14.04.2010, 16:16
BillSwagger Wrote:Ok not gut 'feelings'ACE-OF-ACES Wrote:BillSwagger Wrote:thanks i found the PDF, and the graphs.
Do you have anything to support that theory beyond your gut 'feelings'?
Its not so much a gut feeling as it is i'm left asking questions that haven't been resolved by the data provided.
Just gut 'questions'
Either way you have provided nothing IMHO that would sugest the 109K-4 data is suspect
Just tossing up straw men as to what might be or could be is not proof one way or another
Do the leg work and research to support your theories and than we can talk
BillSwagger Wrote:The 12199 prop was an experimental thin bladed prop. Thin blades are typically used for speed and dives, are they not?And this has what to do with the Bf-109K-4 REALISM RATING that I did?
If the 12195 is the one that was used in service, how did its characteristics differ? Did it offer better climb at the expense of top speed?
Those kind of questions.
Anyway
Here is the deal
If you have a theory about something
Feel free to toss it out there
As long as it is presented as such
A theory
But when you say things like you think this or that is suspect based on your theory
Don