Which, In your opinion is the easiest plane to fly?

[OrLoK 484]

Hello there

 

As a novice pilot, I'm finding the Yak 1 69 the easiest to fly with CEM but Ive not tried all of the other craft in BoS/M. 

 

I tackled the Pe2 as I read the CEM was essentially the same but as you may have seen in my other thread, it can be a spinny slidey thing on the ground.

 

I liked the little open pit stubby Russian one (IL1? the name escapes me) and think I managed it ok CEM wise for the most part.

 

Everything else I've played is in Normal mode which I now find I cant go back to as although I do suck I enjoy the extra workload and playing without CEM feels "cheaty" to me now.

 

Can you recommend other "easy" aircraft? Russian /Lend Lease preferably but I could be dirty and look at Axis planes.

 

(oh, I did try the P40 after studying real flight manuals but it just wanted to fall out of the sky no matter what I did)

 

I love my Yak but want to experience some other planes but also dont want to frustrate myself to rage quit.

 

Ie: I want a challenge but not a hugenormous one

 

Thanks In advance!

 

Rgds

 

LoK

[-SF-Disarray 542]

The LaGG flies a lot like the YAK in most respects, though ground handling can be a bit of a problem due to the lack of a locking tail wheel. The MIG 3 is also great fun, once you get it off the ground; though it is very temperamental on the ground and at low speeds, when trying to take off and land mostly. If you line it up dead center on the runway and go easy on the rudder input it will, for the most part behave. On the German side the JU87 is also fairly simple to fly, though the engine management is a bit more involved than on either the YAK or LaGG in my opinion.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Disarray

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann 1807]

I find the Bf-110, Stuka, Sturmoshin? and P-40 to be the Easiest. 

[=WH=PangolinWranglin 106]

If you're looking for a ground pounder try out the Pe2. She is a bit finicky on the ground but once airborne she is a dream to fly and dive bomb with. 

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

I think the Yaks are the probably the most well rounded.

[J2_Trupobaw 898]

I-16 for me

[[VR]Riderocket 152]

Anything with a low wing loading, the lower, the easier it is to fly. (spitfire will be amazing)

[JG13_opcode 444]

I think the Yaks are the probably the most well rounded.

 

Definitely, and it's much harder to break the engine than in some of the Luftwaffe birds.

 

However for pure ease of flying I'd say the 109G-2 is the easiest.  Auto everything, can't really wreck the engine by overboost, etc.

[SYN_Mike77 577]

The IL-2 is very easy to fly and to drive on the ground.

[Gambit21 5396]

When I take up a 109 or the 190 after one of the Russian birds, it feels like I'm flying with some sort of easy settings turned on.

I get so little stick time, I'm best sticking with the German airplanes for now, as I get rusty in the engine management department.

[Finkeren 6032]

Ease of flying in general: Fw 190

 

Ease of flying in combat: Bf 109 F4/G2 with Yak-1B a close second.

[andyw248 142]

Agree - the FW-190 is the easiest plane after the FM corrections. Yak-1B comes in second for me.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk 1253]

Fw190 can spin and kill pilot when he is not careful enough - I'm seeing that from time to time on multiplayer, but not with 109. G2 is easy next are yaks.

[=EXPEND=Dendro 315]

Stuka is a cadillac on the ground and in the air. 

[Feathered_IV 6965]

The 109 and 190 seem to be the easiest to me.  Just press E and know where your throttle is.

[oppolo 2]

The IL-2 is very easy to fly and to drive on the ground.

I began to fly this few days ago but I still feel it difficult, it is slow so the flak is mine and hard to turn, maybe I load it too much, with rear gunner I feel it  a lot worse in manovrability. due to the large wings, speedy has a large impact on lift so I have to adjust often elevator trim. in every ground attack I have to close oil radiator and then open it again

Edited May 19, 2017 by oppolo

[schurem 89]

Il-2 Sturmovik is such a dream to fly when lightly loaded. I can even shoot the messers with it on occasion. If you put too much stuff on it, she flies like a dump truck. Just because you can does not mean you should.

Edited May 19, 2017 by schurem

[Herne 857]

I think for training wheels, 109 except the e variant, and 190 are easiest to learn in terms of not having to worry too much about engine management or prop pitch. I also prefer the independent wheel brakes.

I did quickly move on to getting familiar with the rest of the german line up available to us, and have also started to fly some russian airframes. I don't fully understand yet how to tell if your fuel mixture is optimal, this was easy in RoF, because the sound of the engine and tacho read outs made it obvious, not so easy to tell here though

Edited May 19, 2017 by herne6210

[szelljr 5944]

...the Albatros  D.V...

[Asgar 1367]

I find the Bf-110, Stuka, Sturmoshin? and P-40 to be the Easiest. 

stop trolling

[=VARP=Ribbon 1099]

On normal settings 109's and yak's, on expert settings only 109's (everything is automated and perform good on low and high alt's) since yak demands engine managment (mixture, radiators and supercharger) and becomes harder to handle on high alt's.

[Thad 1616]

The P40 E-1 obviously!

 

Why? Its' flight model is currently so messed up that one need not worry about survive flying a mission and as a result will never have to learn how to land it.

[=VARP=Ribbon 1099]

Last night i was chasing bf-109 with my yak-1b, pilot was very good and used his plane's advantage so he climbed on over 9000m where his engine is performing much better than yak's, to keep chasing him i had to do constant adjustment of radiators, fuel mixture and control plane through trim system. My engine was dying on that alt.

Still he was slowly running away until he did few mistakes, i shot two short bursts at long range so he panicked and went in turns and zig-zag which i used to come closer to him but still didn't come in effective fire range, i was persistent to follow him and finally he started to make slow turns and attacking me, i drained energy to stall point every time to evade him and to come on his six but still to far to shot him down. He had great advantage in performance over me even i was chasing him.

On the last turn he made we were flying face to face to each other, when he started to fire i slowly pointed plane down to gain energy and stability avoiding being shot than when we were very close i pointed nose up and start shooting, we flew inches from each other than i saw explosion behind me, i killed him while he damaged my engine and canopy. Damage to the engine was very small so i managed RTB without problems.

This was the best fight so far in il2 for me, it lasted aprox half an hour with me being more lucky at the end.

So overall i think 109 is the easiest plane to fly.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann 1807]

The P40 E-1 obviously!

 

Why? Its' flight model is currently so messed up that one need not worry about survive flying a mission and as a result will never have to learn how to land it.

Fly it as a faster Il-2 and you'll love it. I don't understand why People don't like her, I find the P-40 to be enormously forgiving and easy to handle down tp 200kph. The LaGG is far more feisty. It requires a bit more Rudderwork than others, but apart from that it is lovely. And it can tank amounts of damage some Pe-2 Pilots only dream of. 

Maybe we will get a 56"@3000 Upgrade Mod at some Point to make it more competitive, but even until then you have a good JaBo that goes just does what you ask it to. 

[marklar 55]

On normal settings 109's and yak's, on expert settings only 109's

 

Are there two different flying models for normal and expert settings? I thought it's all about AI skills, icons and external views. 

[SCG_Space_Ghost 1965]

Are there two different flying models for normal and expert settings? I thought it's all about AI skills, icons and external views. 

 

No, there are no FM simplifications only CEM simplifications.

[=VARP=Ribbon 1099]

Are there two different flying models for normal and expert settings? I thought it's all about AI skills, icons and external views. 

not in that terms, i meant on bf 109 everything is automated (engine management) in both normal or expert difficulty while yak will also have automated engine management in normal difficulty and on expert you'll have to manage it manual. FM behaviour is always the same.

[Warpig 169]

FM wise, I find the 109 E-7 is an easy plane to fly and learn in.  It's an energy fighter, that can also hold its own in a dogfight.

Edited May 19, 2017 by Warpig

[JG13_opcode 444]

not in that terms, i meant on bf 109 everything is automated (engine management) in both normal or expert difficulty while yak will also have automated engine management in normal difficulty and on expert you'll have to manage it manual. FM behaviour is always the same.

 

In practice, that just means supercharger and radiators.  On cold maps, that really just means supercharger.  Set radiators to ~30% and forget them.

 

Mixture does not appear to affect performance until ~5000 metres when I fly online, and the CSP on the Yaks can't be oversped.

[=VARP=Ribbon 1099]

In practice, that just means supercharger and radiators.  On cold maps, that really just means supercharger.  Set radiators to ~30% and forget them.

 

Mixture does not appear to affect performance until ~5000 metres when I fly online, and the CSP on the Yaks can't be oversped.

Yeah last night it was the first time that i needed give greater attention to mixture, was climbing to over 9000m.

Closing radiators helps a lot when chasing enemy, speed gain. So in that situations i adjust it a lot, opening to cool engine and closing due to speed gain to catch enemy.

[III/JG2Gustav05 836]

Definitely, and it's much harder to break the engine than in some of the Luftwaffe birds.

 

However for pure ease of flying I'd say the 109G-2 is the easiest.  Auto everything, can't really wreck the engine by overboost, etc.not like

not like VVS counterpart, you still can toast her engine by staying on 100% throttle longer than 30mins.

[US63_SpadLivesMatter 830]

The Stuka is a super easy fly. Good when you just want to chill and relax; or chillax, as it were.

[InProgress 923]

Ju-52 lol am i the only one? Super heavy plane, easy to land and take off, easy to taxi you don't even need to be pro pilot because all you do if flying straight

This is most easy plane in entire game, even when you crash land it's so strong that you will always survive it, won't flip or anything. Chances of being killed in this are small, only way you can die for sure is by being shot when on low alt that you won't be able to eject and damge is so critical that you lost control and it's falling down on its nose, so it will explode. But well, premium 25$ and it's transporter with weak tail gun.

 

The Stuka is a super easy fly. Good when you just want to chill and relax; or chillax, as it were.

It's not that easy as people say, require some engine management (or you will break 1min after take off) but once you learn it it's easy. It may be be easy to fly but during battle especially in multiplayer it's certain death unless you have cover or fly with some people together in formation. Also landing on something else than airfields is hard and you will probably flip since you can't land on belly because gear is always down.

Edited May 19, 2017 by InProgress

[19//Moach 430]

of the russian planes, I'd say the IL2 is probably the easiest, smoothest ride - if you don't mind making your enemies wait a bit while you get there (no rush - when you're that important, even your foes can be put on hold)

 

it does have a bit of engine managing to be done, but just read the specs about it and you're good to go - set RPM to about 2050, keep mix at 50% (auto-rich) unless saving fuel is the least of your concerns, open full rads (they don't slow you down at all) in the summer, 50% in the winter - and enjoy the ride

 

just make sure you lock that tailwheel before takeoff - mostly because it's easier to forget it before landing - and that's when you really need it locked

 

 

 

of the german planes - well, the 109 is a bitch on the ground - and it SHOULD be also pretty skittish in the air, with a sharp, scarcely-announced onset of stall and a tendency to ensure any accelerated stall takes you for the full tour of what a spin is all about... but its not that, not in this game

 

many forum-warriors here seem to exist only for the purposes of defending their unhistorical advantages by undermining any efforts to alert the devs about them - but don't listen to them - the devs surely don't, as they're already working on FM revisions that should make 109s a lot more realistic - and that is a GOOD thing, because realism is exactly what it's all about.... right?

 

right!

 

 

now, the HARDEST plane - it's no doubt the P40, not just because of how it insists that the tail should go in front of the propeller despite physics arguing otherwise (hopefully to be rectified in the same lump of all-encompassing FM changes that should have all planes revised in a much eagerly expected updated)

 

but even in what little of its current behavior actually is historical: it's still the hardest, for it lacks a boost regulator, and one must constantly be vigilant of manifold pressure, for without such "modern" facilities, your engine air intake can go from "about right" to "self-destruct" just from a normal takeoff run without any power adjustments

 

but of all it's inconsistencies in the sim - the P40 has ONE from which it actually gains an unhistorical benefit - which is how the radiator exceeds its reality-impaired counterpart with absolute all-weather overcooling capabilities, and at least about high temperatures, you needn't worry - for it can be made to overcool even in the summer, whereas the real thing would have boiled even with the flaps fully open, this one over-cools at "neutral" 

 

but never mind that - temperatures are not accounted for in the engine self-disassembly "simulation" -- and it's literally just a matter of time (ingame experiments have been made) to get a perfectly cooled engine to violently rupture and seize from "unknowable, semi-predictable, catastrophic forces" 

 

 

so try not to rely on whatever's "easy" or "hard" too much -- it may well change (hopefully) soon

Edited May 19, 2017 by 19//Moach

[deWaardt 21]

I find the IL-2 to be very forgiving.

Pull the stick all the way back, and it will protest for a few seconds before going into a spin.

Engine management isn't too much either. Like 19//Moach said.

 

The only problem is that it's slow, so turning tight will cause... trouble.

 

 

 

The Stuka on the Axis side is also very forgiving in how it flies, but you need to know engine management on this machine, otherwise you'll be a glider fairly short after takeoff.

[Asgar 1367]

 

 

of the german planes - well, the 109 is a bitch on the ground - and it SHOULD be also pretty skittish in the air, with a sharp, scarcely-announced onset of stall and a tendency to ensure any accelerated stall takes you for the full tour of what a spin is all about... but its not that, not in this game

 

[9./JG27DavidRed 124]

...

of the german planes - well, the 109 is a bitch on the ground - and it SHOULD be also pretty skittish in the air, with a sharp, scarcely-announced onset of stall and a tendency to ensure any accelerated stall takes you for the full tour of what a spin is all about... but its not that, not in this game

 

many forum-warriors here seem to exist only for the purposes of defending their unhistorical advantages by undermining any efforts to alert the devs about them - but don't listen to them - the devs surely don't, as they're already working on FM revisions that should make 109s a lot more realistic - and that is a GOOD thing, because realism is exactly what it's all about.... right?

 

right!...

 

 

right! but pilots who actually flew that aircraft tell the exact opposite of what you try to spread here...

 

"I was amazed at how docile the aircraft was and how difficult it was to depart, particularly from manoeuvre - in a level turn there was lots of warning from a wide buffet margin and the aircraft would not depart unless it was out of balance. Once departted the aircraft was recovered easily by centralizing the controls."

- Charlie Brown, RAF Flying Instructor

 

"- How the Messerschmitt reacted to hard pull? Did she stall?

There is the general opinion that you could not make her stall by pulling but she could 'slip'."

- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories.

 

"I was particularly interested in the operation of the slats, the action of which gave rise to aileron snatching in any high-G manoeuvres such as loops or tigh turns so I did a series of stalls to check their functioning more accurately. The stall with the aircraft clean, with half fuel load and the engine throttled right back occurred at 105 MPH (168 km/h). This was preceded by elevator buffet and opening the slats about 20 mph (30 km/h) above the stall, these being accompanied by the unpleasant aileron snatching as the slats opened unevenly. The stall itself was fairly gentle with the nose dropping and the port wing simultaneously dropping about 10 degrees."

- Eric Brown

 

"As CL max is reached the leading edge slats deploy - together if the ball is in the middle, slightly asymmetrically if you have any slip on. The aircraft delights in being pulled into hard manuevering turns at these slower speeds. As the slats pop out you feel a slight "notching" on the stick and you can pull more until the whole airframe is buffeting quite hard. A little more and you will drop a wing, but you have to be crass to do it unintentionally."

- Mark Hanna

 

"Unexperienced pilots hesitated to turn tight, bacause the plane shook violently when the slats deployed. I realised, though, that because of the slats the plane's stalling characteristics were much better than in comparable Allied planes that I got to fly. Even though you may doubt it, I knew it [bf109] could manouver better in turnfight than LaGG, Yak or even Spitfire."

- Walter Wolfrum, German fighter ace. 137 victories.

 

"- Did pilots like the slats on the wings of the 109?

Yes, pilots did like them, since it allowed them better positions in dogfights along with using the flaps. These slats would also deploy slightly when the a/c was reaching stall at higher altitudes showing the pilot how close they were to stalling.....this was also useful when you were drunk "

- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories.

 

"During what was later called the 'Battle of Britain', we flew the Messerschmitt Bf109E. The essential difference from the Spitfire Mark I flown at that time by the RAF was that the Spitfire was less manoeuvrable in the rolling plane. With its shorter wings (2 metres less wingspan) and its square-tipped wings, the Bf 109 was more manoeuvrable and slightly faster. (It is of interest that the English later on clipped the wings of the Spitfire.)

For us, the more experienced pilots, real manoeuvring only started when the slats were out. For this reason it is possible to find pilots from that period (1940) who will tell you that the Spitfire turned better than the Bf 109. That is not true. I myself had many dogfights with Spitfires and I could always out-turn them. This is how I shot down six of them."

- Erwin Leykauf, German fighter pilot, 33 victories.

 

"Personally, I met RAF over Dunkirk. [During this] battle not a single Spitfire or Hurricane turned tighter than my plane. I found that the Bf 109 E was faster, possessed a higher rate of climb, but was somewhat less manouverable than the RAF fighters. Nevertheless, during the campaign, no Spitfire or Hurricane ever turned inside my plane, and after the war the RAF admitted the loss of 450 Hurricanes and Spitfires during the Battle of France." In the desert there were only a few Spitfires, and we were afraid of those because of their reputation from the Battle of Britain. But after we shot a couple of them down, our confusion was gone."

- Herbert Kaiser, German fighter ace. 68 victories.

 

"The airplane was equipped with a 60 foot trailing static head and a swiveling pitot head. Although, as may be imagined, operation of a trailing static from a single-seater with a rather cramped cockpit is a difficult job, the pilot brought back the following results:

Lowering the ailerons and flaps thus increases CL max of 0.5. This is roughly the value which would be expected from the installation. Behaviour at the stall. The airplane was put through the full official tests. The results may be summarized by saying that the stalling behaviour, flaps up and down, is excellent. Both rudder and ailerons are effective right down to the stall, which is very gentle, the wing only falling about 10 degrees and the nose falling with it. There is no tendency to spin. With flaps up the ailerons snatch while the slats are opening, and there is a buffeting on the ailerons as the stall is approached.. Withs flaps down there is no aileron snatch as the slats open, and no pre-stall aileron buffeting. There is no warning of the stall, flaps down. From the safety viewpoint this is the sold adverse stalling feature; it is largely off-set by the innocuous behaviour at the stall and by the very high degree of fore and aft stability on the approach glide.

It is important to bear in mind that minimum radii of turn are obtained by going as near to the stall as possible. In this respect the Bf.109E scores by its excellent control near the stall and innocuous behaviour at the stall, giving the pilot confidence to get the last ounce out of his airplanes turning performance."

- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials

 

 

 

 

 

there are hundreds of more quotes that would contradict your claims...sure, these are opinions and they will vary between the pilots themselves...but "skittish in the air, with a sharp, scarcely-announced onset of stall and a tendency to ensure any accelerated stall takes you for the full tour of what a spin is all about"?....lol

Edited May 23, 2017 by 9./JG27DavidRed

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann 1807]

All from virtualpilots.fi? I would like to get the Originals theses Quotes were tkane from at some Point. 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann 1807]

The P-40 is one of the Easier ones to fly but different from the other Fighters but you have to fly it in a Fashion akin to that of flying a PA-18. That means you fly it Power On and once that Tail is up you keep it up from Take-Off to the very last Part of the Roll Out when it drops on its own Accord. 

 

Just like the P-51 the P-40 has a Fuel Tank behind the Pilot's Seat that Ruins the Flying Characteristics until it's empty. If you just Plan for a Short flight of less than 45 Minutes don't take more than 336 litres (60%) and she will be a lot more docile. Low Speed Handling is superior to any other ingame fighter but you have to remember to trim it all the Way to the Left at Low Speed, otherwise she gets a bit squirly. In a turn it's basically like flying on Rails, but flying Scissors requires good Rudder/Aileron/Elevator Coordination at Low Speed and they are the most Difficult Manouver in this Airplane. 

But in all other Situations she flies steady as a Rock. You don't even need Auto Level, just trim her Out and she goes all day. I barely have to touch the Stick flying her. 

 

Landing is quite simple as long as you fly it like a PA-18. So you fly a Flat, Low Angle Approach with Full Flaps and Power at Full RPM and 15-25" and Trim Tailheavy. 

Unlike a 109 you don't flare until she drops on all three, what you do is you come in low and touch down on the Main Wheels in a Horizontal or very slightly Nose Up Attitude. and 10-15" of Throttle still applied and just let her slow down on her own, control the Direction with the Rudder and once the Tail Drops you use Brakes to keep her straight until you come to a full Stop. 

Don't try to Taxi Off the Runway at Speed or you invite a Ground Loop. She Taxis at walking Pace. 

 

As a Lone-Wolf Fighter you are only Effective against Medium and Heavy Aircraft. Any German Pilot worth his Salt will just annihilate you 1v1. 

In many ways it is more suited to the Destroyer than the JaBo or pure Fighter Role, it's basically a single Engine Bf110 and this is what you should fly it as. 

 

 

[edited]

7. Comments containing profanity, personal insults, accusations of cheating, excessive rudeness, vulgarity, drug propaganda, political and religious discussion and propaganda, all manifestations of Nazism and racist statements, calls to overthrow governments by force, inciting ethnic hatred, humiliation of persons of a particular gender, sexual orientation or religion are not allowed and will result in a ban.

 

Do not post such personal attacks. Last warning.

Edited May 24, 2017 by SYN_Haashashin

[Herne 857]

right! but pilots who actually flew that aircraft tell the exact opposite of what you try to spread here...

 

"I was amazed at how docile the aircraft was and how difficult it was to depart, particularly from manoeuvre - in a level turn there was lots of warning from a wide buffet margin and the aircraft would not depart unless it was out of balance. Once departted the aircraft was recovered easily by centralizing the controls."

- Charlie Brown, RAF Flying Instructor

 

"- How the Messerschmitt reacted to hard pull? Did she stall?

There is the general opinion that you could not make her stall by pulling but she could 'slip'."

- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories.

 

"I was particularly interested in the operation of the slats, the action of which gave rise to aileron snatching in any high-G manoeuvres such as loops or tigh turns so I did a series of stalls to check their functioning more accurately. The stall with the aircraft clean, with half fuel load and the engine throttled right back occurred at 105 MPH (168 km/h). This was preceded by elevator buffet and opening the slats about 20 mph (30 km/h) above the stall, these being accompanied by the unpleasant aileron snatching as the slats opened unevenly. The stall itself was fairly gentle with the nose dropping and the port wing simultaneously dropping about 10 degrees."

- Eric Brown

 

"As CL max is reached the leading edge slats deploy - together if the ball is in the middle, slightly asymmetrically if you have any slip on. The aircraft delights in being pulled into hard manuevering turns at these slower speeds. As the slats pop out you feel a slight "notching" on the stick and you can pull more until the whole airframe is buffeting quite hard. A little more and you will drop a wing, but you have to be crass to do it unintentionally."

- Mark Hanna

 

"Unexperienced pilots hesitated to turn tight, bacause the plane shook violently when the slats deployed. I realised, though, that because of the slats the plane's stalling characteristics were much better than in comparable Allied planes that I got to fly. Even though you may doubt it, I knew it [bf109] could manouver better in turnfight than LaGG, Yak or even Spitfire."

- Walter Wolfrum, German fighter ace. 137 victories.

 

"- Did pilots like the slats on the wings of the 109?

Yes, pilots did like them, since it allowed them better positions in dogfights along with using the flaps. These slats would also deploy slightly when the a/c was reaching stall at higher altitudes showing the pilot how close they were to stalling.....this was also useful when you were drunk "

- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories.

 

"During what was later called the 'Battle of Britain', we flew the Messerschmitt Bf109E. The essential difference from the Spitfire Mark I flown at that time by the RAF was that the Spitfire was less manoeuvrable in the rolling plane. With its shorter wings (2 metres less wingspan) and its square-tipped wings, the Bf 109 was more manoeuvrable and slightly faster. (It is of interest that the English later on clipped the wings of the Spitfire.)

For us, the more experienced pilots, real manoeuvring only started when the slats were out. For this reason it is possible to find pilots from that period (1940) who will tell you that the Spitfire turned better than the Bf 109. That is not true. I myself had many dogfights with Spitfires and I could always out-turn them. This is how I shot down six of them."

- Erwin Leykauf, German fighter pilot, 33 victories.

 

"Personally, I met RAF over Dunkirk. [During this] battle not a single Spitfire or Hurricane turned tighter than my plane. I found that the Bf 109 E was faster, possessed a higher rate of climb, but was somewhat less manouverable than the RAF fighters. Nevertheless, during the campaign, no Spitfire or Hurricane ever turned inside my plane, and after the war the RAF admitted the loss of 450 Hurricanes and Spitfires during the Battle of France." In the desert there were only a few Spitfires, and we were afraid of those because of their reputation from the Battle of Britain. But after we shot a couple of them down, our confusion was gone."

- Herbert Kaiser, German fighter ace. 68 victories.

 

"The airplane was equipped with a 60 foot trailing static head and a swiveling pitot head. Although, as may be imagined, operation of a trailing static from a single-seater with a rather cramped cockpit is a difficult job, the pilot brought back the following results:

Lowering the ailerons and flaps thus increases CL max of 0.5. This is roughly the value which would be expected from the installation. Behaviour at the stall. The airplane was put through the full official tests. The results may be summarized by saying that the stalling behaviour, flaps up and down, is excellent. Both rudder and ailerons are effective right down to the stall, which is very gentle, the wing only falling about 10 degrees and the nose falling with it. There is no tendency to spin. With flaps up the ailerons snatch while the slats are opening, and there is a buffeting on the ailerons as the stall is approached.. Withs flaps down there is no aileron snatch as the slats open, and no pre-stall aileron buffeting. There is no warning of the stall, flaps down. From the safety viewpoint this is the sold adverse stalling feature; it is largely off-set by the innocuous behaviour at the stall and by the very high degree of fore and aft stability on the approach glide.

It is important to bear in mind that minimum radii of turn are obtained by going as near to the stall as possible. In this respect the Bf.109E scores by its excellent control near the stall and innocuous behaviour at the stall, giving the pilot confidence to get the last ounce out of his airplanes turning performance."

- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials

 

 

 

 

 

there are hundreds of more quotes that would contradict your claims...sure, these are opinions and they will vary between the pilots themselves...but "skittish in the air, with a sharp, scarcely-announced onset of stall and a tendency to ensure any accelerated stall takes you for the full tour of what a spin is all about"?....lol

 

I enjoyed reading these quotes. Spitfire pilots also talked about how beautiful she was to fly, and how docile she was in a stall, with plenty of warning. 

 

"One constant in Wellum’s book is his passionate love of flying. Even with his life on the line and the Battle of Britain in the balance, Wellum still beams like a schoolboy at the thought of flying a Spitfire. “When I was first given one to fly, my first emotion was almost intimidation. [The fighter] felt like a thoroughbred horse watching a new rider coming up and wondering how much to be bloody minded. But once I was inside, the Spitfire, quite frankly, flew me.” "

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/battle-of-britain/7992268/Geoffrey-Wellum-The-terrible-beauty-of-flying-a-Spitfire-at-the-age-of-18.html

 

" Battle of Britain veteran Michael Wainwright, 91, flew Spitfires when it really mattered. He recalls that whenever he was pursued by a German Messerschmitt Me109 fighter, his defence was to slow down and not, as might be expected, to accelerate. He would then pull into a tight turn the Me109 could never match. "

 

http://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/264514/What-s-it-really-like-to-fly-a-Spitfire

 

"Now you are ready to experience the magic. Controls are so light and responsive that the airplane seems to go where you want just by wishing it. (Did I really move that stick?) It casts your mind back to that feeling that you were “putting it on” like a jacket. I have never felt so seamlessly integrated with an airplane before. Surprisingly the controls are not harmonized. Stick forces for aileron are closer to being normal, but the elevator forces are extraordinarily light and demand the gentlest touch. And, like all fighters of this era, you need your two feet as well as your hands to fly or she will skid and slip all over the sky.

Considering all the power and performance packed into this little airplane, the stall characteristics are benign. With flaps and gear down and the weights we fly at today, stall speed is less than 60 knots. There is lots of warning, little tendency for a wing drop, and recovery is routine and immediate."

 

http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/Stories/tabid/116/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/255/Flying-the-Spitfire--with-Mike-Potter.aspx

 

 

This following link was a good read too. I always thought that bf109 was faster, and could out climb a spitfire across all era's, but appears this may not have been the case. Even, if the performance data in this article can be contested, the action reports are still a good read.

 

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Edited May 24, 2017 by herne6210