PDA

View Full Version : 109 Roll with 'parasite' yaw efect?



pilas-
07-10-2004, 10:48 AM
Hello Everyone,
I've done some offline testing and one thing i notice in the 109 series of planes is that if you roll your wings, to any side, the plane suffers a yaw 'efect'. This same efect is not present in most allied planes like the yak series or the lagg. The rolling apex of the 109 seems to be a circle, while on the other planes it seems to be a dot. Is this on deliberate to simulate a aerodynamic feature of the 109 or could it be a bug?

S! All

Pilas

pilas-
07-10-2004, 10:48 AM
Hello Everyone,
I've done some offline testing and one thing i notice in the 109 series of planes is that if you roll your wings, to any side, the plane suffers a yaw 'efect'. This same efect is not present in most allied planes like the yak series or the lagg. The rolling apex of the 109 seems to be a circle, while on the other planes it seems to be a dot. Is this on deliberate to simulate a aerodynamic feature of the 109 or could it be a bug?

S! All

Pilas

Anca1ag0n
07-10-2004, 11:41 AM
Interesting enough question to deserve a bump...

Fillmore
07-10-2004, 01:41 PM
Perhaps the ball is not centered? I notice the 109 with full power shows the ball very off-center, while other planes (like the FW190) show the ball nearly centered under these conditions.

pilas-
07-10-2004, 04:53 PM
My test is: center the ball and then just roll the plane to about a 75 deg bank. you get more or less the same result for all 109's. The La or yak series is not the same, controls feel more 'precise' and accurate. 109 seems to 'wander' about. The yaw effect can really spoil the aim when you are tracking a target and pulling lead, especially if the target is rolling.

S!

lindyman
07-10-2004, 06:22 PM
I can't tell about these planes, but I do know from real world experience that different planes needs differently much rudder to compensate for adverse yaw. Some need almost nothing at all, some need quite a push on the pedals.
_
/Bjorn.

This Mortal Coil
07-11-2004, 06:38 AM
The ball is quite off-center in the Bf109 series, for example flying level at 400kph. There's no induced roll. Now I step on the pedal to center the ball (no slip?) and now it's starting to roll slightly to the right.

I don't know alot about aerodynamics, but I would expect the tendency to roll when the ball is NOT centered,, when I center the ball, the induced roll should go away?

Can someone explain that to me?

[This message was edited by JZG_Kaiser on Sun July 11 2004 at 05:54 AM.]

WWMaxGunz
07-11-2004, 06:41 AM
Code for ball not right?

I roll a lot of planes, the nose turns into the roll, not away.


Neal

Ejergard
07-11-2004, 07:34 AM
There is an IRL-phenomenon called the "Aileron-break" (direct translation from Swedish, dunno correct term in English). When you bank your wings, it will cause the wing going up to induce a greater drag than the one going down (due to shape of ailerons on each side), thus if you bank left, for example, your nose will want to yaw to the right.
This is mainly valid for sailplanes, though. Don't know any stats of how any of these WW2-birds should behave.

Edit:
Haven't thought of if this is present in the game or not so I went testing, and it doesnt seem as if it is. However, it seems like the 109 is cutting (starting to slide down) unless currect rudder is applied.
Seems weird if 109 is only craft this applies to.

[This message was edited by Ejergard on Sun July 11 2004 at 07:08 AM.]

lindyman
07-11-2004, 08:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ejergard:
... thus if you bank left, for example, your nose will want to yaw to the right.
This is mainly valid for sailplanes, though. Don't know any stats of how any of these WW2-birds should behave.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, the adverse yaw is there in AEP in all (I think) planes. In some more than in others. In most it's very weak.

Until recently, I was convinced this was severely undermodeled to make the game easier for those with no flight training or improper gear. However, having recently had a test flight in a Pitts, I'm no longer sure. The rudder needed to compensate for adverse yaw in that plane was so little that I didn't experience any push on the pedal at all, just a slightly increased pressure against the pedal with a toe was enough, and often too much.

Having played quite a bit with DeviceLink, I've also noticed that there's a discrepancy between the numerical sideslip readout and what is visualised by the ball on the gauge. In some planes there seems to be quite an offset error in the drawing of the ball position. I don't remember the 109s as extreme in this respect, but they're not accurate either.
_
/Bjorn.

LeadSpitter_
07-11-2004, 04:59 PM
try it with all planes you will see they all do. Some more then others.

http://img14.photobucket.com/albums/v43/leadspitter/LSIG1.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-12-2004, 12:03 AM
Well, it was a common joke among Luftwaffe pilots in France that you could tell a 109 pilot because he was always walking in right hand circles from applying rudder to counteract torque.

So, you should need to use a bit of rudder to keep centered in a 109 at full RPMS, in models lacking any rudder trim from the cockpit.

That being said...

it would seem many other planes that had similar torque problems get a nice free pass courtesy of our design team. I spent a bit of time in P-40s today, a plane notorious for having quite a bit of torque. It was pretty manageable all around... even takeoff was a breeze. I can't even get a -40 off the ground in Target:Rabaul, the swing is so pronounced. Here, you can just gun the engine and go... a sure recipe for a ground loop in a real P-40.

Anyway, my point is, because there is so much anecdotal and other hard info on 109s, it seems the design team designed many of its good and bad points to the nines... but didn't go to such detail for other planes, notably the Yaks and LaGGs.

I'm still looking for anything that shows how "maneuverable" the Sturmovik was. That thing can outturn a 109G on the deck with ease, and then accelerate away from it. Now, I know they used Sturmos as fighters (vs. bombers) at times...but nobody should mistake a big, heavy ship like that for a Spit. That is sure what it seems like when I encounter them online in the hands of good pilots. I've never seen ANY account that talked about that kind of agility. Toughness? Yeah, I hear that from all sides...so I shrug and accept it on those times when a Sturmo soaks up my entire magazine and still limps home; heck, if I didn't get my engine one-pinged by the tailgunner, I'm lucky, so why push, it, eh? But I've never seen any accounts of Sturmo drivers barrell rolling their way out of a scrape with rockets and bombs still strapped on it. I see it all the time in IL-2/FB/AEP.

Aaron_GT
07-12-2004, 08:42 AM
You were flying a real P-40, Stiglr?

XyZspineZyX
07-12-2004, 11:14 AM
No, the game's P-40E. GAVCA has a AVG-era Flying Tigers map, and one time when numbers were low, everybody was (as I would normally), gravitating towards the A6M2 Zero. So, I held my nose and went red.

Used Chennault's techniques and claimed quite a few Zekes.

p1ngu666
07-12-2004, 12:39 PM
i cant remmber if it had problems on takeoff, but in dive u hadto hold rudder i think

u could also fly the plane with a largeish bit of wing missing aswell http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
&lt;123_GWood_JG123&gt; NO SPAM!

WWMaxGunz
07-12-2004, 05:00 PM
At low speed turns....
what's the wing-loading on the Sturmo just to give the ball a bit more push?

And is that a 1 or 2 seat Sturmo, loaded or unloaded and African or Russian?


Neal

Liosha
07-12-2004, 06:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pilas-:
Is this on deliberate to simulate a aerodynamic feature of the 109 or could it be a bug?

S! All

Pilas<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fact, it looks like some plane's FM is done more realistically and precise than the others.
This is not a bug, this effect is present in real life and even more than its modelled in FB. So its those planes that do not have this slip effect are less correctly modelled, not a 109!