Throwing some light on rates of turn

[von Brühl]

Are you sure you were in a max-rate turn in the Spit? Dropping flaps does not automatically guarantee that you are turning beyond the 109's capability.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by von Brühl

Are you sure you were in a max-rate turn in the Spit? Dropping flaps does not automatically guarantee that you are turning beyond the 109's capability.

OK, so max-rate turn usually requires a constant speed and altitude as well, I cannot grantee that. I didn't actually time the turn, and I didn't have the time, nor the measuring tools to calculate my actual (as opposed to indicated) rate against the flying manual. I was certainly turning as fast as I could, both before, and after dropping the flaps.

We've all seen how much of an advantage the Spit 2a has had in this game when turning. I've done it loads of times, drop into a hard turn, and if he still stays with me and I'm getting close to the stall, drop the flaps. This has always shook 109s.

But not this time. It seems there is someone out there who can really coax a 109 in the turn.....

Hey, it might just be my imagination. I might not have been turning very steeply... (I doubt that) because I wasn't broken (I had not been engaged yet, and I was over friendly territory) and I was just on the stall buffet.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by pstyle

OK, so max-rate turn usually requires a constant speed and altitude as well, I cannot grantee that.

Maybe for some form of calibration to put in a text book or manual --- but historically a constant speed/altitude turn in a 109 gave well below the practical max turn rate for a short engagement (though clearly giving optimal sustained turn rate) and was regarded as a technique for mediocre pilots.

Originally Posted by http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/spitcom.htm

There is more than one account by German wartime fighter pilots that suggest that many Luftwaffe novices did not use the turning performance of the 109 to the full. They seem to have regarded the point at which the automatic slots popped out as being a warning to ease back. Only more experienced pilots pushed the Bf109 to its limits. The way the slots operated could itself be a problem, causing the Bf109 to "buck" and throw off the aim of the Bf109 pilot, perhaps at the critical moment.

From my understanding the historical way the 109 was flown by most of the experienced pilots was more the egg shaped turns described by Leykrauf. Deliberately pulling the slats out improves the instantaneous turn rate letting you crib lead for a snap shot or trade some excess speed for a few seconds at a better turn rate. However then you have to unload the wing again fairly smartly before too much E is lost and accelerate for a while before trying again.

I recall Molders may have had a different view on things but generally speaking flying the 109 in a nice neat circle was regarded as the best way possible to get shot down.

Max turn rate - like corner speed - is one of those armchair figures that its important not to get too fixated on.

[Talisman]

Having been out turned by a Me 109 E a few times when flying a Hurricane, I decided to check my CloD control calibration (green bars for input and output) and found that I was not getting full elevator deflection.
After giving the joystick some vigorous movements, full forward and back a few times, it appeared to reset to my original settings with full deflection. This seems to happen to me on an intermittent basis (when flying Me 109 too). I suspect that it may be my joystick, which is rather old now, so I plan to order a new one soon. I keep checking my elevator deflection now as I am unable to trust to it. Hope the new stick solves this issue for me. Perhaps others may be getting the odd glitch with elevator calibration too.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by Talisman

Having been out turned by a Me 109 E a few times when flying a Hurricane, I decided to check my CloD control calibration (green bars for input and output) and found that I was not getting full elevator deflection.

Thanks Talisman. It's not impossible that my stick was out of calibration. I had not checked this for a few days, and it is kinda old.
A sensible post.... at last.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Originally Posted by Talisman

Having been out turned by a Me 109 E a few times when flying a Hurricane, I decided to check my CloD control calibration (green bars for input and output) and found that I was not getting full elevator deflection.
After giving the joystick some vigorous movements, full forward and back a few times, it appeared to reset to my original settings with full deflection. This seems to happen to me on an intermittent basis (when flying Me 109 too). I suspect that it may be my joystick, which is rather old now, so I plan to order a new one soon.

Its worth making sure that after turning on your joystick (if it isn't when you start up) and before you start the game that you move the stick through all its movement, including throttle. Sometimes if I don't my PC assumes that certain axes are at 100% when at 50% or so so there is not full movement and I have to move the stick through all its axes in the air when i realise which is dangerous. It might not be your joystick, just the way that calibration works.

[SEE]

These ac were tested in mock combat by the RAE back in 1940 and the results are well documented.

May be two or more players could agree to test the 109 v Spit on a server - find a quiet part of the map and be on the same TS channel.

It would be interesting to see the results of such a test for the CloD 109/Spits but, for the results to be meaningful, the players would have to be completely impartial.

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by SEE

These ac were tested in mock combat by the RAE back in 1940 and the results are well documented.
May be two or more players could agree to test the 109 v Spit on a server - find a quiet part of the map and be on the same TS channel.
It would be interesting to see the results of such a test for the CloD 109/Spits but, for the results to be meaningful, the players would have to be completely impartial.

Not a bad idea.
Could run a series of tests where pilots fly 109 v spits, then swap aircraft.

Then also put the same guys in spits v spits and 109s v 109s just to see how much human/ pilot skill influences their ability to turn.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by SEE

These ac were tested in mock combat by the RAE back in 1940 and the results are well documented.

May be two or more players could agree to test the 109 v Spit on a server - find a quiet part of the map and be on the same TS channel.

It would be interesting to see the results of such a test for the CloD 109/Spits but, for the results to be meaningful, the players would have to be completely impartial.

That's a great idea, Evangelus. I recuse myself since no one would believe me to be impartial, and also because I have very little stick time in the 109 to do it justice.

I myself am doubtful as to the accuracy of the RAE's findings with the 109. No slight to the RAE intended, but they were using a captured 109 without benefit of factory techs (AFAIK), specialized factory tools, etc. The statement that the Spitfire easily matched the 109 in a dive raised my eyebrows -- was this indeed a 109 in as-new shape in proper tune and fitting?

I'd be very interested to hear the findings and impressions of all flyers concerned.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by SEE

These ac were tested in mock combat by the RAE back in 1940 and the results are well documented.

May be two or more players could agree to test the 109 v Spit on a server - find a quiet part of the map and be on the same TS channel.

It would be interesting to see the results of such a test for the CloD 109/Spits but, for the results to be meaningful, the players would have to be completely impartial.

Please NO... those RAE tests are useless since in both the planes there were RAE pilots. We don't know the experience and skill of both nor we know how the fight started (engagement).

We should really limit our knowledge to absolute facts (speed, climb rate ect taking note about the test machine's condition) leaving out all the relative facts (X turn better than Y...) who depends mainly on the pilots.