109 e1 fm

Kurfürst · #1 05-12-2012, 08:57 AM

I do not know how the thing flies in the beta, I have not installed it yet, waiting for the final.

However RAE noted the ailerons snatch for a moment, moving the stick sideways several inches (maximum stick deflection on 109F was 6-6 inches both ways, RAE writes for the 109E its 4-4 inches) and was sufficient to upset aiming. The snatching should only last during the time the time the slats open or close (a fraction of a second), then ceases.

The issue was fixed with the Bf 109F-K with redesigned wings, slats and ailerons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5card

I don't know what has happened to E1 FM but it is now almost
unflyable. The nose bounce when trying to track a target is all
over the place.

See: http://kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/...ls/Morgan.html

4.6. Flying Controls. – 4.61. Ailerons. – At low speeds the aileron control is very good, being similar to that of the Curtiss H-75 ; there is a positive " feel ", there being a definite resistance to stick movement, and response is brisk. In these respects the Me.109 ailerons are better than those of the Spitfire, which become so light at low speeds that they lose all " feel ".

As the speed is increased the ailerons gradually become heavier, but response remains excellent. They are at their best between 150 m.p.h. and 200 m.p.h., and are described as " an ideal control " over this speed range. Above 200 m.p.h. they start becoming unpleasantly heavy, and at 300 m.p.h. are far too heavy for comfortable manoeuvring. Between 300 m.p.h. and 400 m.p.h. the ailerons are described as " solid " ; at 400 m.p.h. a pilot, exerting all his strength, cannot apply more than about fifth-aileron.

More detailed aileron tests (measurement of stick forces and time to bank) were-made, and are described in section 5.2. These tests showed that, although the Me.109 ailerons felt much heavier than those of the Spitfire at speeds between 300 m.p.h. and 400 m.p.h., the aircraft could be made to bank at about the same rate as the Spitfire at these high airspeeds. The more " solid " feel of the Me.109 ailerons at high airspeeds is attributed to smaller stick travel (+/- 4 in. compared with +/- 8 in. on the Spitfire)., fairly rigid control circuit, and partly to the awkward seating position of the pilot. The matter is more fully discussed in section 5.2.

Throttling back the engine does not alter the effectiveness of the ailerons at any speed. Lowering the flaps at low speeds (the ailerons come down 11 deg. with the flaps) makes the ailerons considerably heavier and slightly reduces their effectiveness, although response is. still amply adequate.

Apart from their excessive heaviness at high speeds, the most serious defect of the Me.109 ailerons is a tendency to snatch as the wing tip slots open. This is particularly noticeable when manaeuvring. For example, if the stick is pulled back in a tight turn, putting additional g on the aircraft, the slots open at quite a high airspeed ; as they open, the stick suddenly snatches laterally through several inches either way, sufficiently to upset a pilot's aim in a dog fight.

The snatch appears to be associated with the opening of the slots, for once they are fully open a steady turn can be done, with no aileron vibration, until the stall is approached.

As mentioned in section 4.42 (ADM. 293) some aileron snatching also occurs when gliding near the stall with flaps up and slots open; it disappears on lowering the flaps fully, and so does not worry the pilot during the approach glide.

Quote:

It goes into a stall now very easy and is almost unrecoverable.

Unrecoverable stalls sound very silly for the 109.

When doing tight turns with the Me.109 leading at speeds between 90 m.p.h. and 220 m.p.h. the Spitfires and Hurricanes had little difficult in keeping on the tail of the Me. 109. During these turns the amount of normal g recorded on the Me. 109 was between 2½ and 4 g. The aircraft stalled if the turn was tightened to give more than 4 g at speeds below about 200 m.p.h. The slots opened at about ½ g before the stall, and whilst opening caused the ailerons to snatch ; this upset the pilot's sighting immediately and caused him to lose ground. When the slots were fully open the aircraft could be turned quite steadily until very near the stall. If the stick was then pulled back a little more the aircraft suddenly shuddered, and either tended to come out of the turn or dropped its wing further, oscillating meanwhile in pitch and roll and rapidly losing height ; the aircraft immediately unstalled if the stick was eased forward. Even in a very tight turn the stall was quite gentle, with no tendency for the aircraft to suddenly flick over on to its back and spin. The Spitfires and Hurricanes could follow the Me.109 round during the stalled turns without themselves showing any signs of stalling.

The good control near the stall during these turns at full throttle contrasts with the results obtained from the ADM. 293 tests (section 4.42)) for when gliding the aircraft becomes unsteady at 10 m.p.h. above the stall. Slipstream thus appears to have a steadying influence on the behaviour of the Me.109 near the stall.