P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why deployable at the same time

P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why not deployable at the same time

Hello,

With the P-38L it is currently not possible to deploy the airbrake at the same time as the flaps. That is, if your flaps are down and you deploy your airbrake, your flaps will first be retracted before the airbrake deploys. Can this be fixed?


P.S. Meh, of course the title of this thread should read "P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why __NOT__ deployable at the same time" ...

 

it happens in that way with ju88 and 410, mb is in that way how it worked?

 

To the best of my knowledge, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to use both at the same time in the Lightning. I've never read anyting that said the P-38L could only use either its flaps OR its dive brake at a time, but never both.
Also, the way it's modeled in Il-2 the P-38L can deploy both at the same time (altho this admittely doesn't prove anything).

 

I've just googled a bit. In the official Warbirds game (i.e. the one you have pay for to play), this has actually been fixed 3 years ago.

 

Re: P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why not deployable at the same time

Hi Red Ant,

>With the P-38L it is currently not possible to deploy the airbrake at the same time as the flaps. That is, if your flaps are down and you deploy your airbrake, your flaps will first be retracted before the airbrake deploys.

That's most likely because speed brakes were originally implemented for the SBD, where the landing flaps split into an upper and lower half that extend up and down respectively to act as airbrakes.

>Can this be fixed?

Probably not.

The P-38L actually shouldn't have air brakes but dive recovery flaps, which work decidedly different. They don't create much drag, but mainly improve the transsonic airflow over the wing.

If that transsonic airflow problem would be fully implemented, you'd not have much fun turning with the pre-P-38L models at moderate to high speeds except at low altitude. In Warbirds, Mach effects are badly off anyway, so one shouldn't even try to simulate this.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

ien logics. confer with ju88, pe2, sbd, stuka

 

Re: P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why not deployable at the same time

Hello!

Good point.

I don't have much fun doing that as it is, but I know the problems would actually be quite a bit worse.

Yeah, I know. Warbirds uses IAS to determine when a plane should compress rather than the actual Mach number. Here's something I've been pondering .... WB's wrongly modeled Mach effects mean that a plane moving at 400 mph TRUE airspeed can compress at sea level while it will have no such trouble at 35 kft when in actuality it should be the other way around. HOWEVER ... is compressability only, purlely, EXCLUSIVELY a Mach number dependant problem? I mean I could very well imagine that the FASTER flow of the denser air at low altitude would also make a plane's controls stiffer to some degree. Albeit I'm rather clueless as to how much of an effect this has IRL. Do you have an idea, Henning?

 

I guess that means no. *sigh* Hey, can't you sneaky Russians steal erm I mean mysteriously obtain the Warbirds source code and ...?

 

Re: P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why not deployable at the same time

Hi Red Ant,

>HOWEVER ... is compressability only, purlely, EXCLUSIVELY a Mach number dependant problem? I mean I could very well imagine that the FASTER flow of the denser air at low altitude would also make a plane's controls stiffer to some degree.

Compressiblity is strictly Mach-dependend as the term describes the tendency of the air to let itself to be compressed.

However, the aerodynamic forces acting back on the control surfaces do indeed stiffen the control. This effect is created by dynamic pressure, which is directly dependend on indicated air speed. Accordingly, this effect is worst at high speed at low altitude, just as you pointed out.

Simulator pilots tend to lump it all together as "plane X compresses" (ouch!), but that's quite naive.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

Re: P-38L airbrakes + flaps ... why not deployable at the same time

Actually, I thought to myself.....yeah, let's see the reason they would be deployable at the same time. Not that I challenge you, but I know the FH programmers will want info/data proof.

 

photo of the P-38 dive recovery device

i'd guess that this may have some adverse ramifications on the effectiveness
of the flaps, but maybe not because they were the Fowler type...anyway, the dive recovery installation was for use at high speeds, not at the speeds the Fowlers were for use at. Making them mutually exclusive seems very much justified IMHO

 

I must say though, that I think the dive recovery equipment was operated independantly from any other control device. Right now, when flaps are engaged, if you engage the divebrake, as is called, then the flaps will seemingly move back up on their own. I don't know why this should occur but it seems incorrect.%)

 

If you're driving a P-38L & can't control your speed, it isn't because you're great & the plane is modeled incorrectly

 

So what are you saying actually?

 

the way they work in FH is roughly correct, probably by accident

 

Really now, do you think we are convinced in some way that the application of diveflaps/brakes are some sort of flight enhancement? Of course not.

What happens when you deploy something like what is pictured above?? Well, obviously the aircraft will slow down from drag. That is a braking affect. It does not have to look like a rotor with pads to be a be considered braking. Anything that slows down a vehicle is considered braking. This isn't even the issue though. Why call it a flap in the first place if it does not even function like one? We're splitting hairs.



The main aspect of my own question is why both features of the flaps and divebrake affect each other when they should not.

 

its amazing when a guy can type, but can't read

 

you don't open your doors to slow the car down, do ya?

 

You mean car can be stopped in some other way? How?

 

Lol, where do you live, man?! Use the foot!
If you press it agains the road through the hole in the floor the car will slow down a lot faster than if u open the doors...
You can try combining both techniques, but the foot is usually enough