kyoumu

About N1K2,N1K2-Ja

 

Hello Gaijin. I like WarTunder and I have been playing for two years, but there are things I want you to improve by all means! That is the mobility of N1K2, N1K2-Ja. Is the wing surface load of the current N1K2s really 161.7 kg / m 2? It seems to be unnecessary ... Furthermore, when using the air fight flap, the wing surface load decreases by about 33% to about 107.9 kg / m 2. Since the wing surface load of A6M2 is about 90 kg / m 2, it should be a mobility close to A6M2 ... Gaijin, please listen to my wish!

DSC_0019.JPG

Edited by kyoumu
  • Thanks 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get your point. Though air fight flap can improve turning performance, it doesn't change the wing loading.  N1K2 turning performance seems fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a test on N1K2 stall speed. Came out as 168 km/h clean at full fuel (4000kg), so 170 kg/m2 wing load in this case. The lift coefficient is low - approx. 1.25. This is even low for a laminar flow wing which the Mustang and Tempest had (both ~1.35 cl). J2M also has a laminar flow wing and has a cl of approx. 1.35, so perhaps the N1Ks are a bit under-turning. 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there something wrong with N1Ks? They are awesome when I use em! O3O ((better than with A6M5 otsu and J2M3 which you can barely afford to fly!!!))

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, AfriqueNaive said:

Displayed in my file,N1Ks lift coefficient is 1.71without flaps

 

After doing some test flight, I have to agree with you that N1K1 underperforms in turning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, AfriqueNaive said:

Displayed in my file,N1Ks lift coefficient is 1.71without flaps

I checked the FM file, CL is 1.25 without flaps. I guess there is an error with the game's FM. 1.7, however, is very high.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2017 at 7:30 AM, AfriqueNaive said:

yes,I can provide more screenshots,n1k1-j and n1k2-J did not change the wing design

TIM图片20171113152934.png

Then I can tell you that 1.7 clean for laminar wing is unachievable.

 

That would be higher than most non laminar wing design, which makes it very doubtful. Laminar wings have lower drag profile, but also trade this benefit for a lower Clmax.

 

Basically, you numbers are equivalent to say that a 1.2l car with 79HP can do like a turbo-Injected car at 110HP.

 

If you have the root wing profile / NACA (or equivalent) number of the profile, I'd be happy to find the related NACA document showing the Cl(wing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2017 at 3:23 PM, kyoumu said:

 

Hello Gaijin. I like WarTunder and I have been playing for two years, but there are things I want you to improve by all means! That is the mobility of N1K2, N1K2-Ja. Is the wing surface load of the current N1K2s really 161.7 kg / m 2? It seems to be unnecessary ... Furthermore, when using the air fight flap, the wing surface load decreases by about 33% to about 107.9 kg / m 2. Since the wing surface load of A6M2 is about 90 kg / m 2, it should be a mobility close to A6M2 ... Gaijin, please listen to my wish!

DSC_0019.JPG

Very good post!!! Congratulations for the info

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rapitor said:

Then I can tell you that 1.7 clean for laminar wing is unachievable.

That would be higher than most non laminar wing design, which makes it very doubtful. Laminar wings have lower drag profile, but also trade this benefit for a lower Clmax.

 

Basically, you numbers are equivalent to say that a 1.2l car with 79HP can do like a turbo-Injected car at 110HP.

 

If you have the root wing profile / NACA (or equivalent) number of the profile, I'd be happy to find the related NACA document showing the Cl(wing)

no ,this is Japan's real machine test,If you have questions,i can provide this document to you. 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, AfriqueNaive said:

no ,this is Japan's real machine test,If you have questions,i can provide this document to you. 

What I am telling you is that it is extremely doubtful (if even possible) to reach a wing Clmax of 1.7 clean. Therefore, a plane Clmax of 1.7 is impossible, as it must be lower than the wing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Rapitor said:

What I am telling you is that it is extremely doubtful (if even possible) to reach a wing Clmax of 1.7 clean. Therefore, a plane Clmax of 1.7 is impossible, as it must be lower than the wing

If you can provide new information, welcome

all you say is guess,you do not have any data to support you

TIM图片20171114183617.jpg

Edited by AfriqueNaive
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Rapitor said:

What I am telling you is that it is extremely doubtful (if even possible) to reach a wing Clmax of 1.7 clean. Therefore, a plane Clmax of 1.7 is impossible, as it must be lower than the wing

could you provide some form of proof other than just your word?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AfriqueNaive said:

If you can provide new information, welcome

all you say is guess,you do not have any data to support you

TIM图片20171114183617.jpg

All I say is physics, backed up by multiple experiment made by NACA,  and other nation aerodynamic engineer.

You have a picture of a non translated document (which I do not understand, as I do not read Japanese), which can be misinterpreted and / or subject to typo.

 

32 minutes ago, RustyEagle said:

could you provide some form of proof other than just your word?

NACA wartime report L4G10, July 44.

 

For a profile 66(1)-212 (laminar), and a few other, with a Cl-max of 1.41 to 1.52 (clean), 2.15 to 2.61 (flaps down).

 

That is for some of the best profiles you could found in the hand of NACA at that time, and that's for a uniform profile, representing the wing root, which generates the more lift. Expect reduction on a plane.

 

Alternatively, just look for lift coefficient of laminar wing on google. Be mindful that all the results might not yield to laminar wings though.

 

I can accept that N1K wing root can do 1.7/2.5. N1K overall wing will be lower, and N1K plane  coefficient is likely to be at 1.2-1.3, and never as high as 1.7 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rapitor said:

What I am telling you is that it is extremely doubtful (if even possible) to reach a wing Clmax of 1.7 clean. Therefore, a plane Clmax of 1.7 is impossible, as it must be lower than the wing

Maybe the document underestimated the lift of the fuselage and float? Thus it overestimated Clmax of wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt the engineers would do something as wrong.

 

As I said, I would consider these values to be possible for the thickest section of N1K wing as possible, as it is slightly higher than a purely laminar profile.

 

However, the only info I have for now is a user (AfriqueNaive) stating that according to document, N1K clmax is 1.7/2.5, which is impossible.

And if the difference between wing root lift coefficient and plane lift coefficient is not blatant, that implies that you did not do your homework about aerodynamics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Rapitor said:

I doubt the engineers would do something as wrong.

 

As I said, I would consider these values to be possible for the thickest section of N1K wing as possible, as it is slightly higher than a purely laminar profile.

 

However, the only info I have for now is a user (AfriqueNaive) stating that according to document, N1K clmax is 1.7/2.5, which is impossible.

And if the difference between wing root lift coefficient and plane lift coefficient is not blatant, that implies that you did not do your homework about aerodynamics.

no,As I said, this data is calculated in the hovering to the maximum lift coefficient, the entire wing is not said to be a region。you can search for Yokosuka Naval Air Technical Arsenal and what  they do

TIM图片20171115104518.png

TIM图片20171115105113.png

Edited by AfriqueNaive
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.