Made this thread to discover and post stall speeds of planes. Talked to Gandhi in arena , he said to check zero. I have found some old Squirls post , about an old pilot who flown zero , he said stall speed on zero was about 55 knots. On rdrop.com website about original warbirds, stall speed for a6m2 is 65mph without flaps or 60mph with full. That is about 105,6 km/h. In training arena our a6m2 has stall speed at about 129km/h without flaps. That is like 25 kmh worse than it should be. Ok, mb i would never notice it , but i had fights with gandhi in zero and me in f6f5. New f6f5 is good ( havent finished testing yet) and in real it had stall speed at about 84mph. You can understand danger for zero , not at high speeds only , but at lower as well. I just think we should fix that zero so it could be real dogfighter.
Ran some more tests, 100% fuel, engine off, wings level, no bombs: F6F-5: A6M3: Masses used: F6F-5: 5714 kg A6M3: 2544 kg Wing area: F6F-5: 31 m^2 A6M3: 21.53 m^2 FH Cl Max: F6F-5 clean: 1.32 A6M3 clean: 1.29 F6F-5 full flaps: 1.74 A6M3 full flaps: 1.50 FH Stall speed (from Cl Max): F6F-5 clean: 172 km/h A6M3 clean: 139 km/h F6F-5 full flaps: 150 km/h A6M3 full flaps: 129 km/h So what does this mean? The game says the F6F-5's wing makes more lift per unit area than the Zero's. That's one interpretation of lift coefficient. Now, both the Zero and the Hellcat had high-lift wings so they should be comparable, if anything, with the edge perhaps going to the Zero. Instead, the F6F has a slight edge with no flaps, and a clear advantage with flaps. So where the A6M3 would still be able to pull 56% more G's even with a comparable lift coefficient, FH says it can pull only 34% more. It sounds like a small difference, but it erases 38% of the A6M's advantage, allowing other factors like the Hellcat's climb rate to affect encounters. And for the A6M5, which is noticeably worse than the A6M3, the comparison is even less favorable: and that's the version Gold is now "stuck" with for most of the last years of the TOD. Another subtle observation is the number of data points with flaps. The Zero has fewer data points than the Hellcat, meaning the final stages of pitch-up before the stall happened much quicker over time than in the F6F. This translates to better energy retention for the F6F. Both designs should bleed energy relatively quickly, as full flaps increases the lift coefficient at the expense of a large increase of drag. However, given equally efficient wings (same lift/drag ratio), they should decelerate at roughly the same rate, because the drag created would be proportional to the lift required, which is tied to the aircraft's weight. F6F: more drag but more momentum. A6M: less drag but less momentum. Finally, I'm not sure what to make of these numbers in a broader sense. I think the A6M is still messed up, but then again many planes are. This makes comparisons difficult on paper even though the impact is obvious in the arena.
Bf-110-G2/R3 power on stall, clean config 110-120 km/h or so. Power off stall, clean config 170-180 km/h or something. Is this really accurate?
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ http://electraforge.com/brooke/flightsims/aces_high/stallSpeedMath/stallSpeedMath.html
Awwwwwwwwww ( I , never, liked, school) This is why is easier to just go to http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/ and read data for wb planes....
You did a good job there. Exactly, it was hard for Fas to change planes when he started, because he didnt have good ones to compare to. Reason why i asked you to compare zero to a f6f is , hellcat was recently changed for the better, it is now much closer to real one if u ask me for oppinion. As a plane that was direct opponent to a zero , was made to confront zero , it is much better imho to compare zero to it than to lets say spit. Still, hellcat was not dogfighter, could kill zero in many ways, but zero , zero only had its dogfighting capability.No need to say why +-5kmh on edge is more important for zero . Mumble, LL answered you .But if you have any doubts about test of stall in some plane, just try to fly it more often and to fight in it. That is imho best way to find out.
Btw , zero is not the only plane you would think with bad flaps. I dont know now, would be worth of checking, but in older version, 1.67, i had same impression with ki84. Like it does everything too good without flaps, then when flaps engaged, it just falls dwn in performance.
"Bad flaps" ??? Not all flaps are equal. Different designs for different applications. Fieseler Storch has flaps that can drop to 70 degrees. Stall speed is less that 32 mph. In a good wind the plane can almost take-off vertical !!!!
Sorry i dont understand which part of my post you dont understand. Part about zero and its type of flaps, or part with ki84 and his combat flaps? Following Gandhis post, he says this: A6M3 full flaps: 129 km/h-stall speed. That is 10km/h less than without flaps. So, full flaps give you exrta 10km/h. Since zeke was carrier based plane, dont you think he had flaps that will help it land on cv? So, either speed without flaps is wrong , or flaps are bad in game. Im starting with idea of in game zero having higher stall speed than zero in real life. Part about ki84 is clear, ki had combat flaps, designed to help in combat.
Sorry, I missed the part about combat flaps. BTW: Have a look at this data: http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/index.html http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/AoA.htm
Doofer booked. As per this information Bf-110G-2/R3 stall speeds are: ~170 km/h no flaps, ~145 km/h with full flaps.
It says here 105 without and 90 with (mph) http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/Bf110G2.htm this one is 95/85 http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/Bf110C4.htm
What is that info good for, though? It's just aircraft performance data for one specific version of a computer game. Can't really attach any authority to a web site about another computer game, can you?
Well... let's see... he worked for a game called "Warbirds" back in the 90s.... Author Information: Occupation: Programmer (Edge of Reality, Austin TX) Background: Warbirds '97-'99 (General Programmer, Imagic Online), Dawn of Aces '98-'99 (General Programmer, Imagic Online), World War II Online '99-'01 (Physics programmer, Flight Model programmer, Weapons and Armor programmer, Front End general programmer) Schooling: Master of Science and Engineering (Aerospace Engineering) at University of Texas (Austin, TX), Bachelor of Science (Computer Science & Math, Theatre) at Lewis and Clark College (Portland, OR) This is just another person's opinion and what was found in another online WW2 flight sim.... That's all....
Have you been reading a different forum all these years? You know exactly that the devs will dismiss this kind of 'data' in a heartbeat (and rightly so).
so what ? I'm putting it out there as a point of view. The devs will do what they want. Not only devs read these posts. Gee, ant, take it easy!
You have your point.But I didnt ask Exec where he found all those climb speeds for all planes (thread "testing").Simply , we put here info , all info we r capable of finding. If you look for thread about aircraft manuals, there is manual for P38, with stall speed in it plus different loads. Its just another info. I think we cant expect to make here exact replica of an aircraft, and to learn history facts based on game model.But this is how system works. Someone told me that Exec read some book where p38 was mentioned as a plane that could never outturn anything in European theater. So, would you like to never have real P38 just because someone in some stupid book said for P38 that was bad airplane?And because Exec is believing ? This is attitude we fight against, and thats why we post every info we find. Sometimes if you get screwed up along the way , its good thing going back to start. If those guys in IEN made game , commercial one, they prolly had some data about planes. I dont care if they mb all were Americans, reading only american books, like i dont care if russian admins read different books. Just dont want for some books to be real, for some pilots to be good authority , and for others to be idiots.
