Diving - structural rigidity of 109 in dives
- The Me 109 was dived to Mach 0.79 in instrumented tests. Slightly modified, it was even dived to Mach 0.80, and the problems experimented there weren't due to compressility, but due to aileron overbalancing. Compare this to Supermarine Spitfire, which achieved dive speeds well above those of any other WW2 fighter, getting to Mach 0.89 on one occasion. P-51 and Fw 190 achieved about Mach 0.80. The P-47 had the lowest permissible Mach number of these aircraft. Test pilot Eric Brown observed it became uncontrollable at Mach 0.73, and "analysis showed that a dive to M=0.74 would almost certainly be a 'graveyard dive'."
- Source: Radinger/Otto/Schick: "Messerschmitt Me 109", volumes 1 and 2, Eric Brown: "Testing for Combat".
- (Comment: it seems Eric Brown's analysis is flawed, though, and test pilot Herb Fisher performed 150+ such dives: an example of a 0.79 dive. Several of the dives achieved Mach 0.83. Sources: Herb Fisher, Herb Fisher Jr., and Curtiss-Wright.
- Versuchs-Bericht Nr 109 05 E 43 - Date 15.4.43
This original German test document refers to dive tests of 109s with the tall tail. Result of this test was that the new tail reduced highspeed diving ozillations (which sometimes appeard with the old tail). More interesting is the fact, that in this tests, which had not the aim to estimate the highest mach number or to test the structure, they reached
max. Mach 0,805@7.0km
max. TAS 906km/h@5.8km
max. IAS 737km/h@4.5km
Even more interesting is the fact that they tried different positions of the trimming. With the wrong trimset - the one for cruising at high altitude it was not possible to pull out of the dive just by using the stick. They needed to use the trimwheel to recover the plane from the dive. This happened in such violent manner that the testpilot had to push the stick foreward to be not blacked out...
If the trim was set to +1.15° it was possible to recover without using the trimwheel - both flightpaths, with and without the trimwheel, are very similar. So even with the concrete stick the limitating factor seems to be the pilot.
Also interesting in the dive the canopy iced, also the mechanism of the trim, so it was not possible to set it smooth, but in \"jumps\", but it was still adjustable...
- Source: Hochgeschwindigkeitsversusche mit Me 109, Messerschmitt AG, Augsburg.

- 109 didn't "compress" but the elevators became heavy. When adjusting trim the entire horizontal tail plane moved and reduced the force needed to pull out.

Bf 109 D:
"So down we went about 2,000 feet with the air speed indicator amusing itself by adding a lot of big numbers - to a little over 400 mph. A gentle draw back on the control effected recovery from the dive; then up the other side of the hill.
- US Marine Corps major Al Williams. Source: Bf 109D test flight, 1938.

Me 109 E:
"Steep climb at low air speed was one of the standard evasion maneuvres used by the German pilots. Another was to push the stick forward abruptly and bunt into a dive with considerable negative 'g'. The importance of arranging that the engine whould not cut under these circumstances cannot be over-stressed. Speed is picked up quickly in a dive, and if being attacked by an airplane of slightly inferior level performance, this feature can be used with advantage to get out of range. There is no doubt that in the autumn of 1940 the Bf 109E in spite of its faults, was a doughty opponent to set against our own equipment'."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.


Me 109 E-4:
"During the VNE dive I achieved an IAS of 660 kmh. The original limit was 750 kmh. I was only limited by the height avalable, not by any feature of the aircraft which was extremerely smooth and stable at 660 kmh."
- Charlie Brown, RAF Flying Instructor, test flight of restored Me 109 E-4 WN 3579. Source: Warbirds Journal issue 50.

Me 109 G:
"The maximum speed not to be exceeded was 750kmh. Once I was flying above Helsinki as I received a report of Russkies in the South. There was a big Cumulus cloud on my way there but I decided to fly right through. I centered the controls and then something extraordinary happened. I must have involuntarily entered into half-roll and dive. The planes had individual handling characteristics; even though I held the turning indicator in the middle, the plane kept going faster and faster, I pulled the stick, yet the plane went into an ever steeper dive.
In the same time she started rotating, and I came out of the cloud with less than one kilometer of altitude. I started pulling the stick, nothing happened, I checked the speed, it was about 850kmh. I tried to recover the plane but the stick was as if locked and nothing happened. I broke into a sweat of agony: now I am going into the sea and cannot help it. I pulled with both hands, groaning and by and by she started recovering, she recovered more, I pulled and pulled, but the surface of the sea approached, I thought I was going to crash. I kept pulling until I saw that I had survived. The distance between me and the sea may have been five meters. I pulled up and found myself on the coast of Estonia.
If I in that situation had used the vertical trim the wings would have been broken off. A minimal trim movement has a strong effect on wings when the speed limit has been exceded. I had 100kmh overspeed! It was out of all limits.
The Messerschmitt's wings were fastened with two bolts. When I saw the construction I had thought that they are strong enough but in this case I was thinking, when are they going to break
- What about the phenomenon called "buffeting" or vibration, was there any?
No, I did not encounter it even in the 850kmh speed."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- The vertical dive was how to disengage.
Jussi Huotari: That was the remedy.
Antti Tani: That is how I survived when attacking two of them and losing the first round. They had more speed because I was coming from a lower altitude.
It was nothing special, the (Yak-9) planes were climbing and began to turn back. I had planned to get to shoot at them as they have lost their speed in the turn. But I was not in the right position. I turned at them and pulled the nose up - and I lost my speed, I had to turn below them. I had to push the stick to get behind them, and as they dived at me I dived right down. I turned with ailerons a couple of times, and had full power on.
Then I started recovery from the dive, of course in the direction of home, then checked the dials, the reading was eight hundred plus kmh. Then I started pulling the stick, pulled harder as hard as ever: never in my life did I pull so hard. I pulled with right hand and tried to trim the horizontal rudder with my left hand. But it did not budge, as if it had been set in concrete. But by the by the nose began to rise, but terribly slowly. As my angle was about 45 I heard over the radio as Onni Paronen said, "hey lads, look, a Messerschmitt is going in the sea!" I wanted to answer back but I could not afford to do anything put pull with two hands. As soon as I had returned to level flight and had been able to breath normally for a while, I in a way regained consciousness. I pushed the transmitter key and said "not quite". It was a close shave.
- It was so hard that you almost blacked out?
Antti Tani: I felt I was on the edge, pulling as hard as I ever could."
- Antti Tani, Finnish fighter ace. 21,5 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Jouko "Jussi" Huotari, Finnish fighter ace. 17 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G-6:
After landing Me 109 with damaged rudder trim tab, which shook the rudder heavily in flight:
"Antti Tani: It had to be strong, both the rudder and the pedals, they withstood the damn shaking without any further damage.
Jussi Huotari: The Messerschmitt was a very tough aircraft. You could do vertical dives and the tailplane hang along..."
Antti Tani: But Mäittälä, what happened to him, he lost the tailplane? Mäittälä dived like that, and being a strong man he was able to pull harder than I did. And so the tailplane was ripped off
- The day before a similar dive and recovery had happened to the same plane. Two steep dives in succession and a strong pilot pulling the stick each time, so...
Antti Tani: It certainly was a risky job. It must be that I remember him because I did a dive like that and remembered his tailplane had been ripped off. I, too pulled as hard as I could, because I thought that I am going to die if I don't."
- Antti Tani, Finnish fighter ace. 21,5 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Jouko "Jussi" Huotari, Finnish fighter ace. 17 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G-6:
"The story of Valte Estama's 109 G-6 getting shot down by a Yak-6 was also an interesting one. Their flight of nine planes was doing high-altitude CAP at 7,000 meters (23,000').
(snip) So it happened that the devil fired at him. One cannon round hit his engine, spilling out oil that caught fire. Estama noticed that it wasn't fuel that leaked or burned, just oil.
He pushed the nose of the plane and throttled up. His feet felt hot, but the fire was extinguished and there was no more smoke. The speedometer went over the top as the speed exceeded 950 km/h. The wings began to shake and Estama feared the fighter would come apart. He pulled the throttle back, but the stick was stiff and couldn't pull the plane out of the dive. Letting the flaps out little by little gradually lifted the nose. The plane leveled at 1,000 meters (3,300').
Clarification of the escape dive: "It didn't stay (vertical) otherwise, it had to be kept with the stabilizer. I trimmed it so the plane was certainly nose down. Once I felt it didn't burn anymore and there was no black smoke in the mirror, then I began to straighten it up, and it wouldn't obey. The stick was so stiff it was useless. So a nudge at a time, (then straightening off with trims).
Then the wings came alive with the flutter effect, I was afraid it's coming apart and shut the throttle. Only then I began to level out. To a thousand meters. It was a long time - and the hard pull blacked me out."
- Edvald Estama, Finnish fighter pilot. Source: Recollections by Eino and Edvald Estama by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"-Many claim that the MT becomes stiff as hell in a dive, difficult to bring up in high speed, the controls lock up?
Nnnooo, they don't lock up.
It was usually because you exceeded diving speed limits. Guys didn't remember you shouldn't let it go over.
We had also Lauri Mäittälä, he took (unclear tape), he had to evade and exceeded the speed, and the rudders broke off. He fell in a well in the Isthmus. He was later collected from there, he's now there in Askola cemetery.
The controls don't lock up, they become stiffer of course but don't lock. And of course you couldn't straighten up (shows a 'straightening' from a dive directly up) like an arrow."
- Väinö Pokela, Finnish fighter ace and Me 109 trainer. 5 victories. Source: Interview of Väinö Pokela by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- How fast could you go with it? How fast did you dare to fly in a dive, what was the limit?
It was ... 720 (kilometers/hour), if I remember right. You weren't supposed to exceed it but we did it many times. And as the air was thin up there, so we often had to go vertical when escorting a photographing plane."
- Väinö Pokela, Finnish fighter ace and Me 109 trainer. 5 victories. Source: Interview of Väinö Pokela by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose them easily?
He has never heard of a 109 loosing its wings from his experience or others. The wings could withstand 12 g's and since most pilots could only handle at most 9 g's there was never a problem. He was never worried about loosing a wing in any form of combat."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz Stigler.

Me 109 F/G:
"- What's the fastest you ever had a 109 in a dive?
I've taken it to about 680 to 750 km/hr at which point you needed 2 hands to pulls it out of the dive."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz Stigler.

"During a dive at 400 mph all three controls were in turn displaced slightly and released. No vibration, flutter or snaking developed. If the elevator is trimmed for level flight at full throttle, a large push is needed to hold in the dive, and there is a temptation to trim in. If, in fact, the airplane is trimmed into the dive, recovery is difficult unless the trimmer is would back owing to the excessive heaviness of the elevator."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.

Through the eyes of the enemy - possibly Me 109 G:
"My flight chased 12 109s south of Vienna. They climbed and we followed, unable to close on them. At 38,000 feet I fired a long burst at one of them from at least a 1000 yards, and saw some strikes. It rolled over and dived and I followed but soon reached compressibility with severe buffeting of the tail and loss of elevator control. I slowed my plane and regained control, but the 109 got away.
On two other occasions ME 109s got away from me because the P 51d could not stay with them in a high-speed dive. At 525-550 mph the plane would start to porpoise uncontrollably and had to be slowed to regain control. The P 51 was redlined at 505 mph, meaning that this speed should not be exceeded. But when chasing 109s or 190s in a dive from 25-26,000 it often was exceeded, if you wanted to keep up with those enemy planes. The P 51b, and c, could stay with those planes in a dive. The P 51d had a thicker wing and a bubble canopy which changed the airflow and brought on compressibility at lower speeds."
- Robert C.Curtis, American P-51 pilot.

Through the eyes of the enemy - possibly Me 109 G:
"Thomas L. Hayes, Jr. recalled diving after a fleeing Me-109G until both aircraft neared the sound barrier and their controls locked. Both pilots took measures to slow down, but to Hayes' astonishment, the Me-109 was the first to pull out of its dive. As he belatedly regained control of his Mustang, Hayes was grateful that the German pilot chose to quit while he was ahead and fly home instead of taking advantage of Hayes' momentary helplessness. Hayes also stated that while he saw several Fw-190s stall and even crash during dogfights, he never saw an Me-109 go out of control."
- Thomas L. Hayes, Jr., American P-51 ace, 357th Fighter Group, 8 1/2 victories

Me 109 G:
"Me 109 had good and accurate weapons, but those were the only good points of it. To me, it's unacceptable that somebody had built a fighter plane that couldn't be dived without limits. Me109 had a dive limit of 880km/h - you weren't to exceed it or the plane would break up. Just this happened to Sgt Mäittälä. I (and Pokela) was forced to exceed this limit twice, I can't describe how it felt just to sit in the cockpit waiting, if the plane would break up. I have never gotten rid of that feeling, of being trapped."
-Heimo Lampi, Finnish fighter ace. 13 1/2 victories. Source: Hannu Valtonen, "Me 109 ja Saksan sotatalous" (Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the German war economy), ISBN 951-95688-7-5.

Me 109 G-2/G-6:
"The Russkies never followed to a dive. Their max dive speeds were too low, I suppose. It was the same in the Continuation War, their La-5's and Yak-9's turned quickly back up. "
- How heavy did the Me controls get at different speeds?
"It got heavy, but you could use the flettner. It was nothing special, but a big help.
Once in '43, there was a Boston III above the Gulf of Finland. I went after it, and we went to clouds at 500 meters. Climbing, climbing, climbing and climbing, all the way to seven kilometers, and it was just more and more clouds. It got so dark that I lost sight. I turned back down, and saw the Russkie diving too. Speed climbed to 700 km/h. I wondered how it'd turn out. I pulled with all my strength when emerging from the clouds, then used the flettner. I was 50 meters above sea when I got it to straighten out. I was all sweaty. At that time the Me's were new to us."
- Did the roll capabilites change?
"Not so much. It got stiffer, but you still could bank."
- Were you still in full control at high speeds, like at 600-700 km/h?
"Yes. "
- Mauno Fräntilä, Finnish fighter ace. 5 1/2 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association: Chief Warrant Officer Mauno Fräntilä.

Like I said I have read many many accounts of german pilots flying the 109 and them telling about it's strength's and weaknesses but the plane sheading wings or coming apart in mid air wasn't one of them..

"Through the eyes of the enemy - possibly Me 109 G:
"My flight chased 12 109s south of Vienna. They climbed and we followed, unable to close on them. At 38,000 feet I fired a long burst at one of them from at least a 1000 yards, and saw some strikes. It rolled over and dived and I followed but soon reached compressibility with severe buffeting of the tail and loss of elevator control. I slowed my plane and regained control, but the 109 got away.
On two other occasions ME 109s got away from me because the P 51d could not stay with them in a high-speed dive. At 525-550 mph the plane would start to porpoise uncontrollably and had to be slowed to regain control. The P 51 was redlined at 505 mph, meaning that this speed should not be exceeded. But when chasing 109s or 190s in a dive from 25-26,000 it often was exceeded, if you wanted to keep up with those enemy planes. The P 51b, and c, could stay with those planes in a dive. The P 51d had a thicker wing and a bubble canopy which changed the airflow and brought on compressibility at lower speeds."
- Robert C.Curtis, American P-51 pilot.

anyone noticed that you can break wing much easier when flying online? Exspecially under bad network condition? I do.

I did some tests a while ago and found that when flying a mustang offline, you need to be REALLY stupid to break your wing above 10000 feet. But when flying online, a 50% stick pull applied suddenly at around 330MPH IAS is all you need.

I thought it has something to do with network latency. I reported this to Oleg in ORR, there were some construcive discussion, but it turned sour quite soon and hence it was locked by admin

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:
Like I said I have read many many accounts of german pilots flying the 109 and them telling about it's strength's and weaknesses but the plane sheading wings or coming apart in mid air wasn't one of them..

The dead don't talk...just like the P-51 pilots who died when their wings came off.

quote:

Originally posted by berg417448:

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:
Like I said I have read many many accounts of german pilots flying the 109 and them telling about it's strength's and weaknesses but the plane sheading wings or coming apart in mid air wasn't one of them..

The dead don't talk...just like the P-51 pilots who died when their wings came off.

Ahhh Huh....

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:


http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/structures/tails/..._report/05e43-p1.htm

The site you quote from is a well known 109 Fanboy, Allied hating site in this community.


Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

ANY plane can lose its wings in a dive or break up in really hard manouvres.

Well, I just amused myself by testing a few planes offline and I noticed something:
a6m5 1943: started losing parts at around 780k/ph, would hold together fine pulling up full stick at 720k/ph
It held together better than the hurricane, which started breaking apart at about 20k/ph lower than the zero, is this normal?

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:


http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/structures/tails/..._report/05e43-p1.htm

The site you quote from is a well known 109 Fanboy, Allied hating site in this community.


Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

ANY plane can lose its wings in a dive or break up in really hard manouvres.

Absolutely not a rediculous statement. I said they were never known to shed wings in high speed dives. Never heard of it and posted info confirming this statement.

Berg showed nothing of the kind whatsoever. You are the little boy here not I and your silly whiny pandering statement for berg shows it.

BTW, that site has some totally excellent info unlike the "spitperformance" site.

Obviously you can't see the difference in the quality of the two.

quote:

Originally posted by berg417448:

quote:

Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
We will see a lot more collapsing wings, once we have damage causing material fatigue in BoB. But even without that, I got a lot of collapsing wings, when I flew 109s in a dogfight.


Of course I just didn't say, that it was always due to enemy fire. But well, nobody said so in the quotes above, so it must be weak wings on the 109.

I really wonder, though, why all these statements were made by pilots who were fighting the 109s. Must be pretty boring to stay behind the planes, not fire a single shot and waiting for their wings to come off.

Who said anything about weak wings of the 109? Just like with the P-51 and other aircraft, exceeding the limits will occasionally cause failures of aircraft structure.

True. But a weak wing will come off faster than a stronger one, if both perform a similar maneuver.

This article mentions the well known wing weakness of the P-51 in the crash report though this particular crash didn't come from this apparently.

http://web.ukonline.co.uk/lait/site/P-51%2044-13593%20article.htm

At the time of the accident it was suggested that although there was a recognised weakness in the wing of the new P-51D, the actual failure of the structure could have been triggered by the Starboard main undercarriage leg inadvertently lowering into the slipstream at cruising speed and placing immense pressure on the wing spar. However examination of the official crash reports for both incidents clearly places the blame on a weakness in the front wing spar assembly and associated stressed skin structure between "Rib stations 75 to 91.5, i.e. the Gun Bay area. The report on Orth's aircraft does go on to suggest that failure of the retracting/locking system could be a contributory factor, but merely recommends further investigation.

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:


http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/structures/tails/..._report/05e43-p1.htm

The site you quote from is a well known 109 Fanboy, Allied hating site in this community.


Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

ANY plane can lose its wings in a dive or break up in really hard manouvres.

Absolutely not a rediculous statement. I said they were never known to shed wings in high speed dives. Never heard of it and posted info confirming this statement.

Berg showed nothing of the kind whatsoever. You are the little boy here not I and your silly whiny pandering statement for berg shows it.

BTW, that site has some totally excellent info unlike the "spitperformance" site.

Obviously you can't see the difference in the quality of the two.

I don't even know Berg, but I can see when someone is right or wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:
He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.

Your statement was clearly wrong/trolling, but you are too small minded to just admit it after people posted info showing it was false.

I think its obvious to anyone who reads the thread whos right/whos wrong/whos the troll, so I will leave it here.

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

There is no chance he was making it serious there, you guys just bought it .

quote:

ANY plane can lose its wings in a dive or break up in really hard manouvres.

Yes, that's true!

Problems caused on 'field' however will show that while maneuvering, some aircraft (in game) are more prone to lost their wings at some speeds, while some others cannot lose them whatsoever at those speeds even with maximum elevator trim!

quote:

Originally posted by DKoor:

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

There is no chance he was making it serious there, you guys just bought it .

DOnt be surprised that he really believes these things Dkoor, I have seen him make even more ridiculous statements about Bf109's before.

quote:

Originally posted by Sirrith:
Well, I just amused myself by testing a few planes offline and I noticed something:
a6m5 1943: started losing parts at around 780k/ph, would hold together fine pulling up full stick at 720k/ph
It held together better than the hurricane, which started breaking apart at about 20k/ph lower than the zero, is this normal?

yes, at least in game.
try to get the tool "il2compare" - in that you can check easily the max divespeeds of the planes.

and historicalyy, nothing to worry about i guess.
IIRC the Hurricane never faced a newer version from the Zero than the A6M2 Model 21 - and that is breaking earlier than the later Model 52 and than the Hurricane too btw

quote:

Originally posted by Bearcat99:
the one thing that does still kill me though with the whole wing thing.. is usually if I am chasing a bandid and my wing breaks off.. the bandid may even be going faster and tighter than me... without a blip... I think the sound of rivets popping might help with that... catastrophic wing failure with absolutely no warning was rare.

My opinion is that game may not consider much when structure itself is stressed, but more so the (calculated) deflection on elevator!

For instance the deflection I made (on that track) didn't lasted longer than 1sec. (I don't know how many G's were there, some guys with device link knowledge may answer that perhaps), 2:21-2:22 and in that time my wing came off... now if the turn (and buffeting) lasted for 3-4 seconds and as you said there were some previous 'warnings' this would never happen to me.
I would ease on the stick.

However other than knowing the game I never can't prevent 1sec. wing breakage in maneuver.

Suffice is to say that I was really surprised to see that...

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:

quote:

Originally posted by Xiolablu3:

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:


http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/structures/tails/..._report/05e43-p1.htm

The site you quote from is a well known 109 Fanboy, Allied hating site in this community.


Stalker, all this argument came from your RIDICULOUS statement

'He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.'


Just take that back and all this bickering will stop. You made a completely incorrect statement, Berg showed you with evidence that it was wrong, just be a man and take it back, you were wrong - admit it.

ANY plane can lose its wings in a dive or break up in really hard manouvres.

Absolutely not a rediculous statement. I said they were never known to shed wings in high speed dives. Never heard of it and posted info confirming this statement.

Berg showed nothing of the kind whatsoever. You are the little boy here not I and your silly whiny pandering statement for berg shows it.

BTW, that site has some totally excellent info unlike the "spitperformance" site.

Obviously you can't see the difference in the quality of the two.

I don't even know Berg, but I can see when someone is right or wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by stalkervision:
He..he..he.. Me-109's were never known to shed wings in hard manauvers or even very steep high speed dives. Many many pilots crashed landed them hard and walked away with minor injuries even.

Your statement was clearly wrong/trolling, but you are too small minded to just admit it after people posted info showing it was false.

I think its obvious to anyone who reads the thread whos right/whos wrong/whos the troll, so I will leave it here.

There is info posted both ways that support both conclusions. "Clearly wrong?" Hardly. "Small minded"? Apparently.. if I don't support the other side of those conclusions...

There is apparently documented weaknesses in the P-51 wing. There is no such thing in the Me-109. Totally remarkable in a plane where the wings were detachable for easy transportation!

But then again I am "small minded". How would I know? My words mean nothing as do my posted quotes from actual Me-109 pilots.

They still lost a wing once in a while. For every mechanical structure, there is a limit. And when it comes to dynamic loads, all limits can be exceeded rather easily, even with just minor efforts. And in high speed dives, it usually are dynamics that matter most.