109 F4 G2 vs Spitfire mk IX some maths.

Discussion in 'Warbirds International' started by -kopi-, Apr 24, 2006.

  1. Mcloud

    Mcloud Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    2,400
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Taken from this site
    http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/spitcom.htm

    Both the Spitfire and Messerschmitt became harder to control at high speeds, with greater and greater strength needed on the control column as the speed increased. However the problem was much worse in the Messerschmitt and in the high speed fights that developed in the Battle of Britain the Spitfire had the advantage. It was found that the fabric covered ailerons of the Spitfire caused the increase in force needed on the control column due to the bulging of the fabric at high speed. When metal covered ailerons were fitted the handling of the Spitfire at high speed improved greatly. Unfortunately this discovery did not take place in time to help British pilots in the summer of 1940. The Messerschmitt's elevator control was very heavy at high speed and there are reports that Spitfire pilots would escape from 109s by diving towards the ground and pulling up at the last moment knowing that the German would find it much harder to pull back on the stick to escape destruction. The Spitfire was capable of being pulled out of a dive with such high "g" forces that the pilot would black out (for only a second or so), meaning the pilot, not the aircraft, was the limiting factor, this is how it should be for a fighter. The Messershmitt's heavy elevator control at high speed meant that a German pilot would not be able to pull enough "g" to black out, meaning the aircraft itself was the limiting factor.

    I know you will argue kopi, I don't care, this is my last post for this thread. Like I said 109 and spit were closely matched imo, early 109 was mb better than spit, later spitfires were better than 109s. Yes I know the difference between a tight turn upwards and steady spiral climb, spit was better than 109 at both. If you play at FH a couple of years or more you will think this is not true. Also at FH, Spit XIV is probably worst handling aircraft on red side, 109K handles VERY nicely, This is total bullshit, irl 109K handles like shit, Spit XIV handling was way better.

    chickens vs goats is more fun topic )
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2006
  2. PressLuftHammer

    PressLuftHammer FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    13,933
    Location:
    Ekaterinburg (Russia)
    Its man is incompetantal in airdinamic. He got only one Cl for Spit I and 109E. If u can see my link Clmax can many different even in one plan.
    This man got maximal Clmax for 109E and minimal Clmax for SpitI.
    See source NACA test SpitV (SpitV: 1.12 from "Stalling characteristics of Supermarine Spitfire VA airplane" 1)
    Clmax=1,12 for gliding, power off and flaps and gear up.
    Cmax=2,0 for climb maximal power flaps and gera up.
    But this man got only minimal Clmax.



    Im not this source doc ->109E: 1.48 from full scale Windtunnel test in Charlais Meudan 2)

    Karson Incompetental

    You can read airdinamics book and check this.
    Believe me Karson is woodpecker and write for woordpecker's :)

    Im don see about turn performance :)



    RELAX, STOP SMOKE GRASS !!!!!!
     
  3. bizerk

    bizerk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2001
    Messages:
    2,394
    @ fatale, Wing loadings for Typhoon I have found in the book entitled " Combat Development in WWII, Fighter Aircraft" by Alfred Price ISBN 0-85368-926-1. In the book they did comparative flight trials with the Typhoon IB against the Tempest V. here is what it stated.

    The Comparison is fairly close and clear because the aircraft are fairly similar, differing chiefly in wing section only. The wing loadings are similar (37.7lbs for the Tempest, and 39.7lbs for the Typhoon). here is the comparisons.

    Speeds. according to the official sped curves, the maximum speeds of the Tempest at all heights are 15-20 mph faster. this is also true for all intermediate settings.

    Climbs. The Tempest climbs at a slightly steeper angle and at the same airspeed producing 200-300 ft increase in the maximum rate of climb. because of its greater cleanliness, its zoom climb is much better.

    Dive. For the same reasons as the zoom climb, the Tempest pulls ahead. As the speed is increased it does so more rapidly. In fact it has the best accelleration in the dive yet seen at this unit.

    Turning circle. very similar. Anydifference appears to be in favor of the Typhoon. This is to slight to alter the combat tactics.

    rate of roll. The Tempest has the better rate of roll at all speeds.

    Conclusions. taken all round, the Tempest V is a great improvement on the typhoon IB.

    Interestingly I find that the Typhoon with a higher wingloading according to the comparison has a better turning performance. Also on earlier wing loadings i quoted from another book the wingloading for the tempest is 38lbs for i believe they have been rounded up because this book states 37.7lbs. this may be the case with the other wing loading numbers if not spot on exact! are rounded up.

    also many other comparisons of aircraft in this book they are

    190A-3 vs Spitfire VB, Spitfire IX,P-51IA,P-38F

    P-51B vs Spitfire IX, Spitfire XIV, Fw 190A-3,Bf 109G

    Tempest V vs Typhoon IB (Mentioned above)
    Tempest V vs P-51B, Spitfire XIV, Fw 190A-3,Bf 109G

    A6M5/ Zeke 52 (early model with no armour protection or self-sealing fuel tanks. later models did incorporate some at the expense of some handling performance). Zeke was comapred against these aircraft.

    A6M5 vs F4U-1D (Corsair), F6F-5 (Hellcat), FM-2 (WIldcat), Seafire L. IIC,
     
  4. looseleaf

    looseleaf Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2006
    Messages:
    5,016


    Please do NOT tell me the dog's name is "muk".
     
  5. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    If we have here BOB models in FH then they should have the same roll at high speed or 109 was better. Ofcourse i agree that later spit had greater roll.
    Imo 109s climbed better then spitfire except 109 g6 to spit 9 and spit mk 14(which is porked siruasly but let us leave that for another topic ok?) to 109 g14. Better climber will be better in spiral climb.

    PressLuftHammer you missunderstood somthing i guess.
    This is an article wrote by Carson
    http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/breed.html
    This polemic with that article
    http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/Carson/Carson.html


    But can you see how Mr Wiliams is changin data in favor of spit? Thats why Mr Williams data isnt relaible.

    I agree. Clmax for spit seems to low.
    Got two questions. How can a plane with 32lb/sq ft turn 25s while 31lb/sq ft turns 18.5s?
    And why spit 9c that should turn 18,5 s in FH turns at 17 s?????

    AGAIN AND AIGAIN AND AGIAN FIX THE GOD DAMN SPIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  6. vasco

    vasco Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2005
    Messages:
    2,455
    i know nothing about this problem, that's why i'm asking you (because at this momment i'd rather give credit to tests, than calculations): is the wing loading the only thing that influences the turn performance? aren't there other factors as well? thanks
     
  7. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    The problem is getting right data for CL max. Mine puts spit in disadvatnage. Presslufthammer puts 109 in disadvatage. Still spitfire mk 9c turns 1,5 s faster then it should acording to soviet test.

    SO FIX THE GOD DAMN SPIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  8. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    I caculated cl max for 109 g2 (just for fun :) )from that soviet test where time was 20 s radius 290m and speed 328km/h(91m/s).
    I used 1.1 kg/m^3( it should be somthing like that at 1000m ;) ) for air density.
    Cl is 1,25.
    Now using that CL max for other 109 models i got:
    E4 (weight 2540 kg) time 17s r 247m
    F2 ( 2790kg) 18,6 270
    F4 ( 2890 kg) 19,2 279
    G2 ( 3000 kg) 20 290
    Suprisly these numbers seems to be quite good but still its just for fun :)

    Presslufthammer can you post radius and TAS speed of turn for spit mk9c so i could do the same for spitfire?
    Anyway using spit mk9 c turn time 18,5 and spit mk 9c lf radius 235m and speed 305km/h as reference we get clmax= 1,2 at speed 284 km/h r 235m
    1a(weight 2812 kg) time 15,4s r 194m
    Vc( 3000kg) 16,5 207
    IXc ( 3400 kg) 18,6 234

    Just for a tghought and just for fun.

    BUT STILL FIX THE GOD DAMN SPIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  9. PressLuftHammer

    PressLuftHammer FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    13,933
    Location:
    Ekaterinburg (Russia)
    I' receive Cl=1,23

    Only one moument F2/F4 had combat power engine DB.601N 1020PS (at S.L) DB.601E 1180PS (at S.L) DB.605A 1310PS (at S.L.) and speed in turn is less. But radius is now right my calculate F2 - 267m, and F4 274m

    I have time speed and radius only

    I use Cl=1,18 weigth from Soviet test for Spit IX LF 3292 kg
    Again power Merlin 45 for Spit Vc is less (less speed) . I'm receive radius 212m and time 18 sec.

    SMOKING GRASS VERY DANGER FOR YOU HEALTH !!!! :)
     
  10. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    With 1.23 cl max 109 g2 turn time is 20,3 and radius is 295m so to me 1,25 is more precice.

    But you still dont get it do you?

    SPIT TURNED IN SOVIET TEST 18,5s IN FH IT TURNS 17s

    SO FIX THE GOD DAMN SPIT!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  11. -bw-

    -bw- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,661
    Location:
    Moscow

    Логи с Та арены -3 круга установившегося виража на 1000 метрах c WEP на 100% топлива и +- 10метров не больше отклонение.
    У меня 18,5с
     
  12. -frog-

    -frog- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,936
    Location:
    Świdnik, Poland
    And what are the data from TA for the 109F2/F4 and 109G2?
     
  13. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    Логи с Та арены -3 круга установившегося виража на 1000 метрах c WEP на 100% топлива и +- 10метров не больше отклонение.
    У меня 18,5с

    There is no way you can get only 18,5 in spit 9c. You are not pulling enoguh or just lying. I always get 17 s.
     
  14. -bw-

    -bw- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,661
    Location:
    Moscow
    rename txt-> zip
    внутри логи гос. испытаний :)

    Сделаешь аналогичные
    и там будет 17с- продолжим разговор.
     

    Attached Files:

  15. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    Here you go a track where spit is doing full 360 in 17 s. Get a stoper count the time AND FIX THE GOD DAMN SPIT.

    P.S if you didnt notice we arre talking about spit 9c from 1942 not LF!!!!!
     

    Attached Files:

  16. -bw-

    -bw- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,661
    Location:
    Moscow
    в последний раз объясняю.
    Мне не нужен трек.

    Мне нужны логи с ТА.

    Заходишь на ТА - alt 1000m+- 10m WEP fuel 100% no flaps
    Делаешь минимум 3 круга -логи сюда.
    .startlog <name>
    .stoplog

    Вот когда по логам у тебя получится установившийся вираж 17сек - поговорим.
     
  17. -kopi-

    -kopi- Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    370
    There you go. Log and an xls file with Azimuth noted and time of turn.
     

    Attached Files:

  18. bizerk

    bizerk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2001
    Messages:
    2,394
    Kopi I understand your grief, I mean your only in the top 10 on the score board. If the Spitfire is making your life miserable avoid it and deal with other red targets drones. Try for instance hunting the F6F which manuevers worse then a B-17 (IMHO since the fuel tanks were placed differently the center of gravity is way off) okay I'll say my share.

    PLEASE FIX THE GOD FOR SAKEN F6F!!

    give me a break kopi, have you not seen the A6M's Ki-43's Ki-44's. Is it me or do these planes just absorb battle damage better then the IL-2? I mean how many times I have seen the Jap planes fly off looking like a sprinkler when in real life all those leaks surely would have caught fire and doomed the pilot to death or a bail out. What is your take on it??
     
  19. Red Ant

    Red Ant Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2002
    Messages:
    4,921
    Location:
    Germany
    I agree that there are other planes which are not modeled correctly, but come on bullet, kopi has argued his point pretty well. If a Spit IX took 18.5 secs for a full turn IRL and it only takes 17 here then by all means something should be done about that!
     
  20. -bw-

    -bw- FH Beta Tester

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2000
    Messages:
    1,661
    Location:
    Moscow
    по твоему логу Alt max=1001 Alt min=956
    С такой разницей высот я тебе и за 16с развернусь.
    Это не установившийся вираж.

    Еще раз :3 круга на 1000М +-10М тренируйся :)