What about elevator effectivnes of whole 109 family comparing to other planes?

[303_Kwiatek]

We are before Western Front incoming.  All 109 family got really crap elevator response above 550 kph IAS.  I think it is way too early.   German dive test for 109 F proved that 109 in dive at  +1 deg and 15' trim  need from 750 IAS kph at 5 km  about 1.5 km to out of dive.   For example from original Lagg3 manual these planes need recover from 600 kph IAS about 1400m.  How it is in game we know -  most Russian planes ( beside Mig3) got much better elevator response at high speed ( all of them got fabric cover controls). 

 

Historical German tactic was attack with high speed from above but in game these tactic is seriously crapped beacuse of too early elevator freez.

 

Not mention roll rate where 109 G supposed to get about 4 sec / 360 deg at about 600 kph.  In game it is about 2 second slowier. 

 

Also deveopers ignore facts about 3 minutes emergency power for 109  -  like it is shown in historical photos.  ( Other hand LA5FN got 10 min forzah where in 1943 it was restricted to 5 min )

 

As ususally there is no response from devs here.  Other hand we got LA5FN which got better roll rate that Fw 190 ( German test captured LA5FN showed that La5FN got roll rate between 109 and Fw 190 not better) .  The same is for LA5 and Lagg3.

 

It is good that we will have at least Western Front without VVS planes. But it doesnt change tha fact that 109 will be hurted by past scenarious  ( too weak controls response at medium speeds and too short emergency power duration). 

 

Good that there will be at least Fw 190 D-9

 

Edited October 26, 2018 by 303_Kwiatek

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 You should know by now that VVS planes were vastly superior to the fascist planes. Every data presented showing otherwise is "lying and twisting the truth of history". We had the same debate in original IL-2 if the FM was biased or not. Well, after the code was broken and opened up, this was mostly true. Bloated values for VVS planes and cherrypicked worst values for many others, including western planes. In many cases the "bias" was not big, but enough to negate vices the said plane had IRL. The only plane so far in BoX VVS inventory that is actually evena bit hard to fly is the I-16. Quirky as heck, as it was too. Requires careful inputs or you end flip flopping all over the sky. And speed is nothing to speak of. Other planes are like flying on rails requiring minimal if any trimming etc. Been flying exclusively red inventory now and was "amazed" how easy they are to fly with insanely crisp responses. BoBP will be interesting to see how it comes. For sure waiting for something new there Tempest, P-47D etc. Of course Dora and K-4, too.

[D3adCZE]

Oh boy, the flame is going to be strong in this thread. Wait till I bring my popcorn.

 

Back to the topic. So far, we are at the mercy of devs. If we can prove it strongly enough, they will change the FM.

[FTC_the-nines]

Constant stabilizer management will help (maybe)

[LeLv76_Erkki]

I dont want to comment on BoX, but it should be noticed that in 1946 the Fw 190 D-9 was for long way too fast and the G-2 still climbs and turns much better than in any test(and in general easily outperforms the F-4). Mistakes and inaccuracies went both ways.

[303_Kwiatek]

G-2 should outperform F-4 besides little worse in turn time

[303_Kwiatek]

Besides i read a lot books about German aces flying in 109 and there were no single opinion that 109 was harder to aim and pull up during Boom and Zoom tactic that any other planes. There were only few aces ex. Joachim Marsielie whoes put 109 at the edge of knife fight and were very succesfull in these but most of them prefered standart German tactic of attack from above gaining speed then climb which we know as Boom and Zoom tactic.

Its true that 109 had worse roll rate then Fw 190 expecially at high speed but still was capable to shot planes in dives. Other hand VVS planes had very restricted maximum dives speeds cause construction and fabric covered airframe also some of them was reported that had heavy on controls ( ex. Lagg3). Of course we dont see it in BOX.

 

Here is opinion of British Ace about comparison between 109 E  and Spitfire MK II

 

Spitfire MkII vs. Me 109 E comparative test
A witnesses of a comparative test made in 1940 by RAF pilots at Farnborough. This is an except from the book “Fly For Your Life – The story of Robert Stanford Tuck”, by Larry
Forrester (Mayflower Books, Granada, Publishing Ltd,1979 – ISBN 0 578 12787 ?
* * *
(…) Bob Tuck was chosen to work on a project of the highest importance. In the workshops of the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough, scientists and
specialists of the Air Fighting Development Unit had stripped down and then reassembled the first Me. 109E to fall into our hands. It had been captured intact
after force-landing in western France a few weeks earlier. Tuck and Wing Commander George Stainforth a brilliant pilot who had set up many air records
in the thirties, were ordered to fly an exhaustive comparison test, matching the 109 against the Spitfire. To eliminate any difference in skill between the two
officers, they were to change machines half-way through the trials and repeat their programme exactly. Veteran fighter pilot Group Captain Harry Broadhurst and a large party of brass bats, backroom boys and Rolls-Royce experts were assembled to watch the test. The boffins cuddled their calculations, clicked their slide-rules and chattered excitedly. Stainforth took the Messerschmitt first. Tuck was in his own service Spit. They got down to their first task by forming in line abreast at about 20,000 feet, wing-tip to wing-tip, flying absolutely straight and level with their throttles fixed at pre-arranged settings. Then gently they eased their sticks forward into a shallow dive, without touching their throttles, to see which fighter would draw away. This called for extremely accurate flying, for if either pilot had the
slightest skid or sideslip on, he would lose some of the effect of his streamlining - the machine would present a greater resistance to the air and the speed
wouldn’t build as it should. Nothing in it - German and British plane dived neck and neck. They repeated the manoeuvre with different throttle settings and obtained more or less the same result. In a flat-out, straight and level race the German proved very slightly faster. In various rolls and turns, the Spitfire was decidedly more manoeuvrable. When it carne to pulling up out of a steep dive, the 109 had a most definite  advantage. It could pull up much more sharply, and climb away a little faster. Then they turned to a problem when Tuck and most other combat-experienced pilots considered grave and pressing.
“At this stage” - Tuck talking - ”109’s were getting away form us fairly frequently by sticking their noses right down and going into near-vertical dives. This meant
that the pilot had to take what’s known as negative ‘G’ - in other wor4s, in this maneuver he was on the outside of the curve, like someone going over the top
of a switchback at terrific speed, so gravity’s effect was to yank him up sharply out of his seat and throw him against his harness. In most other dogfight
manoeuvres, you understand, the pilot was on the inside of the curve which this machine was describing, so he was subject to positive ‘G’, which rammed him
down into his seat, bent his backbone like a bow, and pressed his chin forward and downwards on to his chest. Positive ‘G’ also could make him ‘black-out’,
because as he pulled violently out of a straight path through the air his blood tended to rush to his feet. For a few seconds, in the tightest section of pull-out
from a steep dive, his brain was drained of blood and consequently his eyesight blurred and momentarily he became unconscious.
Well, we reckoned we were just as tough and fit as the Luftwaffe boys, and that  we could take just as much ‘G’-positive or negative - as they could. But to our
dismay we’d found that our Merlin engines couldn’t stand up to negative ‘G’, whereas the Messerschmitt Daimler-Benz seemed quite unaffected.
This is the sort of thing that would happen: you’d work up behind a 109 at height, and just as you got set to blow him out of the sky he’d spot you, slam
his stick fully forward and drop like a gannet, more or less vertically. If you tried to do the same, the moment your nose went down your engine would go ‘popbrangl’,
there’d be a puff of dark blue smoke, and you’d lost all your power for several vital seconds. We’d guessed the reason, of course, and the boffins who’d gone over. that captured 109 confirmed it. The Daimler-Benz engine had direct fuel injection, whereas the Merlin had a carburettor which couldn’t cope with the negative ‘G’
imposed by this sudden transition from the horizontal to the vertical. I’m pretty sure the German Intelligence knew this failing, and that the
Messerschmitt squadrons had been briefed to adopt this power-dive technique to get away from our Spits. All we could do in this situation was roll over on to our
backs and then dive after them, but that took several seconds and the Hun usually had time to get well out of range or nip into the cover of a cloud. It was
pretty damned frustrating. George Stainforth and I demonstrated this business, and firmly established the defect for the benefit of the Rolls-Royce chaps who’d have to find the solution. Within a few days they’d devised a footless carburettor for the Merlin that functioned perfectly under the most violent negative ‘G’, and in a matter of a few weeks it was fitted to every operational Spitfire. It shook the Messerschmitt lads when we began going straight on down after them and blasting them as they dived. They changed their tactics pretty smartly.” Dogfighting high over Farnborough, Tuck suddenly found Stainforth’s 109 squarely in his sights. Staring at the now familiar black crosses, for one instant sheer instinct took charge and moved his hand to press the firing button. He checked the action just in time - not that it would have been fatal, for the Spitfire’s guns, though loaded to establish full fighting weight, weren’t cocked. For the second run through the test programme, Tuck got into the Messerschmitt. “Right away I realized one reason why the 109 could pull out of a dive more sharply than the Spit. The rudder pedals were several inches bigger than ours – in fact, the pilot sat with his legs very nearly horizontal. This, of course, considerably reduced the effects of positive ‘G’ in a pull-out, because with the feet high there wasn’t the same tendency for the blood to dram away from the upper body. As a matter of fact, some weeks before I’d had my own pedals extended upwards for about six inches, and I’d found that I didn’t black-out so easily. The medics were very interested in this point, as they supported the suggestion that we should have higher rudder. But some technical type claimed that with the raised pedals there was a danger that with full left rudder on, the toe of the right foot, as it came back, would foul the petrol cocks on that side of the cockpit. That was absolute ballocks, because you never used full rudder in the air - you just couldn’t get it on again at the terrific pressures on the control surfaces, and even if you had manage it, you’d probably have flick-rolled and
over-stressed the whole aircraft! I had flaming arguments on this score, and in the end they let me fly with the extended pedals. Later the idea was adopted as
a general principle on certain marks of the Spitfire.” He didn’t like the 109 cockpit much. “It seemed even smaller than the Spit’s,
and the pilot’s vision was decidedly poorer. The hood and windscreen were certainly far more robust, but they had ‘a lot of thick metal strutting - heavily
studded, like girders - in front and on the sides, and these obviously obscured several sections of the sky. Oddly enough, this one didn’t have a rear vision
mirror. The instrument panel was very confusing at first because it was festooned with scraps of paper bearing conversions - from kilometres to miles,
metres to feet and so on. I had to sit and study it all for quite a while before taking-off. I was interested to note that the gunsight was a reflector job, not
much different from our own.”  Tuck’s opinion, after repeating the test programme in the captured enemy machine, was that the 109E was “without doubt a most delightful little aeroplane - not as manoeuvrable as the Spit mind you, nor as nice to handle near the ground. It had a tendency to a rather vicious stall, because, you see, it was even smaller than the Spit. But certainly it was slightly faster, and altogether it had a wonderful performance. An odd thing that sticks in my memory: it had a distinct, peculiar sort of smell, a certain soundness that I have noted often since then, in every German aircraft I’ve got into. Like an empty beer barrel, or stele
vinegar, maybe. Probably it was the type of dope or spray they used -I don’t know. But it was unmistakable, alien. And not at all pleasant, not like the smell
of our own kites.” (…)

 

 

Edited October 27, 2018 by 303_Kwiatek

[Bremspropeller]

13 hours ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

Besides i read a lot books about German aces flying in 109 and there were no single opinion that 109 was harder to aim and pull up during Boom and Zoom tactic that any other planes.

 

What experience with other fighters (eg. flight hours in a Spitfire, a P-51, etc on a tactical level) was their opinion based on?

Most german pilots never flew another fighter in their entire career. Even the amount of pilots transferring between the 109 and 190 was rather low.

Most people who could compare the two german standard fighters on a basis of tactical experience very much favored the 190.

Go figure.

[Ehret]

In the game we can do much harder booms/zooms than IRL pilots would be able to. Every virtual air-frame is perfectly the same thus we don't worry about variable margins of safety. Neither, we have to deal with compressibility effects, yet.

[ZachariasX]

16 hours ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

Here is opinion of British Ace about comparison between 109 E  and Spitfire MK II

Besides not being good examples for later marks of the aircraft (they are too slow) the exceprt you give stets the following for "better elevator authority":

 

- Engine cutting is the Spit in negative g's, so the 109 pulling ahead. This has no realtion to the ease of moving the stick and getting the aircraft respond to this.

- Feet higher up for (maybe) higher g tolerance of the pilot. Again, nothing about moving the stick.

 

So nothing new. Besides, the germans wanted to dump the 109 for good reason past 1942. If they just had an aircraft to replace it with.

[Haza]

Gents,

 

Related to elevator controls, I've noticed that there are more and more players (both sides) once again are assigning their trim stab/Horizontal stab control to their joystick pitch controls (perhaps in the 109 case to compensate for the lock up).  I realise that the game allows this, however, watching any aircraft appear to do the cobra move, kind of starts to make the sim appear to be more of an arcade game.  To add to this, it would be great in the future if there was a limit to the number of controls that could be operated simultaneously as this would hopefully at least prevent this type of game play that some players need to do just to win. I concur with the OP observations regarding the maneuverability of the VVS aircraft and just assumed that they  had developed vectored thrust ducts in their piston aircraft.

 

Joking aside,  I will put my faith in the developers to ensure that everything in time will be sorted. 

 

Regards

[=RvE=Windmills]

On 10/26/2018 at 1:34 PM, LLv34_Flanker said:

 You should know by now that VVS planes were vastly superior to the fascist planes. Every data presented showing otherwise is "lying and twisting the truth of history"

 

 

Remember that time when they presented their data on the FN, only to be screamed at about how it could not possibly be true etc etc.

 

If you guys are wondering why the devs aren't engaging with you in these discussion, that's the reason right there.

 

There's no point in engaging with people who have no interest in anything besides affirming what they already think.

[303_Kwiatek]

Unfortuantaly there were not many cases ( if any) where VVS planes could underperform comparing to RL knwon data  ( reliable of course) .

 

Roll rates - looks Lagg3-LA5-La5FN -  mostly roll like Fw 190 or even better.  Dive speeds?  Much more then manuals says and what combat stories says.  Control effectivness at high speed -  much better then 109 ( only Mig3 is exeptions)  close to Fw 190 or in same cases even better  

 

Many planes got heavier stick forces with speed in some update ago.  I looked what about roll rate Lagg3 and LA5 with speed?   Nothing changed where other planes yes.

 

Emergency power settings -   VVS planes 5 minutes or 10 or unlimted without problem  ( even if in some cases manulas says less).  German 109?  There were historical photos with 109 F and G models where pilots got marked limit for 1.4 Ata - 3 minutes not 1 minutes. Nothing change here also

 

La5FN -  speed above avarege results ( as always above not below ) , roll rate - better then Fw 190 even if German test showed that LA5FN roll between 109 and Fw190.  Nobody saw any other evidences

 

You want autoflaps in Yaks?  Whooala just push the button and flaps will be opened gradually with speed without penaulty for G load and risk of damage system

 

So its really good that Western Front is coming - there will be not VVS planes at least.

Edited October 30, 2018 by 303_Kwiatek

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

La5FN -  speed above avarege results ( as always above not below )

 

Bullcrap, as usual from you. The in-game speed ranges are within 1% of the source data, and at sea level, within the range of the values reported. Try being a little more intellectually honest when you come in here trying to make a point. 

 

The rest of your post is just your usual regurgitated nonsense you like to trot out every so often and not worth the bother refuting yet again. 

Edited October 30, 2018 by LukeFF