A newbies impression of the 109 and spit

[NZtyphoon]

I note here that one of the sources listed is;
1 - Quoted from Page 61 - Osprey's Aircraft of the Aces - 'Spitfire Mk.I/II Aces' by Dr. Alfred Price.
ISBN 84-8372-207-0

Sic - it is on page 90, so not even that is right. Dr Price goes on to state

Interestingly the Luftwaffe test centre at Rechlin also carried out comparative fighting trials between Bf 109s and a captured Bf 109....The two sets of trials showed that the 'home team' possessed the superior fighter type. Given the naivety with which the trials were conducted any other finding would probably have been regarded as 'politically incorrect'....the Mark I and Mark II Spitfires were roughly equal to the Bf 109 in capability. In the fleeting air combats that were the norm, tactical initiative counted for more than the relatively small performance differences that existed between the opposing fighter types.

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

My guess is that they do not address thrust increase otherwise they would have written it I think.

Reading more closely the phrase I come to think that they perhaps wanted to say "as long as g level remained low during maximum lift pulls" meaning that the absolut lift was low while providing maximum lift for that given speed.

The report includes a series of graphs recording the information; incidentally

Reference 1. REQUIREMENTS FOR SATISFACTORY FLYING QUALITIES
OF AIRPLANES can be found here

[Crumpp]

Quill was a no nothing pilot who just operated the controls and hoped for the best

That is not what I said. Pilots in the 1930's and 1940's were given only very elementary training in aerodynamics. It was considered unnecessary and demanded too much mathematical knowledge. That is straight out of the RAF Flying Manual.

They are not the experts in aerodynamics that we see today in the cockpit.

Glider,

The Spitfire Mk I had unacceptable longitudinal instability. The RAE knew it and corrected it in later marks.

It is a fact.

3/4 inch stick movement to run the usable Angle of Attack range at weak or neutral stability with light stick forces is going to make for a squirrely airplane.



Read the report, the stick force gradient on the longitudinal axis was considered too light by most of the pilots.

By careful flying, maximum performance turns could be made.

The yaw wise stability experiences a pitch up with large deflections that coupled with the longitudinal instability caused the plane to experience rapid accelerations. That means it is very difficult for the pilot to precisely control the elevator. That asymetrical loading is what can cause the airframe to break apart in spin recovery.

[Crumpp]

Guys,

The Spitfire was a great airplane and a very effective fighter. There was no such thing as a Stability and Control Engineer when the Spitfire was designed.

It was a new science and almost all of the World War II era fighters have some sort of stability and control issue. It is just as important as the aerodynamics in their fighting abilities.

The Bf-109 had issues with the coupling effects of yaw-wise and the lateral axis at high speed.

The FW-190 and P-51 had longitudinal axis stick force reversals at low speeds.

Airplanes simply got faster and heavier so quickly that the engineering science did not keep up. It did matter so much when airplanes were slow and light.

[bongodriver]

The average military pilot might have had basic aerodynamics training but you can bet you ass test pilots had alot more.

[Crumpp]

Guys,

The Spitfire was a great airplane and a very effective fighter. There was no such thing as a Stability and Control Engineer when the Spitfire was designed.

It was a new science and almost all of the World War II era fighters have some sort of stability and control issue. It is just as important as the aerodynamics in their fighting abilities.

The Bf-109 had issues with the coupling effects of yaw-wise and the lateral axis at high speed.

The FW-190 and P-51 had longitudinal axis stick force reversals at low speeds.

Airplanes simply got faster and heavier so quickly that the engineering science did not keep up. It did matter so much when airplanes were slow and light.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Guys,

The Spitfire was a great airplane and a very effective fighter. There was no such thing as a Stability and Control Engineer when the Spitfire was designed.

It was a new science and almost all of the World War II era fighters have some sort of stability and control issue. It is just as important as the aerodynamics in their fighting abilities.

The Bf-109 had issues with the coupling effects of yaw-wise and the lateral axis at high speed.

The FW-190 and P-51 had longitudinal axis stick force reversals at low speeds.

Airplanes simply got faster and heavier so quickly that the engineering science did not keep up. It did matter so much when airplanes were slow and light.

This I totally agree with, problems were not unique to the Spitfire.

[Crumpp]

This I totally agree with, problems were not unique to the Spitfire.

The Spitfire has unique stability and control characteristics.

The most outstanding issue is the Longitudinal Stability and Control of the early marks.

This was corrected in later variants.

The average military pilot might have had basic aerodynamics training but you can bet you ass test pilots had alot more.

Not really Bongo. They were the guys that had the balls to climb into an uproven machine.

Hans Sander related a story of performing a max G pullout from a dive in the early testing of the FW-190. The aircraft was well into the transonic realm of flight and upon recovery exhibited water vapor condensation behind the normal shock.

It turned the wings completely white for a second. He had no idea at the time what happenend and effect scared the pants off him at first. He thought something was wrong with the aircraft. He paused, ensured he had control of the aircraft and all engine indications were in the green. He was prepared to bail out if necessary.

You can see the same effect in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQDJG...eature=related

[bongodriver]

Nice video, what was it and what are wings? I don't know what this aerodynamite is you speak of.....I'm only a pilot.

[Crumpp]

Nice video, what was it and what are wings? I don't know what this aerodynamite is you speak of.....I'm only a pilot.

In context, the pilots of the 1930's and early 40's had never experienced such a thing.