#11
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Meanwhile on the other side of the Channel.... From : Kr.-Fernschr.Ob.d.L.,Führ.Stab Ia Nr.8092/40 g.K. (II) (only to Lfl.3) Subject : Comparison flight between Bf 109 E, Bf 110 C, Spitfire, Hurricane and Curtiss. In the following the performance- and air combat comparison that has been performed at the E-Stelle Rechlin between Bf 109 E and Bf 110 C and the captured enemy fighters Spitfire, Hurricane and Curtiss shall be brought to acknowledgement. The results of the comparison are to be announced immediately to all Jagd- and Zerstörer units under command, to guarantee the appropriate air combat behavior in the engagements on the basis of technical conditions. The Bf 109 E type clearly outperforms all foreign planes: Speed: the Spitfire is at 0 m by ca. 20 km/h, at 4 km by ca. 10 km/h, Hurricane and Curtiss at 0 and 4 km altitude by ca. 60 km/h. A similar superiority of the Bf 109 E exists in the climb performance as well. Climb times to 4 km: Bf 109 E 4.4 min, Spitfire 5 min, Hurricane 5.6 min, Curtiss 5.2 min. The plane Bf 110 C is speed-wise inferior to the Spitfire, superior to the Curtiss and Hurricane. Regarding the climb performance is the Curtiss equal at ground level, up to 4 km superior then inferior. Hurricane is inferior up to altitude 2 km, then superior up to 6.5 km. Spitfire is equal at ground level, otherwise superior. The best climb for Bf 109 E and Bf 110 C is achieved with shallow climb angle and higher speeds than at the enemy fighters. It is wrong to climb away steep or climb behind an enemy fighter with the same angle. Before turning fights with the Bf 109 E type, it must be noted in every case, that all three foreign planes have significantly smaller turning circles and turning times. An attack on the opponent as well as disengagement can only be accomplished on the basis of existing superiority in performance. For this the following suggestions are given: The Spitfire and partly the Hurricane have two-pitch propellers. Climbing away with the Bf 109 and Bf 110 must be done with the best climbing speed or even higher speeds of about 280 – 300 km/h. On aircraft with two-pitch propellers with low blade angle the engine will experience a very high over-revolution, and on the other hand with high blade angle high boost pressure – therefore in other words, performance loss. On sudden push forward on stick to below, the carburetor of the enemy fighters cuts out due to the negative acceleration. This [evasive] measure is also recommended. The rolling ability of the enemy fighters at high speeds is worse than that of the Bf 109. Quick changes of the trajectory along the vertical axis cause especially with the Spitfire load changes around the cranial axis, coming from high longitudinal thrust momemtum, and significantly disturb the aiming. In summary, it can be said that all three enemy planes types are inferior to the German planes regarding the flying qualities. Especially the Spitfire has bad rudder and elevator stability on the target approach. In addition the wing-mounted weapons have the known shooting-technique disadvantages. Lfl.Kdo.3/Führ.Abt./Ia. op 1 Nr. 3951/40 g.Kdos. signed, K o l l e r F.d.R.
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Last edited by Ze-Jamz; 05-27-2011 at 04:26 PM. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
The Italians...? >D
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
It is quite funny though...captured enemy aircraft performance charts and how they differ...I mean those 2 examples above are like chalk n cheese..
It is hard for the devs when it comes to ww1/ww2 aircraft FM's...what a task! If only they were still in the numbers that they could be tested and tested again by non biased pilots..and see how the FM's in this game and IL2 actually stand up |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
It is important to know what exacly type of planes was used in test flights and what sort of equimpment was used.
In German test quoted by Kurfurst we clearly have: " The Spitfire and partly the Hurricane have two-pitch propellers. Climbing away with the Bf 109 and Bf 110 must be done with the best climbing speed or even higher speeds of about 280 – 300 km/h. On aircraft with two-pitch propellers with low blade angle the engine will experience a very high over-revolution, and on the other hand with high blade angle high boost pressure – therefore in other words, performance loss." So Spitfire and Hurrciane used in German test flights had 2 stage prop pitch and looking for speed comparison clearly used 87 octan fuel. Also interesting is that German found that both Spitfire and Hurricane even with 2 stage prop pitch unit could outturn 109 E. " Before turning fights with the Bf 109 E type, it must be noted in every case, that all three foreign planes have significantly smaller turning circles and turning times. An attack on the opponent as well as disengagement can only be accomplished on the basis of existing superiority in performance." Also 109 climb adventage was only in shallow and higher speed climb not with steep one: " The best climb for Bf 109 E and Bf 110 C is achieved with shallow climb angle and higher speeds than at the enemy fighters. It is wrong to climb away steep or climb behind an enemy fighter with the same angle." So it was 109 against Spitfire and Hurrciane with 2 stage prop pitch and 87 octan fuel - so common version pre battle of bitain. In Brirish test there were used 109 E-3 against Spitfire MK1 with CS unit ( constant speed propeller): " Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough June 1940 Spitfire IA K.9791 with Rotol constant speed propeller Me 109E-3 Werk-Nr 1304 Comparitive trials between the Me 109E-3 and "Rotol" Spitfire IA 1. The trial commenced with the two aircraft taking off together, with the Spitfire slightly behind and using +6 1/4 lb boost and 3,000 rpm. 2. When fully airborne, the pilot of the Spitfire reduced his revolutions to 2,650 rpm and was then able to overtake and outclimb the Me 109. At 4,000 ft, the Spitfire pilot was 1,000 feet above the Me 109, from which position he was able to get on its tail, and remain there within effective range despite all efforts of the pilot of the Me 109 to shake him off. 3. The Spitfire then allowed the Me 109 to get on to his tail and attempted to shake him off this he found quite easy owing to the superior manoeuvrability of his aircraft, particularly in the looping plane and at low speeds between 100 and 140 mph. By executing a steep turn just above stalling speed, he ultimately got back into a position on the tail of the Me 109. 4. Another effective form of evasion with the Spitfire was found to be a steep, climbing spiral at 120 mph, using +6 1/4 boost and 2,650 rpm; in this manoeuvre, the Spitfire gained rapidly on the ME 109, eventually allowing the pilot to execute a half roll, on to the tail of his opponent. 5. Comparitive speed trials were then carried out, and the Spitfire proved to be considerably the faster of the two, both in acceleration and straight and level flight, without having to make use of the emergency +12 boost. During diving trials, the Spitfire pilot found that, by engageing fully coarse pitch and using -2lbs boost, his aircraft was superior to the Me 109." Both British and German flight test showed that Spitfire and Hurrciane could outturn 109, also Spitfire with CS propeller and 100 octan fuel was faster (at low to medium alts). But here are also some interesting test ( British): Last edited by Kwiatek; 05-28-2011 at 12:17 PM. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
I don't understand your post really Kurfurst. It pretty much backs up a lot of the RAF tests only without the detail - it's more of a confidence report for pilots in combat.
Furthermore, as Kwaitek correctly pointed out, it was vs a 2 stage prop Spitfire on 87 octane and this wasn't a BoB aircraft. Granted, the Rotol prop fitted to the 109E may affect performance but it is a CSP so I'd doubt it makes a marked difference. Finally, I have a faith problem with the items you post because you appear so damned biased towards blue anyway and frequently rebuff good information to the contrary, so I cannot trust your opinion I'm afraid. Sorry about that, in England we call it "The boy who cried wolf". Sadly the effect of this may well lead to bias in the sim in order to appease the complainers and the likes of Kwaitek and I really don't want that. I don't care if the Spitfire was hopeless IRL vs the 109, I just care that the sim best replicates RL performance and history. Last edited by Osprey; 05-28-2011 at 12:57 PM. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
"Both airplanes were fitted with DB 601A engines which gave considerable trouble during the test. A marked falling off of power was noticed as the tests progressed and some of the most important results could not be repeated".
__________________
Il-2Bugtracker: Feature #200: Missing 100 octane subtypes of Bf 109E and Bf 110C http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/200 Il-2Bugtracker: Bug #415: Spitfire Mk I, Ia, and Mk II: Stability and Control http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/415 Kurfürst - Your resource site on Bf 109 performance! http://kurfurst.org |
|
|