"Why is a 'wingover' better than an 'Immelmann'?" Topic

Trying to get my head around aerial combat maneuvering and confused by these two. They seem to accomplish the same thing but the 'wingover' seems to take longer.

I'm sure I'm missing something so hoping someone on here can explain.

So far my thinking goes like this – Energy obviously has to play a big role in this. Perhaps in the WINGOVER almost all the speed lost [KE] is converted into altitude [PE] while in the Immelmann I'm guessing a lot of kinetic energy is lost when you pull the aircraft into the vertical and all the onrushing airflow slams into the aircraft's underside? In the wingover the aircraft enters its vertical climb more gradually and so doesn't lose as much speed [KE]? I know you need a lot of power to do a wingover effectively.

Not better because they are totally different

The wingover is an energy-management maneuver. It is often used as an alternative to the split-s, when a fast turn-around is needed but not a loss or gain in altitude or a change in airspeed at the end of the turn. Because the aircraft does not roll, it also has the advantage of keeping the cockpit facing the same direction during the turn, allowing the pilot to maintain sight of the opponent. Wingover-type maneuvers are often used to abruptly end other climbing maneuvers. Its starts and ends at the same altitude. also know as a cropdusters turn.

YouTube link

The Immelmann is a simple calming half loop stopped at the top when the aircraft is inverted, then a half roll to right the aircraft. you end up higher by the size of the loop and you loose speed because of the calming high G loop and roll. there is also a reverse Immelmann.

YouTube link

A wing over is a pivot around the wing that leaves you in a nose low position, you can use it to control closure and realign your nose if on offense or to force an overshoot or attempt a reversal if defending. An Immelmann is a 180 degree reposition maneuver in the pure vertical. It can be used to challenge an attacker or as a defensive maneuver but is more easily followed. Both maneuvers are energy depleting or change kinetic to potential energy. The wing over just leaves you pointed downhill (trading potential for kinetic as you accelerate) while you are in level flight after an Immelmann. The more advanced discussion is about turn circle size and energy management of which both maneuvers are a part.

Good input so far – I did figure they were different just wondered how exactly and why you might choose one over the other.

Of note is the fact that (apparently) the Immelman of WWI was actually the wingover of today, the modern maneuver termed an Immelman being the half loop and half roll. Terminology changes over time. From a manual called "Practical Flying" published in 1918:

Doug

Doug,
Very cool. A great depiction of aft stick and rudder in desired direction of turn.

I've also seen period sketches from instructional manuals showing an Immelman to be what we think of as an Immelman. I think there is a lot of confusion in what exactly the maneuvers are, and they probably have gone through various name changes over time (or at least multiple names were used for them because of a lack of understanding of the maneuvers).

And I've had discussions with people who make the argument that it was almost impossible for planes of the period to do what we think of as an Immelman and that rather than turning through 180 degrees they really only turned about 135 to 150 degrees.

your right that drawing is of a wingover but they are calling it an Immelman.

Today's Hammerhead stall was originally an Immelman. A wingover is a right or left turn flown nearly vertically that doesn't lose as much speed. The Immelmann is a vertical stall turn to either side.

so what is the half loop roll the is called an Immelman turn.

Look here link
I think that the discussion would more easily move forward if everyone was using the same terms.

cheers

It does get confusing fast with a number of terms loosely bandied about. Fascinating stuff though and a lot of helpful input. Thanks again.

You can try all this stuff out in your favourite flight sim, although it depends how good the flight model is.

I remember the first time I tore off my top wing in an outside loop I was very surprised.

so according to this :
Immelmann
Main article: Immelmann turn

An Immelmann trades airspeed for altitude during a 180 degree change in direction. The aircraft performs the first half of a loop, and when completely inverted, rolls to the upright position.

and the other posts I made the drawing posted above by elsyrsyn is wrong and its a drawing of a wingover

It is perhaps "wrong" now, but my point is that it was not "wrong" 1918, for discussion of which I refer you to Flight Commander McMinnies, Major General Brancker, and Flight-lieutenant Ford, whom you may consult at: link

Doug

It does seem the 'true modern Immelmann' did not exist in WW1 – I'm guessing a/c were not powerful enough to fly up and over the top and would stall and 'wing over turn' which does [as prompted my initial question] amount to a very similar end result – a 180 degree turn with similar altitude and position.