P36 exclusive screenshots

[SpaceWeevil]

Pam,

According to the French Hawk 75-A1 manuals (Notice sommaire générale du Curtiss H75 A1 and the Notice de Manoeuvre de l'avion Curtiss H-75-A.1), the Hawk started to show some lateral instability below 160 kilometers per hour and became less sensitive on the pitch below that speed.

According to the manual stall speed was between 80 and 110 kilometers per hour. Stall speed with lowered flaps is not mentioned.

Drag causes by the cowling flaps from the engine would cause a 10% speed reduction at any speed and setting.

During a normal landing the flaps should be lowered to 45º at 120 kilometers per hours. Flaps should never be lowered when speed exceeds 225 km per hour.
In all "standard" conditions (the French used 4 standard set-ups) the flaps should be up during take off according the manual. However in the flight specification the take off with lowered flaps is described.

The landing shown in the movie posted by Bomber_12th is exactly how it is described in the manual. Arrive at the runway close to stall speed and tilt the nose a bit (or according the French description "raise the engine")

I hope this helps you a bit.

Cheers,
Huub

EDIT: Some additional information I found in Section VI CARACTERISTIQUES DE VOL (Flight characteristics)

Start:
With a start weight of 2630 kg a minimum path of 250 meters is required to be clear of obstacles 8 meters in height.
With flaps lowered 45º take off speed is 118 km/hr. And the aircraft will requires a runway of 165 meters before it lifts.

Landing:
For landing path of 380 meters free of obstacles of 8 meters in height is required for landing.
With flaps down 45º and a touch down speed of 112 km/hr the aircraft will require 225 meters of runway from touch down until full stop.

Pam, I hope you remember to convert all that into MPH, lbs and yards! It must feel strange being brought up on the metric system but being forced to use 'alien' units when you go flying. Of course we need a universal system for safety, but I dare say most Europeans (apart from the Brits) feel it's the wrong one. For all its coldness and lack of folk history at least the metric system is consistent and logical.

 

[warchild]

Pam, I hope you remember to convert all that into MPH, lbs and yards! It must feel strange being brought up on the metric system but being forced to use 'alien' units when you go flying. Of course we need a universal system for safety, but I dare say most Europeans (apart from the Brits) feel it's the wrong one. For all its coldness and lack of folk history at least the metric system is consistent and logical.

::chucles:; Actually, i was born in Illinois. its metric that always gives me a challenge, but being in this community, i've begun thinking in both styles of measuring. to me, theyre both good though i got to admit that i find a bit more quaintness and romance to some old geezer sighting in a line thats so many feet and inches and danged if he aint right most of the time.. for me, it has more of a "human" feeling to it, but, i'm an old fart myself and gotta admit, i miss some of the old ways..

 

[MudMarine]

Metric? Whats that? Only thing it did for me was force me to buy two sets of wrenchs!

 

[Bomber_12th]

Take Off Distance With Flaps Up, at 5786 lbs. - 820 ft
Take Off Distance With Full Flaps, at 5786 lbs. - 541 ft
Take Off Done With Full Flaps (short field) - 73 mph
Stall Speeds - 50-68 mph
Flap (And Gear) Never-Exceed Speed - 140 mph
Full Flaps - (By) 75 mph
Landing Touchdown Speed W/Full Flaps - 69-70 mph

Here are some quick calculations based off of the information that Huub has posted. It is interesting just how slow the speeds are, but then again, they do make sense for the airframe and era of the design. The big difference between stall speeds listed, could be based on clean/dirty stalls, or it could be based on dirty stalls at various weights. I noticed that the airspeed to put the final selection of flaps down, is very close to landing speed. I know that in the P-40, which I believe shares the same flaps as the P-36, the flaps are very very effective. Because they deploy so fast, you usually put half flaps down, after you have slowed enough (140 mph), in the pattern, after putting the gear down, but then you must wait until about 300-400 ft from the runway to put full flaps down, because it brings the airspeed right down to landing speed, right then and there.

 

[SpaceWeevil]

Metric? Whats that? Only thing it did for me was force me to buy two sets of wrenchs!

I think the important thing is to work in one system or t'other and not try to mix them. When I fly the FW190 or Bf109 I have the metric checklists handy and it soon becomes second nature. Incidentally, the Brits built Merlin engines to Imperial measurements but Packard chose Metric!

Anyway, back to the P36. I love how people have chimed in with new information, and how the devs have listened, made changes and not gone all precious. It's a great sign, and I'm definitely in line for this one.

 

[Matt Wynn]

Developer and end users in perfect synchronicity... ok in near perfect Harmony, this I like! this is what defines a community, helping and sharing what we know and what we find :ernae:

 

[huub vink]

I noticed that the airspeed to put the final selection of flaps down, is very close to landing speed.

Hi John,

That depends how you read it. As the "not to exceed speed" for both under carriage and flaps is 225 km/hr, you can lower the flaps earlier than 120 km/h. However when you are still flying at 120 km/hr you should definitely have lowered your flaps! At least that is the way I read it .

Cheers,
Huub

 

[Bomber_12th]

Thank you Huub, that does sound truer in that regard. 73mph take off speed with full flaps is also something to be taken with a grain of salt - figures of which are only to be used if you really want to get off the ground in the shortest amount of runway - 73 mph doesn't give you a whole lot of room ahead of stall speed - and at this speed, the angle of the aircraft would still remain very much in a three-point attitude. Without flaps, take off speed, I can only imagine, may be around the 80-85 mph range, perhaps right in the middle - of course I am only guessing based on my experience with other aircraft - with the tail wheel just barely off the ground at this point.

Dean, the extra airfield and possible Moranes for the airfield sounds excellent! For me, the best means of operating aircraft like these, is off of grass, and I look forward to seeing the scenery and how it comes about.

 

[MudMarine]

I think the important thing is to work in one system or t'other and not try to mix them. When I fly the FW190 or Bf109 I have the metric checklists handy and it soon becomes second nature. Incidentally, the Brits built Merlin engines to Imperial measurements but Packard chose Metric!

Anyway, back to the P36. I love how people have chimed in with new information, and how the devs have listened, made changes and not gone all precious. It's a great sign, and I'm definitely in line for this one.

Always drives me nuts when I fly my butcher bird!!

 

[delta558]

Interestingly (while we're talking figures), in the small part of the operation handbook we've got the section on range and endurance gives two sets of figures; optimum and practical (in the same configuration). There's approximately 200 miles difference, with different fuel usage and time taken. I suppose the practical range is allowing for wear and tear, also piloting ability.

 

[Bomber_12th]

Paul, I've seen those types of figures before with other aircraft, and I wonder if it is the same as "cruise vs. economy cruise". As an example, for practical means - getting from point A to point B the fastest - in a Mustang, one would use 36/37 inches of manifold pressure, with 2400/2300 RPM, and the mixture in auto-rich. Economically however, one could bring this back to 36/2200, or as much as 30/2000 or 28/1800, bring the mixture back to auto-lean, and while your speed would be less practical, your mileage would be much better.

I notice that you state that the "configuration" is the same, does this mean power settings or loading?

 

[warchild]

Take Off Distance With Flaps Up, at 5786 lbs. - 820 ft
Take Off Distance With Full Flaps, at 5786 lbs. - 541 ft
Take Off Done With Full Flaps (short field) - 73 mph
Stall Speeds - 50-68 mph
Flap (And Gear) Never-Exceed Speed - 140 mph
Full Flaps - (By) 75 mph
Landing Touchdown Speed W/Full Flaps - 69-70 mph

Here are some quick calculations based off of the information that Huub has posted. It is interesting just how slow the speeds are, but then again, they do make sense for the airframe and era of the design. The big difference between stall speeds listed, could be based on clean/dirty stalls, or it could be based on dirty stalls at various weights. I noticed that the airspeed to put the final selection of flaps down, is very close to landing speed. I know that in the P-40, which I believe shares the same flaps as the P-36, the flaps are very very effective. Because they deploy so fast, you usually put half flaps down, after you have slowed enough (140 mph), in the pattern, after putting the gear down, but then you must wait until about 300-400 ft from the runway to put full flaps down, because it brings the airspeed right down to landing speed, right then and there.

yeahhh, those flaps are something else. even now, they'll almost stop that plane in mid flight. Landing for me has been interesting cuz it always feels like i'm gonna fall right out of the sky before i'm even going slow enough to touch down.. Even then, its rather amazing to see just how far off my estimations have been, and i'm thinking its because i used the incorrect wing plan. Given its age, i hadnt thought that it would have used the same wing as the b-17, but apparently, i'm incorrect. That wing had a habit of not wanting to let go of the sky. it was very high lift and would explain a lot here..
:;chuckles:; maybe i better pour some coffee and get woke up. gonna be a long, interesting day ..
THank you
Pam

 

[warchild]

I think the important thing is to work in one system or t'other and not try to mix them. When I fly the FW190 or Bf109 I have the metric checklists handy and it soon becomes second nature. Incidentally, the Brits built Merlin engines to Imperial measurements but Packard chose Metric!

Anyway, back to the P36. I love how people have chimed in with new information, and how the devs have listened, made changes and not gone all precious. It's a great sign, and I'm definitely in line for this one.

I cant afford to not listen. normally, i have manuals and documentation straight from the MOD or FAA ot even the manufacturer to use, but not this plane.
The p-36 was the responsible for the first two kills of the american war. thaose were against zeros no less. it was such a good plane that even the germans, once they conquered france and finland, used it. Hell, it could out maneuver their bf-109. its direct offspring ( the XP-37 ) is central in the never ending debate of the origins of the P-51 mustang, and the P-40 ( its direct descendant ) is legendary. how coul i properly honor the guys who flew these things if i copped an attitude and let my over fluffy ego rear its vogon head?

What Dean does is art, and theres a lot there to be exceptionally proud of, but what i do is numbers. Numbers cant be copyrighted, hell, half the time its nigh on impossible to even get the right ones, and yet those numbers are a part of our history, and shouldnt be owned by anyone, but because of that history, neither should they be treated with any less respect than any other information regarding that history.

Keep in mind that when you go to buy this aircraft, your not paying for my work. Your paying for some of the most exquisite and detailed modeling available anywhere, and the artistry of Dean and his modelers and artists. My work is free, and on this one bird, this one time, you can all sit back and say "hey, I helped her make that fly right". Considering the history of Flight Sim with its overblown advertisements, its puffed up claims and its abundance of pure manure, This plane will be a lot to be proud of, for all of us.
Pam

 

[PRB]

Pam, I’ve always been fascinated with the history of the early months of the war, when the allies were getting their butts handed to them every day. Those pilots were astonishingly under trained, by today's standards, yet they didn’t complain, and when to war with these planes, and often to their deaths. It’s a tragic story almost beyond comprehension, as was that entire war, from start to finish. This plane in particular played a large part in those early tragic months. I’m glad it is being made, and you seem to be pouring your soul into it to get it right, and that makes me want to fly it all the more. I can’t wait until it is released!

 

[delta558]

John, to be clearer about the figures I quoted, there are no engine settings given - taking one as an example:

Optimum range with 160gal fuel and 0lb bombs
cruise speed 1060 miles at 6.6mi/gal or 5.3 hrs at 30gal/hr (a.f.c 0.48)

compared to

Practical range with 160gal fuel and 0lb bombs
cruise speed 860 miles at 5.4mi/gal or 4.3 hrs at 37gal/hr (a.f.c 0.60)

Settings for cruise speed (with engine settings) are given seperately.

 

[warchild]

Thanks Paul .. I've got two of the best mates in the world workin on this with me. Delta558 and Butch. if it doesnt fly right, it wont be because of them. I'm loving what i'm seeing here. the care, the concern, and the downright desire of people to give what they have in the way of knowledge to help make this plane fly better than anything else ever made before. Man! Talk about a community to be proud of, and to be proud to be a part of.. I'm in awe.

 

[wiltzei]

OT:

...the germans, once they conquered france and finland...

Finland basically made a contract with the Germans in order to receive arms to be used against the Eastern neigbour, but has been occupied/controlled by any other nation since 1917.

 

[warchild]

John, .

Paul!!! :;lol;; climb on msn.. i have files for you..

 

[warchild]

OT:
Finland basically made a contract with the Germans in order to receive arms to be used against the Eastern neigbour, but has been occupied/controlled by any other nation since 1917.

my bad.. i didnt know this.. it would make perfect sense though.. Finland isnt exactly known as being bad boy on the block, and they needed to defend themselves.

 

[Ken Stallings]

OT:
Finland basically made a contract with the Germans in order to receive arms to be used against the Eastern neigbour, but has been occupied/controlled by any other nation since 1917.

Little known fact is that it was very close to adding the UK and France to that alliance against Stalin!

Imagine how world history had developed had that happened -- an alliance of France, UK, and Germany with Finland to defeat the Soviet Union!

It almost happened!

Ken