Well once again you are picking extract here and there to build an argument. I only wonder if you did build yourself that way (I speak rudely tht way because I don't like your tone and especially the way you behave as ever tht look like to say: hummph, if you can't answer to this right now then you fail).
At first, did you notice that we are talking rather differently of slow speed turns ? All the argumentation is based on physics and pilot accounts and turn around the stall characteristic of the Spit wing.
if you take the both the 109 and the Spit at constant turning speed the SPit will always have an inferior radius as the Hurri will have with the Spit.
The prob with the SPitfire is her configuration : the thin wing, the wide chord, the low span ratio and the elliptical shape. In the order of appearance it will increase the AoA, aggravate the drag generated by the turbulence around the airfoil and aggravate the stall characteristic and makes the airflow around the wing tips unpredictable (hence the exaggerated washout).
The more you turn, the more E you loose. This E deficit is only compensated by your engine. The more excess of power you have the more time you will stay in that configuration. The Spitfire had less P/W ratio than the 109 (except perhaps in your 12lb+ dreams and what will come next in your request) and thicker wings.
You think you are a pilot so you know what come next...
The Spit will have to turn slightly nose down to compensate for the E loss generated from her draggier turn characteristic and inferior P/W and stay away from the low speed/high AoA/Split angle and bank dangerous situation. Invariably the plane with better stall behavior and superior P/W will stay longer in a turn where the speed decrease hence will loose less alt.
So either the Spit pilot will have to unleash the G before his opponent or will he start to spiral down.
In a turn fight, alt his G (you add the Gravity force to what your plane can do).
That's what the 109 pilots describe when they are talking abt their eggs shaped loop. You can also understand that if they are specifically asked about how horizontal where their turns: they never says it was perfectly horizontal.
Obviously, unless the training was complete, it will be hard to imagine a rookie turning that way (but will you yourself bank a Cessna at 90deg and start pulling on the yoke ?). So things are not that clear blurred in fog of war.
If you are reading with attention the test conditions of the turns chart, you'd understand that the test pilots enter the turn with plenty of excessive power to complete it.
But certainly there was no flat donuts turns in a dogfight. Your speed bleeds out unless you are nosing down.
In a modern dogfight, you see jets nosing down to be able to sustain their best turn rate. Why would you think it would be different in a Spit that had 1/5th of the P/W ratio of an 80's jet !
Talking about the 109 and Spits models alternatively taking the leads in the perf race is all about this: the aerodynamics and the P/W ratio. Once one get the upper hands, it felt more dynamics in a dogfight and keep that ounce of extra E to get the advantage in a high G engagement.
the fact is that the Emil model had the advantage during BoB. Just like The FW190 enjoyed before the IX was launched. (yeah I know you also believe that the 190 was the tank Oleg sold to us with the first opus of IL2)
End of arguments tonight. Feel free to bury my post under a wall of fantastical documents hammered en masse by all the Gang as ever.
|