Jump to content
3./JG15_Hans

Bf-109 real life pilots overview

Recommended Posts

These are interview of different well experienced pilots, giving their insights and comparing the 109 with allied planes like the P51 and Spitfire. Good to make you guys compare with what we have in the game :)

 
Skip Holm interview about Bf-109:
 
Interview with unknown (aparently american) pilot:
 
Luftwaffe ace Willi Reschke (for all the deutsch speakers out there:):  
 
Warbird pilot and owner, Connell "Connie" Edwards, renown for his aerial coordination in the 1969 movie Battle of Britain:
 
By far my favorite ace Gunther Rall (pretty long videos, 6:54 and 4:20 for 109 talk):
and
Edited by JAGER_Hans
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because you can't strike down your enemies by diving on them from low earth orbit doesn't mean that it's useless.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bf109 is totally useless after new FM revised. elevator authority at high speed is almost 0. the worst plane in this respect in game. 

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30645-big-changes-short-order-now-how-do-we-predict-online-fightin/#entry500205 :biggrin:

 

Did you really think that the SUPER-109s we had before the update were realistic ? Able to maneuver perfectly at all speeds without problem ?

 

Read this, i hope it's going to reassure you; 

 

1504080562-j1943g190c109.png

 

Wutz Galland, January 1943.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bf109 is totally useless after new FM revised. elevator authority at high speed is almost 0. the worst plane in this respect in game.

No more broken wings because excessive Gs.

 

Elevator should froze at high speed. No more monkey pranks.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in the third video he even says that the 109 had insane stick forces.

 

Actually he says that the 109 had strong stick forces when he tried to pull lead against a P51, he used both hands and also some muscles were needed. And in the end this was somewhat tiresome.

 

But summarized he says it was perfectly doable ( additionally he is mentioning that it was much easier to dogfight in the 190! )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually he says that the 109 had strong stick forces when he tried to pull lead against a P51, he used both hands and also some muscles were needed. And in the end this was somewhat tiresome.

 

But summarized he says it was perfectly doable ( additionally he is mentioning that it was much easier to dogfight in the 190! )

No. It is not only him saying so. You can find some other Germans talk about it (I believe Stigler said it) and a British test and Mark Hannah, claim that the plane requires two hands on the stick at speeds around 500kph and above that you require substantial strenghts to even move the control column.

 

Modern P-51's do not have the feuselage fuel tank and that creates a shift in COG of the plane which makes the control more sluggish but the WW2 plane was actually realy easy to pull and with more G's the stick forces reversed and it was easier to pull.

Mark Hannah flying the 109:

http://www.eaf51.org/newweb/Documenti/Storia/Flying_%20109_ENG.pdf

P-51D Manual, page 67 of the file (66 of tthe document):

http://wiki.hoggit.us/images/8/83/North-American-P-51-Mustang-Pilot-Training-Manual.pdf

Edited by =LD=Solty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Solty: Sorry man, maybe we are talking about different things?  :salute:

 

Willi Reschke said, although it took him both hands and some muscles it was perfectly doable to pull hard and get a lead pursuit to the P51.

 

And even in your link Mark Hannah said the 109 was "quite easy" to maneuver in high speeds:

 

clp7uvgq.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30645-big-changes-short-order-now-how-do-we-predict-online-fightin/#entry500205  :biggrin:

 

Did you really think that the SUPER-109s we had before the update were realistic ? Able to maneuver perfectly at all speeds without problem ?

 

Read this, i hope it's going to reassure you; 

 

1504080562-j1943g190c109.png

 

Wutz Galland, January 1943.

No one say it is realistic in old patch and not only 109 can break the wing but all a/c could before the latest patch. IRL 109 is still maneuverable at speed but not as easy as fw190 is, but what we have in this game is like that 109 is totally freeze and lose control at high speed. for the account you list here is interesting but on the other hand I can find bunch of that with 109 is still ok at speed. Not every pilot like stigler and Galland in luftwaffe prefer 190 over 109. current 109 elevator freeze is overdone, it's not realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simmers will always be simmers.... gamers will be gamers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one say it is realistic in old patch and not only 109 can break the wing but all a/c could before the latest patch. IRL 109 is still maneuverable at speed but not as easy as fw190 is, but what we have in this game is like that 109 is totally freeze and lose control at high speed. for the account you list here is interesting but on the other hand I can find bunch of that with 109 is still ok at speed. Not every pilot like stigler and Galland in luftwaffe prefer 190 over 109. current 109 elevator freeze is overdone, it's not realistic.

 

Sorry but saying that 109 IRL was "still maneuverable", i can't agree, every single report (and pls don't post those Finnish pilots reports for whom the 109 was the best things they've flown) say the complete opposite.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bf109 is totally useless after new FM revised. elevator authority at high speed is almost 0. the worst plane in this respect in game. 

its not useless, its accelerates faster, more stabile, climbs better etc...you should relearn how to use them.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its not useless, its accelerates faster, more stabile, climbs better etc...you should relearn how to use them.

 

Agree, we need only to relearn how to fly it but 109 is far better than before for rmy opinion. Finally it does feel like a Messerschmitt.

Edited by 150GCT_Veltro
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree, we need only to relearn how to fly it but 109 is far better than before for rmy opinion. Finally it does feel like a Messerschmitt.

I agree. The plane is more stable and easier to control. Fighting using its strengths requires patience but works better than before. For those who hoped the 109 would be "nerfed, I'm sorry to say but it is better than ever, you just need to use it correctly

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one talking about why the 109 trim is now set up on +1 as a default?

Edited by E69_geramos109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but saying that 109 IRL was "still maneuverable", i can't agree, every single report (and pls don't post those Finnish pilots reports for whom the 109 was the best things they've flown) say the complete opposite.

I am sorry that your claim is nothing but the noise from 109 Hater. Funny that only your favorite report is allow to cite in your world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one talking about why the 109 trim is now set up on +1 as a default?

It's the setting for taking off in a 109.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the setting for taking off in a 109.

In the new Fm is the setting for flying straight at cruise speed. If you put 0 in flight the plane has a big nose up force and on the F4 the trim is set up on 2 nose down position to fly straight. We don¨t know why the devs change that because had no influence on the previous problem and now is not correct at least that position. We dont know also why the 109 is the only plane who has a delay when you use the trim and please devs explain that becuase has no sense just to broke the handling of the plane 

It has no sense the new trim neutral set up. Please see the video from minute 5. The pilot explains it so clear. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wonder why he explains the exact opposite for take off compared to the manual.

 

Is it maybe due to some weight change on the red 7?

 

Oh guess my question is answered in the beginning already, didn't see because i started at the suggested 5min mark.

Edited by [TWB]Jizzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. The plane is more stable and easier to control. Fighting using its strengths requires patience but works better than before. For those who hoped the 109 would be "nerfed, I'm sorry to say but it is better than ever, you just need to use it correctly

 

How is the 109 in terms of low speed and maneuverability / turn rate now? Is it still the same and only with less roll rate as it happened to the other aircraft? I say that because I started with the 109 and I saw potential to tangle with some Yak pilots. I got some by surprise with tight low speed turns. I have been flying Yaks in the last couple weeks, but I would like to have the option to fly the 109 once in a while.

 

By the way, I liked the delay on the stabilizer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a hell of an aircraft. I think it has improved since the patch. Along with being more historical. Some people just need to re-learn to use it, because it acts like an actual aircraft now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is the 109 in terms of low speed and maneuverability / turn rate now? Is it still the same and only with less roll rate as it happened to the other aircraft? I say that because I started with the 109 and I saw potential to tangle with some Yak pilots. I got some by surprise with tight low speed turns. I have been flying Yaks in the last couple weeks, but I would like to have the option to fly the 109 once in a while.

 

By the way, I liked the delay on the stabilizer.

 

Is it just me or is the post-patch 109 a better low speed turn fighter now? I have that impression - it's easier to stay coordinated in the turn and it doesn't bleed as much speed as it did before at higher AOA. The delay on the Stabilizer was a bug and has been fixed in the newest hotfix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is the post-patch 109 a better low speed turn fighter now? I have that impression - it's easier to stay coordinated in the turn and it doesn't bleed as much speed as it did before at higher AOA. The delay on the Stabilizer was a bug and has been fixed in the newest hotfix.

 

Yeah, I just flew at Berloga and the 109 is way more controllable, and that helps to dogfight. Just two aces flying both sides in several duels could really tell what have changed, but I did not see any negative side to what I was doing before. To me it got better. But I just flew with it for a couple weeks, I can't say much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you keep the speed at its optimal turn range between 300-500 km/h (500 already starting to get stiff), you can turn really well with the 109. I think this is how it should be. Above or below theses speeds, the 109 either feels to heavy or too sluggish so keep this in mind when u dive on someone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you keep the speed at its optimal turn range between 300-500 km/h (500 already starting to get stiff), you can turn really well with the 109. I think this is how it should be. Above or below theses speeds, the 109 either feels to heavy or too sluggish so keep this in mind when u dive on someone

 

Cool, I'll keep that in mind. I won't fly it much though. Visibility is too poor. But it is an alternative whenever I'm flying the German side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or is the post-patch 109 a better low speed turn fighter now? I have that impression - it's easier to stay coordinated in the turn and it doesn't bleed as much speed as it did before at higher AOA. The delay on the Stabilizer was a bug and has been fixed in the newest hotfix.

Delay is still there and we don´t know why

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delay is still there and we don´t know why

 

You can understand better in this post -- from the FM thread. From the last patch I think it was minimized. I flew it yesterday and the transition is faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name="[TWB]Jizzo" post="505086" timestamp="1504269988"]

I really wonder why he explains the exact opposite for take off compared to the manual.

Is it maybe due to some weight change on the red 7?

Oh guess my question is answered in the beginning already, didn't see because i started at the suggested 5min mark.

 

What manual are you talking about?  all Bf-109G and Buchón are trimmed one degree nose-up for take off (-1º indicated) .."Trim +1º for take off" is a old translation mistake.

The trim setting for take off that Volker Bou said in the video for Bf-109 G4 "red-7" is in accordance with Dave Southwood (RAF tests pilot) said, about his flights in the Bf-109G2 trop "Black-6" (German origial Erla airframe) Both trimmed the aircrafts "one degree nose-up" in spite of the original manual who required trim zero for take off.

 

You can see in the following spoiler

1/ Original Bf-109G  Pilots practices manual requiring "Trimmung auf null" (trim to zero) for take-off. 

2/ Report of Dave Southwood (ex-RAF tests pilot) about the Bf-109G2/trop "Black-6". He set  "one degree nose-up" in spite of the original manual who required trim zero for take off, due to a propeller ground strike in the first sortie. 

 

 

1/ Original Bf-109G Pilots practices manual requiring "Trimmung auf null" (trim to zero) for take-off.

21457403_10214467068252776_8196200852792

 

2/ Report of Dave Southwood (ex-RAF tests pilot) about the Bf-109G27trop "Black-6" He set  "one degree nose-up" in spite of the original manual who required trim zero for take off, due to a propeller ground strike in the first sortie. 

12485952_10208634631445501_4742132558072

 

 

 

Edited by III/JG52_Otto_-I-
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Messerschmitt Manuals you can find in the net for Emil and Gustav say +1° and recommend the later especially for night takeoff?

 

2x translation mistake?

Edited by [TWB]Jizzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see where confusion occurs, but when the manuals refer to "+1", pretty sure they are referring to the setting showing in the little Trim Wheel window in the cockpit (1)...it means the stabilizer itself is pointed 1 degree up.  That means the aircraft is trimmed nose down. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly that is what i was trying to point out.

 

But others are making a point, that the trim should be set to "0 or -1" on the window which, means that it would be trimmed neutral or 1° tail-heavy.

 

Which seems to be wrong according to the manual from Messerschmitt.

Edited by [TWB]Jizzo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly that is what i was trying to get accross.

 

But others are making a point, that the trim should be set to "0 or -1" on the window which means that it would be trimmed 1° tail-heavy, which seems to be wrong according to the manual from Messerschmitt.

 

Yes, I agree with you.  Now, while it always problematic to compare an aircraft in one flight sim to another, I'll point out that the K-4 in DCS, also specifies a reading of "1" in the trim indicator window as part of the takeoff checklist...that means Nose Down trim for takeoff. 

Edited by Iceworm
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be a mistake. If all the test pilots say to put the 109 trim on nose up... buchon, red 7, black 7....  And take off configuration does not mean that the cruise trim is also 1 nose down

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...