This has been argued at length. The documented values taken from Instrumented aircraft are shown in the images below. These from documents from the national archives. The Devs have these values:

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/5658/vegcutfile.jpg

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/7585/vegcutfile2.jpg

So the first onset will occur at +0.1g

Spit under modeled as far as boost goes.

109 under modeled as far as top speed goes

There...that was easy

Plenty and plenty of posts on this matter and I'm sure the Devs know

->There is no prob with the speed. I'll try to post some vids.

->The boost story is highly controversial.

-> the carburetor behavior was difficult to handle. True. But we would hve ultimately learn how to do with that. Tht's what a simulator is all about - eg have a look at all the airliner simulator aficionados ! I hope we will see it back one day or another.

~S!

Hi. Based on a undated (? 1940-1941 who knows) sheet of paper, the Englishs was obtained this development in their all existed airplane? I guess to these modifications there is a more tangible source, when, into which airplane, where and who mounted it in? Could we see them?

Compared with this, as you wrote it in the topic (109s autoprop - did it ever existed?):
IvanK: "By general operational employment I am referring to general Squadron use, i.e. How many aircraft were equipped with it and at what date."

There were not enough to the German auto prop pitch, that were published a manual in 1939 (maybe from a joke it would be printed), and the german aug.-oct. 1940 somehow not part of the BOB era anymore...
I will be curious, there will be an automatics in the E-4, E-7 after these (Will be E-7 at all?). I hope so yes, otherwise this -beside all respect- is double standard.

You tried to climb above 8000 metres? Or you watched how fast the airplanes on 6000-7000 metres? The (edit: the 109 E-3...) top speed is ok on sea level... but the high altitude flying is totally wrong...

Effectively I was talking abt low to med alt speed. I will check the high alt perf with a quick test on my next flight.

Regarding your reply to IvanK : they do what they want, no ? It's upon to them to choose on which grd they make this sim credible (and I pay credit to them to be on that ground !)

Personally I found that the neg G carb cut out was a superb feature giving CoD a truly unique taste of credibility regarding effort made down to the details. This has been lacking before in several BoB era Sim since long !

I have for many years read about the cut out in spits by a lot diff and credible historians. I hve no doubt that the utmost majority of RAF planes were affected and that until really late (1942 ?).

Just want to say here (not to you Tom) that it's not because devs in some sort choose to share their enthusiasm with the community that it has to be a place for all sort of exigence. Man hve to be grateful for the possibility to put forward their case (opinion) but shld accept that their idea cld not be followed without any sort of justifications (and I know what I mean :rolleyes: !!).

The only moment that i had a cut out, was in a Spitfire Ia at 15000 feets when i started an vertical dive. Then the engine stopped completely, and when i pulled up it started again.

Theoretically yes, practically no. If the historical accuracy is important (they said this many times), and not only while it is appropriate for their side, it would not be allowed to do things like this then (to reduce serious but existing deficiencies on a subjective manner).

I write about it (among other things) :-P

yea we know :)

I was adding my input to the thread geezer... Thats the issues i have with both AC and have had from the first day playing this sim