Jump to content

Hawker Tempest turning performance


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Found this one at the ww2aircraftperformance website. I wonder if it can be extrapolated towards the lower speed regimes to come up with good Clmax estimate based on listed stall speeds?


tempest-fig3.png

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/rae1501.html

 

Not really.  As you can see, the range of the speeds does not go far enough down: the manual gives a wider range at the low end, but not low enough. Even here, it is not clear that the extrapolation should be a straight line at high AoA. So it is hard to reconcile the stated IAS stall speeds with the PECs.

 

1904370682_TempestPECTests.thumb.JPG.d2fa2832aaf387325b42ad1ac2351c01.JPG

1382213326_TempestPECmanual.thumb.JPG.36d7248410980014777e3004c4cb08da.JPG

 

Edited by unreasonable
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/21/2020 at 4:32 PM, Bremspropeller said:

Turning performance Tempest V vs Typhoon from 1943 (+7lbs boost available at this time).

 

Source:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/Tempest-V_Eng-47-1658-C.pdf

 

827432839_TempestTurnvsTyphoon.thumb.PNG.8a1a5c14c0292e0ca35c364823d09ac2.PNG

 

 

 

Two more things:

 

- asking @LukeFF: Where did you find that the Tempest only carried 150rpg? All my sources (well, those sighted so far) only give the capacity of 200rpg, but no additional information about combat loadouts. Would an additional, optional incresed 200rpg loadout make sense?

 

- paging all the others, too (certaily including @Talon_ ) : Would a +13lbs option make sense for the Tempest on the Normandy map, given that most (all?) Tempest units were supposed to go V-1 hunting? Can't find any evidence for or against the use of the +13lbs setting during that timeframe.

 

V-1 chasing performed using modified Sabre IIA engines at +11lbs 3700rpm on 150 grade fuel.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi folks,

 

Just been doing some research for another thread and came across this: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/sl-wade.html

 

Thought this extract was worth sharing as its a revealing statement from a member of the AFDU test department, note the Thunderbolt II is just another name for the P-47 ( D )

 

Turning Circles

In circumstances where the ability to turn quickly or tightly are infinitely variable, and where two aircraft are nearly the same, such as the Tempest V and Thunderbolt II, a great deal depends on the ability of the pilots. Speed must be taken into account if the results are going to be of any real value.

 

For example, if a Tempest dives on a Thunderbolt with an overtaking speed of only 50 mph, the Thunderbolt will easily be able to avoid the attack by turning, although at the same speed in the hands of equally competent pilots, the Tempest will outmanoeuvre the Thunderbolt. This advantage, however, is no by any means so apparent at high altitudes, due to the greater engine efficiency of the Thunderbolt above 25,000ft.

 

Similarly, where low-altitude and high-altitude fighters are compared any advantage shown by the former will be reduced as the high-altitude fighter gets nearer to its best operational altitude. After taking all these considerations into account, the position of the aircraft relative to each other will be seen from the diagram.

 

Once again, the Spitfire maintains top place, followed by the Mustang, Meteor, Tempest and Thunderbolt. Too much regard to this order should not be paid, particularly by the individual who will angrily recall the occasion when he out-turned a Meteor when flying his Tempest. This sort of thing is inevitable, but we can only repeat that where the circumstances are common to both aircraft, these positions are not far wrong.

 

First prize to the Spitfire XIV.

Edited by Aurora_Stealth
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is also the evaluation of the Tempest Mk II with the Centaurus engine that says the plane retained the maneuverability of the Mk V, both with similar turning circles, but then proceeds to say it always out turns the P-47D. But once again there is no information on the altitude and power settings used by the planes.


 

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

And there is also this test I uploaded earlier, but I'll post it again for the sake of it, where it says the Tempest ran rings around the P-47, but was slightly less maneuverable than the Mustang, I think this one is the most convincing, as it seems the one that makes the most sense considering  the size of the Tempest. 

 

 

Source: This book https://b-ok.lat/book/755164/d84c99?dsource=recommend&regionChanged=&redirect=200333741 

 

 

 

Screenshot (2505).png

Edited by -332FG-Razor_
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ran Rings around = Larger Turning Circle.

Or is it one of those things were Americans are "challenged" when it comes to Communicating clearly because they are completely oblivious to the fact that many american Idioms are idiotic to anyone not American?

 

https://i1.wp.com/bp2.blogger.com/_IUSaTgWqqUA/Rt9Z9CohteI/AAAAAAAAAsw/zEMBPI9JzzA/s400/careless.jpg

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Ran Rings around = Larger Turning Circle.

Or is it one of those things were Americans are "challenged" when it comes to Communicating clearly because they are completely oblivious to the fact that many american Idioms are idiotic to anyone not American?

 

https://i1.wp.com/bp2.blogger.com/_IUSaTgWqqUA/Rt9Z9CohteI/AAAAAAAAAsw/zEMBPI9JzzA/s400/careless.jpg

I take ran rings around to mean it was better in the turn and was able to out pace it in the turn.

 

Ran rings around = faster

 

same way running circles around someone means you are better or faster.

 

 

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite confusing indeed, but my logic is that they mean it had a better turn circle than the P47, because if it's ''slightly less'' than a Mustang, it would make sense it would be better than the P-47, because the P-47 is known for not having the best turning ability .

 

 

2 minutes ago, Legioneod said:

I take ran rings around to mean it was better in the turn and was able to out pace it in the turn.

 

Ran rings around = faster

 

 

I think just the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Ran Rings around = Larger Turning Circle.

 

To run rings around someone is a British idiom, and it means to be better in every regard than something else. The source you refer to would, in this instance, mean that the Tempest was regarded as being the better aircraft in every capacity than the Thunderbolt, but slightly inferior to the Mustang.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

Ran Rings around = Larger Turning Circle.

Or is it one of those things were Americans are "challenged" when it comes to Communicating clearly because they are completely oblivious to the fact that many american Idioms are idiotic to anyone not American?

 

https://i1.wp.com/bp2.blogger.com/_IUSaTgWqqUA/Rt9Z9CohteI/AAAAAAAAAsw/zEMBPI9JzzA/s400/careless.jpg

 

“Ran rings around” is a very English term well understood by native English speakers Klaus.

In this context it refers to overall manoeuvrability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...