Throwing some light on rates of turn

[von Brühl]

Rofl, they downgraded it to historic numbers, which apparantly is too much for you?

OP: Sorry for getting this thread derailed, I actually meant were you keeping your speed up at the optimized turning speed once you dropped your flaps? If not, it's very easy for a 109 to deploy partial flaps , maintaining a higher speed, and better turning via that route. As Doggles mentioned, getting too slow is just as detrimental to your turning ability as going too fast.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by von Brühl

Rofl, they downgraded it to historic numbers, which apparantly is too much for you?
.

They are NOT historic and you and the rest of your crowd know it. Be smug all you want, but you fool no one.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by von Brühl

Rofl, they downgraded it to historic numbers, which apparantly is too much for you?

They downgraded it to below the performance of an 87 octane fueled Spit tested at Boscombe Down in March 1940. Data for this aircraft only exists from 10,000ft up. This is N3171.

No, I'm not going to produce evidence, because all of these arguments are immaterial when we consider that no aircraft in the game can achieve its true operational ceiling. If this is unachievable within the bounds of the current game engine, any arguments about performance at any altitude are so much hot air. Whoever you are, and whoever you might think you want to be. How do the FMs compare @ 30,000ft?

When the designers of this so called simulator finally get around to modelling the atmosphere necessary to allow any aircraft modelled to perform as it should at any altitude, I'll start to take notice, but until then, I'm sorry but you're all talking faeces.

[IvanK]

Good point Dutch +1