fighting at very high altitudes... there has never been a proper guide about it. probably because it rarely happens but it would be interesting anyway..
What do you as an engineer think about the Ju288 in general? This plane could carry almost as much as a B29, could divebomb almost as good as a Ju87 and was faster then a Mosquito. Its just an example, maybe you once in a while could make a video about a plane you personally like and explain things that made it so special.
for me the 2 biggest factors for how well a plane dives is how badly it locks up, handles at high speed, and how much much g forces can the plane take for pulling out
I consider that in a separate category called "high speed handling". This video is about dive speeds and acceleration, and which aircraft would escape or catch the other in a dive.
Love the direction the channel has gone, Adam! Always watched your channel for the engineering and physics you were able to pull out of the game (props to the dev team for the depths they go to - even if the FMs aren't always accurate.) Have definitely used the 109 prop pitch air brake many a time lol. Also I am liking the CF-105 logo!
@@AdamTheEnginerd Probably because people don't notice anymore. You're doing great and your research is very well appreciated. I still think your gameplay analysis should say the focus of your channel, but that's me personally, it's because I love the dissection of every turn, every dive and every shot, why it's good or bad. That's what made me subscribe to your channel at least. I learned more about WT through your videos than any time I have played.
these videos makin me realize why I care about warthunder. It's a beautiful simulation. It's not perfect to reality, but it's detailed and thought out and if you know the game well you can use that to your advantage. it's nice. why its such a shame it feels sorta neglected. at its best moments, it's a really fun and engaging experience.
Hey man, I just wanna thank you for all your videos especially the f4u ones! I hate that plane (except for the usmc on) for the longest time, and then when I came across your videos I realized I really didnt understand some mechanics, and now my games are getting better and I'm understanding why I died. So thanks a lot adam! Keep up the great videos!
"Let's MCAS right into it" and that 737 MAX dive angle representation 😂🤣 All explains what I have known. Once the heavy Thunderbolts and 190's get to the high dive speeds that's when they are untouchable, but until then... well even a Zero will have fun with them. Really puts a damper on the BnZ fighters. Good and informative stuff.
So if I understood well it's like inertia, it's easier for the heavy aircraft to keep it's speed/energy state once it has reached it but it's a bit harder for it to reach it compared to ligher aircraft with better acceleration, right ? (provided only friction forces are applied) 7:50 yeah most players don't understand that time is a crucial part of Air RB, the most obvious case being when climbing : the longer you climb the higher you get and the bigger your "energy reserve" gets (without taking account the situation of course). 8:40 conclusion : stop diving to the deck like a mad man, just shallow dive like a boss ^^
Pretty much, heavier means it'll take longer to reach your top speed, but you'll continue accelerating better than a lighter but otherwise identical aircraft. Yup, takes 200 seconds for an aircraft with 5m/s climb rate advantage to get 1km altitude advantage over the enemy.
However energy retention is different for different planes because of many other factors. A plane like p47d cannot deviate too much from linear and shallow flight path otherwise it will bleed too much energy. While other planes can maintain high energy state while flying loopings etc.
@@AdamTheEnginerd yes, acceleration and turn rate are the most important thing in the actual War Thunder Air RB Match up, Axis wins most battles because of this, also because of the Bomber and Ground Pounder spam. You already know this brother
Well no it wasn't correct, this video proves it! Axis don't win because of better fighters, they win because they have less useless planes, and even some of their bombers aren't too useless (Ju288).
@@AdamTheEnginerdThat's also why mixed games tend fare well for the Axis. Germany, Italy, and Japan all in one team essentially can do anything. Aside from the perceived Axis superiority in composition, exaggerated propeller/engine thrust, You ought to mention MG151's being unrealistically powerful relative to other 20mm autocannons for a while now. And the painfully obvious reality of legacy BRs, outdated FMs, bugged armament, and just general incompetence on the side of allied teams as of late.
So the answer is "technically no, but practically yes", because Japanese planes will tend to have a higher energy advantage at the onset of the dive, giving the illusion that they're "outdiving" the US aircraft when in reality, they'd gotten to their target altitude and increased their speed first, and the acceleration advantage of heavier aircraft doesn't have enough time to kick in and translate into speed, and then again into distance. This isn't better dive performance, but better dive positioning, which *looks* like better dive performance, and results in the average US pilot being caught in the dive.
finally someone did it. ive been saying that weight doesnt matter. gravity is the same for every body in earth. Acceleration differences occur just because aerodynamics.
@@AdamTheEnginerd maybe you should talk about mass. the higher mass is important. weight is just a function of gravity that acts on a mass. power to weight ratio is also important. all the different drags applied act differently if you have a heavier or lighter airplance comparatively. Since not only earth gravity is always apply acceleration onto a body of mass, in case of prop airplanes the engine and propeller apply their own acceleration on your body of mass.
Late reply but if what you are saying is true then why does a feather fall slower than a brick ? (as long as it's not in a vaccum) Don't tell me it's because of the aerodynamics, I'm pretty sure a brick would create more air resistance if it had the same weight as the feather. Mass of the object won't increase the gravitational acceleration but it will decrease the effect that the air resistance has on an object.
It's interesting the speed where the accleration curve of P-47 crosses that of the Zero is almost the same no matter the diving angle. This point is also where the P-47 starts to gain energy faster than the Zero. Also, the aircraft's top level speed is where it starts to lose energy. Therefore I guess it's not wise to dive past your own top speed but instead you should accelerate just enough so you're gaining energy faster than the enemy (or you're gaining while he's losing) and use that to reverse the initial energy advantage he has. Diving is only a faster way of accelerating. Ultimately, it only works when you're heavier but your top speed is higher.
Before watching; My hypothesis is: Given equal drag force and engine power, heavier aircraft will *accelerate* faster, and the difference is greater at high speeds, as their gravitational force is stronger.
Great points, and it does dispel the confusion over a statement like dives well, as many will assume that is what it means. I always had thought when they say a good diver, pilots are speaking about energy retention through a dive rather than acceleration, as even while diving you wouldn't have better acceleration than when you are in level flight, given more mass and most likely more drag, which like you mentioned bombers suffer from. So with a 109 it is a pretty decent diver, because of low drag and good power to weight, however it would be faster to decel to normal air speed than a heavier aircraft, which is certainly useful to know in something like a p-51 chasing one. There being other factors like the laminar flow wings on the 51, which create less drag than the 109's wings, and therefore are better at high speed. Because of this drag issue and wing geometry issue, I doubt that the P-47 is able to retain the energy longer, despite being very heavy. Plus the radial open front engine is always such a drag!
Bf109s aren't low drag, they'd have average drag for their weight. And P47s have a low drag/mass ratio so they do retain energy past their top speed well. P47s just aren't too good at low altitude so at the end of a dive you're low and that's not where P47s are best.
@@AdamTheEnginerd Yeah, you said that based on your assumption that what people refer to as makes a good diver are those two things, but I never heard that is what that meant at all. Is it possible maybe you misunderstood what is meant by a good diving plane as well? I mean certainly terms are often morphed and misused over time, it really just depends on who you ask, right? Albeit I am not certain when it is that I came to understand what constituted a good diver as being good, other than energy retention, combined with top end acceleration combined with lower drag. I might like to credit Long5hot, Jengar, GRIMLZ, perhaps Magz, always been a student, though certainly am rusty in this terminology. For instance you really wouldn't call the 190H a good diver, considering the wingspan of that beast, creating tremendous drag that would eat away at the other advantageous features of accel, correct? In essence, like suggested, just thinking perhaps you could make a part two if warranted on what makes a good diving plane, if based on the aforementioned characteristics. Perhaps even getting other educational youtubers input on what they had heard that it is vs what they thought.
@@chris_hisss People don't know what they mean when they talk about dive. The main aspect of dive is dive acceleration, which is why this video was mainly on dive acceleration and not the various other factors that surround dive. Ta152H would dive averagely. Long wings don't make it very draggy. It has average P/W and average drag, so it dives averagely for its BR. Again, dive acceleration is the main aspect of dive performance. This video dealt with it deeply. I consider high speed maneuverability to be separate from dive performance for the record.
Adam would you like to make a video on working with the I-225's radiator? It overheats so quickly and MEC seems difficult to fix that problem since it interferes with the engine's high alt performance.
Damn great video, the graphs really help with the understanding of certain concepts, and I didn't expect to be able to learn so much from this considering most things you read online about diving is pretty much a TLDR(W?) of your video "light dives better than heavy at the start of the dive" . Thank you for the effort put into the video!
1. Induced drag has no effect. 2. I refuse to take into account wave drag because there is no known way of describing it mathematically. 3. Suppose the speed at which engine thrust equals parasitic drag (slightly above top speed) is the same on two airplanes, then before reaching that speed the lighter plane has greater acceleration and after that point, the heavier does.
1. Still a bit of induced drag even in 90°, because the wings create lift even with no AoA. 2. Wave drag had no effect at these speeds. Just because supposedly you can't describe it mathematically doesn't mean you can't use it. Pi can only be used approximately, and the same is true for many things. 3. That's precisely what the min fuel vs max fuel P47 simulation told us.
Maximize wing loading to just the point before it causes control anomalies. You want as much linear energy retention as possible to help climb out of the dive.
Adam! Do a video on stall fighting manuevers in Sim, or at least how to get out of a flat spin after turning to fast. Not having an instructor can lead to some very interesting flying lol
@@AdamTheEnginerd if you ever do I would start in combined battles, tanks in sim are super suspenseful because you don't know where anybody is and your hearing shots going off all over the place, and you get 1 plane automatically so you could take out a fighter in a very target rich environment
Hey dude! You'r doing a greate job, not many youtubers are so "deep" in this game so keep up the good work! All right, I got a proposition for you. I think many people know about localhost thing and In particular, I was there looking only for IAS and TAS to have them at a same time and i was shocked by the amount of numbers in there. So maybe you can help people understand and use, if not all, then the most important quantities. Big thanks anyway!
Thanks, I will! Yeah local host has pretty much every info you'd need. People who don't know what most of the numbers are aren't the ones who are going to use the local host though.
I watched quite a few of your combat videos and I must admit that your aim is godlike. I do worse in arcade with leading marker ^^. I know its all about practice, but maybe you release some guide/tips how to get better? And what about practice in arcade with marker off or better to get better aim straight in RB? PS. I really enjoy your understanding of battles, enemy weakness and strengths, how to use your plans and all those 1 vs X battles. Never saw such great skill.
Thanks! I wouldn't know how to make a video on how to aim. Watch what I do, don't be greedy, try to predict what the enemy will do based on his plane, your plane, and the situation (altitude, energy, teammates, enemies). You are better off learning to aim in RB.
It's interesting to see the numbers on how long it actually takes to gain separation. There are tons of other factors that influence in-game dives that would be neat to see, but the model could quickly become way too complicated. High-speed handling and rip speed can be pretty important in some scenarios. with the corsair, I've gotten 109s that chased me in dives to rip by looping under them. The later 109s are fast enough that they still accelerate well relatively close to their rip speed, which combined with the larger turn radius at those speeds leads to them overspeeding while following the split-S. People don't seem to expect hard maneuvers that lead to gaining too much speed.
Yeah, I could model maneuvers but it's a detail at this point, the bigger picture I presented in the video is the most useful representation. Yup, at 650+ if a Bf109 follows your split S and doesn't use the prop pitch airbrake, it'll rip.
@@AdamTheEnginerd I know 109s are more popular than other planes with similarly low rip speeds (such as Yaks and Las), but their pilots don't seem to make the mistake of following me in those maneuvers as much.
@@AdamTheEnginerd seeing how MER changes at high speeds would be interesting, since both planes will be making slight maneuvers if the chasing plane is within shooting distance. does the MER advantage of the zero decrease relative to the P-47 the faster the planes are moving?
Engine power and Drag to weight ratio is the key. If two planes are equal aerodinamically When both planes are diving air and friction needs to excert more force on a a heavier plane to stop its acceleration beyong gravity. Force=mass x acceleration : its simple, if that friction opposing force can me diminished by better aerodynamics or better forward propulsion engine force youll dive faster than a heavier plane (fighter vs bomber). If your plane is a brick with huge drag no matter how heavy it is a lighter more aerodynamic one will catch you. In a void no matter the weight every object dive the same. So in air is all as you said a matter of weight to drag ratio and engine acceleration. In ww2 it was wellknown that no German piston-engined plane could outdive the Thunderbolt.
You know, I never did the math, cause I have no idea how to, but my theoretical conclusion was the same, light aircraft beat a dive from stall speed, while aircraft that are already limited by drag, are pushed faster by thier weight.
@@AdamTheEnginerd I enjoy watching people freak out and dive, when a target gets near them.... Welp you just blew your entire game with one bad decision.
As you say, Dives well is somewhat meaningless, if you play boom and zoom, you want to retain energy coming out of the dive, the ability to turn energy back into potential energy for your next pass, or extend away.
maybe you could make a historical video about an event in world war II but include specific technical information on the aircraft involved in the battle and how the pilots used or misused their aircraft within the battle i think it would be very interesting to hear about but the actual historical events of the war along side detailed technical information on the aircraft used such as the Battle of Britain and how the Luftwaffe and the RAF fought one another using their aircraft to their advantage or how they misused them either way, love your vids
it doesn't really matter whether your aircraft is diving better or worse as long as there's at least 2 second window where your planes and the enemy planes is under 500m you're dead if 1 bullet hits you cause if it's not impaired your aircraft performance most of the time you'll make a turn or maneuver out of reflex to dodge which bleeds your speed and further eliminate dive performance difference
I never really factored weight into diving characteristics, I always thought that the maximum speed the airframe could take and the loss of control as the speed increased was more important. Incidentally, aircraft with nigh features also have a reputation of being heavy.
if the aircraft is heavy while the drag is low it will dive faster then a plane with the same weight with higher drag (same engine and propeller off course)
You have to remember that the engine of the planes are different try to use the same plane and one with bombs, other without bombs. Try to use heavy bombs to test it out.
Planes are indeed different, which is why I tested the P47D25 with minimum fuel vs maximum fuel. That's much better than bombs because bombs change drag as well, while fuel only changes weight.
I always misjudge enemies airplanes speed and energy level. For some reason in War Thunder its very hard to judge someones speed while in real life I see a car and I see a plane and I can get a timing right when and where it will be. It feels like cognitive dissonance like something is missing.
Distance is big so it's hard to get a sense of how fast they are approaching if you like at the plane itself. I look at the distance ticker, the faster it ticks the faster you both are going in a merge.
Ik the general opinion on bombers, but there isn’t really a guide on the different bomb types for different nations and how many kg of explosive mass are actually needed for bases/airfields. It might take a while, but such a guide may improve the efficiency of bombers overall.
Bombing bases and airfield is pretty much the most useless thing you can do. Doesn't matter if you use 1 bomb less on a base and use 1 more bomb the af, if you can't finish off the af.
AdamTheEnginerd yeah fairs. Base bombing only really works with the German bombers imo and requires some competence from the players. Not a lot, but some. Can also work well at rank 1 but people usually lack abilities there
Hey. Saw your tempest mk2 spaded video and came here. My question: Why do longer chases against better diving props, translate to bigger *energy* difference? Unless I can climb back to altitude, I wouldn't have built up energy difference right?!
You can get a bigger energy difference if the worse diving plane loses energy (lower speed gain per altitude if you prefer) than the better diving plane.
Thanks a lot Adam! These videos are full of information and prove really useful for the everyday player. You put a lot of work on it, and its really cool, again, thanks a lot! (Its not like i will be constantly reminding myself of these everytime i play, so that i perform better, but serves as a nice curiosity, and a tool that i might use when i feel like it, you know, casually... :D)
My pleasure! Yeah I worked on this for at least 30 hours. The conclusions are easy and intuitive to remember, as well as how to dive without getting caught (minimizing dodges, diving early enough).
Heavier objects don’t fall faster. Leonardo da Vinci actually proved this by dropping heavy and light spheres that had the same size, and they fell at the same speed
Yo man, you ever do sim stuff in WY? Maybe one day a video on Mach tuck and how it effects certain aircraft differently? I've been effected heavily in the Mig-19 models, and the P-38s, in sim and it would be helpful if there was like a trimming guide or a way to smooth the transition into mach. I think I'm wording this correctly, please correct me if I'm wrong, but yeah, just a suggestion.
It's in the description of my videos where I use guns ;). 600m is too high, 75%+ of your kills are below 600m. I used to do 400m, now I'll be staying at 500m.
Cool man. I’ve been wondering for a while. I got used to 600. However I’ve been realizing that the only time its truly useful is when people are Running or when a head on happens
@@AdamTheEnginerd More so because they're not amazing enough in a dive or acceleration to offset their need for speed and lack of manoeuvrability. American planes are certainly good (a lot of the issue is my own skill level), but I've just always felt they're too restrictive in playstyle, yet when played well their advantages don't seem as strong as other types when those other types are played to their own strengths. It's a lot of why Russian fighters are my favourite in terms of playstyle and performance; they can face most any more specialized types. Basically, I like always "having options", and US planes tend to have the least options to get out of anything but an ideal situation. From my average skill and experience perspective, of course.
@@AdamTheEnginerd But isn't that teamplay advantage neutralized if the opponents do teamplay too? "Get a team" is always the solution that is given when people debate why the axis always wins at some prop BRs.
@@SangsungMeansToCome US planes playing together will win over opponent's teamplay, as long as they climb correctly and maintain energy they will win via attrition of slowly splitting up and eliminating their opponents no matter the amount of teamplay. I have played many matches where it took just 2 decent p47 players to destroy a groups of german fighters working together at 5km+ alt
Adam a question, what software do you use to get the math and stats for these videos? I can see you use MATLAB but where do you get the information about masses, trust and in general the information about the planes' flight model and performance?
I follow these instructions to get read the flight model files: www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/8nq70p/tutorial_how_to_datamine_or_how_i_learned_to_stop/ You need some understanding of what to look for and what coefficients do what to do any meaningful work with them.
Very useful info, but I would contend that it isn't normally American aircraft pilots that say American aircraft are heavier so when you get into trouble you should dive away, they know that that isn't normally going to save them because they have experienced those types of deaths. Its the 109 and zero pilots that are always above and behind you and have never played American planes before that say that after they kill you. They also say things like, "Americans teams would win if they side climb" and "American plane players are just stupid". I could be wrong just my thoughts.
In my experience it is said 90% of the time by people in US planes. Likely new players I'll admit though. People in general say that as well, not necessarily US pilots. My favorite is when a bomber pilot blames friendly fighters for his death.
0:43 isn't dive angle also a possible meaning of "good dive?" My facts may be wrong but I recall the Corsair's dive flaps let it head straight down without overspeeding, and almost no plane could follow it for more than a few seconds (except I think Buffalos, and Wildcats which literally didn't have a Vmax)?? And a lot of the terms you use are mysterious to people like me who are comfortable with engineering in general but have no idea what a "rip speed" is or what the various spawn modes you mention are. You clearly are making all these great vids to communicate, so why not at least define your terms when you first use them in a given vid? To be fair I see you sometimes defining it later, so may just be a question of edit to move that forward... Thanks for all the work!
It might be a small benefit to be able to dive at any angle, but in practical applications it's not too significant. What do you mean by "spawn modes"? Rip speed is simply Vmax. My pleasure!
I can't buy any camouflages of p51 d30..... I know this topic is pointless but I'd like to know why. I got p51d30 in order to buy its camouflage.......
@@AdamTheEnginerd yeah and after they make theirselfs believe that bias exists, they have no chance of winning and become RP whores who go for the first easy target they see instead of putting up a fight and trying to win That's why I don't play alies anymore because I can't win 1v5s Sry for the rant lol
@@AdamTheEnginerd A few months ago I wanted to be an aeronautical engineer, but here in Brazil it is very difficult to be, you literally have to study while shitting. Research about "ITA" (Aeronautical Technological Institute), it is the most difficult university course in the country and one of the best and most difficult universities in Latin America.
So... heavier planes dive faster at higher speeds, which is the type of speeds you should be at in a diving plane, meaning heavier aircraft DO dive better than lighter aircraft
No, for one the initial dive acceleration is actually pretty important. If the enemy gets close enough to make you dodge, then you bleed even more speed and you might get caught. Second, B29 is heavier than P51, and yet P51 dives better at every speed. That's an easy counter-example, hence "heavier aircraft DO dive better than lighter aircraft" is false.
@@AdamTheEnginerd B-29 doesn't dive faster than P-51 because B-29 is also a bigger plane with far more drag and different aerodynamics, which is why that imho was not really a good example. A P-51 with the mass of a B-29 would dive faster than a P-51 with normal mass. When no other factor of a plane is changed except mass, it's acceleration will be lower in a straight line and up, but in a dive it will have higher kinetic energy and therefore will be less affected by the force of air resistance.
@@AlmightyDude420 No, a P51 with the mass of the B29 would have the worst acceleration out of any single engined fighter below its top speed. Look at the example with a minimum fuel P47 and maximum fuel P47, the minimum fuel P47 accelerates better at low speed until its top speed, and then the maximum fuel P47 accelerates better beyond the top speed (4:05). That's because a higher mass with the same power will lower P/W ratio, and hence lower acceleration.
@@AdamTheEnginerd AdamTheEnginerd Yea, basically what I said. In a straight line and up, the acceleration is lower with a heavier plane. In a dive, it will retain its kinetic energy better, due to being less affected by air resistance. Air resistance increases exponentially with speed. Planes with more mass have proportionally higher kinetic energy at the same speed, and get less affected by the force of air resistance. Think about the hammer and feather experiment on one of the Apollo missions. In a vacuum, they fall with the same acceleration, but one gets higher kinetic energy. On the Earth, we have an atmosphere of air to slow a light feather down far quicker than a more massive hammer. I understand that less mass means lower power to weight ratio, which is why we agree that at a lower speed where air resistance as far less, an equally powerful engine will need more time to get more mass up to speed. But at higher speed where air resistance becomes a powerful counter-balancing force, a light plane will need a lot more power to push the plane any faster than it's already going, and if the wings didn't rip, air resistance would balance it down to constant speed at a certain point. At that same speed, a heavy plane will have more to go before air resistance balances it to this point. I understand that at low speeds, a light plane will accelerate better, but I just feel that when in a heavy plane, you should always keep your speed up and be in a very shallow descent, when enemies are close.
@@AlmightyDude420 Then we agree with everything, except you seem to underestimate the importance of the low speed dive acceleration but that's alright.
Love things, the derivative of things, and their derivatives, and their derivatives, and their derivatives, and the integral of the derivative of their integrals.
Feel free to suggest ideas for future educational videos!
Stay useful.
i knew it was a myth the moment i first took my Hayabusa Otsu for a ride
btw, can you talk about the Squadron Vehicle Firecrest?
Perhaps testing the P-51Ds rudder lock and handling at combat speed that have been noticed as being 'off' on the current FM?
fighting at very high altitudes... there has never been a proper guide about it. probably because it rarely happens but it would be interesting anyway..
What do you as an engineer think about the Ju288 in general?
This plane could carry almost as much as a B29, could divebomb almost as good as a Ju87 and was faster then a Mosquito.
Its just an example, maybe you once in a while could make a video about a plane you personally like and explain things that made it so special.
Lol'd at the 737 MAX being in the graphic for dive angles
Hahaha I did as well!
@Zero Fun MAX did not exist in 2001
"See you in your dreams."
Uhh... Adam, you're frightening the children.
I told COPPA that this video wasn't for children.
Doesn't mean that they still don't watch.
No longer my problem in that case ;).
Worst case scenario is me showing them graphs in their sleep.
I slept then had a nightmare of that man
@@AdamTheEnginerd oh no! not the graphs xD
MATLAB: an engineers best friend and a computer scientists worst nightmare
Lmao CS don't have to use it if they don't want to!
@@AdamTheEnginerd CS student here, used gnu octave for few of my math classes (honestly just used C myself)
@@thisconnectd Don't know what gnu octave is haha. 95% of my programming time has been on Matlab.
@@AdamTheEnginerd gnu octave is essentially a free, open source Matlab.
@@setesh1294 Oh, sounds interesting.
"See you in your dreams "
-Oh, not again please.
Your dreams of me aren't pleasant?
A suggestion for another vid would be something like this - but zoom climbing vs shallow climbing. Same planes. An idea.
Thanks for this vid!
It would actually mimic the same tendencies as this video haha.
"Cya in your dreams"
It's time to hold J in my dreams as well
Nah, fight!
"Cya in your dreams"
Creepy
I prefer the term endearing.
who doesn't dream of graphs?
@@ngstigator Bunny girl.
@@AdamTheEnginerd haha
Well researched information Adam!
Anyways,I would love to see more German matches,especially Bf109s ;)
Thanks!
They are on my list!
@@AdamTheEnginerd Nice to hear that ;)
Please dont. Axis teams dont need any more good players
for me the 2 biggest factors for how well a plane dives is how badly it locks up, handles at high speed, and how much much g forces can the plane take for pulling out
I consider that in a separate category called "high speed handling". This video is about dive speeds and acceleration, and which aircraft would escape or catch the other in a dive.
Love the direction the channel has gone, Adam! Always watched your channel for the engineering and physics you were able to pull out of the game (props to the dev team for the depths they go to - even if the FMs aren't always accurate.) Have definitely used the 109 prop pitch air brake many a time lol. Also I am liking the CF-105 logo!
Thanks! These kinds of videos are ones I prefer making, but they do take a massive amount of time!
@@AdamTheEnginerd Just know that you have the Adam514 Stans out here who appreciate it. Add me on WT - WULVER
I love seeing how much you have improved in the voice department in a few months Adam, very good video too. Your content keeps getting better.
Thanks! Interestingly I get less and less comments about my voice!
@@AdamTheEnginerd Probably because people don't notice anymore. You're doing great and your research is very well appreciated. I still think your gameplay analysis should say the focus of your channel, but that's me personally, it's because I love the dissection of every turn, every dive and every shot, why it's good or bad. That's what made me subscribe to your channel at least. I learned more about WT through your videos than any time I have played.
This is like a physics lab on kinematics, force, and energy explained to people who have not leaned physics.
Hmm I aim for it to be understandable by people who have passed high school physics.
these videos makin me realize why I care about warthunder. It's a beautiful simulation. It's not perfect to reality, but it's detailed and thought out and if you know the game well you can use that to your advantage. it's nice. why its such a shame it feels sorta neglected. at its best moments, it's a really fun and engaging experience.
Well said! WT is a high quality game, with a few bad mechanics.
"stay useful"
>me crying my life's bad decision
Do your best!
been wondering about this for years. never got a satisfying answer. thanks for all the work you do, cheers
My pleasure!
Hey man, I just wanna thank you for all your videos especially the f4u ones! I hate that plane (except for the usmc on) for the longest time, and then when I came across your videos I realized I really didnt understand some mechanics, and now my games are getting better and I'm understanding why I died.
So thanks a lot adam!
Keep up the great videos!
Yeah some of the F4Us are truly good.
My pleasure! I will!
Lemme see some War Thunder videos after school.
Sees Matlab.
Hahaha PTSD?
Guess we got a new commandment for Adam's Ten Commandments: Never dive straight down.
Hmm certainly not the whole way down. Good rule of thumb is to head almost directly away from the enemy's direction.
"Let's MCAS right into it" and that 737 MAX dive angle representation 😂🤣
All explains what I have known. Once the heavy Thunderbolts and 190's get to the high dive speeds that's when they are untouchable, but until then... well even a Zero will have fun with them. Really puts a damper on the BnZ fighters.
Good and informative stuff.
Haha yes!
Thanks!
Cannonfodder43,
still with the 190's I see ^^
Yeah great video
So if I understood well it's like inertia, it's easier for the heavy aircraft to keep it's speed/energy state once it has reached it but it's a bit harder for it to reach it compared to ligher aircraft with better acceleration, right ? (provided only friction forces are applied)
7:50 yeah most players don't understand that time is a crucial part of Air RB, the most obvious case being when climbing : the longer you climb the higher you get and the bigger your "energy reserve" gets (without taking account the situation of course).
8:40 conclusion : stop diving to the deck like a mad man, just shallow dive like a boss ^^
Pretty much, heavier means it'll take longer to reach your top speed, but you'll continue accelerating better than a lighter but otherwise identical aircraft.
Yup, takes 200 seconds for an aircraft with 5m/s climb rate advantage to get 1km altitude advantage over the enemy.
However energy retention is different for different planes because of many other factors. A plane like p47d cannot deviate too much from linear and shallow flight path otherwise it will bleed too much energy. While other planes can maintain high energy state while flying loopings etc.
Before watching I'm going to automatically state my assumption the Japanese still greatly outdive everything.
Was that assumption correct?
@@AdamTheEnginerd yes, acceleration and turn rate are the most important thing in the actual War Thunder Air RB Match up, Axis wins most battles because of this, also because of the Bomber and Ground Pounder spam. You already know this brother
Well no it wasn't correct, this video proves it! Axis don't win because of better fighters, they win because they have less useless planes, and even some of their bombers aren't too useless (Ju288).
@@AdamTheEnginerdThat's also why mixed games tend fare well for the Axis. Germany, Italy, and Japan all in one team essentially can do anything.
Aside from the perceived Axis superiority in composition, exaggerated propeller/engine thrust, You ought to mention MG151's being unrealistically powerful relative to other 20mm autocannons for a while now. And the painfully obvious reality of legacy BRs, outdated FMs, bugged armament, and just general incompetence on the side of allied teams as of late.
So the answer is "technically no, but practically yes", because Japanese planes will tend to have a higher energy advantage at the onset of the dive, giving the illusion that they're "outdiving" the US aircraft when in reality, they'd gotten to their target altitude and increased their speed first, and the acceleration advantage of heavier aircraft doesn't have enough time to kick in and translate into speed, and then again into distance. This isn't better dive performance, but better dive positioning, which *looks* like better dive performance, and results in the average US pilot being caught in the dive.
Next test idea? Do American planes like the P-47s and P-51Ds really turn better at high speed, or do other planes just turn worse at high speed.
They'll turn relatively better than their competition, as in they'll conserve the same turn radius over a bigger speed range than most other aircraft.
finally someone did it. ive been saying that weight doesnt matter. gravity is the same for every body in earth.
Acceleration differences occur just because aerodynamics.
The drag to weight ratio matters though! More weight helps accelerate past the level flight top speed of the aircraft.
@@AdamTheEnginerd maybe you should talk about mass. the higher mass is important. weight is just a function of gravity that acts on a mass. power to weight ratio is also important. all the different drags applied act differently if you have a heavier or lighter airplance comparatively. Since not only earth gravity is always apply acceleration onto a body of mass, in case of prop airplanes the engine and propeller apply their own acceleration on your body of mass.
Late reply but if what you are saying is true then why does a feather fall slower than a brick ? (as long as it's not in a vaccum)
Don't tell me it's because of the aerodynamics, I'm pretty sure a brick would create more air resistance if it had the same weight as the feather. Mass of the object won't increase the gravitational acceleration but it will decrease the effect that the air resistance has on an object.
It's interesting the speed where the accleration curve of P-47 crosses that of the Zero is almost the same no matter the diving angle. This point is also where the P-47 starts to gain energy faster than the Zero. Also, the aircraft's top level speed is where it starts to lose energy. Therefore I guess it's not wise to dive past your own top speed but instead you should accelerate just enough so you're gaining energy faster than the enemy (or you're gaining while he's losing) and use that to reverse the initial energy advantage he has. Diving is only a faster way of accelerating. Ultimately, it only works when you're heavier but your top speed is higher.
Yup, a dive is not much different from going straight!
Scary how much work you put into such videos! Waiting 2 weeks was worth it, keep it up 👍
Scary in a good way I hope!
Thanks, I will!
Before watching;
My hypothesis is:
Given equal drag force and engine power, heavier aircraft will *accelerate* faster, and the difference is greater at high speeds, as their gravitational force is stronger.
Only when above their top speed!
Really awesome vid!! Thanks Adam!
Thanks, my pleasure!
Great points, and it does dispel the confusion over a statement like dives well, as many will assume that is what it means. I always had thought when they say a good diver, pilots are speaking about energy retention through a dive rather than acceleration, as even while diving you wouldn't have better acceleration than when you are in level flight, given more mass and most likely more drag, which like you mentioned bombers suffer from. So with a 109 it is a pretty decent diver, because of low drag and good power to weight, however it would be faster to decel to normal air speed than a heavier aircraft, which is certainly useful to know in something like a p-51 chasing one. There being other factors like the laminar flow wings on the 51, which create less drag than the 109's wings, and therefore are better at high speed. Because of this drag issue and wing geometry issue, I doubt that the P-47 is able to retain the energy longer, despite being very heavy. Plus the radial open front engine is always such a drag!
Bf109s aren't low drag, they'd have average drag for their weight. And P47s have a low drag/mass ratio so they do retain energy past their top speed well. P47s just aren't too good at low altitude so at the end of a dive you're low and that's not where P47s are best.
@@AdamTheEnginerd So do you think that is what is generally referred to as a good diver is referring to?
I explain it in the video, but it's mainly dive acceleration and top speed.
@@AdamTheEnginerd Yeah, you said that based on your assumption that what people refer to as makes a good diver are those two things, but I never heard that is what that meant at all. Is it possible maybe you misunderstood what is meant by a good diving plane as well? I mean certainly terms are often morphed and misused over time, it really just depends on who you ask, right? Albeit I am not certain when it is that I came to understand what constituted a good diver as being good, other than energy retention, combined with top end acceleration combined with lower drag.
I might like to credit Long5hot, Jengar, GRIMLZ, perhaps Magz, always been a student, though certainly am rusty in this terminology.
For instance you really wouldn't call the 190H a good diver, considering the wingspan of that beast, creating tremendous drag that would eat away at the other advantageous features of accel, correct?
In essence, like suggested, just thinking perhaps you could make a part two if warranted on what makes a good diving plane, if based on the aforementioned characteristics. Perhaps even getting other educational youtubers input on what they had heard that it is vs what they thought.
@@chris_hisss People don't know what they mean when they talk about dive. The main aspect of dive is dive acceleration, which is why this video was mainly on dive acceleration and not the various other factors that surround dive.
Ta152H would dive averagely. Long wings don't make it very draggy. It has average P/W and average drag, so it dives averagely for its BR.
Again, dive acceleration is the main aspect of dive performance. This video dealt with it deeply. I consider high speed maneuverability to be separate from dive performance for the record.
Adam would you like to make a video on working with the I-225's radiator? It overheats so quickly and MEC seems difficult to fix that problem since it interferes with the engine's high alt performance.
You need to adjust mixture to keep it performaing at high alt. Reduce prop pitch to 80-90 will help cooling a lot with not much loss of power.
@@AdamTheEnginerdI've just given it a try, and IT WORKS. Thank you so much Adam, you are great.
@@budweiser.pie62 My pleasure!
I literally saw the conversation about this on the Discord server. Great video as always, too!
I've been planning to make a video on this topic for over 2 years though!
@@AdamTheEnginerd Damn, does making a physics video take that long, or did you just have more important things to do first?
It takes many hours, but that's not the reason for why it was released today. I just had other things to do first.
I see
Damn great video, the graphs really help with the understanding of certain concepts, and I didn't expect to be able to learn so much from this considering most things you read online about diving is pretty much a TLDR(W?) of your video "light dives better than heavy at the start of the dive" . Thank you for the effort put into the video!
Thanks!
Yeah I went in depth here! Could have gone even further in depth, but already this is a 13 minute video.
My pleasure!
1. Induced drag has no effect.
2. I refuse to take into account wave drag because there is no known way of describing it mathematically.
3. Suppose the speed at which engine thrust equals parasitic drag (slightly above top speed) is the same on two airplanes, then before reaching that speed the lighter plane has greater acceleration and after that point, the heavier does.
1. Still a bit of induced drag even in 90°, because the wings create lift even with no AoA.
2. Wave drag had no effect at these speeds. Just because supposedly you can't describe it mathematically doesn't mean you can't use it. Pi can only be used approximately, and the same is true for many things.
3. That's precisely what the min fuel vs max fuel P47 simulation told us.
Maximize wing loading to just the point before it causes control anomalies. You want as much linear energy retention as possible to help climb out of the dive.
Yup that would be best for dive and LER, but sacrifices turn performance and takeoff/landing performance, which can be important.
Adam! Do a video on stall fighting manuevers in Sim, or at least how to get out of a flat spin after turning to fast. Not having an instructor can lead to some very interesting flying lol
Perhaps I'll play sim one day.
@@AdamTheEnginerd if you ever do I would start in combined battles, tanks in sim are super suspenseful because you don't know where anybody is and your hearing shots going off all over the place, and you get 1 plane automatically so you could take out a fighter in a very target rich environment
don't we already know heavier objects don't fall faster
Not everyone knows. And weight matters for aircraft (power and drag as well).
Thanks Adam a great quality video as usual! Very interesting to watch : )!
My pleasure, glad you found it interesting!
Hey dude! You'r doing a greate job, not many youtubers are so "deep" in this game so keep up the good work!
All right, I got a proposition for you.
I think many people know about localhost thing and In particular, I was there looking only for IAS and TAS to have them at a same time and i was shocked by the amount of numbers in there. So
maybe you can help people understand and use, if not all, then the most important quantities. Big thanks anyway!
Thanks, I will!
Yeah local host has pretty much every info you'd need. People who don't know what most of the numbers are aren't the ones who are going to use the local host though.
This was an excellent analysis. I learned so much. Thanks
I wish I knew more of this technical stuff
My pleasure, glad to hear it!
1 technical video per month!
I watched quite a few of your combat videos and I must admit that your aim is godlike. I do worse in arcade with leading marker ^^. I know its all about practice, but maybe you release some guide/tips how to get better? And what about practice in arcade with marker off or better to get better aim straight in RB?
PS. I really enjoy your understanding of battles, enemy weakness and strengths, how to use your plans and all those 1 vs X battles. Never saw such great skill.
Thanks! I wouldn't know how to make a video on how to aim. Watch what I do, don't be greedy, try to predict what the enemy will do based on his plane, your plane, and the situation (altitude, energy, teammates, enemies). You are better off learning to aim in RB.
good video. and its nice to know why i die in a dive and how to impruve.
Thanks! Indeed!
Great video Adam, one must appreciate the amount of work you put in,in these kind of videos anyways im still waiting for that FW 190A video :D
Thanks! It's a lot of work indeed!
Fw190A is on my list!
The "See you in your dreams"... Is that a threat?
It can be interpreted however you want ;).
In the thumbnail it looks like one of the p47s wings is longer than the other and it’s really bugging me
Hahaha it's called perspective!
It's interesting to see the numbers on how long it actually takes to gain separation. There are tons of other factors that influence in-game dives that would be neat to see, but the model could quickly become way too complicated.
High-speed handling and rip speed can be pretty important in some scenarios. with the corsair, I've gotten 109s that chased me in dives to rip by looping under them. The later 109s are fast enough that they still accelerate well relatively close to their rip speed, which combined with the larger turn radius at those speeds leads to them overspeeding while following the split-S. People don't seem to expect hard maneuvers that lead to gaining too much speed.
Yeah, I could model maneuvers but it's a detail at this point, the bigger picture I presented in the video is the most useful representation.
Yup, at 650+ if a Bf109 follows your split S and doesn't use the prop pitch airbrake, it'll rip.
@@AdamTheEnginerd I know 109s are more popular than other planes with similarly low rip speeds (such as Yaks and Las), but their pilots don't seem to make the mistake of following me in those maneuvers as much.
@@AdamTheEnginerd seeing how MER changes at high speeds would be interesting, since both planes will be making slight maneuvers if the chasing plane is within shooting distance. does the MER advantage of the zero decrease relative to the P-47 the faster the planes are moving?
@@Turk3YbAstEr Yeah the faster the speed, the better the faster plane's MER will be relative to the slower plane's MER.
Engine power and Drag to weight ratio is the key. If two planes are equal aerodinamically When both planes are diving air and friction needs to excert more force on a a heavier plane to stop its acceleration beyong gravity. Force=mass x acceleration : its simple, if that friction opposing force can me diminished by better aerodynamics or better forward propulsion engine force youll dive faster than a heavier plane (fighter vs bomber). If your plane is a brick with huge drag no matter how heavy it is a lighter more aerodynamic one will catch you. In a void no matter the weight every object dive the same. So in air is all as you said a matter of weight to drag ratio and engine acceleration. In ww2 it was wellknown that no German piston-engined plane could outdive the Thunderbolt.
Precisely (beyond a certain speed for the P47 outdive part that is).
You know, I never did the math, cause I have no idea how to, but my theoretical conclusion was the same, light aircraft beat a dive from stall speed, while aircraft that are already limited by drag, are pushed faster by thier weight.
Meaning that "denser" aircraft have a small advantage at extreme speeds.
Pretty much!
Thank you FOR MAKING THESE!
My pleasure!
@@AdamTheEnginerd This partially explains why american planes are so good at shallow dives, and shallow climbs against their competitors.
Which is linked to their higher top speed, indeed.
@@AdamTheEnginerd I enjoy watching people freak out and dive, when a target gets near them.... Welp you just blew your entire game with one bad decision.
Ouch, the 737 graph stung. Fair play though.
-737 builder
Hahaha are you truly a 737 builder?
@@AdamTheEnginerd Indeed
Nice, 737 is quite a popular aircraft even in mainstream media nowadays.
As you say, Dives well is somewhat meaningless, if you play boom and zoom, you want to retain energy coming out of the dive, the ability to turn energy back into potential energy for your next pass, or extend away.
The aircraft with better dive acceleration will also retain energy better at that speed.
Am I wrong in thinking that a heavier aircraft will zoom better? As in a zero can boom and zoom, but a P47 will be more efficient.
@@merocaine Yes, but no because of weight, it's because it has a higher top speed.
maybe review the prem j2m5? very under-tiered plane with amazing guns
I don't have it unfortunately.
Unemployed Goose Absolutely love that plane
maybe you could make a historical video about an event in world war II but include specific technical information on the aircraft involved in the battle and how the pilots used or misused their aircraft within the battle
i think it would be very interesting to hear about but the actual historical events of the war along side detailed technical information on the aircraft used such as the Battle of Britain and how the Luftwaffe and the RAF fought one another using their aircraft to their advantage or how they misused them
either way, love your vids
I'll consider it!
Thanks for the support!
it doesn't really matter whether your aircraft is diving better or worse as long as there's at least 2 second window where your planes and the enemy planes is under 500m you're dead if 1 bullet hits you cause if it's not impaired your aircraft performance most of the time you'll make a turn or maneuver out of reflex to dodge which bleeds your speed and further eliminate dive performance difference
I never really factored weight into diving characteristics, I always thought that the maximum speed the airframe could take and the loss of control as the speed increased was more important. Incidentally, aircraft with nigh features also have a reputation of being heavy.
I'm only talking about dive performance, not high speed handling. This video is only about which aircraft would catch which in a dive.
@@AdamTheEnginerd No yeah I'm just posting my thoughts :D
if the aircraft is heavy while the drag is low it will dive faster then a plane with the same weight with higher drag (same engine and propeller off course)
Yup, its drag to weight ratio would be lower.
Keep those graph videos coming!
I will!
I feel like a true apples to apples test would be the same plane against itself but with minimum fuel and maximum fuel
How do you find the weight of aircraft in game?
In the flight model data files.
Do you answer every comment? Cause that's dedication.
Except the really stupid ones sometimes.
Can you play with the Me 262 Squad vehicle? I'm going to unlock it in 2 weeks, and i don't know if it is a good airplane for realistic air battles. Ty
I don't have it unfortunately.
*_Very interesting stuff!_*
I agree!
You have to remember that the engine of the planes are different try to use the same plane and one with bombs, other without bombs.
Try to use heavy bombs to test it out.
Planes are indeed different, which is why I tested the P47D25 with minimum fuel vs maximum fuel. That's much better than bombs because bombs change drag as well, while fuel only changes weight.
I always misjudge enemies airplanes speed and energy level. For some reason in War Thunder its very hard to judge someones speed while in real life I see a car and I see a plane and I can get a timing right when and where it will be. It feels like cognitive dissonance like something is missing.
Distance is big so it's hard to get a sense of how fast they are approaching if you like at the plane itself. I look at the distance ticker, the faster it ticks the faster you both are going in a merge.
Ik the general opinion on bombers, but there isn’t really a guide on the different bomb types for different nations and how many kg of explosive mass are actually needed for bases/airfields. It might take a while, but such a guide may improve the efficiency of bombers overall.
Bombing bases and airfield is pretty much the most useless thing you can do. Doesn't matter if you use 1 bomb less on a base and use 1 more bomb the af, if you can't finish off the af.
AdamTheEnginerd yeah fairs. Base bombing only really works with the German bombers imo and requires some competence from the players. Not a lot, but some. Can also work well at rank 1 but people usually lack abilities there
P47 is just absolutely insane at dive speeds however the quickest diving prop irrc is the spitfire 9
Highest Mach number prop yeah.
Ending the video about diving with that Fw190 diving on you triggers my anger over unresolved plot points in shows :D
Haha nothing special happened ;), plus the video is about aircraft performance!
It's complicated. Much like anything else in air-to-air combat.
What is complicated?
I'm curious about your graphics and post-FX settings
(I'm watching the video well :)
Normal post FX, around medium settings.
Hey.
Saw your tempest mk2 spaded video and came here.
My question: Why do longer chases against better diving props, translate to bigger *energy* difference? Unless I can climb back to altitude, I wouldn't have built up energy difference right?!
You can get a bigger energy difference if the worse diving plane loses energy (lower speed gain per altitude if you prefer) than the better diving plane.
Thanks a lot Adam! These videos are full of information and prove really useful for the everyday player. You put a lot of work on it, and its really cool, again, thanks a lot!
(Its not like i will be constantly reminding myself of these everytime i play, so that i perform better, but serves as a nice curiosity, and a tool that i might use when i feel like it, you know, casually... :D)
My pleasure! Yeah I worked on this for at least 30 hours. The conclusions are easy and intuitive to remember, as well as how to dive without getting caught (minimizing dodges, diving early enough).
Are there plans for MiG-21MF/SMT gameplay?
Not really, I'm avoiding top tier.
Heavier objects don’t fall faster. Leonardo da Vinci actually proved this by dropping heavy and light spheres that had the same size, and they fell at the same speed
When not taking into account thrust and drag, indeed!
Love it, good job Adam 👍🏼🍻
Thanks!
have you tried the do-335 a-0? i really know how to use it
I have. I'd recommend the one with the 20mm, not the 15mm.
Super important to know if u wanna live, thanks for uploading.
Well done!!
Indeed, thanks!
As expected. Good video for those that don't know =)
Thanks!
nice video👍 Love these new technical education videos
I love you
Thanks! Same kind of thing as I did before, but a bit longer!
Indeed, but now there is your voice instead of text
I've always done voice in my technical videos though.
Oh, really 😅
you should be a physics teacher
:p
Haha maybe! But, I wouldn't be able to handle people who wouldn't care for the subject, so prob not a good idea.
omg he uses matlab lol. I can smell the engineer from a mile away, excellent video man!
Haha thanks man!
"LETS MCAS RIGHT INTO IT" OMG
Appropriate?
Love the choice of 737 MAX
It wasn't a choice, it was a necessity ;).
What´s your source for the P47D Flat plate area? Because I highly doubt that it´s only 0,5m^2 higher than the zeros.
Yo man, you ever do sim stuff in WY? Maybe one day a video on Mach tuck and how it effects certain aircraft differently? I've been effected heavily in the Mig-19 models, and the P-38s, in sim and it would be helpful if there was like a trimming guide or a way to smooth the transition into mach. I think I'm wording this correctly, please correct me if I'm wrong, but yeah, just a suggestion.
Adam,could you create a guide on aiming in air rb? I can never get thoes guns on target like you do.
I wouldn't know how to make a video on aiming though.
Never considered this before. Great video! Any tips for playing a stock Ta 152 H1?
Thanks!
Stay close to your team, maybe kill a bomber while climbing. I've got a relatively recent Ta152H video.
Dude what’s your targeting distance usually set to? I normally use 600
It's in the description of my videos where I use guns ;).
600m is too high, 75%+ of your kills are below 600m. I used to do 400m, now I'll be staying at 500m.
Cool man. I’ve been wondering for a while. I got used to 600. However I’ve been realizing that the only time its truly useful is when people are Running or when a head on happens
Thanks for this, this is really interesting!
Also, another reason why I'm not a fan of US planes. :P
My pleasure!
Because they dive worse at low speed and dive better at medium-high speeds?
@@AdamTheEnginerd More so because they're not amazing enough in a dive or acceleration to offset their need for speed and lack of manoeuvrability. American planes are certainly good (a lot of the issue is my own skill level), but I've just always felt they're too restrictive in playstyle, yet when played well their advantages don't seem as strong as other types when those other types are played to their own strengths.
It's a lot of why Russian fighters are my favourite in terms of playstyle and performance; they can face most any more specialized types. Basically, I like always "having options", and US planes tend to have the least options to get out of anything but an ideal situation. From my average skill and experience perspective, of course.
I do understand what you mean. US planes are the ones that benefit the most from teamplay.
@@AdamTheEnginerd But isn't that teamplay advantage neutralized if the opponents do teamplay too? "Get a team" is always the solution that is given when people debate why the axis always wins at some prop BRs.
@@SangsungMeansToCome US planes playing together will win over opponent's teamplay, as long as they climb correctly and maintain energy they will win via attrition of slowly splitting up and eliminating their opponents no matter the amount of teamplay. I have played many matches where it took just 2 decent p47 players to destroy a groups of german fighters working together at 5km+ alt
Adam a question, what software do you use to get the math and stats for these videos?
I can see you use MATLAB but where do you get the information about masses, trust and in general the information about the planes' flight model and performance?
I follow these instructions to get read the flight model files: www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/8nq70p/tutorial_how_to_datamine_or_how_i_learned_to_stop/
You need some understanding of what to look for and what coefficients do what to do any meaningful work with them.
Very useful info, but I would contend that it isn't normally American aircraft pilots that say American aircraft are heavier so when you get into trouble you should dive away, they know that that isn't normally going to save them because they have experienced those types of deaths. Its the 109 and zero pilots that are always above and behind you and have never played American planes before that say that after they kill you. They also say things like, "Americans teams would win if they side climb" and "American plane players are just stupid". I could be wrong just my thoughts.
In my experience it is said 90% of the time by people in US planes. Likely new players I'll admit though.
People in general say that as well, not necessarily US pilots. My favorite is when a bomber pilot blames friendly fighters for his death.
@@AdamTheEnginerd indeed
0:43 isn't dive angle also a possible meaning of "good dive?" My facts may be wrong but I recall the Corsair's dive flaps let it head straight down without overspeeding, and almost no plane could follow it for more than a few seconds (except I think Buffalos, and Wildcats which literally didn't have a Vmax)??
And a lot of the terms you use are mysterious to people like me who are comfortable with engineering in general but have no idea what a "rip speed" is or what the various spawn modes you mention are. You clearly are making all these great vids to communicate, so why not at least define your terms when you first use them in a given vid? To be fair I see you sometimes defining it later, so may just be a question of edit to move that forward... Thanks for all the work!
It might be a small benefit to be able to dive at any angle, but in practical applications it's not too significant.
What do you mean by "spawn modes"? Rip speed is simply Vmax.
My pleasure!
I can't buy any camouflages of p51 d30..... I know this topic is pointless but I'd like to know why. I got p51d30 in order to buy its camouflage.......
No idea, I don't use that stuff.
F84 gameplay..? I never see any recent videos on the F84 Thunderjet. Would be neat to see one.
It's on my list!
:D
Hmm, why 88% prop pitch on P47 D-25? Why not lower (between 75-80%)?
Higher is better at low speed, and power matters less and less as you speed up.
There are honestly so many factors I don't think it can be surley said.
Uh like what? I presented 100% fair simulations of dives.
Yup
In war thunder people go into 90 degree dives instead of doing shallow dives and then complain about bias
Relatable.
@@AdamTheEnginerd yeah and after they make theirselfs believe that bias exists, they have no chance of winning and become RP whores who go for the first easy target they see instead of putting up a fight and trying to win
That's why I don't play alies anymore because I can't win 1v5s
Sry for the rant lol
Thanks for the video, I always had this doubt.
My pleasure! Hope you don't have any more doubts!
@@AdamTheEnginerd A few months ago I wanted to be an aeronautical engineer, but here in Brazil it is very difficult to be, you literally have to study while shitting. Research about "ITA" (Aeronautical Technological Institute), it is the most difficult university course in the country and one of the best and most difficult universities in Latin America.
@@AdamTheEnginerd Have only 60 vacancies for the year of 2021.
@@AdamTheEnginerd But I still have so much interest in aviation.
@@pedrosabino8751 It's certainly a difficult degree! You need to evaluate if you'll regret not trying.
So... heavier planes dive faster at higher speeds, which is the type of speeds you should be at in a diving plane, meaning heavier aircraft DO dive better than lighter aircraft
No, for one the initial dive acceleration is actually pretty important. If the enemy gets close enough to make you dodge, then you bleed even more speed and you might get caught.
Second, B29 is heavier than P51, and yet P51 dives better at every speed. That's an easy counter-example, hence "heavier aircraft DO dive better than lighter aircraft" is false.
@@AdamTheEnginerd B-29 doesn't dive faster than P-51 because B-29 is also a bigger plane with far more drag and different aerodynamics, which is why that imho was not really a good example.
A P-51 with the mass of a B-29 would dive faster than a P-51 with normal mass. When no other factor of a plane is changed except mass, it's acceleration will be lower in a straight line and up, but in a dive it will have higher kinetic energy and therefore will be less affected by the force of air resistance.
@@AlmightyDude420 No, a P51 with the mass of the B29 would have the worst acceleration out of any single engined fighter below its top speed. Look at the example with a minimum fuel P47 and maximum fuel P47, the minimum fuel P47 accelerates better at low speed until its top speed, and then the maximum fuel P47 accelerates better beyond the top speed (4:05). That's because a higher mass with the same power will lower P/W ratio, and hence lower acceleration.
@@AdamTheEnginerd AdamTheEnginerd Yea, basically what I said. In a straight line and up, the acceleration is lower with a heavier plane. In a dive, it will retain its kinetic energy better, due to being less affected by air resistance.
Air resistance increases exponentially with speed. Planes with more mass have proportionally higher kinetic energy at the same speed, and get less affected by the force of air resistance.
Think about the hammer and feather experiment on one of the Apollo missions. In a vacuum, they fall with the same acceleration, but one gets higher kinetic energy. On the Earth, we have an atmosphere of air to slow a light feather down far quicker than a more massive hammer.
I understand that less mass means lower power to weight ratio, which is why we agree that at a lower speed where air resistance as far less, an equally powerful engine will need more time to get more mass up to speed. But at higher speed where air resistance becomes a powerful counter-balancing force, a light plane will need a lot more power to push the plane any faster than it's already going, and if the wings didn't rip, air resistance would balance it down to constant speed at a certain point.
At that same speed, a heavy plane will have more to go before air resistance balances it to this point.
I understand that at low speeds, a light plane will accelerate better, but I just feel that when in a heavy plane, you should always keep your speed up and be in a very shallow descent, when enemies are close.
@@AlmightyDude420 Then we agree with everything, except you seem to underestimate the importance of the low speed dive acceleration but that's alright.
Love things, the derivative of things, and their derivatives, and their derivatives, and their derivatives, and the integral of the derivative of their integrals.
Ye.
@@AdamTheEnginerd how you stop your plane from moving so much while diving with high speed
@@21kjavierrr Don't touch the mouse when the plane is heading straight down.
@@AdamTheEnginerd but if the enemy moves to the side
Good stuff. Now, he worst premium they ask? It must be the LA11. Please take it out and try to make it work.
La11 is fine at 5.3 imo. Typhoon is a much worse premium since the tech tree typhoon is significantly better.
@@AdamTheEnginerd Cheers mate. I just can't make it work for me. Just hoping to see, how you handle that "beast"....
Adam what does the magneto in MEC do? Is it important?
Controls how many igniters are being used. Leave it auto and you'll get best performance.
@@AdamTheEnginerd Ok thank you