Quote:
iia said:
Quote:
hugo said:
yes,but we are talking about 0-300,not 0-100 as per the a/m


You can just add 0-100 of ~4 sec into 100-300 run to get the result of 0-300.


Please tell me he realises that -what sort of posters are we getting on here

Back to the topic, Studying my runs against what CGT1178 has achieved, I am begining to think that it is the slope of the airfield combined with the roughness of the surface which made my acceleration so bad.
If you look at the chart below you see that the slope peaks at over 4.5 metres up to about 270kph then it goes down. If I check the data from 280kph to 310kph (during the downward slope) the increment takes ~12s

I can't tell accurately from CGT1178's graph, but perhaps he would confirm his 280-310kph time it looks to be longer than 12s ?

If you look at the chart above you see that the slope peaks at over 4.5 metres up to about 270kph then it goes down. If I check the data from 280kph to 310kph (during the downward slope) the increment takes ~12s

I can't tell accurately from CGT1178's graph, but perhaps he would confirm his 280-310kph time it looks to be longer than 12s ?