Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
343KKT_Kintaro

D.520 & Bf 109 E-3 in the 5.010 patch

Recommended Posts

The purpose of the present thread is to compare two antagonistic aircraft of the Battle of France (May and June 1940). Both are available in "Cliffs of Dover" since last Summer thanks to the new add-on, obviously I refer to the Dewoitine D.520 and the Messerschmitt Bf 109 E-3.


The patch that since yesterday has upgraded our "Cliffs of Dover" up to version 5.010 has brought some modifications to the airframe, propeller and engine of the D.520 in order to correct the aircraft's speed and rate of climb. Thus, today I took the time to proceed to some tests on board the two aircraft, first the Bf 109 E-3 and then the D.520. To time the climb of both aircraft the stopwatch on my mobile started to run as soon as I was launched on the runway. The two planes were carrying their maximum load of war stuff (canons, machine guns and ammunition) and 400 litres of fuel each (402 litres for the Dewoitine as I couldn't round up to 400 better than 402).


Bf 109 E-3: I reached an altitude of 8000 metres in 11 minutes and 23 seconds (average rate of climb = 11.7 m/s). Then I descended to an altitude of 1000 metres and in sustained flight I reached a maximum peak of 452 km/h in level flight.


D.520 : I reached an altitude of 8000 metres in 13 minutes and 10 seconds (average rate of climb = 10.12 m/s). Then I descended to an altitude of 1000 metres and in sustained flight I reached a maximum peak of 460 km/h in level flight.


I think that the historical performances of the 109 E-3 and the D.520 for May 1940 are a bit above my results, but I am not experienced enough with the simulators of this new generation that are DCS, RoF, IL2CoD and IL2GB, and at least for IL2CoD I should perhaps practice more engine management, trim, etc., so maybe I'm making mistakes somewhere.


Feel free to share your opinions, or even to proceed to the same tests yourselves, just to see if you improve my numbers (it shouldn't be too complicated, especially for the D.520 rate of climb).


PS: I had a blast while proceeding to the above mentioned flights. This simulator is a blessing...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What speed are you talking about, Kintaro? The IAS (indicated airspeed) or TAS (true airspeed)? 

460 km/h indicated at high altitude are not few.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 5th_Hellrider said:

What speed are you talking about, Kintaro? The IAS (indicated airspeed) or TAS (true airspeed)? 

460 km/h indicated at high altitude are not few.

 

 

Thank you for your interest in my concern.

 

Please go to the following sources (source A deals with Amercian tests with a captured 109 E-3)  :

 

Source A)  http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

 

-  -  -  -  QUOTE  -  -  -  -

 

US flight tests of an Me 109 E-3 operating at 1.3 ata obtained 290 mph at sea level and 339 mph at 17,500 feet.

 

-  -  -  -  END OF QUOTE  -  -  -  -

 

The above statement is quite close to the result I obtained with our "Cliffs of Dover" simulator (290 mph = 466 km/h, but I didn't flew my 109 E-3 at sea level...)

 

Now, let's see the below link. With French informations translated into English, it is a study based on a 1940 French report after tests and a simulated dogfight between a D.520 and a captured 109 (E-3 ??).

 

Source B)  http://www.pangea-systems.com/wwiiws/aircraft/D.520/DvsBf/trad.html

 

Again, if you read the comparisons, you'll find similarities with those test flights I did with "Cliffs of Dover" (the 109 is by far a better climber than the D.520... but it is supposed to be a bit faster too, and, precisely, I didn't manage to exceed 450/455 km/h at levelled-flight with the Messerschmitt). As I'm still learning how to take the full advantage of our modelled aircraft in "Cliffs of Dover", I think I need to keep testing the planes. If I go back to the tests I will publish here the new results, just in case somebody has some interest in kaking note of them. Last time Pattle got me when he was flying his 109 while I was sitting in my D.520's cockpit... and I'd like to reverse the trend... :help:  :rofl:

2 hours ago, 5th_Hellrider said:

What speed are you talking about, Kintaro? The IAS (indicated airspeed) or TAS (true airspeed)? 

460 km/h indicated at high altitude are not few.

 

 

Oh, I forgot that one. Well, I guess that my measurements correspond to the indicated speed, as I was simply reading my speed indicators on board those two planes. Both with the 109 and with the D.520, the speed tests were done at 1000 metres high aproximately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pay attention to the difference between IAS and TAS, this is a very important thing. As the altitude increases, the gap between the IAS (the one indicated) and the TAS (true airspeed) increases.
In short, your instrument indicates much less than true speed.

 

I don't really want to do manually the conversion calculations between IAS and TAS so I try to use a calculator taken from the web: http://indoavis.co.id/main/tas.html
460 km/h IAS should be 546 km/h at 7000 m (always if I am not wrong to put some data in the thing). However, a credible speed for those two planes at that altitude. 

 

NB: to measure the plane's climbing performance, try doing the 0-6000 m and 0-3000 m.
8000 m is too much, the engines start to lose a lot of power at that altitude.

Also remember that every plane has a climb speed with which it climbs best (faster).

 

 

Anyway it's a great job, if you have time and desire, try other planes too! 👍

 

Your intervention was probably also to point out that the D.520 seems to be too fast in game. It was probably. My friend Clydefrog and I during last week's event managed to escape from several 109s.
I haven't tried with the new patch though.

With the 109s with manual prop pitch a lot depends on the pilot if he knows how to set the right RPM and rads.

 

From the report you linked, it appears that the level speed of the two real planes was quite close. So in line with the planes in game. 

It would be worth trying at different altitudes though.

PS: I only now realized that your speeds were relative to 1000m alt. I had misunderstood and thought they were at high altitude.

Edited by 5th_Hellrider
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Oh, I forgot that one. Well, I guess that my measurements correspond to the indicated speed, as I was simply reading my speed indicators on board those two planes. Both with the 109 and with the D.520, the speed tests were done at 1000 metres high aproximately.

 

True speed is show in 'Wonder Woman View", but better use that Varratu scripts that compute time to climb, show TAS speed...  in HUD messages.

Edited by Sokol1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that you are citing reports and performance trials of captured aircraft. We do not know the state these aircraft were in, if they were properly serviced and flown correctly. It's always best to stick to data of the original manufacturer or of the test centers of the respective nations. Otherwise this will end up as a very unfair comparison.

 

Is there any specific concern with either of these two planes or what is the purpose of these tests?

In the previous game versions the D.520 was overperforming in speed by around 30kmh at all altitudes, this has been adressed now (patch 5.010).

Edited by Karaya
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mikmak!

 

I didn't mention the percentages of my radiators on board both planes, but I'll do it next time.

 

One comment only: in my understanding, the percentage of throttle opening depends on the plane and is not worth mentioning when proceeding to such trials. If you fly one D.520 and you switch on your automatic propeller mechanism, you can pull backward your throttle lever at 100%, and, if I'm not wrong, this will not reduce the aircraft's speed nor the engine's health. On the contrary, I wonder if pushing forward full power the throttle lever of one Bf 109 E-3 wouldn't have some negative consequences on the manifold pressure and, thus, on the balanced proportion of ata/RPM that is required for reaching the nicest and fastest performances of the aircraft. Just wondering. If I'm wrong, simply let me know. Contrary to the throttle, in order to proceed to a fair comparison, I think the fuel load should be the same aboard both planes. In the game, in my humble opinion, an equivalent proportion of fuel loads should be the following: 400 litres for the Messerschmitt and 402 kilograms for the Dewoitine.

Edited by 343KKT_Kintaro

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...