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.

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.

I can ....
 

.... only agree
:!:

Horrible plane. :mad:

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

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.

wow
thanks Sternjaeger II
nice info ;-)

We're all armchair aces.

:confused:

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... ;)

..really? ;)

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

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

Yes

Thak looks strange. I like it.

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

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

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?

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

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

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:

It's a brutal beauty. :)

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.

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

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..

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

I'm to lazy to count it up


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

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

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 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

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.