REDUCE Rate of Change for Trim - Bf109

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

 

Odd how this differs from random allied pilot accounts on machines in unknown condition.

 

But it won't change your point for sure so I will leave it by that. Hopefully it helps others to not follow blind claims such as

Lol. Vne for all 109 variants is 750km/h. The plane disintegrates before 800. I find it interesting that that very official looking typed document with SECRET stamps and classification revision stamps is all in ENGLISH.

 

 

[Dave]

Abfangen.jpg

I don't speak much German so I don't know what that says. Perhaps you could translate it for us.

Odd how this differs from random allied pilot accounts on machines in unknown condition.

I'm guessing for this statement that the image above contradicts this. The first document I read, and mentioned, which talks about the difficulty in trimming at high speed was an English translation of the Mtt test pilot's comments. As soon as I find it again I will provide a link.

 

 

But it won't change your point for sure so I will leave it by that. Hopefully it helps others to not follow blind claims such as

Please state what part of that "claim" is false and, if you have it, supply supporting material disputing it. Feel free to withhold the snide remarks.

[JtD]

German aircraft regulations at the time gave a safety factor for vne. It was allowed to test fly the aircraft and increase the handbook figures if test were successful, if the limit was related to instability or other compression effects, but not for the static pressure. So German aircraft will not be overstressed immediately when exceeding vne, they might become hard to control, see for instance the aileron characteristics on the Bf109.

 

The text says at high speed it was easy to trim tail heavy but hard to trim nose heavy. It also mentions grease freezing solid at high altitude as a reason for poor to adjust trim, an issue that was easy to work out with the use of proper grease.

Edited April 22, 2016 by JtD

[Venturi]

1/ There is a bug in the Bf-109 elevator trim Handwheel.

Now in the BoS, we have ONLY ONE turn in the handwheel from full nose-up to full nose-down

In the real aircraft you have about FOUR turns of handwheel, from full nose-up to full nose-down,

 

 

Otto, haben Sie einen Beweis?

Edited April 22, 2016 by Venturi

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

So, rate of change is off, and the rotations need to be more. In other words, it needs to be slower, and it needs to have more revolutions.

 

I believe that is more or less, what I said to begin with. Thank you for the graphs, I think that I wouldn't want to go >750kph in that plane if any yaw would rip off the outer parts of the wings. Not sure the wing tips ripping off with yaw at high speed (>750kph) is modeled. But it should be.

 

That is why a reduction of hard coded RATE of change is needed, specifically for this a/c.

 

There is no problem with putting it on a joystick axis. The problem is that it only takes a second to go from full down to full up.

 

Read the original post. Reduce RATE of change.

 

Venturi, That is not true, .. now in the Il2-BoS Bf-109G2, we need FIVE seconds (with joy axis) and SEVEN  long seconds (pushing keys) for move the the elevator trim handwheel from +2º (full nose down trim) to -6º (full nose up trim). This time is very approximate to the time for operation the trim, in the real aircraft (with about 4 turns of travel).. if you are not a rookie  pilot.  

 

We need more turns for operate the elevator trim with more accuracy, (not for enlarge the time), because in the real aircraft the pilot was need helping with the elevator trim in tighten turns.

The FM is wrong, because in the real Bf-109 at hight speed, a pair of degrees of movement in the horizontal stabilizer AoA, generates a tight turn, and a lot of G´s who can damage the airframe.. fortunately or unfortunately, this is not modeled.

 

By the way, .. I remenver to you that I comented in my previous post, Bf-109G was able to recover dives about 906 km/h TAS, Mach 0.8, (1450 mph TAS) pulling with stick, ...

and also pulling with the trim handwheel, but it was more dangerous...  ​Please read my previous post again, and the attached PDF

and Bf-109 was the faster pistons fighter airplane in dive of WWII until P-47 appeared. ..liked or disliked you.

 

You should be more worried about the antigravity "flaps-spoilers", of the russians aircrafts, .. and the Vfe airspeed of all airplanes.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by III/JG52_Otto-I-

[Venturi]

That is one and a quarter second per full revolution of the wheel. You must have 

 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I tested last night and the G2 is about a turn and a quarter from full up to full down. The animation may have to be modified.

 

The time however is approximately five to six seconds. They even modeled in acceleration to get the wheel moving -it's slower at the start. I recall there was a DEV post saying that was their target time from pilot accounts. I have the trim on a hat switch not an axis.

 

I could not replicate one second travel at any airspeed. It seems the trim is generally in line with the DEV's target as modeled. Are guys on an axis getting different times?

Edited April 27, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

That is one and a quarter second per full revolution of the wheel. You must have 

 

 

 

Please Stop trolling with the time !!. ...How many time you need for turn the steering wheel in your car when you re driving?  half an hour per turn?

Watch the video of a real Bf-109, minutes 1:10 to 1:19, that is all the time needed for retract the flaps, after take-off, ..That is 20º flaps, is 4 turns in flaps handwheel, The pilot takes 8 seconds.  

 

http://youtu.be/jenWQy4Zm-w?t=1m8s 

 

Venturi what is the correct time for you one hour?

Edited April 27, 2016 by III/JG52_Otto-I-

[Monostripezebra]

That is one and a quarter second per full revolution of the wheel. You must have jazz hands..

 

 

1-2 seconds is not an unrealistic speed.. at least that´s what I saw, when I played around on a similar system on a parked aircraft, though. Those THS systems made their way to a lot of different aircraft because of their efficency... and maybe one should really differenciate between fixing "a game" issue and "realism, pls nerf-109" complaints, the mixup seems unhealthy and distracting from a real issue.

 

 

The real issue is the so called "stabilizer exploit" of mapping the stabilizer trim to joystick on the same axis as the elevator. It did allready exist in other sims as the classic Il2 and greatly enhances maneuverabilty and aplies to all stab-trimable sim aircraft. Mapping can be done in game or externally via joystick configuration tools.

 

I´ve testet it extensivly can definatly confirm it exists in BoS, it not only seems to have great impact on maneuverabiliy but also on energy retention, I suspect that is, because BoS models a very distinct elevator drag at high deflections and if the stabilizing fin moves too, the net defelection towards the virtual airstream is then at a relative lower value. It is most noticable on the F4 and G2 but affects also the other 109s as well as the Mc202 (albeit the MC then suffers from lack of controllability). Effectivty seems to increase with decreasing plane weight.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGtexCZxuCo

what´s in this test flight footage: in a similar energy state I can pull lead on two yaks while the non-stab using 109s stalls out. But you also note the increased "wobble".. of course it leaves room to debate, but if you try it yourself (elv.+trim mapped on same axis) you will easily conform with the general results.

 

Time-to-trim testing on my end shows, that with my usual keyboard setup stab trim is rather slow and takes several seconds, but mapped in game to the stick on the elevator axis, I get a significantly faster changerate. Regardless of how historic it is, changing the max. obtainable axis trim time to a similar time value like obtainable via the keys would probably be a semi-realistic approach vector do combat this "exploit" without breaking the game for people with legitimate trim axis on a device.

 

In my oppinon that would obviously be a very much more valid approach then pulling some "compressibility" sekrit dokumintz for one plane only without revising other planes trim aspects for speed..

Edited April 27, 2016 by Dr_Zeebra

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

We also need to stop mixing terms. Some are now talking about flap speed and most are talking about stab speed. This is a complaint, largely unfounded, about the stab. Mapping is a separate, DEV confirmed, issue with no forseeable fix in the future unless you want to get rid of multiple maps for all functions..............which aint gonna happen either.

[Venturi]

Please Stop trolling with the time !!. ...How many time you need for turn the steering wheel in your car when you re driving?  half an hour per turn?

Watch the video of a real Bf-109, minutes 1:10 to 1:19, that is all the time needed for retract the flaps, after take-off, ..That is 20º flaps, is 4 turns in flaps handwheel, The pilot takes 8 seconds.  

 

http://youtu.be/jenWQy4Zm-w?t=1m8s 

Venturi what is the correct time for you one hour?

That is only takeoff flaps, at low speed, and it takes him 8 seconds.... Flaps and trim have same number of revolutions for lock to lock IIRC.......

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Venturi, we are obviously not playing the same sim. None of your time info matches my in-game experience. Flaps and trim do not have the same revolutions or time to go from lock to lock, either.

[Venturi]

In real life, they do.

[Dave]

I just can't get over how ridiculously maneuverable the 109 is in pitch in-game. I've just been playing some multiplayer after a long break and am consistently out-turned by 109s regardless of speed. Just now I dropped in on an F4 that had dove under me and was pulling away due to a speed margin. I was doing about 450km/h in a Yak. He would have been doing about 500. He hauled the nose up and I went with him full backstick but he just effortlessly pulled up and over with me almost blacking out yet unable to match his pitch rate.

 

This is F#$%ING RIDICULOUS!

 

Forget being even mediocre in pitch - the 109 at the bottom of a dive was appalling at recovery. Unless the 109 model is just stupidly over-responsive in pitch this guy had to be abusing the stabilizer trim. It seems ALL 109 drivers are and it has reached the point that the game is simply not fun any more for VVS. I appreciate a challenge and readily accept that the VVS aircraft were inferior in many aspects, but with this gaping hole left open to abuse there is no corner of the envelope at all for us to exploit despite the well documented historical shortcomings of the 109.

Edited September 10, 2016 by Dave

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

This issue is long present in the game. Stab and pitch in same axis gives 109 stability and capabilities to pull crazy turns or save pull out from deadly dive , 109 with stab and pitch combo can pull lots of G-s and only barier are wings - can be rip off :-)

Edited September 10, 2016 by 307_Tomcat

[L3Pl4K]

 

 

I just can't get over how ridiculously maneuverable the 109 is in pitch in-game. I've just been playing some multiplayer after a long break and am consistently out-turned by 109s regardless of speed. Just now I dropped in on an F4 that had dove under me and was pulling away due to a speed margin. I was doing about 450km/h in a Yak. He would have been doing about 500. He hauled the nose up and I went with him full backstick but he just effortlessly pulled up and over with me almost blacking out yet unable to match his pitch rate. This is F#$%ING RIDICULOUS! Forget being even mediocre in pitch - the 109 at the bottom of a dive was appalling at recovery. Unless the 109 model is just stupidly over-responsive in pitch this guy had to be abusing the stabilizer trim. It seems ALL 109 drivers are and it has reached the point that the game is simply not fun any more for VVS. I appreciate a challenge and readily accept that the VVS aircraft were inferior in many aspects, but with this gaping hole left open to abuse there is no corner of the envelope at all for us to exploit despite the well documented historical shortcomings of the 109.

Ask Han, if and when that is fixed.

[nervenklau]

This issue is long present in the game. Stab and pitch in same axis gives 109 stability and capabilities to pull crazy turns or save pull out from deadly dive , 109 with stab and pitch combo can pull lots of G-s and only barier are wings - can be rip off :-)

I doubt people really use this setting, you will lose about 10 - 15 kph at max speed in level flight if they do it. because max speed has to be achieve with triming at fully nose heavy.

Edited September 10, 2016 by nervenklau

[Venturi]

People use it.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Just so we are clear, neither I nor anyone in my squad uses it. Try to not throw a blanket over an entire group to make a point. Also, the 109 doesn't suffer appreciably below 550 kph in standard trim. Exaggeration harms your argument.

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Ive not encountered anyone on blue comms stating they use it or recommending to try it.

 

Out of all the YouTube recordings I have watched there was only one that I have seen that might have actually used it.

 

Hopefully mapping both stab trim and elevator to the same axis gets corrected soon so the focus can shift to something of more importance.