Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-03-2012, 06:02 AM
*Buzzsaw* *Buzzsaw* is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 467
Default

Salute

Kurfurst is quite correct in noting the game 109 is quite difficult to recover from spins. I have often seen game 109's spinning to their destruction from considerable heights.

This is quite clearly an incorrect modelling of the real aircraft, which was in fact easy to recover from spins or stalls, one would have to be quite ham handed to maintain a spin in the historical aircraft. Not impossible mind you, given a pilot doing all the wrong things, but given a pilot with the training, recovery should be prompt and with a relatively minor altitude loss.

As far as the historical Spitfire stall characteristics were concerned, there was definitely the possibility of a violent flick and spin if the aircraft was pulled into a high G Stall, however, the Spitfire had a characteristic which allowed experienced pilots to know exactly how far to take it. At a point just before the stall, the aircraft would begin to shudder slightly, this was the warning. Experienced pilots learned to ride this edge, as the shudder happened, and maintain it just at that point.

Unfortunately, this vibration or shudder is not present in the game either.

Last edited by *Buzzsaw*; 12-03-2012 at 06:12 AM.
  #2  
Old 12-03-2012, 06:39 AM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

If the 109 had the elevator authority of a Spitfire, it would certainly be possible to send it into a flick or spin easily as well. Stalling characteristics and control characteristics are related, but still a different pair of shoes.

Hurricane stalls/spins were more problematic than the Spitfires, but it didn't have the sensitive elevator.

Recovery from spins shouldn't be hard in any of the three, but easiest in the 109.
  #3  
Old 12-03-2012, 01:09 PM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw* View Post
Salute

Kurfurst is quite correct in noting the game 109 is quite difficult to recover from spins. I have often seen game 109's spinning to their destruction from considerable heights.

This is quite clearly an incorrect modelling of the real aircraft, which was in fact easy to recover from spins or stalls, one would have to be quite ham handed to maintain a spin in the historical aircraft. Not impossible mind you, given a pilot doing all the wrong things, but given a pilot with the training, recovery should be prompt and with a relatively minor altitude loss.

As far as the historical Spitfire stall characteristics were concerned, there was definitely the possibility of a violent flick and spin if the aircraft was pulled into a high G Stall, however, the Spitfire had a characteristic which allowed experienced pilots to know exactly how far to take it. At a point just before the stall, the aircraft would begin to shudder slightly, this was the warning. Experienced pilots learned to ride this edge, as the shudder happened, and maintain it just at that point.

Unfortunately, this vibration or shudder is not present in the game either.
Can I just say that I found this to be a very good summary of the situation and post 44 is one of the best descriptions I have seen of flying the Me 109.

Thanks for both
  #4  
Old 12-04-2012, 12:41 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
One wonders what the 109 would have been like to fly without the slats.
It would have been rather bad in the stall characteristics.

The wing would have stalled all at once instead of root first and the tips receiving an energized boundary layer to keep the flow attached.
The entire wing stalling would be violent and uncontrollable.
Same thing the Spitfire would do without the twist. Major difference being twisting the wing does not energize the boundary layer so the ratio of turbulent to laminar flow remains the same.
The slats increase the amount of turbulent flow over the wing. The turbulent flow portion of the boundary layer is the high energy, high lift portion.
__________________
  #5  
Old 12-04-2012, 02:57 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
nothing to do with making it better at turning
Obviously, this comment is an effort to troll because it is contrary to the physics behind the slats.

The slats are a very practical method of allowing the pilot to quickly, precisely, and safely achieve CLmax.

They act as training wheels allowing the pilot to maximize performance of the aircraft without fear of losing control.
__________________
  #6  
Old 12-04-2012, 04:22 AM
CWMV's Avatar
CWMV CWMV is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 758
Default

Oberleutnant Erwin Leykauf said, ‘For us, the more experienced pilots, real
manoeuvring only started when the slats were out.'

From Messerschmitt Bf 109 at War. Pretty common statement. Ive seen interviews with Rall where he said the same thing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by banned View Post
Just fix the friggin thing you boof heads. It's getting boring now. Only 11 people on the whole thing. Yawn.
  #7  
Old 12-05-2012, 04:25 AM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CWMV View Post
Oberleutnant Erwin Leykauf said, ‘For us, the more experienced pilots, real
manoeuvring only started when the slats were out.'

From Messerschmitt Bf 109 at War. Pretty common statement. Ive seen interviews with Rall where he said the same thing.
The key of course are the words 'the more experienced pilots'. As the war went on the proportion of experienced pilots fell dramatically.
  #8  
Old 12-05-2012, 06:57 AM
CWMV's Avatar
CWMV CWMV is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 758
Default

With respect that has nothing to do with the purpose/effect of the slats. They did what they did, up to the pilot to exploit it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by banned View Post
Just fix the friggin thing you boof heads. It's getting boring now. Only 11 people on the whole thing. Yawn.
  #9  
Old 12-04-2012, 05:35 AM
*Buzzsaw* *Buzzsaw* is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
The slats are a very practical method of allowing the pilot to quickly, precisely, and safely achieve CLmax.
Actually your comments are an exaggeration.

What the slats do is allow a pilot the confidence that if he pulls too much G and stalls his aircraft, the likelyhood of a violent spin is diminished and the knowledge he should be able to recover relatively easily.

The slats in themselves do not give any guarantee of a stall not occurring, they merely make the event, when it occurs, less violent.

The pilot still must be able to judge whether or not his aircraft is about to depart, and how many G's he is able to pull before departure may occur.

The slats opened prior to the stall, by RAF estimation, approx. 1/2 a G, and in pulling further G's and in order to avoid a stall, the pilot had to know the further signs of a stall approach, in the same way a Spitfire or Hurricane pilot was required to monitor his aircraft's behaviour.

In addition, the installation of the slats was not without penalty. As noted, the slats by deploying, increased the lift generated by the outer section of the wing, but they also generate more drag and reduce the speed of the aircraft. For earlier models of the 109, in particular the E, the chances of the slats deploying assymetrically in a turn was a factor, which was noted to cause aileron snatching and which could cause the aircraft to change direction without the pilot's intention.
  #10  
Old 12-04-2012, 06:40 AM
NZtyphoon NZtyphoon is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by *Buzzsaw* View Post
Actually your comments are an exaggeration.

What the slats do is allow a pilot the confidence that if he pulls too much G and stalls his aircraft, the likelyhood of a violent spin is diminished and the knowledge he should be able to recover relatively easily.

The slats in themselves do not give any guarantee of a stall not occurring, they merely make the event, when it occurs, less violent.

The pilot still must be able to judge whether or not his aircraft is about to depart, and how many G's he is able to pull before departure may occur.

The slats opened prior to the stall, by RAF estimation, approx. 1/2 a G, and in pulling further G's and in order to avoid a stall, the pilot had to know the further signs of a stall approach, in the same way a Spitfire or Hurricane pilot was required to monitor his aircraft's behaviour.

In addition, the installation of the slats was not without penalty. As noted, the slats by deploying, increased the lift generated by the outer section of the wing, but they also generate more drag and reduce the speed of the aircraft. For earlier models of the 109, in particular the E, the chances of the slats deploying assymetrically in a turn was a factor, which was noted to cause aileron snatching and which could cause the aircraft to change direction without the pilot's intention.
From what I have read 109 pilots did have concerns about the slats banging open, causing a jolt because of aileron snatching and sometimes upsetting the pilot's aim. Fact is that all designs are a compromise in one way or t'other - like I keep saying slats were no better nor worse at aiding control than other aerodynamic aids. In the end it was the pilot's skills and experience that made a real difference; learning how to get the best out of the aircraft was a great survival technique.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.