He-162 Salamander

[Soren]

The He-162 was very sensitive to control imput, being almost overly agile according to its pilots, so it certainly was no rookies a/c. At slow speeds stalls could end in viscous spins, esp. if you didn't know what to do to get out of it, something Brown found no difficulty achieving though. The problem was that all previous methods of getting out of a spin in piston engined a/c didn't apply to the He-162.

[kool kitty89]

OOPS... (double post)

[kool kitty89]

I don't think SFC for the 003 engine changed too much at altititude, though it still may have been significant (maby 10%) but this is just speculation. I have read that it had much better altitude performance than the 004B.

Thanks for the info on the P-51's wings, Ibelieve the P-63 had similar characteristics, though in later models it had a new wing with larger area and improoved laminar flow (255 ft2 for the P-63E and XP-63D compared to 248 ft2 on the P-63A/C)

And "expert" being a realative term...


The P-80A wouldn't be particularly good in a turning fight either depending on fuel load. Plus ealy models' engines only put out 3850 lbf. A vampire Mk.I had faily low wing loading but inless it was a late model with a 3,100 lbf goblin II acceleration would be even worse.with a thrust/weight of <.27 with 2,700 lbf Goblin I.

[kool kitty89]

Also the fuel consumption for the 003E may have been better than the 1.4 kg/kp*hr for the 003A. (this figure is for sea level iirc)

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

The problem was that all previous methods of getting out of a spin in piston engined a/c didn't apply to the He-162.

What was done differently? Here's the general "spin 101" training gouge.

I've spun jets and recipts, recovery was about the same.

P - Retard the throttle to idle. In most aircraft, power hampers the recovery.

A - Ailerons neutral. Many pilots will attempt to recover from the spin using the ailerons. This may actually make the problem worse.

R - Apply full opposite rudder. Apply rudder opposite the rotation of the spin. If you have trouble determining which way the airplane is spinning, look at your turn coordinator or turn needle. It will indicate the direction of rotation.

E - Apply forward elevator. Immediately after applying opposite rudder, apply a quick forward motion on the control yoke and hold anti-spin controls until the aircraft starts to recover.

D - Recover from the dive. Once you have completed the four previous steps, and the rotation stops, recover from the dive.

[Soren]

Hey FLYBOYJ, remember what would happen if you were aggressive with the rudder ? Apply full rudder in the He-162 and your playing a dangerous game.

Also the He-162 didn't suffer from the torque effects the piston engined fighters did, and thus this didn't affect recovery as much. (Hence why recipts have to cut power emmidiately)

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

Hey FLYBOYJ, remember what would happen if you were aggressive with the rudder ? Apply full rudder in the He-162 and your playing a dangerous game.

The key is "aggressive rudder" and I would think that would be more prevalent at high airspeeds. You would still use full rudder if in a spin.

Originally Posted by Soren

Also the He-162 didn't suffer from the torque effects the piston engined fighters did, and thus this didn't affect recovery as much. (Hence why recipts have to cut power emmidiately)

True but regardless of p factor, power will still induce the spin whether it comes from a propeller or turbine - in both cases reducing power is a key part of the equation of getting out of the spin.

[Soren]

We agree.

However the sensitive controls would make it abit more tricky. Brown notes the nasty spins, but he knew how to recover.

[FLYBOYJ]

I think Brown was an experienced enough pilot to know how aggressive to be with the controls of the 162, not slamming the rudders and knowing when to chop power in a spin so the aircraft doesn't start "wrapping up."

[kool kitty89]

I knew that acheiving full laminar flow over the P-51 was not practically possible on production P-51s, but did the P-51 actually use an airfoil altered from the original NACA laminar flow airfoil that was originally chosen?

Even if it was not a "true laminar flow airfoil" it would still have laminar-ish flow and the CL would still be realitively low, lower than the Hellcat (very high-lift), F4U, Fw-190 (medium-high lift, the 190 and Corsair actually using the same NACA airfoil), P-40, P-38 (medium lift as well), and the P-47 (although it also used a low-lift/low-drag airfoil iirc, albeit not a laminar flow type one)

[Soren]

The F4U Corsair's Cl suffered from the cooler placement on the leading edge and the gull wing though, so its Cl wasn't as high as the F6F & 190's.

[delcyros]

Originally Posted by Soren

The F4U Corsair's Cl suffered from the cooler placement on the leading edge and the gull wing though, so its Cl wasn't as high as the F6F & 190's.

Have You sources to proove this, Soren? Or is this a guess.

[Soren]

Yes I have sources, read NACA report nr. 829

The F4U's CL isn't much different from the -51's because of the cooler placement. The report also shows the effect the guns in the wings have.

[delcyros]

Originally Posted by Soren

Yes I have sources, read NACA report nr. 829

The F4U's CL isn't much different from the -51's because of the cooler placement. The report also shows the effect the guns in the wings have.

This report is a very important document. However, it does show some notable differences. The F-4U´s wing does provide a max. Cl. beeing generally higher than the P-51 until the wing is stalled. The P-51 wing does stall later as it appears. The Cl at angle of attack 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 deg is:

P-51:---.38---.66---.94----1.23---1.30
F-4U:---.88---1.19--1.34---1.40--completely stalled

..and thus suggesting a superior Cl over a wide range of angle´s of attack compared to the P-51.

[Soren]

Read the report again.

The F4U's wing stalls at 18 deg, while the P-51's stalls at 17.7 deg.