Auto-Pitch control.

[droz]

Is Auto-pitch control available in complex engine management for the 109? I know there was always an option to mess with pitch control in original IL2, but was auto-pitch by default. I'm curious if the 109 actually had an auto-prop pitch, or was it just a game mechanic?

It does get difficult managing prop pitch in the heat of battle.

Also, is it possible to get some tutorials on the proper engine management of all the aircraft in game?

[Kurfurst]

The first 109Es (production started end 193 came without constant speed units.
The pilot manually adjusted propeller blade angle constantly at any angle, to match engine RPM and torque.

There were two systems for this: the first one, which we have on our early E-3, was a lever on the dashboard, and ideally suited pilots born with three hands.

On the second system had the propellor blade angle set by a thumb switch located on the throttle. This one become standard for the rest of the war.

Finally, automatic propellor govenor system was introduced:

"The constant speed airscrew is fully automatic and requires no operationby the pilot, as r.p.m. and pitch setting are governed by the throttle opening and engine load. This is a great advantage in combat, being one thing less for the pilot to worry about. He can, however, control the pitch manually in the event of failure of the automatic control."

This automatic system appears to be introduced around late 1939, or perhaps earlier; what is known that the December 1939 already describes it, along with aircraft armor. Evidently not all older production Emils were retrofitted by the BoB started, so they had manual control (like our E-3) though it was eventually retrofitted to older Emils.

Since production of the E-4 (the most important type during the BoB) commenced in May 1940, so I suppose when the E-4 will be introduced it will feature the auto prop pitch and armor.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by Kurfurst

Since production of the E-4 (the most important type during the BoB) commenced in May 1940, so I suppose when the E-4 will be introduced it will feature the auto prop pitch and armor.

you sure?

Hooton in Eagle in Flames gives the percentage losses of 109s by subtype:

July
E1 - 44%
E3 - 30%
E4 - 20%

August
E1 - 40%
E3 - 8%
E4 - 52%

September
E1 - 38%
E3 - 1%
E4 - 61%

October
E1 - 36%
E3 - 2%
E4 - 62%

and from Kurfust, over at ubi a while ago,

"I have some actual numbers. On 31 August 1940, fighter units (excluding JG 77) reported 375 E-1s, 125 E-3s, 339 E-4s and 32 E-7s on strength, indicating that most of the E-3s had been already converted to E-4 standard. JG 77 had around 100-125 aircraft with it, but for the rest of the units, its 75% cannon E-3/4/7, the rest are all MG E-1s. The E-1 and E-3 were produced parallel and in about equal numbers from the end of 1938, but by mid-1940, the production of the E-1 stopped, replaced by the E-4 and then the E-7."

and

In Ulrich Steinhilper's book 'Spitfire on My Tail', he relates quite clearly that they, JG52 didn't get there first cannon armed 109's until mid september , and then only 2, which were hand me downs from another unit. Rest of the unit bar these 2 planes was still in E1's.

Seems to me the E1 was the most important, certainly until september

of course, i understand why you don't what this too public.....

[Kurfurst]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

you sure?

Seems to me the E1 was the most important, certainly until september:cool

Look at the loss figures.

All E-3s were converted to E-4 rather quickly, and don't forget that the E-7 is just an E-4 that can carry a droptank, too. In any case, the only difference between E-1 (all MG) E-3 (MG FF) and E-4 (MG FF/M - could fire mine shells) was armament. Since E-4s were of the newest production, they had all the latest upgrades, but the other were retrofitted quickly. The first E-1s produced in 1938 were without armor and CSU, but if you read British reports of crashed aircraft, they found both to be present in E-1s in 1940.

Personally I like the E-1. It will be fun. There's but a 4 mm plate between a pilot in a Spitfire and four MG 17s and their 3000 rounds of custom-belted 7.92 mm AP..

I'd risk to say that the E-1 will be mighty unpopular with Red on servers for this reason.

Originally Posted by fruitbat

of course, i understand why you don't what this too public.....

Yup, that's why I posted it, riiiiight, Sherlock.

[fruitbat]

I'm just poking fun, lol.

personally, i'm really looking forward to flying the E1.

it will really cool flying the E1 through july, aug, and then getting an E4.

I do however think that there is a perception with many, that the E1 wasn't in the BoB.....

looking at the loss figures, combined with the figures you posted, its got to be somewhere midway through aug-sept that the E4 became the most common, the loss figures and the figs you posted don't quite tally though....

[Kurfurst]

Ooops..

Yeah I guess the perception is because just about any BoB book goes into great details comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the 'Emil's cannon' and the 'RAFs eight gun battery'. No mention anywhere of all MG Emils. Gee, I am a revisionist again, THE BOOKS say it goddamnit!

Seriously, the thing is just that: if they changed a spring in the MG FF cannon on an E-3, it became an MG FF/M, and that Emil become an E-4 because it had an ff/m.. the rest of the details were all shared accross the model line.

Changes in guns, engine and radio made a 'new' model, not other changes introduced in the midtime in production.. and these didn't have to be radical. The G-4 for example was just a G-2 with VHF radio, and the G-6 was just a G-4 with 13mm MGs... hell the 109G itself was just a 109F-4 with a new engine! In fact the spare part list of the Gustav only lists new parts, and otherwise refers back the to F parts list..