Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- FM/DM threads (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=196)

- - Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=34115)

An obvious statement but the Spit trials you quote above seems to be without the extra boost that 100 octane allows.

A second observation, can someone explain how the Me109 is supposed to have a better manoverability at higher speeds than the SPitfire when all the tests point out how difficult the 109 is to manoever at high speeds due to the way the controls stiffen up at high speed compared to the Spitfire?

Last I don't see how the chart on posting 129 page 13 proves what it says it proves. I would appreciate it if it could be explained to me in simple terms or explain the maths behind the criteria thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by JtD (Post 461789)

No, it says the Spitfire at its best turn performance velocity beats the 109 at its best turn performance velocity. According to these figures, the 109 cannot outturn a Spitfire in a sustained turning fight at sea level unless the Spitfire lets it happen, however, the Spitfire can outturn the 109 in said scenario no matter what the 109 does.

Yes that pretty much nails it.

The speed advantage is still speed advantage as JtD said it 100% ly - ''This remains true in turnfights. The 109 has the choice to maintain the higher airspeed at a lower corner velocity, the Spitfire has the choice to maintain a higher corner velocity at a lower airspeed, so the 109 can maintain the initiative.''

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crumpp (Post 461800)

You do understand the Spitfire and BF-109 do not achieve their best turn performance under the same conditions of flight?

Yes that's what I was saying before. ;) But when it comes to sustained turn that does not really matter.

Do you know what would happen if you entered a pure turn and burn (TnB) fight against a Spitfire (you in a 109)? :-P

Quote:

An obvious statement but the Spit trials you quote above seems to be without the extra boost that 100 octane allows.

It does not change the outcome or outlook. Despite the higher wingloading, the Bf-109 has more excess thrust because it is lighter.

Quote:

JtD says:

No, it says the Spitfire at its best turn performance velocity beats the 109 at its best turn performance velocity.

How is your statement ANY different from mine???? :confused:

Quote:

Crumpp says:
Looking at one single point in the envelope tells us the Bf-109E3 is hopelessly outclassed IF it tries to match the Spitfire at the Spitfires best performance velocity.

Performance in the context of the conversation is TURN performance.

The Spitfire has to reduce speed significantly below the Bf-109's to reach that best turn velocity.

That is a fact.

Quote:

According to these figures, the 109 cannot outturn a Spitfire in a sustained turning fight at sea level unless the Spitfire lets it happen, however, the Spitfire can outturn the 109 in said scenario no matter what the 109 does.

That is one way of looking at it.

Another way is the Spitfire must give up 30 kph of speed in order to realize any advantage at all.

It is the same exact scenario. One that leaves the Spitfire with no choice but hope it sticks around in the turn fight.

If the Bf-109 does not, the Spitfire has lost the initiative.

Quote:

Do you know what would happen if you entered a pure turn and burn (TnB) fight against a Spitfire (you in a 109)?

Sure, you would use the Bf-109's sustainable load factor advantage to put the Spitfire turning defensive circles beneath you until you killed him.

Quote:

A second observation, can someone explain how the Me109 is supposed to have a better manoverability at higher speeds than the SPitfire when all the tests point out how difficult the 109 is to manoever at high speeds due to the way the controls stiffen up at high speed compared to the Spitfire?

Don't confuse high load factors found in instantaneous performance with low load factors achievable in sustained performance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crumpp (Post 461827)

Sure, you would use the Bf-109's sustainable load factor advantage to put the Spitfire turning defensive circles beneath you until you killed him.

That's not the TnB mate. ;)

yea i thought that was ZnB?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crumpp (Post 461826)

How is your statement ANY different from mine???? :confused:

You're saying the 109 is flying at the Spitfires best turn performance speed, I am saying the 109 is flying at its own best turn performance speed. Quite a difference.