Maybe so, but the Rare Bear speeds are at (or near) sea level and include lots of speed-robbing turns.
I don't know any of those off the top of my head, but remember, TAS (true airspeed) is much greater than IAS (indicated airspeed) at high altitudes, while the speed of sound is slower. This means that your speed in terms of Mach number will be higher at altitude.Good points, how about apples to apples, how fast will/would/has/can a TU95 go at sea level? What's the straight line top speed of the Bare Bear?
In fact, with constant pressurization (ratios) top speed at all levels for both a turboprop and reciprocating engine is almost constantTo make it a better race, assuming the Rare Bear has a supercharger, find it's fastest altitude and then find the top speed of the TU95 at that altitude. It should be easy for the rocket scientists here.
No, you won't.I've taken a good hard look at the power density that you can achieve with piston engines. Done right on a per lb bases you can make a piston engine that has a higher power density.
Or maybe not, at lower altitudes the TU will have more advantageous prop blade angles and more air for more engine power so maybe it could really crank it on and beat the Rear bare at lower altitudes, you would need to know if and/or how much the TU engines loose power at high cruise altitude.And there you have it folks, the Rare Bear beats the Tu by a landslide and following mach numbers is like chasing ghosts.For example, our plane flying at Mach .8 at 5,000 feet will cover ground 5 knots faster than a plane flying at Mach .9 at 40,000 feet.