Quote:
Im not good at maths at all, so how is that working? Acceleration is proportional to excess power, or exponential?
Im asking this because something is fishy with the acceleration of some aircraft, primarily the La-5FN. Compared to La-5F, it has ~12% more powerful engine, slightly lower weight, and about the same drag. But acceleration is far-far better. So either the La-5F is porked, or the La-5FN is an UFO in this regard. I suspect the latter. Because if we take the factors above into account, I think it should have only about 15-20% better acceleration, for example 270 to 500 should take about 44-48 seconds, not 36.
As far as I know VK-105 Yaks all have very good FM, so LaGG-3 S66 is also fishy, because its slightly better than even the Yak-1b. I doubt that its OK.
Correct me if Im wrong.
|
First thing you have to recognize is that my test results have to be expressed as whole seconds; I use the track time shown in the lower right hand corner of the screen, and stop the track at every listed interval (270-350, 350 to 370 and every 10kph after that). While I try to average the interval times of three or most often, four runs, I also note the altitude changes and 'weight' the average accordingly.
Since no one can fly absolutely level acceleration courses in cockpit and in real time (I'm trying to duplicate what the average player could do), no two 'runs' are the same, especially if there is a wide separation between the variometer and the altimeter (the artificial horizon can also be a factor); you can only focus on one thing at a time, and an exceptionally level run will have variations of 'only' 15-20 meters (that's thirty to sixty five feet) over the course of the full run. Many times, I've had changes in altitude of 30 meters or more (up or down in almost even proportion) in an interval lasting less than 4 seconds.
What I have noticed is that some aircraft will literally 'blast' through the early intervals at almost exactly the same times even when there are rather large climbs or losses of altitude (and even if they are considered to be on the 'draggy' side), and some others are affected to varying degrees by varying altitude; I believe that the aircraft that generally have powerful engines tend to do the 'blasting', while the ones with lower power to weight ratios tend to require a very level flight in order to achieve their best times.
Over the total course, aircraft with the weaker engines tend to slow more quickly as drag (which increases exponentially with speed) exerts its influence, even when they are very clean aerodynamically. The Zero series is a good example of this; initially, the engine is able to overcome the inertia of flying at 270kph and pick up speed quickly because the aircraft is so light compared to its fairly large size/wing area, but as drag increases, its acceleration bogs down rather quickly.
Heavier (or compact, in the case of the FW 190A series) but still aerodynamically clean aircraft like the Mustang with a good power to weight ratio will not only 'blast' through the early stages, but the kinetic energy of their greater weight carries them through those sudden little climbs or periods where the trim is out of whack (skids and sideslips) with less of a penalty. At the far ends of a run, I find that staying level and in good trim becomes more critical with the 'heavies'.
If the aircraft is both heavy and underpowered...
As for the 'proportional' aspect of the La-5F vs the La-5FN, my understanding is that the FN had an extra 200 hp at full boost over the F, and that makes it significantly 'quicker'
when full boost is applied, a maximum of two minutes in RL, if I remember correctly. On a 3360kg (7400 lb) aircraft, that will be felt. I would expect that as production progressed, there would have been incremental improvements in finish and quality as well, and there was still room for the La-7 with essentially the same powerplant as the La-5FN to 'clean up' and demonstrate even better performance.
As for the LaGG, remember that this was the final version of the aircraft that had been improved quite a bit over the early war versions, and the game assumes it to be in ideal condition, not at the normal RL condition that it apparently came to the Front in. With the same engine & a bit more weight than the Yak-1b, it should be fairly close.
cheers
horseback