Landing the BF-109

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by Skoshi Tiger

I find that most people are coming in a too shallow an angle (myself included) and flying onto the runway. We get away with it because the sim is too forgiving and even if we only get into trouble 1% of the time it's ok it only a sim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotat...ure=iv#t=4m56s

I guess there is no real substitute for proper technique.

cheers!

I LOVE flying Cessnas in bush situations. A 172 can do some spectacular things. A Pilatus Porter even more....I swear I saw a sales video where they landed the thing on a tennis court (turbos props FTW). But those are very stable planes, these warbirds are a bit more touchy.

I think when your life depends on it, you find the exact numbers you want to hit on all legs of the circuit. I've had a fair amount of stick time, but even the best of friends won't let me take the landing all the way down to the runway (danged FAA lol). Usually you don't have AAA holes in your wing though. I SO hope weather effects are detailed in SoW.

Splitter

EDIT: Found the Pilatus video...check out around 20 seconds in. What an amazing aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GSHM...eature=related

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Splitter

Why do you unlock your tail wheel prior to landing?

I was taught to raise flaps to reduce lift and put more weight on the wheels for breaking and steering. Does leaving them down give an advantage in reducing speed by drag?

Splitter

I've never used tailwheel lock except when taking off from a carrier. The rest of the time it's not needed.

I've flown a 172, a 150, a PA-38 and a Tiger Moth (but only not very straight and not very level).
These planes are very light and have very low wing loading, so cutting lift is a good thing on landing (although you're stuck with the Tiger!).
Heavier 'planes with high wing loading aren't going to take off again unless you make them, so cutting lift ain't so urgent. A sudden gust could lift a Tomahawk but it'd struggle with a 109, or any other WW2 fighter. Depending on the wind strength of course.
Mind you, this is 'only a sim/game'...........unfortunately.
As soon as my lottery win comes through, I'm buying a Yak3.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by Splitter

I LOVE flying Cessnas in bush situations. A 172 can do some spectacular things. A Pilatus Porter even more....I swear I saw a sales video where they landed the thing on a tennis court (turbos props FTW).

EDIT: Found the Pilatus video...check out around 20 seconds in. What an amazing aircraft.

Fantastic video, Thanks for sharing!

Originally Posted by Splitter

But those are very stable planes, these warbirds are a bit more touchy.

Your right there. I think the point I was getting at was that because a lot of people try to fly the plane onto the strip (myself included) We tend to come in a lot faster than we should.

In Il-2 we've got alot of runway (and I don't think I've ever burst a tyre lasnding) so it doesn't matter too much. It would be good to get some short strips in the sim (SHort grass strips in SOW hopefully???) to make us concentrate on our landing technique.

bye and thanks!

[Romanator21]

Quick question: Why do you unlock your tail wheel prior to landing? I have always kept it locked in every sim to minimize the chance of a sideways skid on the ground. I unlock it when I need to turn off onto the taxi way.

For some reason, the "float" over the runway seems better than X-Plane. In X-Plane you can float forever in seems.

I also notice none of you seem to raise flaps on touch down. I was taught to raise flaps to reduce lift and put more weight on the wheels for breaking and steering. Does leaving them down give an advantage in reducing speed by drag?

I lock the tail-wheel for take-off (as everyone should do). Whether you unlock it for landing is up to you. Il-2 doesn't model cross-winds to the degree that you will need it.

I kept the flaps down because I had ample runway, and I didn't feel bothered to raise them at that time. If it was a short field landing, I would have raised them and started braking sooner. I should mention that I had full back pressure on the stick once I touched down. Relaxing after touchdown may cause your tail to rise even without the use of brakes.

Landing with a nose-wheel is similar in a sense, but for a different reason. You keep back pressure to prevent the nose gear from coming down too hard, or from sticking in the mud.

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by Romanator21

I lock the tail-wheel for take-off (as everyone should do). Whether you unlock it for landing is up to you. Il-2 doesn't model cross-winds to the degree that you will need it.

I kept the flaps down because I had ample runway, and I didn't feel bothered to raise them at that time. If it was a short field landing, I would have raised them and started braking sooner. I should mention that I had full back pressure on the stick once I touched down. Relaxing after touchdown may cause your tail to rise even without the use of brakes.

Landing with a nose-wheel is similar in a sense, but for a different reason. You keep back pressure to prevent the nose gear from coming down too hard, or from sticking in the mud.

If things like cross winds, thermals, turbulence, and the like get modeled into SoW my wife is not going to be happy. She'll never see me...ok, maybe she will be happy depends on where we are in the month.

Things like that may tick off a lot of old timers, but it will certainly bring out the real virtual pilots (is "real virtual pilots" an oxymoron?). There is a lot more to flying a plane than most of us realize. Just learning to cross control or crab in a crosswind is going to drive some people nuts at first.

Landing a 109 in a cross wind might lead me to drastic measures.....but I'll go there with a smile.

Splitter

[Romanator21]

My sentiments exactly. I can't wait to have some "real" pilot workload!

I get a greater high from making a good landing than making a kill in this game. But I can see that I'm not the only crazy one

[bf-110]

Bf-109 landing gear was very fragile.It was said that was common to belly land them.

[winny]

Originally Posted by Splitter

(is "real virtual pilots" an oxymoron?).

Splitter

It is... and it isn't, so it is..or is it? I think you've inadvertantly created some wierd oxymoronic loop..

[zakkandrachoff]

Originally Posted by Pablo

I find 180kph works just fine for me everytime. The 109 does take a bit of gatting used to but when you find the sweet spot you should never have any trouble.

true

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by winny

It is... and it isn't, so it is..or is it? I think you've inadvertantly created some wierd oxymoronic loop..

lol, Just wait until I divide by zero....

Yes, BF-110, I would like to know what prompted the Germans to design the plane with that landing gear. In that they are rooted in/near the fuselage but fold outward into the wing, I don't see it as a space saving measure. It would seem that because landing gear mounted on the wings folds into toward the fuselage it is six of one, half dozen of the other.

Or were the wings too weak?

Seems like I should know the answer but I don't lol.

Splitter