Jump to content


A6M5 -roll


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
11 replies to this topic

Bopgun #1 Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:17 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Would somebody explain to me why this plane basically has the same role capabilities as the Me410 a massive bomber. That just doesnt seem right.

Edited by Bopgun, 30 November 2013 - 05:22 PM.


Heh #2 Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:23 PM

    Sky Whale Historian

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 11,960
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Zeroes had terrible reputation as rollers. Even at low speed their roll rate sucked.
Heh - aeromarine biologist

View Posthahiha, on , said:


OMG Heh you have had so many posts O_O

hawkeyededic #3 Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:38 PM

    Resident Researcher

  • -Community Ace-
  • 962 battles
  • 2,036
  • [WG-CA] WG-CA
  • Member since:
    10-05-2012

From what I have read about the Zero's, especially the later model ones, they had good roll rates to the left, but struggled to roll to the right due to engine torque among other things. This also applied to turns, it was found that a zero in a right hand turn could not follow an American plane due to engine torque.

 

 

(actually I might have my directions flipped, and I don't want to dig through the mass of papers and books I have to find the copy of the report I have from US test flights of captured A6M Zeroes, if it even survived the floods in 2011)



 

Hawkeye's Hangar, your one stop spot for all my repaints. Like me on Facebook for news, updates and more.


An_Average_Jho #4 Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:47 PM

    Helvetic Polyglot

  • Alpha tester
  • 57 battles
  • 2,588
  • [WWPD] WWPD
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I don't know anything about their historical specs, but it's completely possible. 

 

The 410 may be heavier, and have a greater moment of inertia, but it also has bigger control surfaces (the distance of the control surfaces from the center of mass also has an effect).

 

An analogy would be comparing the acceleration of a tank and a car. Even though the tank is much heavier than a car, the tank could accelerate faster given you could find an engine powerful enough. If the 410 has bigger/more effective control surfaces, it is entirely possible that it would have a similar roll rate than the Zero.

 


Everything tastes better if it tries to eat you before you eat it

I named my airplane Iosef because it kept on Stalin

 

"Quod natura non dat, Salmantica non præstat"


Bopgun #5 Posted 30 November 2013 - 11:19 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 3 battles
  • 68
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Alrighty then! Thanks!

ironhelix73 #6 Posted 22 December 2013 - 10:10 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

There's a video on youtube about a travelling group of historic fighter planes, and the pilot of the zero comments about how he has to be careful not to roll too fast during their maneuvers because none of the other planes can keep up with him. 

 

Pretty sure the zero had no trouble rolling. This game doesn't even bother to TRY getting any of the historical characteristics of the aircraft right. They might as well replace the models with spaceships or birds or something, because the in-game stats do not correspond to the graphical representations of the planes.



ironhelix73 #7 Posted 22 December 2013 - 10:11 PM

    Airman Basic

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Posthawkeyededic, on 30 November 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

From what I have read about the Zero's, especially the later model ones, they had good roll rates to the left, but struggled to roll to the right due to engine torque among other things. This also applied to turns, it was found that a zero in a right hand turn could not follow an American plane due to engine torque.

 

 

(actually I might have my directions flipped, and I don't want to dig through the mass of papers and books I have to find the copy of the report I have from US test flights of captured A6M Zeroes, if it even survived the floods in 2011)

You don't need to dig into any papers or books, there are still zero's flying, and their pilots report that they roll just fine. Search youtube.



oldkye #8 Posted 22 December 2013 - 11:43 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha tester
  • 0 battles
  • 1,477
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

It's actually not as big of a problem as you think if you face a zero indeed you should roll if he rolls with you you'll have a advantage "in" the zero though you should simply yo-yo behind them in a slightly different arc.

 

For example: when followed by a zero one common FW tactic is to use their Superior roll rate to "spin" this slows their plane to drop behind you as normally it's much faster well making the targeting icon fly in a circle confusing new pilots,  

Sadly this is actually this not that hard to deal with in the zero you have a much lower stall speed so simply hit S+E at the same time to throttle down and engage flaps then shoot down the middle of the red spiral as their actually inertia and direction is still straight.



JDMFreakz #9 Posted 23 December 2013 - 04:19 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 106 battles
  • 1,654
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

zero's roll rate is the worst for a light fighter..

 

this also applies IRL..

 

because of its engine torque..


 


Pogo68 #10 Posted 23 December 2013 - 05:22 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 1649 battles
  • 1,377
  • [-BFS-] -BFS-
  • Member since:
    11-06-2012

My understanding of the slow roll rate of the Zero, in particular the A6M2-21, is that it's due to the massive ailerons which ran almost 2/3 the length of the wing,

These had no hydraulic boost to aid the pilot, so at speeds above 300 knots they became very heavy, and could only be moved with difficulty.

The elevators, on the other hand did not seem to be affected.

 

This was less of a problem in the A6M3 which had a shorter wing and shorter ailerons, and a faster roll rate but lower turn rate.

 

The Zero performed best below 250knots, and at this speed it becomes a royal pain at the hands of a skilled and aggressive pilot.

 

 


DICTA BOELCKE for WoWP
    1. Try to secure the upper hand before attacking.
    2. Always continue with an attack you have begun
    3. Open fire only at close range, and then only when the opponent is squarely in your sights
    4. You should always try to keep your eye on your opponent, and never let yourself be deceived by ruses
    5. In any type of attack, it is essential to assail your opponent from behind
    6. If your opponent dives on you, do not try run away from his attack, but fly to meet it
    7. When over the enemy's lines, always remember your own line of retreat
    8. It is better to attack in groups of four or six. Avoid two aircraft attacking the same opponent

Binestar #11 Posted 20 January 2014 - 08:08 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Alpha tester
  • 64 battles
  • 1,028
  • [RDDT3] RDDT3
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Akutan_Zero

 

Engine torque as people listed above made the zero easier to roll to the left than the right.  Large ailerons meant that at high speeds turning was difficult, and a carburetor meant negative G's could stall the engine from fuel starvation.

 

"We now had the answer for our pilots who were being outmaneuvered and unable to escape a pursuing Zero: Go into a vertical power dive, using negative acceleration if possible to open the range while the Zero's engine was stopped by the acceleration. At about 200 knots, roll hard right before the Zero pilot could get his sights lined up."



JDMFreakz #12 Posted 22 January 2014 - 04:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 106 battles
  • 1,654
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012
Its radial engine prevented the fuel starvation from negative G.. If they were V engine, they'll suffer hard.

 





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users