WWII Fighter roll rate comparison

[daveymac82c]

Hi everyone,

that video with the P-38 duing the 1995 Duxford air displays got me thinking about how WWII fighters compared in manuevrebility; specifically roll rate.

So pilots, historians, nerds.... I'm not really interested in which was best, or worst, but how did they compare to eachother? The P-38 looks to have had a very decent roll rate, based on the duxford video, but could a Spit roll faster? Slower? And how about a BF-109, Mustang, etc, etc.

Thanks,

David

[fritzthefox]

If you really want to learn more, visit the SimhHQ forums and place a post in the IL-2 Forum saying something improbable like "The FW190 rolls slower than an Ercoupe" and then sit back and watch the fur fly. You'll rapidly be buried in performance data charts


In general, roll rate is affected by aircraft weight, wingspan (shorter spans roll faster), overall stability and aileron authority (which isn't just a function of aileron size, but also how light on the controls the ailerons are). Note that aileron response can vary considerably with airspeed and altitude. Many aircraft were notorious for being difficult to manuever at high speeds (like the Zero, depite its agility, and the 109) because stick forces became so heavy.

The Fw190 rolled faster than a dachshund falling down an alpine ski slope, while the Spitfire banked more slowly. (Relatively speaking, anyway. For example, I once met a Mig-21 pilot who had flown a Mustang, and he commented on how pokey the P-51's roll rate was. Most pilots wouldn't describe a P-51's roll rate as leisurely, so it's definitely relative to what you know)

Flying technique also can make a big difference.

Anyway, the simmers are fanatics about such information, and thus are a great source.

[hsperdue]

I can make a few comparisons... but Fritz already made the point that your opinion depends on what you know...

A P-38 with Aileron Boost rolls very nicely... very much like an F-4, without aileron boost it rolls very much like a B-25 (which isn't bad, but it isn't quick).

A Mustang is a bit slow in roll... the T-6 is much more nimble on it's feet (and it has a slightly larger wingspan).

The F-15E is better than all of them... but won't beat and Extra 300L or a T-38...

Remember that the jets are hydraulically boosted... and that makes a huge difference... among the unboosted airplanes I gotta say the T-6 is really nice<g>...

gunny

[corsair166b]

We did this one already....a few times.....the Corsair and the P-38 came out the champs, the P-38 only after boosted controls were added later in the war....

M

[Mark V]

Strange nobody has mentioned the P-40 - it has a fantastic rate of roll.

[bipe215]

What about the Bearcat? I know it didn't fight, but it was there.

[fritzthefox]

I really wasn't kidding about simmer's. Here's a lively conversation in another forum regarding roll rates. With CHARTS...

[hsperdue]

I really wasn't kidding about simmer's. Here's a lively conversation in another forum regarding roll rates. With CHARTS...

Dude-

I've trained in some fancy sims... and there are even fancier visuals coming out... but there is NO SIM, Class D or home computer driven that flies like the real thing... period... dot.... Sims are good for approximation, and procedures... what simmers think means nothing to me.. no apologies.

gunny

[bipe215]

Gunny,

They're not talking about sims. They've got charts from actual flight tests. I read all five pages. By the last one, two guys are fightin' like two cats in a sak. Its pretty funny.

Steve G

[hsperdue]

Gunny,

They're not talking about sims. They've got charts from actual flight tests. I read all five pages. By the last one, two guys are fightin' like two cats in a sak. Its pretty funny.

Steve G

Oh, never mind<g>.....

[daveymac82c]

Oops,

sorry I brought it up. lol.

Thanks,

David