Maneuverability of WWI fighers?

Rob Romeor · 15 September 2006, 08:20 PM

Has the minimum turning radius or turn rate of various WWI fighters been mearsured?

How about roll rate?

Thanx Rob ‘not Romeor’ Romero

mustang · 15 September 2006, 09:51 PM

Rob Romeor

Minimum turning radius and rate of turn are not precisely the same. The equations are different. Both are complex and depend on a number of factors, they can however, be calculated with a good degree of accuracy.

Rate of roll is much easier and can be measured with a good degree of accuracy by a reasonably skilled pilot with a stop watch.

I don't, know where you live. If USA try Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators. If UK try AP3456A Flying, Volume "A". Be prepared for some Maths.

I doubt whether either of these characteristics were measured to any significant degree in WW!.

Cheers

Mustang

Jeff Brooks · 16 September 2006, 05:30 AM

there was an article in WW1 Aero Magazine (#182, page 49) about the airfoils & the turning ability of WW1 Fighters. if you are interested, I'll scan it and email it to you.
Jeff

Sreiko · 16 September 2006, 06:40 AM

As well many use rotary engine it was not the same turn in the left or in the right side. To regret I miss in the moment specific data

Rob Romeor · 16 September 2006, 10:51 AM

Jeff why don't you post it online, so everyone can check it out. If not I'd be happy to receive an e-mail from you.

Thanx

Rob 'nor Romeor' Romero

Jeff Brooks · 16 September 2006, 12:17 PM

Forum rules .. copyrighted materials ... etc...

Machinbird · 16 September 2006, 03:46 PM

The following example is a bit subjective, but probably not all that far from WWI performance: Once had an opportunity to do a little formation flying with my Luscombe on a J-3 Cub, only when I began to join up with the J-3 he reefed into me with a hard turn and the chase was on. I was generally looking at the J-3 with 90 degrees of turn at what would be considered rock throwing distance! I avoided following him into the vertical since I was concerned about him coming back down into me (Neither of us were wearing parachutes.) Compare the relatively light wing loading of many WWI aircraft to these machines. In most cases the WWI fighters had better power to weight than the next generation machines we were flying in my example.
In the case of two WWI aircraft going at each other, my guess is that it was a very tight fight with turn radius not more than 100 yards except in the case of the high wing loading slash and run fighters.

Tripehound · 17 September 2006, 09:26 AM

It dosen't appear that there was much done about quantifying maneuverability of fighters back then. The only thing I've seen on it is in "Three Wings For The Red Baron" by Leon Bennet. The U.S. Air Service did some post war testing of a Jenny and an SE5a, the oject of which was to see how fast each could do a "180". Three methods of turning were tried: steeply banked, wing-over, and reverse turn (split S). I think the French called this last one "renversement" or something like that. Steeply banked was the slowest, but safest. The Jenny got around in a little over 14 seconds, the SE5a in just under 8. The wing-over and split S (fastest) were quicker but required a partial stall and resulted in a loss of altitude. The SE5a's time for a wing-over was 7 seconds, the Jenny 10 seconds. The people doing the testing figured a DR.I needed about 7 seconds for a steeply banked reversal. The short wing span and resistance to stalling of the DR.I meant that it's wing-over and split S times were not significantly greater, but with a superior steeply banked time and little to no loss of altitude, this didn't much matter.

jumpinjan · 17 September 2006, 11:51 AM

Let me ask this question. If you had an enemy fighter on your tail, would you do any other type of turn instead of a steeply banked, high-G turn? A high-G turn (descending spiral) is a defensive maneuver where your enemy needs to point tighter to get some shots off, right? So, my opinion is to consider the banked turn and exclude the rest. That should be the figure-of-merit to compare and I think that is what was modeled in the WWI Aero article.
Jan

Bruno Stachel · 17 September 2006, 01:20 PM

I remember a discussion on a RC site, discussing the flight characteristics of WWI types. It was mentioned that most WWI aircraft had woefully small rudders. Was there a reason for them being so small? Did designers realize how much the rudder factored in making coordinated turns? I wonder if many of the roll and turn rates would have improved with more rudder area.