Late BF109 tail design

[Bilbo_Baggins]

Hey guys, I've asked this before in a couple of threads to no avail, so thought I'd just try posting one here as I'm still curious at times:

 

Is anyone able to genuinely feel a difference between the late tail fin and the earlier? If so could you try describe this difference in handling please, and at what speeds and power settings, etc.?

 

I just personally can't feel the difference or benefit in the later tail design - although it does look damn good! 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Bilbo_Baggins

[oc2209]

Anyone's free to jump in and correct me, since I'm not at all certain on this, but...

 

It was my assumption that the tail/rudder was enlarged to counteract the high torque effect primarily during takeoff, and not really meant to matter during regular flight or combat. Which was possibly related to the extension of the tail wheel's length, which was also seen as desirable for slightly improved ground handling especially because of the low pilot experience that was commonplace in the Luftwaffe at the war's end.

 

Again, I'm not claiming a source on any of this. Just nebulous thoughts that may or may not be correctly remembered from dozens of different WWII aviation books.

 

As to why you can't feel the difference in flight... maybe because the 109 somehow always had decent rudder authority, the extra size is redundant/unnoticeable at regular flight speeds, and only has a significant impact at takeoff speeds?

 

Pure unscientific speculation on my part.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

4 hours ago, oc2209 said:

Anyone's free to jump in and correct me, since I'm not at all certain on this, but...

 

It was my assumption that the tail/rudder was enlarged to counteract the high torque effect primarily during takeoff, and not really meant to matter during regular flight or combat. Which was possibly related to the extension of the tail wheel's length, which was also seen as desirable for slightly improved ground handling especially because of the low pilot experience that was commonplace in the Luftwaffe at the war's end.

 

Again, I'm not claiming a source on any of this. Just nebulous thoughts that may or may not be correctly remembered from dozens of different WWII aviation books.

 

As to why you can't feel the difference in flight... maybe because the 109 somehow always had decent rudder authority, the extra size is redundant/unnoticeable at regular flight speeds, and only has a significant impact at takeoff speeds?

 

Pure unscientific speculation on my part.

The opposite is True. The small Tail was good enough at low Speeds, but approaching Sub-Sonic Speeds became weird and difficult to Control, would flutter etc. The Late Tail is meant to more safely Dive at up to Mach 0.8.

This is the relevant Paper. I shows the behaviour and recommendations for the redesigned Tail. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Me_109_Dive_Test.pdf

[oc2209]

42 minutes ago, 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann said:

The opposite is True. The small Tail was good enough at low Speeds, but approaching Sub-Sonic Speeds became weird and difficult to Control, would flutter etc. The Late Tail is meant to more safely Dive at up to Mach 0.8.

This is the relevant Paper. I shows the behaviour and recommendations for the redesigned Tail. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Me_109_Dive_Test.pdf

 

That makes sense, especially with P-47s being such a constant threat (even if less commonly used in the fighter role from '44 on). 

 

Thanks for the link.

[oc2209]

Just checked my library last night. Of all the references to the late 109's tail changes, only one mentions any reason why; and that one says it was to counteract torque during takeoff. The book is called Messerschmitt 109, of the Warbirds series from MBI publishing. The author is D.A. Lande. So either he's wrong, or the tail was changed for perhaps multiple reasons (referring to Klaus' link above).

 

Maybe changing the angle and height of the vertical stabilizer is what helped for high speed diving, while the change in rudder area is what helped for takeoffs. The extra rudder tab might be to help high-speed control too.

 

Ultimately, it would still mean that the extra tail size probably wouldn't be terribly noticeable in regular flight, which I define as speeds ranging from 150-350 MPH.

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by oc2209

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

Just checked my library last night. Of all the references to the late 109's tail changes, only one mentions any reason why; and that one says it was to counteract torque during takeoff. The book is called Messerschmitt 109, of the Warbirds series from MBI publishing. The author is D.A. Lande. So either he's wrong, or the tail was changed for perhaps multiple reasons (referring to Klaus' link above).

 

Maybe changing the angle and height of the vertical stabilizer is what helped for high speed diving, while the change in rudder area is what helped for takeoffs. The extra rudder tab might be to help high-speed control too.

 

Ultimately, it would still mean that the extra tail size probably wouldn't be terribly noticeable in regular flight, which I define as speeds ranging from 150-350 MPH.

 

The actual  effective Size Difference is pretty small. The "Larger Rudder" is really just an  "top in, stick it in"-insert into the standard Tail of a "Bf109-whatever", some slightly different Hinges, a Cut for the new Balancer and done.

It is slightly taller, but the effective Rudder Area is the same or less, with the Balancer Horn being replaced with Stabilizer. The Actual Rudder Surface Effectiveness thus shouldn't really be any higher at low Speeds.

[Avimimus]

I find I have the impression of it being a slightly better gun platform (more stability in yaw), and that turn initiation (e.g. roll) is a bit different... but mine is a very subjective opinion from someone who isn't typically a Bf-109 pilot

 

[Bremspropeller]

On 12/4/2020 at 2:07 AM, Avimimus said:

I find I have the impression of it being a slightly better gun platform (more stability in yaw)

 

That precisely was the intent of the taller tail.

Seems it works well in game ?

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

[LukeFF]

^ Looks like 1 with Erla canopy and short tail, 1 with heavy canopy and short tail, and then 2 with heavy canopy and tall tail.