Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[Crumpp]

I still don't understand what you are trying to prove.

Not sure you understand much of the science at all. I certainly don't like the attitude or implication I have something to prove or a vested interest in the outcome.

The math is what it is.....

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Not sure you understand much of the science at all. I certainly don't like the attitude or implication I have something to prove or a vested interest in the outcome.

The math is what it is.....

I don't know if your trying to prove that the 109 had a better sustained turn or straight line speed and don't see how the diagram helps either case.

In short I don't see how it proves anything.

[camber]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Not sure you understand much of the science at all. I certainly don't like the attitude or implication I have something to prove or a vested interest in the outcome.

The math is what it is.....

math is math, and physics is physics.

But coding useful models is a different animal. Part of my job is coding physical process simulations. Providing you have implemented the correct maths, your output depends on the physical constants you choose as appropriate.

Perhaps if you listed the constant values you used for the Spit and 109 we could evaluate your graph a little better. The math equations would be good too.

camber