SoW:BoB DB601 Pitch / MG-FFl

[JG53Frankyboy]

should the SoW:BoB DB601 driven planes , far Bf109 and Bf110 (Do215 most propably not flyable, if there will be any He111P flyable, doubtfull) have only manual propeller pitch ?!
i guess yes !

reason Bf110:
http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/arc...110-manual.pdf

reason Bf109:




and i hope both, the Bf109E and Bf110C will be armed with the MG-FF/M , ready to fire the mineshells........................................ ......................E-4 and C-4 to say it clear

[TheGrunch]

I *believe* that other fighter groups were provided with aircraft with automatic propeller control as early as July, off the top of my head, but whether they were as reliable as this example I'm not sure.

[Blackdog_kt]

This would be interesting. In fact, if SoW gives us improved engine modelling then controlling pitch/RPM will become more important that throttle for the German planes.

The reason is that the German aircraft didn't have constant speed propellers. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i think i read somewhere that they were simple variable pitch propellers. But what's the difference?

Well, constant speed props automatically vary the pitch to keep the RPM at the value you set. This is usuallly done through a hydraulic system contained in the spinner of the prop, with oil pressure inside the mechanism working against the air resistance that the prop faces. When the air resistance is low the oil pressure inside the mechanism overcomes it and changes the propeller pitch one way. When the air resistance overcomes the oil pressure inside the propeller governor, the pitch changes the other way. Essentially by moving the pitch lever you are not directly affecting prop pitch, you are probably setting the oil pressure inside the governor and each oil pressure value corresponds to a certain RPM value via the function described above.
So, with constant speed props you select your desired RPM and the prop does the rest, within some limits of course. For example, if you downthrottle too much the RPM will still drop as there's not enough power to maintain it, if you go too fast in a dive the RPM will rise as the automatic pitch system reaches its gimbal lock limit.

However, things are different for a variable pitch prop that is not constant speed. These don't maintain a selected RPM, you simply select your desired prop pitch angle by moving the lever, directly affecting prop pitch. That means if your airspeed rises and you want to maintain RPM and prevent over-revving, you'll have to do it yourself as the prop won't do it for you. Similarly, if you start climbing and losing airspeed, you'll have to adjust pitch to prevent the RPM from dropping. Essentially, this prop is variable in pitch but needs constant monitoring of RPMs.

The way i see it, it would be nice if we could have separate control profiles for different aircraft. Then, people with a single throttle would be able to save different profiles, so that when for example i'm flying a 109E i can assign my slider to prop pitch, as this is the one that can fry my engine if left unattended, and use the keyboard for my throttle settings. In fact, there's only 2-3 main throttle settings in each aircraft: max(take-off/WEP), climb, max continuous cruise. However, if i'm flying an aircraft with a constant speed prop, then it would be more convenient to revert to the classic control scheme and control the throttle with the slider and the prop RPMs with the keyboard.

[lane]

Steinhilper also wrote about manually changing the propeller pitch. "Of special importance was teaching them how to change the pitch of the propeller to get maximum pull from the engine at high altitude." See attachment (if it works). There is a note at the end of Chapter 16: "This technique of varying the throttle setting and pitch led to a constant rising and falling of engine speed. One of the observations of people in Britain was that you could tell which aircraft were German and which were British because the German engine noise seemed always to be rising and falling - unlike the British engines which seemed to remain constant. This may explain the phenomenon." I've read about that quite a few times over the years.

[Blackdog_kt]

Excellent piece of information, i'd never have thought of what they were doing.

If i'm reading it correctly, they were essentially storing energy in the supercharger momentarily and then used it to increase their climb rate in bursts. Planes don't cruise on maximum RPM all the time since the propeller has more "pull" if it's angled to have a bigger "bite" of air, but this also results in increased air resistance/drag and lower RPMs.

So, they were setting high RPMs and momentarily sacrificed some "pull" to speed up the engine and the supercharger, then used the power stored in the supercharger to drive the prop at lower RPMs with higher pull. It's amazing what kind of little tricks seasoned veterans could pull. I guess that each little thing by itself didn't do much, but adding it all up together must have given a tangible performance advantage.

[rakinroll]

Thanks for these docs Franky.

[zapatista]

interesting information, since this would mean the whole period of BoB the germans should have the earlier 109 models that require the "3 handed" approach

there is usually some knowledgeable folks (and a few OC ones to ) hanging around the main forums who would have some more definitive information on this "production series" issue and the variants provided to each group (from reliable historical sources) during that specific BoB time period.

if the posted information is correct, it would be important for this aircraft variant to be the main (? only) 109 version provided for the german side during BoB

[Matt255]

T: Technical aircraft features
* Manual and auto prop pitch Bf109 variants will be featured

Source:
http://www.freewebs.com/heinkill/stormofwarnews.htm

Not sure if this is still up to date.

Anyway, i think some late E-4's had an automatic-pitch (those that still flew when the F reached the front), but no E-3. However, so far i haven't seen a E-4 (or later variant then the E-3) in any of the screenshots yet.

I fly with manual prop-pitch in IL-2. I highly recommend trying that out. It needs some time getting used to, but after a while, it's basically like shifting gears in a car. You do it automatically without thinking about it.

[JG53Frankyboy]

actually its not possible to destinguish an E-4 from an E-3 just looking at it!
the only difference was that the E-4 had MG-FF/M that were able to fire mineshells.
btw, if Maddox decides to make an E-3 as THE 109 in SoW:BoB it would be a mistake because the two main variants during this time were the E-1 (non 20mm canons) and the E-4! almost all so far produced E-3 were rearmed to be E-4s

[Matt255]

Afaik, all E-4 planes had the new canopy. I know that some E-3 have been retrofitted with that canopy (and FF/M etc.), but not the other way around (E-4 with old style canopys). And the 109's on the screenshots are definately E-3's (old canopy + 20mm cannons, that rules E-1 and E-4 out).

And Oleg stated already, that there will not be a E-1 variant.