PDA

View Full Version : 109 Elevator Authority??? Wow it's bad!



faustnik
12-27-2004, 12:29 AM
Was the Bf109's elevator authority this bad before 3.03? I have not flown a 109 in months and was shocked to when I flew one in 3.03. The elevator gets really heavy at only 300mph?

If it was like this before, I have a lot of 109 guys to apologize to. I thought they were using T&B tactics because they had a plane that turned too well. Turns out its because they can't control the plane above 300mph. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

JG52_Helgstrand
12-27-2004, 01:04 AM
I agree the 109 has got a lot harder to control since 3.03 IMHO. Especially above 400.
And don't get me started on blackouts!!

OldMan____
12-27-2004, 02:48 AM
It has changed nothing in 3.03... it is like that for some time now.

Enofinu
12-27-2004, 02:49 AM
109 is useless piece of plane now. no need to fly it anymore. Glad that its 20mm is useless too, so there is no good points on that fighter. Oleg, can you delete 109 series from this game completelly?

CV8_Dudeness
12-27-2004, 02:52 AM
man people made me laugh when they said the bf109 was a dominant turner

it only became competitive when you got under 280 Kmh

at 400 Kmh it totally sucked balls

Abbuzze
12-27-2004, 03:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CV8_Dudeness:
man people made me laugh when they said the bf109 was a dominant turner

it _only_ became competitive when you got under 280 Kmh

at 400 Kmh it totally sucked balls <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few things are wrong here... 1st to call the Me109 a dominant turner, vs P47 and P51 perhaps, but vs the most other planes you should avoid this..
And also the speeds you mention are wrong...

Some sources say, that it got real stiff at 650 km/h and till 550km/h it was ok. At lower Speeds it was Ok as you allready said..
Oher say that till 480 km/h the forces where no problem, so this clearly shows that it was more a question what you are used to... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

FatBoyHK
12-27-2004, 03:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
Some sources say, that it got real stiff at 650 km/h and till 550km/h it was ok. At lower Speeds it was Ok as you allready said..
Oher say that till 480 km/h the forces where no problem, so this clearly shows that it was more a question what you are used to... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

InGame or IRL ?

Abbuzze
12-27-2004, 03:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FatBoyHK:

InGame or IRL ? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

RL, for example the unability to recover from a 80‚? dive in a 109 is the result of a wrong trimset! with the right trimset it was no problem to recover it with just pulling the stick back!

CV8_Dudeness
12-27-2004, 04:12 AM
i typed about the Bf109 in IL2:FB

not about RL . . . .

Zmir88IAP
12-27-2004, 04:25 AM
You can read on nearly every test flight report of any other nation(most US and british) that the elevator was a pure horror at more than ~250mph.
4 importand factors can limit the turn radius:
-the stall-boundary
-the g-limit(pilot Blackout)
-the elevator force
(-structural cell limits(f.e. modern jets with much loadout cant turn at 9g cause the cell could be damaged))

At "low speed" nearly every fighter of WW2 has its limit at the stall boundary. After that it depeds on the plane(and speed)-if the elevator is good enough you could turn until you got blackout-if its to heavy you cant...the 109 couldnt.

Thats why many german pilots said that the FW190 turns better than the 109...and it did at higher speed.

Thats why you didnt get in a Blackout with the 109 but in the Yak3 for example you could do this easy at higher speeds(think about an report from croatian pilots which said that the 109 is better cause you dont got a blackout*gg*).

Thats why the P47 turns better in the eyes of the US and many german Pilots. Even a 100% fuel loaded P51 will turn much better at high speed...at low speed not.
You can say the same for the Zero...if a P38 pilot said that he could outturn a Zero it was(100% sure) at high speed.

PS: Cant notice any different in 303m to 302m.

Abbuzze
12-27-2004, 04:47 AM
Zmir88IAP

100% correct Zmir!
But "pure horror"... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Let us take a look at some test:

Emil:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Elevator
This is an exceptionally good control at low air speeds, being fairly heavy and not over-sensitive. Above 250 mph, however, it becomes too heavy, so that maneuvrability is seriously restricted. When diving at 400 mph a pilot, pulling very hard, cannot put on enough 'g' to black himself out; stick force -'g' probably esceeds 20 lb/g in the dive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
As I mentioned before, trimset, the wheel was easy to move... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Mark Hanna
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Pitch is also delighful at 250 mph and below. It feels very positve and the amount of effort on the control column needed to produce the relevant nose movement seems exactly right to me. As CL max is reached the leading edge slats deploy - together if the ball is in the middle, slightly asymmetrically if you have any slip on. The aircraft delights in being pulled into hard manuevering turns at these slower speeds. As the slats pop out you feel a slight "notching" on the stick and you can pull more until the whole airframe is buffeting quite hard. A little more and you will drop a wing, but you have to be crass to do it unintentionally. Pitch tends to heavy up above 250 mph but it is still easily manageable up to 300 mph and the aircraft is perfectly happy carrying out low-level looping maneuvers from 300 mph and below. Above 300 mph one peculiarity is a slight nose down trim change as you accelerate. This means that running in for an airshow above 300 mph the aeroplane has a slight tucking in sensation - a sort of desire to get down to ground level ! This is easily held on the stick or can be trimmed out but is slightly surprising initially. Maneuvering above 300, two hands can be required for more aggressive performance. EIther that or get on the trimmer to help you. Despite this heavying up it is still quite easy to get at 5G's at these speeds. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here is also the tendency of the 109 mentioned that it got noseheavy at higher speeds, so you have to counter this witht the trimm...
With the right trimset you are even able to blackout yourselfe with just the stick...

Stoyanov
12-27-2004, 06:35 AM
This one is for the Bf109E...
http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg

Abbuzze
12-27-2004, 07:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stoyanov:
This one is for the Bf109E...
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Keep in mind that ALL tests are made in relation to the plane you were use to fly...
For Spit I/II german Pilots report it as a plane with a very tight turning circle but with very bad harmonized steering, sluggish ailereons vs. excellent elevators.
Jug Cockpit was called much to big all switches were much to far away from the pilot and he had to lean foreward to reach‚¬īem, you know how Jugpilots called the 109 cockpit?
All tests are made with a certain point of view... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
12-27-2004, 07:56 AM
My in-game experience has the cutoff at about 400 KPH. Above it you have weak elevator response. Below it you can fight well.

My only problem with this is the fact that to fight well you have to slow down so much that it negates one of the strongest points of the 109...speed. Zoom climb is still good, but you must make sure you have more speed than your adversary as the P-51, P-47 have better "E" retention. And the Spit has a lower stall speed.

The 109 is a challenge to be successful in and given the option, I'd take the G2 over the other mk108 armed variants...even the G6 a/s.

One of my favorite tactics in the 109 now is to take a K4 and stay about 200m off the deck. When I enter the target area, I'll throttle up and try to belly-shoot opponents with the 30mm and skeedaddle outta there. The K4 is still really fast.

TB

faustnik
12-27-2004, 10:20 AM
Yes, I have heard that the 109 elevator gets very heavy at 400mph in RAF tests but, not at under 300 like in 3.03. I have heard so many complaints from Allied pilots about the 109 that I guess I started to believe it. What a load of BS. 109s out-turning Spits in PF, yeah right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif . Sorry again to all my 109 wingmen for buying it for a second.

My 190 may not do any sustained turning but, at least I can pull lead in a target in a 600kph dive. I'll stick with the Wurger.

Red_Russian13
12-27-2004, 10:34 AM
Yes, above about 400KPH it can be tough to handle.

It seems from my experience that those who fly the 109 all the time, love it, and can do some amazing things in it.

But really, that's the way with all aircraft that people pick as thier sole rides. People use the strengths to thier advantage. Personally, I love the 109. Any variant will do. I am most confident (although I usually lose anyway) in a 109.

Red_Russian13
12-27-2004, 10:36 AM
Faustnik,

Is that a bass on your vertical stabilizer?

MEGILE
12-27-2004, 10:48 AM
<span class="ev_code_RED">TRIM ON A SLIDER NOOB!</span>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

faustnik
12-27-2004, 11:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Red_Russian13:
Faustnik,

Is that a bass on your vertical stabilizer? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, FlyFish made that skin for me! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Vipez-
12-27-2004, 11:11 AM
its 3.02 that made the 109 elevators heavy..


this is the reason i completely hard to abandon 109 and fly only 190 from now on..

hope it gets fixxed in the next patch..

JG5_UnKle
12-27-2004, 11:59 AM
It is even worse at high altitude, seems the sim maybe mixes up TAS & IAS when it comes to elevator authority http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

westcoastphil
12-27-2004, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TgD Thunderbolt56:

One of my favorite tactics in the 109 now is to take a K4 and stay about 200m off the deck. When I enter the target area, I'll throttle up and try to belly-shoot opponents with the 30mm and skeedaddle outta there. The K4 is still really fast.

TB <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sheesh....now I have fly upside down when you're on the server. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

carguy_
12-27-2004, 12:14 PM
From what I read this applied to all Me109 so I`m glad it is back like it was in IL2.Maybe ppl won`t be so sore about the old G6Early.

Also I read that Me109 was a VERY hard plane to stall which is nonsence in FB/AEP.

Diablo310th
12-27-2004, 02:50 PM
This all very good information for a Jug pilot...unless of course u LW types are passing around mis-information to lure me into a trap. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

faustnik
12-27-2004, 02:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Diablo310th:
This all very good information for a Jug pilot...unless of course u LW types are passing around mis-information to lure me into a trap. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't get too confortable! Our 190s do fine at high speeds! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
12-27-2004, 03:18 PM
Do like other 109ers and use trim on a slider. Trim and flaps she pulls up with the best of them be sure. Poor highspeed control is just yet another example why the 190 was a better fighter. But in this game the 109 is among the best in the game.

JG52_Helgstrand
12-27-2004, 05:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OldMan____:
It has changed nothing in 3.03... it is like that for some time now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I would have to disagree, I fly 109 almost exclusively and I have sure noticed a diff since 3.03.

It feels like I'm flying a diff plane now.
I'm getting tired of having to re-learn my ride every patch release. B1tch moan gripe blah blah blah...lol

And what's with the instant 2 min black outs now.

Fehler
12-27-2004, 05:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG52_Helgstrand:
And what's with the instant 2 min black outs now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cmon you know what's up with that...

faustnik
12-27-2004, 05:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
Do like other 109ers and use trim on a slider. Trim and flaps she pulls up with the best of them be sure. Poor highspeed control is just yet another example why the 190 was a better fighter. But in this game the 109 is among the best in the game. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If the 109 is the best in-sim after 3.03, a lot of Allied pilots need to change their approach.

SkyChimp
12-27-2004, 06:24 PM
I can pull all sorts of Gs in a Yak and not black out http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Bull_dog_
12-27-2004, 06:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
I can pull all sorts of Gs in a Yak and not black out http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I had an intersting dogfight with a La-7 whilst flying a Mustang...During that fight, our speeds stayed mostly above 600km/hr as we spiraled downwards...I entered a few lag turns to prevent me from blacking out. I think he was trying to get my wings to fall off, but alas it didn't happen...what did happen is that eventually I blacked out and he didn't and shot me down....imagine that, a La uber turner doing high speed turns in order to defeat a Mustang http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Zatorski
12-27-2004, 06:59 PM
The saving grace is that you can go to combat flaps in a 109 at high speeds, and they won't stick open on you unless you are going way too fast. Another great thing about the 109 is get a fistfull of speed, pull up, let the speed shrink to 300 KMH, let go of the stick and watch the altimeter spin.

Red_Russian13
12-27-2004, 09:31 PM
Faustnik;

I love bass fishing!

I just flew some 109 missions. I don't notice too much difference in this new patch. Or course, I'm a terrible pilot, so...

I did notice that the Zero is a squirrely sucker now.

MuerteColorado
12-27-2004, 09:53 PM
109 should be pretty much uncontrollable over 350 mph.

thats from many books ive read.

but heres a tidbit. the K4 has much worse elevator control at high speed than the 109AS.

try it youll see.

CV8_Dudeness
12-27-2004, 11:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zatorski:
The saving grace is that you can go to combat flaps in a 109 at high speeds, and they won't stick open <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
same with every other A/C in FB

HayateAce
12-27-2004, 11:44 PM
So when will Oleg employ stiffened ailerons? As of now the 109 does fast rolls at high speed.



http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg

CV8_Dudeness
12-27-2004, 11:51 PM
the Elevators have been overly porked to compensate mr HayateAce

WTE_Ibis
12-28-2004, 12:06 AM
Great plane,I love it,trim is the thing.

Nero111
12-28-2004, 12:35 AM
I've always loved the 109's since Sturmo days, still my fav planes.
Thing is if you dont use trim on a slider in a 109 you're as good as dead against any half descent opposition, just my 2c worth.
I havent installed 3.03 yet, waiting on the server software, but if the 109's are worse AGAIN, it will be a sad day, for me at least hehe.

BBB_Hyperion
12-28-2004, 02:06 AM
Wow must be Xmas overtime. I saw finaly HayateAce posting an document .)

Well does this document mentions the trimset ? And when not why not the ability to use it for high speed pullout ? And why they always get this 109E test thats at first is not applyable to the later series cause of changed rudder stabilizer long fin construction etc.
And is based on which plane condition ? And how many Planes were tested of this series ?

I know the answers already. This 109 E Test has been discussed to death sometime on LEMB board.

Here is the difference between wrong and right trimmed plane.
http://www.butcherbirds.de/hypesstorage/109f4trimm.jpg

The effect of moving the stabilizer is that the forces needed to pull out are reduced when it is in wrong position for level flight its very hard even impossible to pull out.

For more details.
http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/109myths/#dives

Would be intresting when someone posts a control forces comparison http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Still 109 without trim is only half a plane .)

VK_Dim
12-28-2004, 02:41 AM
From what i read and saw in documentaries about BF109, somethin is really wrog now. You are talkin about some low speeds 350-400kmh slow elevator response. Slow, stiff and hard elevator, YES but not below 600kmh dives..
Cheers

Abbuzze
12-28-2004, 02:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
So when will Oleg employ stiffened ailerons? As of now the 109 does fast rolls at high speed.



http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1st. It seems that all planes in FB roll like mad!

2nd. You forgot to mention that the test you show is from an Emil!
Emil was not a good roller, BUT early Spitfire I/II were even worse, cause their ailereons where fabric covered! And a Hurricane was much worse than both!!!

The new metallcoverd ailereons of the Spit V brought it to the level of the emil at lower speed and was better at higher speed.
But the new redesignd wing of the later 109s were better in roll than the old Emilwings!

Stoyanov
12-28-2004, 05:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
So when will Oleg employ stiffened ailerons? As of now the 109 does fast rolls at high speed.



http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1st. It seems that all planes in FB roll like mad!

2nd. You forgot to mention that the test you show is from an Emil!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
yup its for Emil,I said that already.I agree that all planes roll like crazy...even the spit after 2.04 rolls verrrrrry good even on high speed.However i think that the 109's elevator is better then it was in 3.02bm,and when u add some flaps and trim its almost perfect for mehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Skalgrim
12-28-2004, 05:53 AM
abbuzze,

think you has too the divetest from the improve f4, those diveteast was the base for g6, they have change rudder deflection etc to get better highspeed maneuver,

by those test had the testpilots with trim by 750km/h ias get almost blackout, that means almost 7gs

think hartmann has not get so many kill with weak highspeed maneuver

the 109g was better highspeed maneuvere plane as 109f, but therefore weaker at slow speed, because less rudder deflection


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CV8_Dudeness:
man people made me laugh when they said the bf109 was a dominant turner

it _only_ became competitive when you got under 280 Kmh

at 400 Kmh it totally sucked balls <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few things are wrong here... 1st to call the Me109 a dominant turner, vs P47 and P51 perhaps, but vs the most other planes you should avoid this..
And also the speeds you mention are wrong...

Some sources say, that it got real stiff at 650 km/h and till 550km/h it was ok. At lower Speeds it was Ok as you allready said..
Oher say that till 480 km/h the forces where no problem, so this clearly shows that it was more a question what you are used to... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Recon_609IAP
12-28-2004, 05:59 AM
I love flying the 109, great aircraft.

Thanks for that snippet HayateAce. The current modelled 109 is the best yet - Oleg did a super job.

I've noticed that all aircraft when high speeds have a stiffer elevator authority - nice to see

Skalgrim
12-28-2004, 06:04 AM
and please, look 109e and 109k are not same plane,

that can you see only from looking,

109e and 109k are much more differ as spit1 and spit9

JG54_Arnie
12-28-2004, 06:09 AM
No problems here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

OldMan____
12-28-2004, 06:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Skalgrim:
abbuzze,

think you has too the divetest from the improve f4, those diveteast was the base for g6, they have change rudder deflection etc to get better highspeed maneuver,

by those test had the testpilots with trim by 750km/h ias get almost blackout, that means almost 7gs

think hartmann has not get so many kill with weak highspeed maneuver

the 109g was better highspeed maneuvere plane as 109f, but therefore weaker at slow speed, because less rudder deflection


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CV8_Dudeness:
man people made me laugh when they said the bf109 was a dominant turner

it _only_ became competitive when you got under 280 Kmh

at 400 Kmh it totally sucked balls <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A few things are wrong here... 1st to call the Me109 a dominant turner, vs P47 and P51 perhaps, but vs the most other planes you should avoid this..
And also the speeds you mention are wrong...

Some sources say, that it got real stiff at 650 km/h and till 550km/h it was ok. At lower Speeds it was Ok as you allready said..
Oher say that till 480 km/h the forces where no problem, so this clearly shows that it was more a question what you are used to... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can summarize all this in... BUTCHER BIRD RULES!!!!

Atomic_Marten
12-28-2004, 12:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Was the Bf109's elevator authority this bad before 3.03? I have not flown a 109 in months and was shocked to when I flew one in 3.03. The elevator gets _really_ heavy at only 300mph? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hm.. I have play with the Bf109 late a lot, and must say that it is wise to not exceede 500/550kmh -> IMO this is a border speed.

To compare Fw190 and Bf109 in dive and tracking target? Lemme see.. it's like uncomparable. With Fw190 it's comfortable, and with Bf109 it's hard in high speed fights.

But Bf109 is still the better fighter in game then Fw190 (I admit Fw190 superiority in interception role), and I will continue to play with it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Worth to mention that I'm just downloading v3.03.

BerkshireHunt
12-28-2004, 12:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Abbuzze:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
So when will Oleg employ stiffened ailerons? As of now the 109 does fast rolls at high speed.
http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

1st. It seems that all planes in FB roll like mad!

2nd. You forgot to mention that the test you show is from an Emil!
Emil was not a good roller, BUT early Spitfire I/II were even worse, cause their ailereons where fabric covered! And a Hurricane was much worse than both!!!
The new metallcoverd ailereons of the Spit V brought it to the level of the emil at lower speed and was better at higher speed.
But the new redesignd wing of the later 109s were better in roll than the old Emilwings! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to clarify, to the best of my knowledge all Spitfires from the VB onward had metal- skinned ailerons. No 109 ever had metal- skinned ailerons, though from the F onward they had metal- skinned flaps. Some K4s had plywood- skinned elevators.
Should be borne in mind that the Spitfire wing was much larger (in span and area) than that of any 109, which largely accounts for the poorer roll. But it's not immediately obvious to me why the 109F wing, with rounded tips (ie increased span) and similar- sized ailerons should roll better than that of an Emil. Did the ailerons have greater travel?

Magister__Ludi
12-28-2004, 01:07 PM
About that scan from a test somebody has posted earlier:

First off all, Emils had completely different ailerons than later series, they had the peak roll at low speeds (200mph compared with 300mph of later models), typical for early war planes. Those planes had problems with controls at high speeds, they were not designed to go that fast.

This particular test compares an Emil with early Spitfires (I/II); both these planes had poor controlability at high speed, but the test concludes that Emil had stiffer controls. Unfortunately this tells a lot about testers bias and much less about the planes in test. The reason they give Spitfire better controlability at high speeds was because the Spitfire's stick had a larger lateral travell, 8 inch (though blocked by pilot's feet), whereas Emil had 4 inch lateral travel. This is why controls appered stiffer for Emil, because they traveled less.

Despite this, British pilots asked to comment the roll performance of the 2 planes found that roll performance was the same, and scorned the results of this test (you can read details about these early RAE tests and their veracity in "Augsburg Eagle: The story of the Messerschmitt 109", book written by a British author, who himself perpetuated a lot of British propaganda myths regarding Luftwaffe's planes). The test also does not say nothing about how poorly harmonized Spitfire controls were, they had very large travel for ailerons and very short for elevators. 109 controls were very nicely harmonized. Anyway, later 109 models had much better roll performance than their Spit counterparts. Spits never had good roll performanc at high speed for the whole duration of the war.

Regarding the 109's elevators it was already mentioned, over 400mph they became heavy, and a different trim was required in order to ease the control forces. Again, German fighters had a superior solution for elevator control at high speeds, which is: movable horizontal stabilizer, solution still used by today's transonic planes (like airliners for instance). Allied pilots that briefly tested German planes did not understand how to properly use these controls. More confusion was created also from the different way 109 and 190 reacted to trim control at high speed. The big advantage of using movable horizontal stabilizer was that the elevator was still effective at speeds where the ailerons were already locked by compressibility effects - no other ww2 planes enjoyed this level of control, once the compressibility occured, all controls were locked until denser atmosphere was reached (hopefully before reaching Vne).

We, 109 drivers, were asking for proper flight controls from the beginning. Unfortunately, instead of a correction we get more and more unrealistic characteristics, defects that never were. After 2 years I tend to agree with Enofinu, why not delete 109, if Maddox team fears it so bad.

Magister__Ludi
12-28-2004, 01:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Just to clarify, to the best of my knowledge all Spitfires from the VB onward had metal- skinned ailerons. No 109 ever had metal- skinned ailerons, though from the F onward they had metal- skinned flaps. Some K4s had plywood- skinned elevators. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Metal skinned or not ailerons, Spitfire always had poor roll performance. It peaked at 60-70 deg/sec at 200mph. Bf-109G peaked at 80-90 deg/sec at 300 mph. Of course up to 200mph there was not much of a difference between the roll performance of the 2 planes, but at higher speeds 109 was a clear winner.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Should be borne in mind that the Spitfire wing was much larger (in span and area) than that of any 109, which largely accounts for the poorer roll. But it's not immediately obvious to me why the 109F wing, with rounded tips (ie increased span) and similar- sized ailerons should roll better than that of an Emil. Did the ailerons have greater travel? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Large span wings are one reason why Spitfire had poor roll performance, the other is the wing twist that made the ailerons much less efficient (Spitfires had a flat peak roll, extended on a large speed interval, because of the wing twist). I posted many times the NACA report detailing Spitfire handling, you have there all the answers.

HayateAce
12-28-2004, 01:36 PM
Perhaps after 2 years of continual improvement, the Maddox team has finally seen that the 109 was pushed too far, too superior. More than they were in real life.

Sure it was a great fighter, but not the very best in the world. It is great news that the 109 is beginning to come back into some reasonable performance limits.

Regarding the Spitfire, what can I say. It was simply a superior aircraft at MOST stages of its development. Sorry to break that to you. One of the Spit's few true serious weaknesses is that it had short legs. This will never matter in ForgottenBattles dogfight servers.

My hat is off to the late Reginald Mitchell for creating not only a beautiful aircraft but likely one of the top 2 thoroughbred dogfighters of the war.

Instead of saying the Maddox team fears the 109, you should thank them for making it such a server dominating aircraft and giving it every benefit of the doubt on FM and turning performance. But now it's time to get back some reality.

"Mitchell's "Toy" was about to teach the Luftwaffe a new game...."

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/types/uk/supermarine/spitfireI-III/spitfire.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
12-28-2004, 02:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
you should thank them for making it such a server dominating aircraft and giving it every benefit of the doubt on FM and turning performance. But now it's time to get back some reality. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

worse than RL elevator performance is "Reality" according to HayateHater when its to do with the Bf109

JG5_UnKle
12-28-2004, 02:29 PM
Try the turn test at 6000M

Elevator authority is poor in the 109 and you can match it against historical data - see if it can be done in 24 seconds...

carguy_
12-28-2004, 02:36 PM
Hmm flew some hours in G6Late and up to 550kph it definitely didn`t change.

Magister__Ludi
12-28-2004, 02:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Perhaps after 2 years of continual improvement, the Maddox team has finally seen that the 109 was pushed too far, too superior. More than they were in real life. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

After 2 years of moaning from 14 year old hayateaces like you, that do not know anything about planes and air combat, except turning endlessly in online airquake sessions, we got this 109 flight model, a parody of the real life plane performance.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Sure it was a great fighter, but not the very best in the world. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

109 proved itself in combat. On Eastern Front a tiny little force of 400-500 fighters (JG 51, 52, 54 usual total strength), most of them 109s, caused the loss of 90000 USSR planes. Of course not all these were destroyed by fighters, part were lost in accidents, part were lost to AAA (however German AAA on Eastern Front was mostly absent), nevertheless the number is IMPRESSIVE. Without a top class combat plane such a result would have been impossible.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It is great news that the 109 is beginning to come back into some reasonable performance limits. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In your 14 year old ace expertise which are those newly modelled performance limits?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Regarding the Spitfire, what can I say. It was simply a superior aircraft at MOST stages of its development. Sorry to break that to you. One of the Spit's few true serious weaknesses is that it had short legs. This will never matter in ForgottenBattles dogfight servers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spitfire was a decent dogfighter, but nowhere near 109. Compared with 109, Spitfire had slower max speed, slower climb rate and acceleration, poorer roll rate, weaker guns (20mm Minengeschoss were the hardest hitting 20mm shells), the only slight advantage was a meager 1-2 second advantage in turn rate, too small to be useful in real life combat.

The difference in effectivness can be seen easily reading this list of Luftwaffe aces that downed Spitfires. Are you aware of similar results of Spitfire pilots? No? Ok.

http://www.luftwaffe.cz/spit.html

My proposal is to drop entirely the German planes, if they are so many that cannot stand superior planes. I'm sure Oleg will provide those with pink wheeled Spits and Yaks.

Fehler
12-28-2004, 04:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HayateAce:
So when will Oleg employ stiffened ailerons? As of now the 109 does fast rolls at high speed.



http://www.vnvv.com/pics/109E.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cool, you have learned how to post a caption, but have you learned to read it?

Take a closer look hotshot.. it's talking about the Bf 109-E (E is for Emil). E, in this case is not for EVERY Like you would enjoy thinking.

Go practice more, you will have greater gaming pleasure.

lipp98
12-28-2004, 04:33 PM
I`ve noticed it too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

Skalgrim
12-28-2004, 04:45 PM
Mark hanna had say, 109g has until 480km/h ias better rollrate as p51.

He was a testpilots and know from he speak.

Spit and 109 was very match birds, read Mark Hanna.

Some time spits was better, because better fuel, but same power are match plane.

109 had use bad fuel (87 octan), but with mw50 could they it balancing,

190 had get the good fuel, because they need it more as 109.

Explain why climb g2 with 3050kg with 1300ps 21m/sec,

spit can that not, 109 had better lift and drag.

With same power and similar weigh are 109 faster and climb better as spits.

Spain g10 3150kg 1680ps merlin engine has initialclimb from 28m/sec, not many plane can that match.

Germans g10 has had 10% more power by only 3%more weigh, that means german g10 initial climb was probable 30m/sec.

When you it compare with finns g2 climb test, it seem possible, so many more weigh had g10 not,but 550ps more power.