Best Piston Engined Fighter Ever...

[Lucky13]

Gentlemen,

I take it that you have seen this website?
WWII Aircraft Performance
FW 190 D-9 Flight Trials

[Soren]

That is a good site for Allied a/c performance, but most definitely not for German fighter performance - make your own conclusions from what you see on the site, don't base it on what is said on the site.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Soren

Lets do the calculations:´

Everything else being equal we'll assume a CLmax of around 1.4 for both a/c, however CLmax is going to increase slightly with AR. As to 'e' (Oswald efficiency factor, well the Ta-152H's should be higher for obvious reasons, the F4U featuring a gull wing.

The basic figures

Ta-152H CLmax: 1.45 (This is a low educated guess, it might be higher)
Ta-152H 'e': 0.8
F4U-4 CLmax: 1.40
F4U-4 'e': 0.77

Cd0 is unknown for both a/c so therefore total drag will be represented by the Cdi.

Height: Sea Level
Temperature: 15 C
Pressure: 101325 Pascals
Atmosphere: 1.164 Kg/m^3
Speed of sound: 349 m/s

Speed is going to be a high 600 km/h, the absolute for both a/c at SL.

Ta-152H-1 Aerodynamics at SL

Lift:

L = 1.45*23.3*.5*1.164*600^2 = 7078633.2

Drag:

Cdi = (1.45^2)/(pi*8.94*.80) = 0.0935747393
Cd0 = -Unknown-

D = 0.0935747393*23.3*.5*1.164*600^2 = 456 814.66

L/D ratio = 15.49

F4U-4 Aerodynamics at SL:

Lift

L = 1.4*29.17*.5*1.164*600^2 = 8556377.76

Drag:

Cdi = (1.4^2)/(pi*5.35*0.77) = 0.151447355
Cd0 = -Unknown-

D = 0.151447355*29.17*.5*1.164*600^2 = 925600.557

L/D ratio: 9.24

___________________________________________

Ta-152H L/D = 15.49
F4U-4 L/D = 9.24

Thats an extra 59% of lift for the Ta-152H for every unit of drag.

Soren, I performed some spot calculations on the values you used, although converted to English units, and, sure enough, I found them to be in proper order. I also found them to be technically correct and interesting and, …… operationally worthless. The comparison you made between the Ta-152H and the F4U-4 was at SL, with an airspeed of 373 mph (600 km/hr), the aircraft were at Clmax, which I believe is between 15 and 18 degrees of angle of attack. At that speed and angle of attack, the lift, as you show, is very great. In fact, according to my calculations, the aircraft would be pulling between 12 and 14 gs! This is a situation that could not safely exist. Aircraft performance in an unrealistic environment is something pilots care little about.

Now, once we get beyond the theoretical aerodynamics, let’s look at the real world aerodynamics, first, all the arguments I have already made are still valid. Second, at SL, straight and level, at 373 mph, the Ta-152H is creating about 56 lbs of induced drag and the F4U-5 is creating about 92 lbs. If the Ta-152H rolls into a level 60 degree bank, the induced drag will increase by about 168 lbs. The F4U-5’s induce drag will increase by about 275 lbs. The Ta-152, which is at max airspeed at that altitude, has no excess thrust available. It will lose airspeed. However, the F4U-5 has about 469 lbs of thrust in excess of the Ta-152 (based on 710 shaft hp advantage the F4U-5 has). The F4U-5 will actually be able to either accelerate or it could maintain airspeed and pull more gs. This is the same energy advantage that will last up to the 25-30k I have discussed before. This is something a pilot does care about.

The formula I used is a contraction of the ones you have used.

W=L in level flight

Di=2*W^2/(pi*rho*e*V^2*b^2) where b is span.

I used your e values.

As to why high AR wings hasn't been used much on fighters in time, again its almost purely for structural integrity reasons.

I am sure Tank took into consideration the reduction in induced drag as compared to the increase of parasitic drag of the high aspect wing when he considered the configuration of the Ta-152C.

[Hunter368]

Does anyone else feel dumb on this thread or is it just me?

I feel like I am back in high school math class again.





MATT!!!! Where the hell are you man? Can you tell what the hell these two are saying? I think its damn Chinese!





Where the hell are my Tylenol 3? My head hurts all these numbers and big words.


Is there any naked girlie pictures soon? I am bored.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Hunter368

Does anyone else feel dumb on this thread or is it just me?

I feel like I am back in high school math class again.





MATT!!!! Where the hell are you man? Can you tell what the hell these two are saying? I think its damn Chinese!





Where the hell are my Tylenol 3? My head hurts all these numbers and big words.


Is there any naked girlie pictures soon? I am bored.

Sorry for the techno-babble. Unfortunately when comparing aircraft that have long past its prime and with few remaining, many not flyable, all we have to compare is the performance numbers and that only gives a feel for what the aircraft is capable of. Only the real pilots in real combat can tell you what each plane is capable of and they tend to be prejudice for the aircraft that brought them through the war.

Both of these aircraft are powerful and capable aircraft and represent the final configuration of the piston powered warbirds. Both were generally similar in air-to-air performance over most of the air warfare envelope and were superior in other areas, with the Ta-152H being an outstanding high altitude fighter and the F4U being an outstanding air-to-ground fighter.

Anyway, this has given me a headache too. Too many old dusty brain cells had to be reactivated and they weren't happy about that.

[Lucky13]

Let's send them up in a P-51D and a Ta 152H-1 for some mock dogfights and solve it that way....

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Lucky13

Let's send them up in a P-51D and a Ta 152H-1 for some mock dogfights and solve it that way....

Well, there are a few P-51Ds around, but you might have a problem finding a TA-152H-1. Besides, the P-51D would probably have difficulties.

[Soren]

Davparlr,

The reason I made a Clmax comparison at 600 km/h was to show you that the difference in induced drag is still large at high speed.

The difference between the Ta-152H-1 and the F4U-4 is that the Ta-152H-1 is a dedicated air-superiority fighter/interceptor while the F4U-4 is a multirole fighter-bomber. The Ta-152H has the advantage in speed, climb and maneuverability, however it can't be used in as many roles or carry anywhere near as much equipment as the F4U-4.

The F4U-4 is one of the best multi-role fighters of WW2, with only the FW-190 as a close rival - both are maneuverable, fast, good climbers and can carry an awesome array of weapons.

As to the Ta-152C-1, well this was designed and built for two things only - speed and endurance. However the shortcomings of the design were certainly not something Tank was unaware of, hence why the Ta-152H got absolute priority.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Soren

Davparlr,

The reason I made a Clmax comparison at 600 km/h was to show you that the difference in induced drag is still large at high speed.

The difference between the Ta-152H-1 and the F4U-4 is that the Ta-152H-1 is a dedicated air-superiority fighter/interceptor while the F4U-4 is a multirole fighter-bomber. The Ta-152H has the advantage in speed, climb and maneuverability, however it can't be used in as many roles or carry anywhere near as much equipment as the F4U-4.

The F4U-4 is one of the best multi-role fighters of WW2, with only the FW-190 as a close rival - both are maneuverable, fast, good climbers and can carry an awesome array of weapons.

As to the Ta-152C-1, well this was designed and built for two things only - speed and endurance. However the shortcomings of the design were certainly not something Tank was unaware of, hence why the Ta-152H got absolute priority.

I won't argue your conclusion about the F4U-4. I do think the F4U-5 is another story. Also, I understand your point in your example, but I think it misrepresents the performance of induced drag vs lift. I made an Excel chart showing induced drag vs. airspeed in ft/sec at level flight for the Ta-152, F4U-1, and F4U-5. Unfortunately I did not know how to import it into this site. It shows that, at low airspeeds, i.e. high alpha, there is a large difference in drag favoring the Ta-152, but as the airspeed increases, alpha lowers, all curves converge on zero and the differences of the drag becomes quite low. Since, due to g limitation of the pilot, all high speed maneuvering is done at relatively small alpha levels well below Clmax, the excess power of the F4U-5 pretty well negates the L/D advantage of the Ta-152H. My data indicates that, if the Ta-154H pulls more than 4 gs, it starts to equal the energy advantage of the F4U-5 at SL. More gs, and it gets an advantage, all the way up to the 12 or 14 gs that generate Clmax (although neither aircraft could do this). At high altitude, the Ta-152H has no WWII, or any piston powered fighter, equal.

All in all, I doubt that experienced pilots in both planes would not hesitate to take his aircraft against the other, and it would be quite a tussle with the most proficient pilot being the winner, but, I think, at lower levels and higher speeds, the F4U-5 pilot would have a slight advantage in tools, e.g., energy management. At higher altitudes and slower airspeeds, the advantage would swap. It would have been a site to see.

[Soren]

What its about at SL when the speed increases is structural integrity and pilot endurance, cause the Ta-152H can easily pull a tighter turn at any speed, however with an increase in speed an increase in G follows, and in this area and in this era the pilot is the weak point.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Soren

What its about at SL when the speed increases is structural integrity and pilot endurance, cause the Ta-152H can easily pull a tighter turn at any speed, however with an increase in speed an increase in G follows, and in this area and in this era the pilot is the weak point.

I agree. If the Ta and F4U were stressed to 12 gs, not unreasonable, and they were remote controlled, the F4U could never generate the excess power needed to stay with the Ta, and would have trouble from 4 to 5gs. The pilot is the limiting factor. But that is the envelope they are forced to play in. As altitude goes up, alpha required per g also increases, which moves the Ta into more favorable environment by being closer to that Clmax number. It would pull 4 gs at a higher alpha, and as drag difference increases, it would start eating up the excess power of the F4U which would start bogging down.

[Soren]

The excess power of the F4U-4 was minimal however, and wouldn't save it at SL, nomatter the speed. The energy lost in a turn by the F4U-4 is simply so much greater than that lost by the Ta-152H that anything but quick evasive maneuvers, as those used by the Fw-190A against the Spitfire, was a very deadly and onesided gamble to try against the Ta-152H.

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by Soren

The excess power of the F4U-4 was minimal however, and wouldn't save it at SL, nomatter the speed. The energy lost in a turn by the F4U-4 is simply so much greater than that lost by the Ta-152H that anything but quick evasive maneuvers, as those used by the Fw-190A against the Spitfire, was a very deadly and onesided gamble to try against the Ta-152H.

At 25k and top speed, the difference in drag of the Ta-152H and F4U-4 is only 368 lbs in a 3 g turn. However, the title of this site is "Best Piston Fighter Ever", and we were comparing the Ta-152H with the F4U-5, which has significant thrust advantage at this altitude (760 thrust HP, 824 lbs thrust). In addition, it would have a likely higher top speed by 30 mph, and also, a most likely higher dive speed. It would maintain this advantage to SL.

From 25k ft down, and most likely 30k down, the F4U-5 would have more tools for pilot to use against the Ta-152H, than the Ta-152H pilot would have to use against the F4U-5. Also, because of circumstances, the Ta-152H was never able to proved itself as a reliable, dependable aircarft, whereas the F4U-5 was a war proven design of extended life.

[jonsidneyb]

Originally Posted by davparlr

All in all, I doubt that experienced pilots in both planes would not hesitate to take his aircraft against the other, and it would be quite a tussle with the most proficient pilot being the winner, but, I think, at lower levels and higher speeds, the F4U-5 pilot would have a slight advantage in tools, e.g., energy management. At higher altitudes and slower airspeeds, the advantage would swap. It would have been a site to see.

Heck if they are equals I might want to hesitate. I don't like being = in a life and death fight.

If they are equal I will be on the side with twice as many planes in the air and then I am going to cheat.

I am going to stay on the fringes of the fight waiting for some engaged aircraft that have lost velocity due to their manuvering and make a high speed pass to help out my buddy. I don't like fair fights.

[lesofprimus]

Heck if they are equals I might want to hesitate.

Then u aint a fighter pilot...

If they are equal I will be on the side with twice as many planes in the air

U dont get to choose sides... This is realistic, not ur little fantasy world...

and then I am going to cheat.

What, with a cheat code???