Sternjaeger Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 So yesterday after almost a month of no flying I updated the game and went for a spin, I was quite curious to try the La5 and I really liked its behaviour, so I got even more excited to try the Bf109s, but I soon realised that the old issues re. stability are still there. Could anybody tell me if there's a plan to address that? I have to say that now I can defo see the issue a lot of people were moaning about, especially if you compare it to the La5/Yak 1. 2
Mmaruda Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 I did some tests today and my suspicion is the wobble is due to the nature of the trim in the 109s. The Russian planes have a larger range of the pitch trimmer, while the 109 seems more limited due to the vertical stabilizer. I was using an axis for this, but that did not work well. I find it's easier to trim properly by using the hat switch. However, with high speed the vertical stabilizer is just not enough - the nose pitches up, you still have to use the stick to correct and it's just not precise enough. You need to make constant, delicate adjustments and with limited range of the joystick movement it's just not precise enough, hence the wobble. I finally managed to get this under control, but it's like flying a helicopter at times - you need to anticipate what will happen to the plane and constantly adjust.
AX2 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 (edited) Sternjaeger I need send a PM to you but the forum site answer The member Sternjaeger cannot receive any new messages You was banned o you are a bot ? Edited May 29, 2014 by Mustang
SYN_Saintblu Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 He is probably so popular his inbox is just full.
Gambit21 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 The more I fly the 109, the more I like it. Just a matter of muscle memory and not over-reacting with inputs I guess. I can't speak for the accuracy, but I'm learning to compensate for the initial problems I was having.
Pringliano Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 (edited) The more I fly the 109, the more I like it. Just a matter of muscle memory and not over-reacting with inputs I guess. I can't speak for the accuracy, but I'm learning to compensate for the initial problems I was having. I confirm. It's been a process of adaptation / proficiency, but it's slowly becoming one of my preferred.... :-), the F model. As soon as I consider myself ready in the F model, I'll start training in the "G"... Then the Stuka, and the Pe-2.... Edited May 29, 2014 by jcomm
Bussard_x Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Flying the 109F and G always set the elevator trim on 2 right from start. This means high speed without pushing the stick forward all the time, which costs energy and is more than anoying. Make full use of the 109 as energy fighter with high speed and fast climbs. If you decide to do a turn fight make sure your speed is not too low, than you gave a good chance against the Soviet fighters.
sturmkraehe Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 I wonder if we need 199 threads dealing with the flight behaviour of the 109 ...
BraveSirRobin Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 I wonder if we need 199 threads dealing with the flight behaviour of the 109 ... Sounds like a good poll question. 2
JtD Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Before the trolls get yet another topic locked where the OP made the mistake of asking a simple 109 related question, here's the answer: Changes to the 109 FM are planned according to statements by the developers, which were made some time within the last two weeks. 5
SCG_Neun Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Before the trolls get yet another topic locked where the OP made the mistake of asking a simple 109 related question, here's the answer: Changes to the 109 FM are planned according to statements by the developers, which were made some time within the last two weeks. Thanks JtD, I hadn't heard that and it's good to know.
AX2 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Before the trolls get yet another topic locked where the OP made the mistake of asking a simple 109 related question, here's the answer: Changes to the 109 FM are planned according to statements by the developers, which were made some time within the last two weeks. Two weeks shure ! 1
Sternjaeger Posted May 29, 2014 Author Posted May 29, 2014 first of all apologies Mustang, as Saintblu suggested my inbox was indeed full As for the behaviour, I don't think it's a trimming issue per se, simply because the issue is on every axis really, but as JtD said it's good to know they're gonna look into it, cos at the moment it's extremely frustrating to keep the damn thing steady to aim. Constant effective deflection shooting is virtually impossible (at least for me!). 1
AX2 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 (edited) Use your business sense to do business They can have an engineer from Sukhoi. *) The engineer can made thousands of equations, profile of the wing ( airfoil ) , tail rudder distance from the center of gravity. bla bla bla bla bla...and bla A) All of this need be made with external engineering software, for one million hours of calculations-. B) If such data was entered ( input ) by a human, to other software ( like imput engineering data to BoS ), there maybe a human error here. The engineer can not be sure of seeing his calculations actually well represented in BoS C) If data from one engineer and external engineering Software ( example BF 109 FM ), was input to BoS by removing the whole human involvement... Like ( imput the engineering calculations to BoS by another software working as a bridge ) It may also can be an erroneous intepetacion between software 1 and software 2 , by the " bridge Software" and by the digital nature of the physics engine in BoS. *) AGAIN The engineer can not be sure of seeing his calculations actually well represented in BoS If all this will ended well, And you had a perfect 109 mathematically AND and all of us agree that you have a perfect FM of BF 109 " mathematically at FM" None of us fly in a real cockpit of 109, only have a warthog recreating an A10 I'm not in flying a real cockpit of 109 THEN you are created a perfect flight model AND is unusable in games. First pair logical thing to do --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . Edited May 29, 2014 by Mustang
AX2 Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 (edited) Sternjaeger Before the trolls ...... made some time within the last two weeks. This is a big troll from JtD. My English is bad, I must clarify, In my previous post I talk to the project manager BoS, " The Boss " Edited May 29, 2014 by Mustang
Sternjaeger Posted May 29, 2014 Author Posted May 29, 2014 it's ok man, let's wait and see what the devs do with this, I am just not enjoying the experience at the moment (maybe that's why I haven't been flying it much), and I feel like I'm not alone in this sentiment, so it'd be great if this issue got addressed as a matter of urgency. 1
II/JG17_HerrMurf Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 At 2450-2470 rpm I trim the f4 half way between 2 and 3 for most of the flight envelope. I hardly use the rudder after takeoff except for fine tuning my sight alignment and this is very fine movement. Otherwise she is pretty steady. I haven't tinkered with the G2 much because I cant seem to get the engine performance out of the !@#$ thing. I find the f4 to be the better flyer for the altitudes currently utilized in what are essentially dogfight servers >10,000'. There are some pilots who have clearly figured out the G2 though and they are fun to try to wing along with in my Friedrich.
ShamrockOneFive Posted May 29, 2014 Posted May 29, 2014 Hopefully legitimate question. I've noticed that the leading edge slats seem to deploy on the Bf109G-2 but not on the F-4. I haven't spent a huge amount of time with the Bf109 but I'm starting to learn it. It's a wee bit sensitive as you guys mention but it is quite a performer... but unless something changed in the last patch it does seem like the one has the slats working and the other doesn't. Still something they are working on perhaps?
gx007 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) Hopefully legitimate question. I've noticed that the leading edge slats seem to deploy on the Bf109G-2 but not on the F-4. I haven't spent a huge amount of time with the Bf109 but I'm starting to learn it. It's a wee bit sensitive as you guys mention but it is quite a performer... but unless something changed in the last patch it does seem like the one has the slats working and the other doesn't. Still something they are working on perhaps? Slats work on 109F. I prefer the F over G. Better visibility and performance (to my liking). I use two notches on trim and seems to work fine. I struggle with the Lagg and La5 with stalling and flip overs. Edited May 30, 2014 by gx007
II/JG17_HerrMurf Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 LE slats are working. The only reason I can see to jump into a G2 is for the artificial horizon and clouds........but it's not implemented yet. So, nope. I gave up on the Lagg a long time ago. Still enjoy a bit of Yak and La5. But based upon my user name you can probably guess it's not that often.
AX2 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) 1) Disable the rudder and Disable ailerons at controls settings ( now you only have control pitch ) 2) Load as example 60% of fuel or less 3 ) Set horizontal stabilizer to nose down, setting - 1 4 ) Slow down the plane between 240 km/h to 300 km/h. 5) Accelerate the engine to 1.3 ata - reach 340 km/h to 380 Km/h, Not more. 6 ) Push the joystick foward hard and fast, ( make a fast nose down dive ) and remember point 1) 7) Look what happens at the video 8) Before, please turn down the speakers volume, a little https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMYmCrKhcl8 9) Thanks for watching 10) Try this in other aircraft by your self If Me 109 did that when dive, The luftwaffe dive test is a lie, you can also burn your books and burn your library. . Edited May 30, 2014 by Mustang 1
Streiff Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 Before the trolls get yet another topic locked where the OP made the mistake of asking a simple 109 related question, here's the answer: Changes to the 109 FM are planned according to statements by the developers, which were made some time within the last two weeks. Actually, they said the 109 may have a slightly oversensitive rudder. Apparently the insanely sensitive elevator have passed them by.
AX2 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) Actually, they said the 109 may have a slightly oversensitive rudder. Apparently the insanely sensitive elevator have passed them by. And Torque problem and pitch at the BF 109 FM . 340 km/h to 380 km/h Is a optimal cruising speed for the 109, to perform a hard dive into an enemy without problems. Now I will go to burn my books Edited May 30, 2014 by Mustang
69th_chuter Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 ... 3 ) Set horizontal stabilizer to nose down, setting - 1 ... Actually + is nose down and - is nose up (German convention during this period). The video shows you rolling from -2 through zero to 1 (+1). It's just me ... seriously. lol
AX2 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 Actually + is nose down and - is nose up (German convention during this period). The video shows you rolling from -2 through zero to 1 (+1). It's just me ... seriously. lol Thanks you very much, for your clarification and expertise in these matters I set ( Trim ) horizontal stabilizer to nose down ( + 1 or -1 , was my typo mistake, apologies ) Chuter Look the video again, the horizontal stabilizer is set nose down +1 .. then.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMYmCrKhcl8
Tab Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 And Torque problem and pitch at the BF 109 FM . 340 km/h to 380 km/h Is a optimal cruising speed for the 109, to perform a hard dive into an enemy without problems. Now I will go to burn my books do you mind sharing some books where it's stated that a dive should be performed as shown in your video?
AX2 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) do you mind sharing some books where it's stated that a dive should be performed as shown in your video? YES The Luftwaffe , 109 pilot manuals say 1) How perform a dive ? 2 ) Be very careful because you will die in an uncontrolled spin 3) You must begins a dive praying for yourself , to any god in the universe 4 ) Start the dive with the engine off. 5 ) Open the cockpit as fast as you can 6 ) Then Bailout - Because if you push the stick forward you will die uncontrolled spin 5) Better go and fly any other aircraft in the world, then you can push the stick forward without problems at any Speed It is clear ? Edited May 30, 2014 by Mustang 4
Letka_13/Arrow_ Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 I thought that the official, steep dive procedure was to dip one wing first then go inverted? If you exceed AOA while pushing the joystick down you are gonna cause a stall and negative G's. Yep, it has stalled because negative AOA limit, which is a much lower limit than positive, was exceeded.
AX2 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 No other aircraft does that Roll, ( like uncontrolled helicopter ) , in my tests., also this happened with ailerons and rudder enable at 109. I don't have time now for a better explanation. 2
1CGS LukeFF Posted May 30, 2014 1CGS Posted May 30, 2014 No other aircraft does that Roll, ( like uncontrolled helicopter ) , in my tests., also this happened with ailerons and rudder enable at 109. I don't have time now for a better explanation. Once again, please quit it with the large bold text. 3
II/JG17_HerrMurf Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 Mustang, I am happy you are testing but several people have asked for clarification of your testing methods and resource materials. Yelling (BOLD/CAPS), sarcasm, and ignoring these questions is hardly helping you make your case. I don't have a real problem with rudder or aileron function and I haven't messed with any curves. To me the game version of the 109 requires smooth/fine movements and she flies very well. My landings took some work over several hours and my combat numbers are good in MP. I cant yank her around like a Yak and have to think well ahead of the curve for position and energy. How the 109 compares to either the manuals or the real thing I can't say. If you have real world data or even anecdotal wartime data you should share it. 2
Gambit21 Posted May 30, 2014 Posted May 30, 2014 Once again, please quit it with the large bold text. Agreed Unnecessary and obnoxious.
AX2 Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) Mustang, I am happy you are testing but several people have asked for clarification of your testing methods and resource materials. Yelling (BOLD/CAPS), sarcasm, and ignoring these questions is hardly helping you make your case. I don't have a real problem with rudder or aileron function and I haven't messed with any curves. To me the game version of the 109 requires smooth/fine movements and she flies very well. My landings took some work over several hours and my combat numbers are good in MP. I cant yank her around like a Yak and have to think well ahead of the curve for position and energy. How the 109 compares to either the manuals or the real thing I can't say. If you have real world data or even anecdotal wartime data you should share it. Thank you very much for your respectful clarification, Really. As example I have a Pe 2 in game , and the Pe 2 remains very stable up to 840 km / h in dive. Then Pe 2 is the new P47 at BoS ?.... maybe.... I think the way of the FM at BoS already was closed. In this forum there are many real life pilots, with much experience at RL, if they do not see anything wrong with the 109, I must keep myself in silence .because this is already a lost cause. At least 180 people has viewed my video. For better or worse I only have this http://www.4shared.com/office/WxaeCL0oce/Diving_Test_109F_WNr9228_ger_e.html For all , Have good flights and have fun in GAME Cheers . Mustang. Edited May 31, 2014 by Mustang
Gambit21 Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 I must keep myself in silence ... Mustang. Anyone in favor of the above, raise your hand. 3
FuriousMeow Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 In this forum there are many real life pilots, with much experience at RL, if they do not see anything wrong with the 109, I must keep myself in silence .because this is already a lost cause.. They have real life experience flying a 109? If so, then lets have the information. If not, yes, keep yourself in silence.
303_Kwiatek Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 They have real life experience flying a 109? If so, then lets have the information. If not, yes, keep yourself in silence. Maby you could explain why Russian planes in CLOD behave in different way then 109? I mean they fly more natural and realistic way then 109 and don't copy such stupid flick rolls with rudder kick (not as such degree) or negative pitch apply?
DD_bongodriver Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 He must mean BoS. They have real life experience flying a 109? If so, then lets have the information. If not, yes, keep yourself in silence. real 109 experience is irrelevant when talking about unbelievable physics, the 109 was not magic contrary to popular belief it seems.
ShamrockOneFive Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 Seems like the 109 has more control authority than the other types. Do the same moves in other aircraft and they don't seem to be able to respond as quickly... the 109 will respond instantly (for better or worse). In any case, the devs said they would be revisiting the 109 so that makes me happy. And by and large its still the highest performing fighter but requiring a little more sensitive flying. Also not sure why the Pe-2 was brought into the conversation... ?
AX2 Posted May 31, 2014 Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) Also not sure why the Pe-2 was brought into the conversation... ? This needs to be taken very seriously or will never end !!! I just call of the developers. And we understood each other very well , Despite a big language barrier , they use all his well learned politesse , Why.... Study my video and you get the aswer... listen carefully the end of the video, that's what's missing from the 109 http://youtu.be/MoRG4PmTC0A . Edited May 31, 2014 by Mustang
Recommended Posts