Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)
-   -   short 109 pilot interview (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=25345)

Bewolf 08-11-2011 10:48 AM

short 109 pilot interview
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b69pO...eature=related

So the 109 is good at yawing? First time I heared that, though it makes sense I suppose.

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 11:33 AM

erm..no.

First of all, that's a Buchon, not a 109, and the pilot is talking the usual "I'm flying the best plane in the world" gibberish.

Does that make much of a difference? Yes. If you look at the Buchon from its side, the propeller axis sits higher than on the 109, which means that most of the slipstream travels above the wings and straight into the rudder, while on the "normal" 109, the same slipstream travels a bit lower.

The "yaw happy" behaviour is mainly cos the plane is really short (not long, as he says) and very light, and yes, probably more nimble than a Mustang at low altitude, but the way he delivers his impressions comes out a bit confusing..

Bottomline: whatever this guy is talking about, it has nothing to do with WW2 fighters, cos he's not flying one.

Pluto 08-11-2011 11:49 AM

I can ....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 322463)
erm..no.

First of all, that's a Buchon, not a 109, and the pilot is talking the usual "I'm flying the best plane in the world" gibberish.

Does that make much of a difference? Yes. If you look at the Buchon from its side, the propeller axis sits higher than on the 109, which means that most of the slipstream travels above the wings and straight into the rudder, while on the "normal" 109, the same slipstream travels a bit lower.

The "yaw happy" behaviour is mainly cos the plane is really short (not long, as he says) and very light, and yes, probably more nimble than a Mustang at low altitude, but the way he delivers his impressions comes out a bit confusing..

Bottomline: whatever this guy is talking about, it has nothing to do with WW2 fighters, cos he's not flying one.

.... only agree
:!:

Rattlehead 08-11-2011 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 322463)
erm..no.

First of all, that's a Buchon,

Horrible plane. :mad:

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rattlehead (Post 322473)
Horrible plane. :mad:

yeah, they look fugly!! http://planetsmilies.net/vomit-smiley-31.gif

JG52Krupi 08-11-2011 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 322475)

Im no aerodynamics engineer but regarding your comment on the yaw and position of the prop I would have thought that having the engine placed lower would lead to better control as the higher prop would lead to more of the surface being affected by prop wash??

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi (Post 322483)
Im no aerodynamics engineer but regarding your comment on the yaw and position of the prop I would have thought that having the engine placed lower would lead to better control as the higher prop would lead to more of the surface being affected by prop wash??

yes, in order to be efficient, a control surface needs to be in a good airflow, with propwash the air gets rammed down along the fuselage and into the control surfaces,making the surface more efficient. The problem is that the movement is turbulent and circular, so if you don't have a long tail surface it might affect lateral stability (and do what he mentions in the video, tending to turn, mainly because there's no trim on the 109/Buchon rudder).

So once again, Messerschmitt engineers got it right, and improved things with the tall rudder versions.

skouras 08-11-2011 01:39 PM

wow
thanks Sternjaeger II
nice info ;-)

ATAG_Doc 08-11-2011 02:45 PM

We're all armchair aces.

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timej31 (Post 322533)
We're all armchair aces.

:confused:

II./JG1_Wilcke 08-11-2011 03:12 PM

All airplanes are beautiful! If given a chance I would not refuse to drive a Buchon.

JG52Krupi 08-11-2011 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by II./JG1_Wilcke (Post 322548)
All airplanes are beautiful! If given a chance I would not refuse to drive a Buchon.

Ban this man NOW! The buchon is an abomination as is a db605 engined spit... ;)

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi (Post 322561)
Ban this man NOW! The buchon is an abomination as is a db605 engined spit... ;)

..really? ;)

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2458/...1a62f00854.jpg

JG52Krupi 08-11-2011 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II (Post 322569)

http://i26.tinypic.com/11w9e7a.jpg

Yes

pupo162 08-11-2011 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi (Post 322590)

Thak looks strange. I like it.

skouras 08-11-2011 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by II./JG1_Wilcke (Post 322548)
All airplanes are beautiful! If given a chance I would not refuse to drive a Buchon.

this Spanish version of the original Famous Bf-109....:-P
i would not refuse to drive it either
ugly as it was..;-)

Blackdog_kt 08-11-2011 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi (Post 322590)

Strange as it looks, the different cowling seems to be putting some missing and much needed machismo and menacing looks back into that otherwise girly-looking aircraft.

/ducks and covers :-P

What can i say, i like the brutish ones better. I'm not RAF-averse, the Spits just look fragile by nature. Hawker designs on the other hand not only mean business but look the part too, and everyone looking at a Typhoon or Hurricane can see it ;-)

JG52Krupi 08-11-2011 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 322622)
Strange as it looks, the different cowling seems to be putting some missing and much needed machismo and menacing looks back into that otherwise girly-looking aircraft.

/ducks and covers :-P

What can i say, i like the brutish ones better. I'm not RAF-averse, the Spits just look fragile by nature. Hawker designs on the other hand not only mean business but look the part too, and everyone looking at a Typhoon or Hurricane can see it ;-)

+1

Rattlehead 08-11-2011 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 322622)
Strange as it looks, the different cowling seems to be putting some missing and much needed machismo and menacing looks back into that otherwise girly-looking aircraft.

/ducks and covers :-P

What can i say, i like the brutish ones better. I'm not RAF-averse, the Spits just look fragile by nature. Hawker designs on the other hand not only mean business but look the part too, and everyone looking at a Typhoon or Hurricane can see it ;-)

Yeah, actually that particular marriage doesn't look at all bad. Much, much better than the Buchon, imo.

Blackdog, I guess you're also a fan of planes like the P-47 and the Corsair then, considering their rather brutish looks?

Sternjaeger II 08-11-2011 07:45 PM

I actually think that the cowling used for the Frankenspit came from a Bf110.

JG52Krupi 08-11-2011 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rattlehead (Post 322635)
Yeah, actually that particular marriage doesn't look at all bad. Much, much better than the Buchon, imo.

Blackdog, I guess you're also a fan of planes like the P-47 and the Corsair then, considering their rather brutish looks?

Im gonna say 190 the most brutish looking aircraft out there :D

Blackdog_kt 08-11-2011 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rattlehead (Post 322635)
Yeah, actually that particular marriage doesn't look at all bad. Much, much better than the Buchon, imo.

Blackdog, I guess you're also a fan of planes like the P-47 and the Corsair then, considering their rather brutish looks?

Yup. It doesn't have to be ugly, just business-like (i mean, the mosquito is good looking but it's still manly enough :-P ). When i see elegant lines i think more in terms of "private pilot's ride" than "killing machine". That's why i also prefer the early mustangs and 47s to the late ones (i like the razorback look) or the 47s and 38s to the mustangs overall.

Nothing to do with the aircraft's actual capabilities of course, just a matter of taste :grin:

As a final note i'd have to agree with Krupi.
The 190 takes the cake because the bad-guy looks match the "stats" (firepower, durability and way of employment). It's what i was flying in the previous IL2 series almost exclusively (mostly the Antons, not so much the Doras) even when i wasn't that good in it initially or was outclassed by other fighters.

It helped me learn a lot, because by sticking with one ride against all kinds of match-ups and being determined to make it work i had to read up on all kinds of different tactics.

In CoD i'm a bit more flexible because we don't have 190s yet and also because the aircraft have a lot of individuality and it's a pity to miss it now that the systems are also modeled, plus the bombers are way too much fun to ignore.

Well, fun times ahead is all i can say. :grin:

Rattlehead 08-11-2011 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi (Post 322674)
Im gonna say 190 the most brutish looking aircraft out there :D

It's a brutal beauty. :)

Rattlehead 08-11-2011 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt (Post 322713)
Yup. It doesn't have to be ugly, just business-like (i mean, the mosquito is good looking but it's still manly enough :-P ). When i see elegant lines i think more in terms of "private pilot's ride" than "killing machine". That's why i also prefer the early mustangs and 47s to the late ones (i like the razorback look) or the 47s and 38s to the mustangs overall.

Gotcha. Those early model P-47's definitely had a distinctive, no-nonsense look about them.
For purely looks, my vote for American planes would go to the P-38. I love the look of that plane.

Richie 08-12-2011 06:06 AM

For the people who think 109s are 2nd rate aircraft. Watch the fourth video especially but the whole thing is the best "Battle Of Britain" Documentary I've ever seen :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDDeLRy7UM0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5D49ohukdA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IHLZzEe5L4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8FsRU0fv_A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MW0irwx8A4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIcWxowigxY

Rattlehead 08-12-2011 10:01 AM

I'll have to watch these when I get in tonight, but thanks for posting the vids.

Regarding the 109, I personally haven't heard or read of anyone regarding them as second rate, but I was watching the Dogfights program on History one night when an American pilot, I forget who now, said they referred to the 109 as "easy meat." He had a bit of a cocky attitude which I didn't like.

I felt that the remark was quite disrespectful not only to the 109, but also to the German pilots, who were by that time mostly young, poorly trained and hopelessly outnumbered.

Sternjaeger II 08-12-2011 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rattlehead (Post 322879)
I'll have to watch these when I get in tonight, but thanks for posting the vids.

Regarding the 109, I personally haven't heard or read of anyone regarding them as second rate, but I was watching the Dogfights program on History one night when an American pilot, I forget who now, said they referred to the 109 as "easy meat." He had a bit of a cocky attitude which I didn't like.

I felt that the remark was quite disrespectful not only to the 109, but also to the German pilots, who were by that time mostly young, poorly trained and hopelessly outnumbered.

he was probably one of the late stage pilots, by 1944 most of the experten were gone. But yes, in the end even pilots are human beings, and respect was a bit hit and miss on all sides..

Al Schlageter 08-12-2011 11:05 AM

Approximately 2/3 of the Experten with 50 or more claims survived the war.

Richie 08-12-2011 11:25 AM

I'm to lazy to count it up


http://www.acesofww2.com/germany/Germany.htm

Rattlehead 08-12-2011 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richie (Post 322900)

Ha...one of my favourite pages on the internet.

speculum jockey 08-13-2011 04:54 AM

I don't really see how the pilot was wrong. It was well known that you could kick the rudder on the 109 and get a hell of a lot of yaw out of it, despite the smallish rudder. Although I do agree that he's wrong with the "take on 5-6 mustangs". I can't think of a fighter mismatch in WWII that would go that way without taking something from 1939 and putting it up against something from 45.

Richie 08-13-2011 09:35 AM

I say a G10, G14/AS, G6/AS can take on any P-51 with a pilot that knows how to fly it well.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgHBuELUoUQ

Sternjaeger II 08-14-2011 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speculum jockey (Post 323209)
I don't really see how the pilot was wrong. It was well known that you could kick the rudder on the 109 and get a hell of a lot of yaw out of it, despite the smallish rudder. Although I do agree that he's wrong with the "take on 5-6 mustangs". I can't think of a fighter mismatch in WWII that would go that way without taking something from 1939 and putting it up against something from 45.

I don't think he's wrong (apart for a couple of minor things),he just doesn't talk about a plane that we can relate to. Guys,don't forget that most pilots are not engineers as well,so they dont get a complete understanding of why a plane flies in a certain way.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.