Comparing 109 behavior down runway.

[Uriah]

I am not trying to pick a fight nor saying one game has it right and the other not.
I forget what 109 (f4?) it is in BoS but in CLOD the one I was messing with is the E-4B.

In CLOD the plane does not move right or left as easy on the runway. Given it is a grass field in CLOD and concrete in BOS.

In BOS I have to use right rudder to start down the runway to keep going down the runway straight. In CLOD I have to use left runner. I was particularly surprised about this.   In IL2 it seems you have to push the right rudder pedal as in BOS but not near as much.  In fact BOS seems to require this more than the other two.

In CLOD while going down the runway (landing) it is much easier when using the breaks to nose over.

In all of this I have no clue which is more accurate.

[FuriousMeow]

CloD doesn't have lateral traction for the landing gear, meaning the aircraft can slip on the ground sideways. Lack of grip in the nature will allow the plane to slip across the surface rather than grip it and "dig in." Could be why there's less lateral motion when using the rudder on the runwa

Edited December 10, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[andyw248]

When flying BoS, I noticed I had to apply almost full right rudder for the 109, and almost full left ruder for the LaGG, on initial takeoff roll. The amount of rudder required will then decrease for both airplanes while dashing down the runway. Having flown small airplanes in RL, the most powerful having 285hp, this matches my expectations for a 1,000+ hp airplane very well. In that 285hp airplane I also have to apply significant right rudder on initial takeoff roll. I also think that the decrease in required rudder force with increasing speed is modeled very accurately. Finally, it seems that the light wing dip towards the side with the deflected rudder upon liftoff is also modeled extremely well (can easily be countered with a tiny amount of aileron).

[Fifi]

Yes, in BOS, ground handling and take off runway is my favourit so far VS any sim.

Just hoping they won't change anything of those good points...

Landing is much better at 2nd session too.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Fifi

[ACG_Kraut]

Also, keep in mind that the F4 in BoS has a much more powerful engine than the E4 in CLoD, so there is going to be more torque effect in the F4 requiring more rudder input to compensate. Just wait until we get the G2, if you go full power in a Gustav right away, not even full right rudder will keep you going straight.

 

As far as the brakes go, they are insanely over-modeled in CLoD, they should not be nearly as touchy as they are. BoS has the brakes feeling much more realistic imo.

[SKG51_robtek]

Also, keep in mind that the F4 in BoS has a much more powerful engine than the E4 in CLoD, so there is going to be more torque effect in the F4 requiring more rudder input to compensate. Just wait until we get the G2, if you go full power in a Gustav right away, not even full right rudder will keep you going straight.

 

As far as the brakes go, they are insanely over-modeled in CLoD, they should not be nearly as touchy as they are. BoS has the brakes feeling much more realistic imo.

Do you really believe a few percent more power (1350 vs 1475 at 1.42 ata) will have a significant increase in torque?

[ParaB]

Do you really believe a few percent more power (1350 vs 1475 at 1.42 ata) will have a significant increase in torque?

 

Uhm, the E-4 was rated at ~ 1000 HP compared to 1350 HP of the F4 (Startleistung).

 

A quite significant difference.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 The propellor was also heavier in F and G series than in E series. Torque of the engine was greater and this has an effect too. I feel Cliffs of Dover is a breeze to fly after BoS. Bu BoS ain't hard either if you follow the rules of the plane as veterans said

[SKG51_robtek]

".....Just wait until we get the G2, if you go full power in a Gustav right away, not even full right rudder will keep you going straight......"

 

Uhmm, i compared F4 and G2.

 

And Bf109 E4 had up to 1175 hp at sea level.

Edited December 11, 2013 by robtek

[ParaB]

Uhmm, i compared F4 and G2.

 

Ah yes, sorry. My bad.

 

Shouldn't multitask when reading through the forums.

 

Edited December 11, 2013 by ParaB

[Quax]

In the real 109 they did need the right brake at beginning of the take off roll. So BoS comes closest by far comparing sims. 

[Reflected]

I'm very happy to read this folks. I don't have access yet, but I've read many accounts that the 109 was very hard to keep straight during takeoff, if you slammed the throttle not even a fully deflected rudder would help you. I'm so glad to hear it's modeled accurately in BoS. Can't wait to try it!

 

EDIT:

 

An anecdote:

I've read the book of a Hungarian 109 pilot in which he tells a story when they showed the 109 to captured USAAf pilots. They didn't worry at all that the Americans would try to take off and escape because they were sure the USAAF pilots would break the plane on takeoff as they applied throttle like they would in a P-51.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Reflected

[303_Kwiatek]

Strange story becasue  in P-51 you need to apply throttle carefully at take off  - it is very noticable also in DCS P-51.

 

 

BTW 109 E in CLOD you need also  counter right pedal  at beginig of take off running.

Edited December 12, 2013 by Kwiatek

[Reflected]

Strange story becasue  in P-51 you need to apply throttle carefully at take off  - it is very noticable also in DCS P-51.

 

 

BTW 109 E in CLOD you need also  counter right pedal  at beginig of take off running.

 

Yes, but remember, it was a Hungarian pilot's assumption who never flew a P-51. 

[Kurfurst]

Do you really believe a few percent more power (1350 vs 1475 at 1.42 ata) will have a significant increase in torque?

 

There should not be any major difference between the 109F-4 and G-2 for take off torque - given that the 1942 max. authorized takeoff ratings were 1350 PS (F4) vs 1310 Ps (G2) respectively. IOW, the 109F had a bit more power at low altitudes..

[Primus_71]

Obviously, yawing moments are modeled in BoS, but is rolling moment from slipstream and/or engine torque modeled? I can't really tell.

 

I'd imagine, it may have been a factor in take-off incidents in BF109.

[Quax]

Obviously, yawing moments are modeled in BoS, but is rolling moment from slipstream and/or engine torque modeled?

 

yes, it´s modelled

 

 

I'd imagine, it may have been a factor in take-off incidents in BF109.

 

 

very unlikely, and on a concrete runway surely not.

 

 

PS:  yaw of the slipstream is the major factor. If you lift the nose too rapidly, you get the gyro effect additionally (same direction).

Edited December 12, 2013 by Quax

[OBT-Psycho]

just a thought here, but back when I was new to flightsim I took some courses in a virtual school on a french forum. We learned procedure for take off and the instructor advised us to push 50% throttle until the tail rose, and only then 100% to lift up the aircraft.

 

I didn't see at this point why being so gentle with throttle, as when you start by slaming throttle you were still able to control the stuff. but it was in the "good ol' dayz" of 1946. And only now do I understand why he told us such thing.

 

So I think the dev got it just right and I feel being proved right every more minutes I spend in BoS. Also do I only understand the difficulties we may face once we get those twin-engines they promised. the runway will never seems so short annd narrow

[ll./JG77_JadeBandit]

I find it funny just how much I enjoy the ground physics in a flight simulator, when I first heard the break pressure release and the how realistic the take off and landings were I just thought to myself....This is going to be epic! That G2 is gonna be a beast on takeoff, I better start practicing breaking with rudder  on takeoff now before I bury a few G2's in the dirt.