The 'Great Debate' - Spitfire vs BF109

[MiG-3U]

Originally Posted by lane

Get a clue. That document is a hack. It is not a Spitfire I loading and C.G. diagram. A.P. 1565E corresponds to Spitfire V documentation. A cursory examination of the text will confirm that to anyone who knows what they are looking at. The 'IA' and 'IB' in the title block are obviously photo-shopped. You should be ashamed, but won’t be I’m certain.

The only hack there is metric conversions of the moments because it was used to create Spitfire model for Targetware:

http://target4today.com/forum/viewto...&showtopic=581

The late war documentation for the early Spitfires (I, II and V) is basicly same.

As usual, Crumpp misinterpret the content of the table. It actually shows that the use of the bob weighs (inertia device) depends on CoG, propeller and tail configuration. Note that his original argument was that Bob-weights have absolutely nothing to do with CG limits:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=245

And it was the RAE report 2535 which proves that the NACA MAC calculation was in error (see dimensions p. 7), just like NACA admited the possibility in the their Spitfire report.

http://aerade.cranfield.ac.uk/ara/dl...rc/rm/2535.pdf

Anyway, you can continue to argue with him as long as you will, no matter what evidence you use, he will come back...