Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 04-21-2011, 09:39 PM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 617Squadron View Post
The ME 109 had one major advantage over the Spitfire and Hurricane; it could 'bunt' and pull negative G without the engine stalling. A Spitfire or Hurricane had to roll inverted before diving, to maintain positive G on the carburettors and keep fuel flowing to prevent the engine from starving and stalling.

Rolls-Royce did produce a modification (Mrs. Cottle's Orifice I believe it was called) that went some way to helping the problem, however, they were never able to eliminate it as the Merlin didn't have fuel injection, as per the 109's Daimler Benz engine.
Her name is Tilley and Merlin it did get fuel injection. The injection was single point, not multi point as on the DBs.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-21-2011, 09:45 PM
617Squadron 617Squadron is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 47
Default

As far as I am aware, the early Spitfires (as depicted in CoD) weren't fitted with the modification, so that's why all Battle of Britain era film of Spitfires and Hurricanes shows them rolling onto their backs before diving, to prevent fuel starvation.

It may have been a fuel pump issue rather than carbs, you could be right; to be honest, I'm not that much of an anorak about the RR Merlin engine.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-21-2011, 10:14 PM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 617Squadron View Post
As far as I am aware, the early Spitfires (as depicted in CoD) weren't fitted with the modification, so that's why all Battle of Britain era film of Spitfires and Hurricanes shows them rolling onto their backs before diving, to prevent fuel starvation.

It may have been a fuel pump issue rather than carbs, you could be right; to be honest, I'm not that much of an anorak about the RR Merlin engine.
Tilley's Orifice was introduced after the BoB. Sixty series and later Merlins got the fuel injection.

It was a combination of carb and fuel pump. The lean mixture cut out was a minor issue. What was the major issue was the rich mixture that flooded the engine. This was because the fuel flowed into the card unrestricted. Tilley's Orifice restricted this flow of fuel.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-21-2011, 10:20 PM
Rattlehead Rattlehead is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 617Squadron View Post
The ME 109
Sorry to be a pendantic pain in the rear, but the 'Me' designation is a misnomer. It was always called the Bf 109.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-21-2011, 10:38 PM
Al Schlageter Al Schlageter is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 657
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattlehead View Post
Sorry to be a pendantic pain in the rear, but the 'Me' designation is a misnomer. It was always called the Bf 109.
Is that so. Then why do I have a factory drawing for the 109 wing that is titled 'Flugel Me109F, Me109K' and another factory drawing that is titled 'Flugel Me109F, Me109G'?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-21-2011, 10:51 PM
Triggaaar Triggaaar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellbender View Post
In that documentary they say the 109 could out-turn and out-run ("They could hit us as they wanted and get away with it every time they wanted") the Spitfire. That doesn´t somehow match with my experience in the game.
There's no point in that documentary where it says the 109 could out-turn the Spit. This documentary was on uk tv some months back. Tom Neal who was commenting about the 109s being able to hit the British and escape when they wanted was largely being modest. If it really was as simple as that, Tom Neal would have died, and the Germans would have shot down more than they lost, but the reverse is true.
__________________
i7 930 @ 4.0 GHz - 6 Gig ram @ 1600 - AMD 6970 2 gig
Win 7 64 bit on 1st HDD (7200rpm) - Steam on 2nd HDD (7200rpm)
TrackIR 3 with vector exp - MSFF2 - Native res 1680 x 1050
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-21-2011, 11:00 PM
Triggaaar Triggaaar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by seiseki View Post
But the facts were, it could out dive out run and out gun the spitfire..
That's not correct. It could out gun the spitfire, but that's not so relevant in a 1 v 1, where only one plane gets to use it's guns. The 109 could out-dive the Spit in the first few seconds, but data suggests the Spit was faster in 1940, could out-turn the 109, and could out-climb it too.

A massive aerial battle like the Battle of Britain is too complicated for easy comparisons to be made. Both sides had advantages/disadvantages. The 109s were supposed to be protecting the bombers, but the British planes were starting on the deck and having to climb to meet the Germans. And each fight would have unequal numbers. The veterans also have different personalities, skill levels, egos/modesty, experiences, which all make it difficult to make accurate judgements.
__________________
i7 930 @ 4.0 GHz - 6 Gig ram @ 1600 - AMD 6970 2 gig
Win 7 64 bit on 1st HDD (7200rpm) - Steam on 2nd HDD (7200rpm)
TrackIR 3 with vector exp - MSFF2 - Native res 1680 x 1050
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-21-2011, 11:45 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

From what I have read the 109 could turn inside a Spit in the hands of an elite pilot. However, with an average pilot at the controls the Spit would usually turn inside the 109.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-22-2011, 03:24 AM
maxwellbest maxwellbest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 36
Default

Have to agree with TV presenter re the 109. You can argue all you like about the relative merits of the flying characteristics of the Spit and the 109. Firepower. And the 109 won out on that score. Pure and simple. Cant recall the name of a book I read re BOB years ago, where that was discussed in depth. Also compared the .303 vs 50 cals. With Fighter Command armed with 50 cals, it would have been a less close run thing. But that's counter factual of course, very much a what if. Hmmm, come to think of it, why was'nt Fighter command armed with 50 cals? Someone else can chime in here.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-22-2011, 08:18 AM
41Sqn_Stormcrow
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Triggaaar View Post
There's no point in that documentary where it says the 109 could out-turn the Spit. This documentary was on uk tv some months back. Tom Neal who was commenting about the 109s being able to hit the British and escape when they wanted was largely being modest. If it really was as simple as that, Tom Neal would have died, and the Germans would have shot down more than they lost, but the reverse is true.
You cannot deduce from pure and general kill numbers during Bob (and even these numbers can be debated) if the 109 or the spit was superiour. This is utterly nonsense for several reasons:

- The numbers usually given for Bob are total numbers disrespecting types of planes. My bet is that most plane losses on German sides are bombers. So not helpful at all when comparing Spit vs 109 because bombers are no 109s. So you cannot say from these numbers how effective or ineffective the German fighter force really was with respect to the RAF on a fighter vs fighter comparison.
- you would have to compare kills of 109 by Spit and kills of Spit by 109 to get a statement. However most kills in Bob were made by Hurricane. So also if we had a number showing kills fighter vs fighter it would be pointless as we would have to distinguish between the two RAF fighter types. Remember that the Hurricane was the most numerous plane engaged in Bob on RAF side and scored most of the kills. A highly underestimated plane in the Bob celebrations. I have a lot more admiration for the Hurri pilots as they were performing in an inferiour plane.
- comparing pure kill numbers to deduce relative performance leaves out context. Who had the more advantage (for instance altitude, numbers) at the initial stage of a dogfight would likely come out victor.
- comparing numbers leaves out the significance of fighter tactics that are essential in a dogfight.


And even in a 1vs1 dogfight (if we had relevant statistical data to make conclusions) one could only compare if both pilots had the same experience and the same capacities.

So even if a Spit pilot says that he could outturn the 109 it has to be looked into detail. Perhaps the 109 pilot was a novice not very familiar with the plane and therefore did not dare to go close to the limits of stall in order to pull tight. Perhaps he also had not yet gained a good feel for when the 109 turns best.

The same goes for pilots claiming that they could outturn a Spit. If the 109 pilot knew the limits of his plane and could pull it to the limits while the Spit pilot was a novice it is highly believable that the 109 pilot could outturn that particular Spit.

So one has to be very very carefull when just deducing this and that by comparing summary kill numbers and even when listening to pilot narrations.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.