Spitfire supposed to dive better than the 109?

[Winger]

I experienced this now twice. i Dove after a fleeing spitfire. At around 780 IAS my 109 was loosing parts resulting in total failure while the spit just kept on diving pretty unimpressed.

Winger

[jf1981]

Are you sure he survived all right ?
That speed is more than the Spit can handle, it should overspeed from 725 km/h IAS.

[FFCW_Urizen]

i start loosing parts of my plane at around 400-450 mph IAS, depending on alt. Maybe you killed the pilot and the spit was just going in, but then otoh, i wouldn´t be surprised in a little dm hiccup.

[Fenrir]

Spitfire was known to have high Mach no., bout the .92 (from memory, don't flme if I'm wrong!). The 109 likely does not have such high an ultimate dive speed - where your advantage is, or more precisely should be in dive acceleration; you can bunt and initially outdistance a Spitfire in a 109 but given enough altitude I'd expect the Spitfire to gain eventually.

Also remember the Flight Models are still a work in progress - could be worth testing and taking to the Dev Team.

[IvanK]

Originally Posted by Fenrir

Spitfire was known to have high Mach no., bout the .92 (from memory, don't flme if I'm wrong!). The 109 likely does not have such high an ultimate dive speed - where your advantage is, or more precisely should be in dive acceleration; you can bunt and initially outdistance a Spitfire in a 109 but given enough altitude I'd expect the Spitfire to gain eventually.

Also remember the Flight Models are still a work in progress - could be worth testing and taking to the Dev Team.

Dont think we can ever get high enough in CLOD at present to get into Mach number territory

[Glider]

I wouldn't set too much store in the 0.92 Mach no. It was reached but it was a test pilot and the machine basically fell apart around him, the prop came off, the engine almost fell out.

Mind you the wings stayed on

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Glider

I wouldn't set too much store in the 0.92 Mach no. It was reached but it was a test pilot and the machine basically fell apart around him, the prop came off, the engine almost fell out.

Mind you the wings stayed on

0.89 is the figure I recall seeing quoted as a "typical" dive. Also IIRC in that particular test, the wings stayed on but were bent backwards (i.e. the structure failed).

[bw_wolverine]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

0.89 is the figure I recall seeing quoted as a "typical" dive. Also IIRC in that particular test, the wings stayed on but were bent backwards (i.e. the structure failed).

Wow. A pilot actually did this test? Did he have to bail out? Surely, he must have.

Was it part of the test or just a 'test' that came out of an accident?

Very cool nevertheless!

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by Glider

I wouldn't set too much store in the 0.92 Mach no. It was reached but it was a test pilot and the machine basically fell apart around him, the prop came off, the engine almost fell out.

Mind you the wings stayed on

Alex Henshaw's account of experiments conducted on a Mk V are interesting: pilots were complaining that the engines were over-revving in a dive, so Castle Bromwich test pilots conducted some test flights:



Here's an account by an aerodynamicist regarding the fabric ailerons:

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

Both true. In fact when I did my dive tests, I pulled out using the trimmer exclusively. In the high speed dives, I need a lot of down trim and a lot of rudder trim, but got up to at least 440mph, maybe 450, but by that time I was more concerned with where the ground was.

P.S. I also brought prop pitch down to fully coarse, i.e. lowest revs.

From Pilot's Notes Spitfire IIA & IIB

DIVING

21. The maximum permissible diving speed is 450 m.p.h. A.S.I*. Note the following:

(i) Constant-speed airscrew. - At maximum r.p.m., 3,000 , the throttle must be 1/3rd open. The pitch control need not be brought back to reduce r.p.m., the range of pitch is enough to hold down the r.p.m. at any airspeed.

(ii) The flaps must be up at over 120 m.p.h A.S.I.

(iii) The aeroplane should be trimmed in the dive, i.e. the trimming control tab should be set to give no load on the elevator. This will lessen the possibility of excessive "g" being induced in easing out of the dive, particularly if the pilot should release his hold on the stick owing to "blacking out' or any other reasons. No difficulty is experienced easing out of the dive will be experienced even if the aeroplane is trimmed in the dive as the elevator is comparatively light and recovery is not resisted by excessive stability in pitch. Elevator tabs may be used, very carefully, as described in para. 14.

(iv) The rate of descent is very great, so ample room for recovery must be allowed.

* Note Henshaw's comment on speed being pegged at 470 m.p.h. A.S.I so one wonders whether this was a misprint in the Pilot's Notes.

[janpitor]

Maximum permissible actually doesn´t mean maximum that the aircraft can sustain. A safety factor is used in aircraft construction and also in manuals/permissible maneuvers.