Comparing Mosquito Biv cfg and air files with the Mosuito NFII, XII, and XIII

[mongoose]

Checking these with chatGPT's help, it would indicated worse performance with the NFs than the Biv,For instance critical altitude for the Biv is 17000ft but the NFs is 13900ft even though Biv 1230hp against NFXiII etc with 1280hp. The suggestion is to use the Biv cfg and air file for now unless a modeller wants to change them at some time or other.

 

[Pat Pattle]

Could ChatGP write you an air file based on known engine performance? (I don't know it's capabilities).

 

[greycap.raf]

Making the correct engines isn't a big thing. Finding time to do it is another story.

 

[Thudman]

Wouldn't there be a power to weight ratio difference between aircraft the two due to the equipment installed?

 

[mongoose]

Wouldn't there be a power to weight ratio difference between aircraft the two due to the equipment installed?

I took that into account comparing a loaded Biv. Also the covered Ai means slipstream should not be worse than the Biv. It may not be 100% correct but a big improvement I think.

 

[mongoose]

So having put in the Biv cfg and air I summarize

• The original NF XII/NF XIIIflight model exhibits:
  • noticeably poorer climb above about 20,000 ft,
  • continuous yaw corrections required,
  • practical climb performance that is significantly inferior to the bomber flight model.
• After substituting the B Mk IV AIR and CFG:
  • the yaw problem is greatly reduced or disappears,
  • climb to 30,000+ ft is much stronger,
  • the aircraft remains controllable and believable,
  • there are no obvious adverse effects on takeoff or general handling. I tested this using
  • Same aircraft model.
  • Same payload philosophy.
  • Same pilot.
  • Same climb speed (about 150 mph IAS).
  • Comparison from approximately 20,000 ft upward. I have yet to test the NFII

 

[mongoose]

Could ChatGP write you an air file based on known engine performance? (I don't know it's capabilities).

Possibly; I haven't tried that although it can analyze cfg and air if I use aired to get what it wants from the latter.

 

[mongoose]

So it said "Yes, an AIR file could be developed using known engine and aircraft performance, but it would normally be based on a suitable existing AIR file and tuned experimentally. Engine data alone are insufficient, and the corresponding CFG would also need to be checked and probably modified." Also I have to use aired to open the air file as it can't do that itself, so a bit of a procedure!