ubi.com    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  1C:Maddox Games  Hop To Forums  IL2 Maddox General Discussion    Why did so few planes have divebrakes?
Page 1 2 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
Posted
The only fighters I can think of off the top of my head that had them are the P-38 (and only the later models) and the Corsair. But there are so many other planes that seem like they need them. I've been trying to practice with the Fw-190 but time and time again I find myself building up way too much speed in my dives when I spot enemies directly underneath, shooting by and unable to slow down, this thing would've been amazing with airbrakes.
 
Posts: 107 | Registered: Sun August 16 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
I just adjust during the dive or pull up to horizontal, wait a sec to bleed off speed, and split S . Granted if you're trying to go for surprise this might not work.

Ususally I cut throttle and set PP to 0 , that works good enough.

It's funny the Corsair's brakes are deploying its gear! I was laughing at that. Pretty ghetto but it works.

You can use full flaps and deploy gear, but I think they break around 400 km / hr (exception is combat flaps) but for me that's too slow to pull them back up and its easier to use a maneuver to control your speed.



IT's . .

partly the compressibility stall was a new discovery and most planes didn't dive bomb (near / vertically around 60 degrees to 90) that much . . .

They didn't need air brakes because they didn't have the speeds like jet fighters would later (and air brakes would help in overshooting which is kind of important for dogfighting).


Most fighters when they needed to dive, required all the speed they needed.

And that's something extra you have to put in, which adds to weight / one more thing maintenance has to check . . . and that for non dive bombers the advantages aren't enough to justify.

For something like the P-38, pilot safety was a concern and since high speed compressibility stall was a known issue with that plane, Lockheed decided it put them in.


__________________________

I look to the sky where my help come from.
And I seen it circling around from the mountain
Thunder!
You feel it in your chest
You keep my mind at ease and my soul at rest
 
Posts: 150 | Registered: Tue August 18 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Waldo.Pepper
Posted Hide Post


Turn your question on its head and you will have the majority of the answer. Ask yourself - "Why should all planes have dive brakes?"
 
Posts: 4735 | Registered: Sat October 25 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
The only fighters I can think of off the top of my head that had them are the P-38 (and only the later models) and the Corsair. But there are so many other planes that seem like they need them. I've been trying to practice with the Fw-190 but time and time again I find myself building up way too much speed in my dives when I spot enemies directly underneath, shooting by and unable to slow down, this thing would've been amazing with airbrakes.


I believe some of the late model P-47s (the M and N) had dive brakes as well. Perhaps also some of the very late production D blocks had them as well.

Most fighters didn't have them because, frankly, they didn't need them.

There are also other considerations to think of, such as the fact that high-speed compressibility was not really understood at the time, nor were phenomena like mach-tuck, so there was no perceived need for them.


ImpStarDuece,

Flying Bullet Magnet... Catching Lead Since 2002

"There's no such thing as gravity, the earth sucks!"

"Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol, morphine or idealism."
-Carl Jung

 
Posts: 2801 | Registered: Sat March 27 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Ba5tard5word
Posted Hide Post
Lower throttle, lower prop pitch, do maneuvers to bleed speed, etc.


-----------------
Farewell to freedom in the Adriatic and to the days of wild abandon.
Check out my BRAND NEW campaign, "The Pirate Menace"
Also check out my old Air Pirates campaigns!
Air Pirates Part One
Air Pirates Part Two
 
Posts: 2167 | Registered: Tue February 12 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
Lower throttle, lower prop pitch, do maneuvers to bleed speed, etc.


I've always found a lower pitch to increase speed, not decrease it. And in a way it makes sense...even though I can't put it into words very well. lol
 
Posts: 581 | Registered: Fri November 11 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Outlaw---
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Unknown-Pilot:
quote:
Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
Lower throttle, lower prop pitch, do maneuvers to bleed speed, etc.


I've always found a lower pitch to increase speed, not decrease it. And in a way it makes sense...even though I can't put it into words very well. lol


It depends on the definition of "high" and "low" and the type of "pitch" control you're using. Constant speed props govern the RPM, not the prop pitch directly. Setting it to "high" RPM will present the "flat" of the blade to the wind. This moves less air when the engine is turning the prop thus allowing the engine to turn faster and, thus, develop more horsepower. When the preset max engine RPM allowed by the governor is reached the pitch increases to prevent over-rev. Conversely, this provides the most drag when the airspeed is faster than what the engine can produce. So, to limit dive speed drop power to idle and select "high RPM" on the prop governor.

If your aircraft has a direct pitch control, then set it to low pitch for max drag in power off situations (such as when diving).

--Outlaw.


 
Posts: 1007 | Registered: Sat October 06 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
This reminds me of the time my wife came home, walked into the livingroom and asked "why are the curtains closed?". I told her, "because nobody opened them?".
 
Posts: 6 | Registered: Mon October 12 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
DON'T EVER... mention dive brakes.... you'll throw the 'energy fighters' into a spin
Veryhappy



Forget the Garlic, Beetroot and Hardtack - Just gimme Gunz-n-Drugz
 
Posts: 2839 | Registered: Fri December 01 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Crash_Moses
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
quote:
Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
The only fighters I can think of off the top of my head that had them are the P-38 (and only the later models) and the Corsair. But there are so many other planes that seem like they need them. I've been trying to practice with the Fw-190 but time and time again I find myself building up way too much speed in my dives when I spot enemies directly underneath, shooting by and unable to slow down, this thing would've been amazing with airbrakes.


I believe some of the late model P-47s (the M and N) had dive brakes as well. Perhaps also some of the very late production D blocks had them as well.

Most fighters didn't have them because, frankly, they didn't need them.

There are also other considerations to think of, such as the fact that high-speed compressibility was not really understood at the time, nor were phenomena like mach-tuck, so there was no perceived need for them.


Correct. In fact, the main reason dive brakes were installed on the P-38 was the problems with compressibility...something early war fighters didn't have to deal with too much. And it wasn't until later in the war that engine and airframe technology allowed for the manufacture of real weapons platforms such as the Corsair. Can you imagine diving in a TBD? Zoiks!

Of course, the SBD had them all along and as you know...it won the war. Twice.


--------------------------------------------------------
B-25/PBJ Precision Ordinance Delivery Manual

"Bad grammar is one thing up with which we shall not put!" - Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 1819 | Registered: Sun December 12 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Daiichidoku
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ImpStarDuece:
I believe some of the late model P-47s (the M and N) had dive brakes as well. Perhaps also some of the very late production D blocks had them as well.


D-30 block onwards had em installed

also installed on Bearcats, P80s, P59s, and most interestingly, A/B26 Invaders

they were also tested on Hellcats and Mustangs


 
Posts: 3119 | Registered: Thu September 09 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by doraemil:


It's funny the Corsair's brakes are deploying its gear! I was laughing at that. Pretty ghetto but it works.



Eh? Haven't used the Corsair in IL2 enough to know that but in MCFS2 it had real spoilers.
 
Posts: 107 | Registered: Sun August 16 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Open your canopy and then stick your middle finger out at the enemy.
Flip him the bird. This may cause some drag to slow you down a little.
 
Posts: 790 | Registered: Sun November 02 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Hmmm I believe the very early P-51's had dive brakes but where not wired up to work....is this true?
 
Posts: 1 | Registered: Fri October 30 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
the A-36s did have dive brakes. Not sure about the -51As...
 
Posts: 791 | Registered: Thu May 22 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of Kettenhunde
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Why did so few planes have divebrakes?


The airfoil chosen has the most influence on the need for divebrakes.



Our Museum glorifies no state, but strives to use these aircraft as a memorial for all lost in war. Our freedom can only be truly appreciated when held in contrast to those who sought to destroy it. Our staff is proudly made up of people from many cultures and religions. Click the photos for details of our projects.
"Those who do not remember history are destined to repeat it." - Winston Churchill
 
Posts: 3069 | Registered: Fri March 25 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Picture of BillSwagger
Posted Hide Post
To add to that, on some planes they were called dive flaps which aided in getting the nose of the plane up. I'm sure they also slowed the plane up some in the process.
From what i've read they weren't really used that way, but were very capable.
It was a normal part of dive procedure to deploy the dive flaps prior to the dive on some craft like the P-38 and P-47.
My guess is that this insured that the plane would not over speed or become uncontrollable when the pilot is also trying to point his nose at the target to bomb.

I'm sure deploying the dive flaps in mid dive also caused a sudden shift in pitch which would make accuracy a bit tough if you didn't have time to adjust or make corrections.
 
Posts: 1401 | Registered: Sat February 28 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
Re pitch - leave it at the 100% setting (or max safe rpm when in direct mode of a 109) for maximum deceleration, without exceptions.

Making the prop more streamlined (ie coarser aka lower % pitch) and letting the engine be turned over slower only lowers your drag.


----------------------------------
Flying online as 453_Whittle
E8400 @3.8, 9800gtx+
Phenom II X4 B50 @ 3.4 Wink
Uni-joint / hall effect sensor stick guide:
http://www.jpfiles.com/hardware/uni_stick.pdf
 
Posts: 423 | Registered: Sun December 04 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
quote:
Why did so few planes have divebrakes?


The airfoil chosen has the most influence on the need for divebrakes.


"Why is the sky blue?"
"Light waves and gas molecules have the most influence on our sky's colour"


----------------------------------
Flying online as 453_Whittle
E8400 @3.8, 9800gtx+
Phenom II X4 B50 @ 3.4 Wink
Uni-joint / hall effect sensor stick guide:
http://www.jpfiles.com/hardware/uni_stick.pdf
 
Posts: 423 | Registered: Sun December 04 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
To add to that, on some planes they were called dive flaps which aided in getting the nose of the plane up. I'm sure they also slowed the plane up some in the process.
From what i've read they weren't really used that way, but were very capable.
It was a normal part of dive procedure to deploy the dive flaps prior to the dive on some craft like the P-38 and P-47.
My guess is that this insured that the plane would not over speed or become uncontrollable when the pilot is also trying to point his nose at the target to bomb.

I'm sure deploying the dive flaps in mid dive also caused a sudden shift in pitch which would make accuracy a bit tough if you didn't have time to adjust or make corrections.


Well look at the P-80, it has airbrakes on the nose, nowhere near the wings, and modern fighters often fold both rudders inward to slow down (or they split the rudder it it only has one tail fin). I'm sure if they just made brakes that consisted of flaps on the left and right sides of the fuselage it would not change the pitch at all.

Another reason for adding airbrakes: if you have them and the bandit on your tail doesn't, you can force an overshoot much more quickly than by slipping and using zero power with cowl flaps. The problem with using wing flaps and gear for this is that they break over a certain speed, and gear takes a LONG time to deploy.
 
Posts: 107 | Registered: Sun August 16 2009Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
  Powered by Eve Community Page 1 2  
 

ubi.com    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  1C:Maddox Games  Hop To Forums  IL2 Maddox General Discussion    Why did so few planes have divebrakes?

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy