just disagree and make a rebuttal; no need for snobby remarks. If I've sounded snobby, I've not meant to do so.
  8. Hell, in game I can't even defeat a Lagg unless I surprise them.
  9. I think it's highly unlikely that anyone is this forum is an actual expert, we all simply have opinions based on information that we gather.
  10. There is absolutely no way that the USAAF and RAF could have lost the air war with the numbers of men and equipment that they were putting up. It would be incredibly absurd to think so.
  11. Nobody is arguing that. What I AM saying is that folks are hyped about the P51 thinking it's the best thing around and that the allied troubles will disappear because it's some fantastic plane. It was fast at very high altitudes, could dive decently well, and had extremely long range, that's about it. How could they not coordinate? In real life engagements involving jets, the allies usually had 50+ fighters in the air for every German jet in the fight. JG7 would routinely take up 25-30 jets against formations of 1500+ bombers and 600+ escort fighters. I see the jet situation during the war kind of similar to the quarteback who decides to run the ball. He may get past a few, but usually he is overwhelmed by everyone who is coming from every direction trying to tackle him all at once.
  12. Using the Spit MK9 as a baseline for my comparison. Don't act dense.
  13. I'd love a code for BoBP for my daughter. She's 10 and learning quickly in the F4 now but I'd love to get her in a D9 or 262 with me!
  14. I believe it will be similar to the current Spit Mk9 but much faster in a straight line and dive albeit with worse climb, turn, and acceleration ability. Also will likely take more of a beating as it is a more stout airframe.
×
×
  • Create New...