Updated RAF FMs in 1.07.18301

[bongodriver]

[QUOTE=6S.Manu;443101]But a plane does not turn by itself: it's the pilot who manages the controls.QUOTE]


And this is exactly why there is no reason to question the Spitfires superior turning ability, whenever there is a report of a 109 out turning a Spit the 109 was probably being flown by a skilled pilot against an average Spit pilot.

Spitfire had neutral stability in pitch with light elevators, this means the pilot could hold it in a high rate of turn with little more than 2 fingers on the stick while the 109 driver was using much more effort, the 109's slats may have given it some benign stall characteristics, the Spit was pretty benign too despite the stability, but being able to reach a higher 'alpha' is by no means a guarantee of a high turn rate, in fact holding an aircraft close to the stall is quite bad for turn rate, the 109 has a relatively high wing loading compared to the Spit another diasadvantage for turn rate.

[DC338]

Stalls and spins are nothing to be afraid of for a well trained pilot. I bet they would have given it more of a pull if it had a Swastika on it and Tracers coming out. Probably didn't want to look stupid.

There is a fan plot somewhere of a spit v 109.

[Crumpp]

Spit was pretty benign too despite the stability,

Baloney.

I suppose the NACA, the RAE, the Operating Notes, and Gates are all wrong.

You however must be correct. You can submitt your Dad's logbook as proof.

Spitfire had neutral stability in pitch with light elevators, this means the pilot could hold it in a high rate of turn with little more than 2 fingers

Sure, an experienced pilot could do it who had lots of practice. In fact, in the Spitfire Mk V when the stability and control was addressed with bob-weights, there were pilots who did not like it.

However, the very light stick forces combined with very small amount of stick travel required to use up the available angle of attack would make for an aircraft that is difficult to precisely manoeuver. This is why the POH advises the pilot to brace himself against the cockpit. Small stick movements make for large aceleration changes in the Spitfire.

The stick force imbalance between the longitudinal and lateral axis contributes to the slow rate of roll the pilot is able to apply at high speed. He is fighting a very sensitive elevator with high lateral control pressure. It makes for an aircraft that is difficult to change the direction of the lift axis.

The RAE had no measureable standards for stability and control. It was all based on opinion. However, when the early marque Spitfire was subjected to measureable and definative standards, it was unacceptable.

Who cares if a pilot cruising along with 2 fingers on the stick in the pattern felt it was "easy to fly".

The stability and control of the design effected its ability as a dogfighter and gun platform as noted by the NACA, Operating Notes, and every measurable standard.

[Crumpp]

Stalls and spins are nothing to be afraid of for a well trained pilot.

Only when you need room to recover and you don't have it.

Or when the aircraft will not recover at all.

There is a reason why the Spitfire was placarded against spinning.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Only when you need room to recover and you don't have it.

Or when the aircraft will not recover at all.

There is a reason why the Spitfire was placarded against spinning.

Another reason to doubt your claims to be a pilot, for those of us who do fly recognise the airframes shudders and buffets as 'warnings' of impending stalls and are able to react to them by simply unloading, which in an aircraft with light elevator controls is much easier.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

Another reason to doubt your claims to be a pilot, for those of us who do fly recognise the airframes shudders and buffets as 'warnings' of impending stalls and are able to react to them by simply unloading, which in an aircraft with light elevator controls is much easier.

Have to agree with this 100%. In a glider in a stack you fly all the time with your eyes out of the cockpit. As a result and you rely on touch and sound to get the best out of your glider and overtake the other gliders and learning to fly to the warning signs is critical.

Its also a fairly easy thing to teach, it gives the student far more confidence in their abilities and makes it safer for other pilots.

To pretend that its the portent of doom is far from the truth.

As an aside people who highlight that because a high speed stall is loud, that things bang and it can if taken too far cause problems with the structure is only a feature of a Spitfire clearly have no experience of a high speed stall. Guess what, it happens in all aircraft even gliders and all aircraft with have structural failure if pushed too far.

We taught high speed stalls before people were allowed to go solo and it always gets peoples attention. I had an B52 gunner of many years service who thought that his world had come to an end when he first experienced one. However you also teach how to recognise one and avoid it.
In case your interested he brought his pilot along a few weeks later and he was taught how to really fly by another instructor. He got a kick out of going solo before his pilot.

[TomcatViP]

I quite agree with your values Seadog (if it does interest someone)

However the Full flap recommendation with the "best Flap" tag shld be detailed as being the minimal turn radius at slow speed to avoid an obstacle or a collision during airfield operation and NOT a combat procedure.

Split flap are not quite reliable when it comes to pull G what ever your Old IL2 experience teaches you (one thing that I would like so much to stay a thing of the past and being hard coded by the devs - e.g dissimilar operation when G>[2.5; -3] is pulled)

[DC338]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

I quite agree with your values Seadog (if it does interest someone)

However the Full flap recommendation with the "best Flap" tag shld be detailed as being the minimal turn radius at slow speed to avoid an obstacle or a collision during airfield operation and NOT a combat procedure.

Split flap are not quite reliable when it comes to pull G what ever your Old IL2 experience teaches you (one thing that I would like so much to stay a thing of the past and being hard coded by the devs - e.g dissimilar operation when G>[2.5; -3] is pulled)

Flaps are used in Combat, though as you correctly say not in the same way as was portrayed in IL-2 (which was the one of the faults). Far too much flap use in the sim. Full flap in a spitfire could have been used in a scissors fight as it is a radius not a rate fight. You would have to be Slow however and careful in it's employment as the speed range is small.

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Only when you need room to recover and you don't have it.

Or when the aircraft will not recover at all.

There is a reason why the Spitfire was placarded against spinning.

Must have killed a lot of Fw190 pilots with its snap roll/stall.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by Al Schlageter

Must have killed a lot of Fw190 pilots with its snap roll/stall.

Infact IIRC there are not reports of 190s out-turning Spitfires... but the 190 is a totally different animal compared to the 109.

Ah, to be honest, I'm not really a 109 lover...