Thank you. Kind as always... :^)
>
> Here's the numbers again with the Albatros D-Va added for comparison:
>
> Aircraft Engine Speed at G.L. Rate of Climb Ceiling
> D-V 100hp Oberursel 107 mph 8.6 ft/sec 13,000 ft
> D-VI 110hp Le Rhone 125 mph 18.1 ft/sec 19,500 ft
>
> Comparison A/C
> Fokker D-VII 185hp B.M.W. 124 mph 19.7 ft/sec 22,900 ft
> Spad XIII 200hp H.Suiza 147.5 mph 19.3 ft/sec 22,300 ft
> Sopwith Camel 150hp B.R.1 N/A 121@10Kft 20.6 ft/sec 22.000 ft
> S.E.5a 200hp W.Viper 137.8 mph 15.2 ft/sec 22,000 ft
> Albatros DVa 180hp Mercedes 117 mph 9.6 ft/sec 20,500 ft
> There!
I'm somewhat taken aback by two results: The Camel's rate-of-climb (I
had no idea it could climb so well!), and the Albatross'. I would have
guessed it higher. I'm wondering, are these figures *maximum* rate
numbers, or the craft's performance at a given height (i.e. @ sea level)?
[given the technology of the day, these might tend to be one and the same]
In machines with superior airfoils (e.g. Fokk D.VII) I would expect to
see considerablly better performance in the climb at increasing altitude.
Is there a sort-of general inference that can be drawn here in relation
to such designs as the Camel (i.e. the Camel's-- and similar types'-- climb
typically falls-off by XXX% @ 15,000, XXX% @ 20,000)?
Thanks, Erik
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Heavens were the grandstands, and only the Gods were spectators. The
stake was the World. The forfeit was the Player's place at the table; and
the Game had no recess. It was the most dangerous of all sports-- and the
most fascinating. It got in the blood like wine. It aged men 40 years in
40 days; it ruined nervous systems in an hour. It was a fast game-- the
average life of a pilot at the Front was 48 hours. And, to many, it
seemed an Age....
Elliot White Springs, WWI ace
------------------------------------------------------------------------------