Hello;
Decades ago, I recall my aerospace teacher asking the class "What would happen, if an aircraft is flying nicely trimmed for steady, level flight, and you applied more power? All of us newbies answered "The aircraft would speed up." However, we were told that the aircraft would climb, not speed up. So I've assumed that to be true ever since. I also assume that he was taking about a basic GA machine, such as a Cessna 150.
On full sized fighters such as the P-51D and especially on the Griffon-powered Spitfire, you can easily see that the engine is mounted with a couple degrees of downthrust. My friend Rob mentioned that this keeps a fighter from suddenly climbing if the pilot increases power when he's in hot pursuit of the enemy in front of him. This seems to tie in nicely with the "It will climb, not speed up" statement.
What's different about a WWII Mustang or Spitfire compared to a 3/4 replica, among other things, would be weight and overall power. 200 horses instead of 2000. So would anyone take a stab at the following:
If you actually added a couple degrees of downthrust to a 3/4 replica fighter, what would be the overall effect? Something good, bad, or almost negligible?
And why, you ask, would anyone want to do that? To make the metal cowling have the same appearance as the original, or as close as possible. The downthrust angle is quite noticeable on a Mustang (see picture), especially the parallel lines of the cowling around the exhaust stacks.
So, any takers on this one?
Thanks, Tom.
Decades ago, I recall my aerospace teacher asking the class "What would happen, if an aircraft is flying nicely trimmed for steady, level flight, and you applied more power? All of us newbies answered "The aircraft would speed up." However, we were told that the aircraft would climb, not speed up. So I've assumed that to be true ever since. I also assume that he was taking about a basic GA machine, such as a Cessna 150.
On full sized fighters such as the P-51D and especially on the Griffon-powered Spitfire, you can easily see that the engine is mounted with a couple degrees of downthrust. My friend Rob mentioned that this keeps a fighter from suddenly climbing if the pilot increases power when he's in hot pursuit of the enemy in front of him. This seems to tie in nicely with the "It will climb, not speed up" statement.
What's different about a WWII Mustang or Spitfire compared to a 3/4 replica, among other things, would be weight and overall power. 200 horses instead of 2000. So would anyone take a stab at the following:
If you actually added a couple degrees of downthrust to a 3/4 replica fighter, what would be the overall effect? Something good, bad, or almost negligible?
And why, you ask, would anyone want to do that? To make the metal cowling have the same appearance as the original, or as close as possible. The downthrust angle is quite noticeable on a Mustang (see picture), especially the parallel lines of the cowling around the exhaust stacks.
So, any takers on this one?
Thanks, Tom.
