PDA

View Full Version : In game Spit versus Hurricane turn rates.



Pollack2006
01-16-2007, 07:16 PM
From my none too extensive readings in the past I took it that the Hurricane could turn inside a Spitfire (though it lost out on all other performance attributes) but this doesn't appear to be the case in-game.

Why is this so? Am I wrong or has the game crippled the Hurri?

Xiolablu3
01-16-2007, 07:24 PM
How I see it in game, the Hurricane can do a quicker 'instantaneous turn', but the Spitfire can do a much better 'sustained turn'.

I too have read many accounts of how the Hurricane could 'turn inside' the Spitfire. But often that was talking about pulling a hard instantaneous turn to get a shot on a bandit. Most times it doesnt differentiate between a 'sustained turn' and a 'instantaneous turn'.

If you think about it, the Hurricane looks much draggier and less aerodynamic, with a big thick wing. I would think just by looking that the Spitfire would have a better wingloading, and also its wing would create 'more lift' allowing it to do a much better sustained turn.

The Hurricane on the other hand, looks like it may be able to do a very quick initial turn, but not be able to keep it up for very long, owing to its draggy frame,worse wing loading/power loading.

Therefore the game 'seems' right to me. But this is totally without science, and purely 'my thoughts'.

Hopefully someone will be along later to explain it properly (and correctly). http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I despise what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

pirate.amcc
01-16-2007, 08:14 PM
from using both planes quite a lot
ive noticed hurricanes turn sharper than spits even in a sustained turn although they get a bit wobbly at the slower speeds

using flaps and 100% throttle you can easy out turn a spit and even bag one in a turning fight
each time ive tried a hurri style turn in a spit using flaps they jam lol

ive had quite a few fights spit vrs hurricane
even though the hurricane has less of everything the spit has they are just as capable

even if they have no cannons just mg`s lol

FritzGryphon
01-16-2007, 10:34 PM
In AEP I found Hurricane to have a 19.5 second turn time, and Spitfire Vb to be 17.5. These are consistant with the reference.

The Hurricane is slower and this contributes to it's small turn radius. But for continuous, non-descending, long-term turning, the Spitfire is considerbly better. The tendancy of the Spitfire to overshoot can be moderated by flaps.

This was one of the reasons the Hurricanes were largely tasked with bomber interception in the BoB. Same engine, but Hurricane is heavier.

Lunix
01-17-2007, 12:00 AM
Thicker wings provide more lift without increasing drag.

StellarRat
01-17-2007, 12:36 AM
Are you sure about that? From purely instinctive feeling I'd say this makes no sense. You're shoving something fatter through the air. A narrow beam ship is faster than an wide beam ship all else being the same.

GH_Klingstroem
01-17-2007, 03:07 AM
increasing lift is the same as increasing drag! At low speeds, induced drag will be high and at high speed profile darg will be high.. These curves look almost like an X



. x . x . . . . . . .x
d x . . x . . . x. . .
r x . . . . .x. . . . .
a x . . x . . . x . . .
g x x . . . . . . . x
.. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
speed

I know the graph looks a bit funny...Wasnt the easiest to draw an X... But try to visualise it! the vertical curve is total drag (profile drag + Induced drag).
and the bottom horizontal curve is Velocity in Indicated air speed, IAS.

Profile drag starts at bottom left and Induced drag starts att top left. As u can see. When speed increases induced drag decreases but profile drag increases. In the middle where both meet, will give u lowest total drag. For prop planes, this is close to best rate of climb. (try to climb at that speed)

Induced drag is the drag that comes from producing lift. The slower you go, the more u need to increase ur angle of attack to provide the same amount of lift at less speed, When u increase angle of attack, coefficent of lift will increase but so will induced drag drag as u can see above!!

Profile drag is basically drag from the airframe going trough a medium. U will always get this, but mostly at higher speeds! nThink about it, when u put ur hand ot trough the window in a car at slow speed u dont create as much drag as u do when u go a fast speed! U can even feel it easely!

So induced drag (lift drag) u get at low speed(+ very small amount of profile drag) and profile drag at high speed(+very small amount of induced drag)!

A high lift creating wing such as the hurricane, will create lots of lift and as we could see in the simple graph above, will also create lots of drag! This is the reason the hurricane cant go very fast! No planes with thick wings will go fast! However she wil perform at low speeds!!
Hope this clears a few things out!
cheers

Tully__
01-17-2007, 06:32 AM
Thick wing profiles give good lift/drag ratios at low speeds so they have less induced drag than a thin wing for the same total lift.
They also tend to give good stall characteristics. Combined together, these two charactertics make for an aeroplane that turns well with docile, easy to fly characteristics.

The other side of the coin is that thick wings have a high profile drag. This means they at even at only moderately high speed you need a great deal more power to maintain speed, reducing sustained turn without loss of altitude ability at best corner speeds and reducing top speed. Sound familar? It turns really well at speed but doesn't keep the speed long. It's easy to handle in a turn at low speed and (should) give nice predictable stall characteristics. Unfortunately stalls in PC sims seem to come in two varieties:

1. Semi-realistic but unreasonably savage; OR
2. Scripted/animated rather than real time calculated (leading to odd behaviour like when entering a conventional spin at the top of a loop you gain altitude in the spin http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

mynameisroland
01-17-2007, 06:50 AM
I think Hurricane turn is undercooked in IL2 , I can turn exceptionally tightly in it but the Spitfire is much easier to turn imo. Maybe this is incorrect?

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/mynameisroland/huuriturtn.jpg <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/mynameisroland/boemherTemp4.jpg

Tully__
01-17-2007, 07:03 AM
Roland, there are problems with that comparison. First, it has all three aircraft @ 300mph. That early in the war there is no way they would have been able to maintain turns at that speed, top speeds were only 20-50mph faster. Those would have to be considered instantaneous turn performance for that specific speed.

I also doubt that was best turn speed for any of the 3 aircraft.

Thirdly, the figures are showing best turn radius for each aircraft at that speed rather than turn time, though given they're all at the same speed turn time would be proportional to radius. In a real fight each pilot would fly to his strengths and choose to fly the circle (if it were that sort of fight) at the speed his aircraft could complete a circle in the shortest time, not the smallest radius.

In order to get a better idea of comparitive turn speeds it would be best to do the comparisons at typical combat speeds. At the speed quoted in that article no-one would be doing much turning of any sort for long, they'd either slow down real quick from turn induced drag, black out (note the g forces quoted, all 7G or more) or stop the turn in favour of maintaining energy.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

mynameisroland
01-17-2007, 07:12 AM
how about as examples of instantaneous turn?

It says just below that in a turning fight planes lose height to maintain speed. I find this chart interesting because it illustrates the viewpoint of German aces that the Bf 109E could out turn the Spitfire. Im guessing that you'd have to be a good pilot to achieve that but interesting still.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/mynameisroland/boemherTemp4.jpg

Monty_Thrud
01-17-2007, 07:13 AM
http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//turningCircles.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//pro_109_turn_2.jpg <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//beatup.jpg
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif..http://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//2006-02-23_012924_pilot11.gif ..http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif Soviet Fighter Tactics (http://luthier.stormloader.com/home.html) Merlin (http://www.spitfire.dk/Chapter5.htm) The Doors (http://www.thedoors.com/index.cfm?fa=home1)
DA! (http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/index.htm)
WWII Links (http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/index.htm)

mynameisroland
01-17-2007, 07:25 AM
Read the bit about slats opening, uneven opening may have been a problem specific to this captured Bf 109 also due to pilot unfamiliarity. Top Bf 109 Aces have been quoted on numerous occasions that they could out turn the Spitfire. I AM NOT A 109 FAN, but I still tend to believe experienced German pilots over RAF pilots flying an unfamiliar type.

Likewise on most allied reports even the Typhoon and Mustang can out turn the Bf 109.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y294/mynameisroland/boemherTemp4.jpg

Brain32
01-17-2007, 07:40 AM
Russian tests say, turn time in seconds at 1000m:
SpitfireMkI 19s
SpitfireMkVb 18,8s
HurricaneMkIIa 19-20s
HurricaneMkIIb 20,5s<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

This is my sig http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JtD
01-17-2007, 08:46 AM
To my best knowledge, Hurricanes should turn with or slightly better than early Spitfires.

Brain32 quotes a slight disadvantage for the Hurricane. But the Soviets received very worn out Hurricanes, years old, with hundreds of combat hours so I figure the Soviet Hurricanes were not quite in factory fresh conditions. I'm sure this had some impact on the test results.

AKA_TAGERT
01-17-2007, 08:51 AM
Originally posted by Pollack2006:
From my none too extensive readings in the past I took it that the Hurricane could turn inside a Spitfire (though it lost out on all other performance attributes) but this doesn't appear to be the case in-game.

Why is this so? Am I wrong or has the game crippled the Hurri? Got Track?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

************************************************** **
IF WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER.. THAN WHAT THE H IS YOUR QUESTION?
************************************************** **

Tully__
01-17-2007, 09:28 AM
Top Bf 109 Aces have been quoted...
In many cases this could be the result of a disparity in G tolerance between the attacking pilot and the victim, allowing the attacking pilot to turn tight simply because he is less uncomfortable/hindered by the high G than his victim.

Alternately, unlike the test above where speeds were carefully matched, the attacking pilot may have been flying at close to his corner speed while the other pilot was floundering at much lower speeds. While lower speeds allow tighter radius turns they do nothing to help you turn a full circle onto the other guys tails faster than he turns on to yours.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<center>
http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/sig.jpg
SST X-45 profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fb.zip) | SST X-52 Profile (http://jennirivers.actewagl.net.au/fbx52.zip) | Joysticks & IL2/FB/PF (http://www.airwarfare.com/tech/sticks.htm) | IL2Sticks Utility (http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_essential_files.htm#087)
Maddox Forums Moderator</center>

JtD
01-17-2007, 09:46 AM
The comparison test between the Emil and Hurricane quoted above is indeed one of the poorer jobs the British did. They did not fly the Emil to it's limits (the comment regarding the slats system is a proof of that) and the Emil wasn't in best condition. While I think the Hurricane indeed had a turn advantage over the Emil, it was not a large one.

Pollack2006
01-17-2007, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:Got Track?

No, it's just the impression i've formed; mainly flying against Emils. In a VB i'm on to an Emil's tail like a whippet, the Hurricane takes longer to saddle up(assuming in both cases the Emil driver elects to turn-fight).

WWMaxGunz
01-18-2007, 10:07 AM
So much depends on the altitude the turn is made because the planes did not have uniform
power with altitude.

Hurricane I would outturn Bf-109E-4 from about 4000 feet down and be outturned by the same
109 about 8000 feet and up. High up the Spitfire turned better by ability to keep power
but very high I believe that the 109 has the edge.

Xiolablu3
01-18-2007, 01:26 PM
I believe worn out Hurricanes may affect the ones in game, they were never meant to be British Hurricanes, always representing the Russian Hurricanes.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

--------------------------------------------------------------------
"I despise what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

tomtheyak
01-18-2007, 04:59 PM
One word:

FUEL.

Half the reason the Russian Hurris performed badly was the grade of avgas they were using - over Britain during the BoB and after 100 grade fuels and upwards were available which helped keep the Hurri competitive. Not so in Russia where the conditions, the lower grade (and sometimes poorer quality fuels) plus I imagine a lot of head scratching from VVS ground crews trying to get familiar with Imperial measurements all stack up against it.

The Merlin itself though reliable is in Russian terms a fussy engine maintainence wise - the traditional Russian view on engineering is to make something work and work well for say as an example 100hrs - then bin it. It's relaible within its life and works solidly. Western ethos tends to be to make the thing more complex and require more attention but give it a longer useful life. Say 300hrs but a full service every 100.

I think sometimes this is why the Russians preferred the Airacobra in the end; the Allison was a notoriously rugged workaday engine when used at its best heights and without the complexities of superchargers etc.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Tom
****

"When a prang seems inevitable, endeavor to strike the softest, cheapest object in the vicinity as slow and gently as possible."

click sig to go to VWA:
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a52/tomtheyak/tomsig01.jpg (http://www.web-wings.co.uk/chrisbroad/VWA/)