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 > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-07-2012, 09:58 PM
jf1981 jf1981 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 334
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch View Post
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.
Yes but I think they messed also on the aircraft, there's no reason to need rudder trim in such a dive.
  #12  
Old 08-07-2012, 11:56 PM
IvanK IvanK is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 886
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenrir View Post
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
  #13  
Old 08-08-2012, 12:40 AM
Glider Glider is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 441
Default

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
  #14  
Old 08-08-2012, 01:02 AM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider View Post
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).
  #15  
Old 08-08-2012, 05:45 AM
bw_wolverine's Avatar
bw_wolverine bw_wolverine is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
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!
__________________
Pilot #1 (9:40 hours flying time, 3/0/1 Fighters, 7/2/0 Bombers). RIP

No.401 Squadron Forum


Using ReconNZ's Pilot Log Book
  #16  
Old 08-08-2012, 08:30 AM
SG1_Gunkan SG1_Gunkan is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Spain
Posts: 154
Default

The real 109 just need to roll during a normal dive and the Spitfire couldn't follow him. Was so hard for spitfires pilots that they even need using the rudder. But, at the same time this was dangerous and some pilots died because the wings twisted and broke.

I remeber have read too some problems with fabric controls surfaces.

Please correct me if i am wrong or inaccurate.
  #17  
Old 08-08-2012, 05:14 PM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SG1_Gunkan View Post
The real 109 just need to roll during a normal dive and the Spitfire couldn't follow him. Was so hard for spitfires pilots that they even need using the rudder. But, at the same time this was dangerous and some pilots died because the wings twisted and broke.

I remeber have read too some problems with fabric controls surfaces.

Please correct me if i am wrong or inaccurate.
I think the wing-flexing issue was corrected in later marks.
  #18  
Old 08-08-2012, 05:14 PM
CaptainDoggles's Avatar
CaptainDoggles CaptainDoggles is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,198
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bw_wolverine View Post
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!
Yep, it was an actual test. They started from 40 000 feet.
  #19  
Old 08-08-2012, 05:42 PM
bw_wolverine's Avatar
bw_wolverine bw_wolverine is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
Yep, it was an actual test. They started from 40 000 feet.
I wonder how many forms the pilot had to sign before that one!
__________________
Pilot #1 (9:40 hours flying time, 3/0/1 Fighters, 7/2/0 Bombers). RIP

No.401 Squadron Forum


Using ReconNZ's Pilot Log Book
  #20  
Old 08-08-2012, 06:29 PM
Baron Baron is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 705
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bw_wolverine View Post
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!

I remember reading Pierre Clostermans biography about such an event where he and his wingman (iirc) chased down a high alt recognisances ac. (Do17?) where both spits was condemned after the mission. Wings bent, aluminium sheeting all wrinkled. I seem to remember them both got nose bleeds from the sheer speed and the resulting manoeuvres getting out of the dive. Intresting though, is the fact that the recon must have reach similar speeds before being shot down (not falling apart into a torpedo).

Fast indeed, but everything is relative. Like, can i park the plane afterwards without the wings falling of.


Not sure if i remember everything exactly to the letter but the essence is there.

Last edited by Baron; 08-08-2012 at 06:43 PM.
Closed Thread


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 12:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.