Ares Games
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: AVERAGE CLIMB RATE AND SPEED AT ALTITUDES FOR HISTORICAL PLANES

  1. #1

    Default AVERAGE CLIMB RATE AND SPEED AT ALTITUDES FOR HISTORICAL PLANES

    I found this elsewhere, and though everyone may like the graphs.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	averageclimb.jpg 
Views:	124 
Size:	139.2 KB 
ID:	13921Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Speed at Altitude Graphic.jpg 
Views:	124 
Size:	147.3 KB 
ID:	13922
    Last edited by usmc1855; 05-28-2011 at 16:27.

  2. #2

  3. #3

    Default

    Fascinating, thanks for sharing

  4. #4

    Hunter's Avatar May you forever fly in blue skies
    Users Country Flag


    Name
    Terry
    Location
    Arizona
    Sorties Flown
    2,813
    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default

    Cool! Thanks.

  5. #5

    Default

    Nifty! I'm a sucker for graphs

  6. #6

    Default

    Well done any chance of the same for 2 seaters

  7. #7

    Default

    I like them!

  8. #8

    Default

    Great Job Brian!

  9. #9

    Default

    That first graph shows some interesting things for the SPAD XIII. It shows that it has the fastest climb rate out of all the planes that we currently have in WoW.

  10. #10

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Hajj View Post
    That first graph shows some interesting things for the SPAD XIII. It shows that it has the fastest climb rate out of all the planes that we currently have in WoW.
    Yes & I always thought that honour belonged to the SE5a.

  11. #11

    Default

    I'm very sceptic to the graphs going up anywhere after sea level, unless the engine being designed specifically for high-altitude use, like the Maybach Mb.IVa. That engine had too big a compression ratio, meaning that it couldn't use full throttle at sea level without blowing up, but in the thinner air could be run at full power. Other normal engines loose power with altitude. And power should be everything for these planes, except the ones with high altitude engines, like Fokker D.VIIF with it's overcompressed BMW IIIa, Pfalz D.XII with it's overcompressed Mercedes D.IIIaü and maybe the S.E.5 with it's high-compression Wolseley Viper. So some of these graphs doesn't make sense to me.

  12. #12

    Default

    Cool graphs. Was that put together in excel. If so could you upload the file please.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wombat View Post
    I'm very sceptic to the graphs going up anywhere after sea level, unless the engine being designed specifically for high-altitude use, like the Maybach Mb.IVa. That engine had too big a compression ratio, meaning that it couldn't use full throttle at sea level without blowing up, but in the thinner air could be run at full power. Other normal engines loose power with altitude. And power should be everything for these planes, except the ones with high altitude engines, like Fokker D.VIIF with it's overcompressed BMW IIIa, Pfalz D.XII with it's overcompressed Mercedes D.IIIaü and maybe the S.E.5 with it's high-compression Wolseley Viper. So some of these graphs doesn't make sense to me.
    It looks as though the D.XII and the D.VIIF are the only two models with any significant increase in speed as altitude is gained (15 and 20kmh respective). Surprising, the D.IIA gets an 8 kmh boost between 4 and 5,000 meters in altitude, topping out at 173kmh.
    (The N-17 gains 4kmh [156-160] as it rises from sea level to 1k, but losses that speed as it continues to climb, with a speed at 5k in altitude of 148kmh)
    Last edited by usmc1855; 05-29-2011 at 11:40.

  14. #14

    Default

    I didn't create it, and it was posted from whence I acquired it, as a PNG file.

  15. #15

    Default

    The graphs show some very interesting things.
    If I read this right the 2nd graph shows the N11 being faster than the N17.
    It gives the Dr1 a bit more speed than it it generally credited with.
    It also highlights how the BMW engine turned the Fokker DVII from a good plane to a great one.

    Pooh

  16. #16

    Default

    Looking closely at the performance details of each plane (N-11 and N-17) it appears that the second graph has them mixed up, one for the other:

    Specifications (Nie 11)

    Data from "The Worlds Greatest Aircraft"
    General characteristics


    Performance


    Armament



    _____________________________________________
    Specifications (Nie 17)

    Data from Those Classic Nieuports
    General characteristics

    • Crew: one
    • Length: 5.80 m (19 ft 0 in)
    • Wingspan: 8.16 m (26 ft 9 in)
    • Height: 2.40 m (7 ft 10 in)
    • Wing area: 14.75 m˛ (158.8 ft˛)
    • Empty weight: 375 kg (825 lb)
    • Loaded weight: 560 kg (1,232 lb)
    • Powerplant:Le Rhône 9Ja 9-cylinder rotary engine, 82 kW (110 hp)

    Performance


    Armament



    (A few individual aircraft had both guns)

  17. #17

    Default

    The Siemens-Schuckert D.III and D.IV do not seem to be on the graphs and they were supposed to be able to outclimb anything.

  18. #18

    Default

    Brian,
    The N11 & the N17 are reversed on the 2nd graph.
    That's what i thought too.

    Pooh

    Still if we were to use this chart for our card decks, the Pfalz DXII and the Fokker DVIIf would be in the same speed range as the Spad XIII & SE5a.
    The Spad XIII would have a better climb rate.
    The Dr1 might be moved up a speed band, if not the Sopwith Tripe should be faster though the Dr1 should outclimb it and the Camel.

    I think I'll leave things be but it is fun to see some more specific information than averaged climb and speed with no altitude listed.

    Pooh

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by usmc1855 View Post
    I didn't create it, and it was posted from whence I acquired it, as a PNG file.
    So where did you find it?
    Karl
    It is impossible for a man to begin to learn what he thinks he knows. -- Epictetus



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •