PDA

View Full Version : Spifire V, elevator weights



Koohullin
03-07-2004, 06:42 PM
"At a meeting at Boscombe Down on June 30 it was decided to that all F Mk Vs should have an inertial weight installed in the elevator control system, 6.5lb for the VB and 3.5lb for the VA. It was claimed that no condition would arise should any squadron omit the weights when a Mk VA was modified to VB standards, and vice versa. The installation of the weights did not find favour with every squadron, in particular those in No. 11 Group:

Hornchurch: All pilots are beginning to complain

Biggin Hill: Condemned for making Spitfire difficult to land and reducing manoeverability

Kenley: Did not notice the effect of the weight, but opinion of the Spitfire in general low

Tangmere: Do not care for the device but will give at fair trial"

pg 143. Spitfire: The History

Now why would these comments be made if the Spitfire had such bad elevator characteristics without the weight?

Koohullin
03-07-2004, 06:42 PM
"At a meeting at Boscombe Down on June 30 it was decided to that all F Mk Vs should have an inertial weight installed in the elevator control system, 6.5lb for the VB and 3.5lb for the VA. It was claimed that no condition would arise should any squadron omit the weights when a Mk VA was modified to VB standards, and vice versa. The installation of the weights did not find favour with every squadron, in particular those in No. 11 Group:

Hornchurch: All pilots are beginning to complain

Biggin Hill: Condemned for making Spitfire difficult to land and reducing manoeverability

Kenley: Did not notice the effect of the weight, but opinion of the Spitfire in general low

Tangmere: Do not care for the device but will give at fair trial"

pg 143. Spitfire: The History

Now why would these comments be made if the Spitfire had such bad elevator characteristics without the weight?

WWMaxGunz
03-07-2004, 08:44 PM
That is not the problem.

Some of the problem is that some people believe that the Spitfires should have far more elevator response in pitching the nose up or maybe the wings should begin to stall easier based on some quotes.

This is something that should be answered or checked or both, we only hope one of those.

Another problem is that sim fliers in general do not get to feel backforces on the stick which is how a pilot can feel what is happening.

Somewhere in the middle is and may already be a solution.

Those pilots that didn't like the weights were already used to the plane as it was. Look at how some loved the Spits and some did not, so it is all relative to what you are used to and how you use it.

For me, I don't like when people use only the accounts that support their views while dismissing all other evidence. If nothing else, things changed during the war, sometimes rapidly. When a plane with a problem was released then you will find quotes about that, often bitter. That doesn't mean the problem never got fixed. Once fixed the complaints stop but not so often do you find quotes saying so, just later pilots saying they like the plane. Trial by anecdote will only produce a poor sim and I am sure Oleg knows this, it is one reason to have faith in his work -- just one.


Neal

BerkshireHunt
03-08-2004, 04:05 AM
Since at least one Spitfire V is in flyable condition I don't see any reason to speculate about these things. Whatever you want to know should be easily obtainable (- not that I think time should be wasted by anybody on Isegrim's disinformation).
Neal, I have to disagree with you, you cannot resolve a dispute by relying totally on (imperfect) computer algorithms and completely ignoring pilot statements.
This Spit V is being flown by Pete Kynsey over Audley End airfield:
http://server5.uploadit.org/files/Minusmonas-spitV.JPG

His colleague, Charlie Brown, says of this machine:
"The Mark V is undoubtedly the most delightful, capable yet utterly benign aircraft that I have ever flown. All Spitfires speak to you through the controls but none more than this aircraft. It is utterly predictable in its handling and positively inspires me with confidence. Even the take off and landing are easy compared to other aircraft of the same configuration, power and weight. To put the aircraft in perspective, I should perhaps compare it with the de Havilland Chipmunk, a relatively accessible aircraft and one which is often quoted as having the ideal control harmonisation (or feel). Those who have been lucky enough to experience the joy of the Chipmunk will know exactly what I mean."

Doesn't sound like the stall- prone disaster Isegrim would have you believe.

WWMaxGunz
03-08-2004, 04:49 AM
I'm not saying to ignore pilot statements. I'm saying that selecting only those, or parts of those, that support a private agenda is wrong. The whole mass of information or at least as much as can be gathered needs to be considered and that's a tough job.
Not every account is equal. An account from before an early fix was made about the problem fixed tells me little about that AC later. Some pilots were better at knowing those things than others. Yeager went on to become a test pilot only on the strength of his piloting skills and from his record there I'd pay more attention to his accounts of a plane than most others. Ditto with men who spent umpteen hours in a plane whenthey spoke of that plane. But don't ask me to take airspeed readings as gospell because I also know that at high speeds those guages weren't true. 900+ kph dives in prop planes... 109's yet and they pulled out? I want to see ground track data or something a lot more reliable than pitots and guages.

A good AE doesn't rely on pilot accounts the way people on this board like to. The math behind his algorithms is more precise than any pilot accounts. People build planes that fly using it and the quality of the knowlege in the last decades is much better than before computing got cheap. Oleg can check his flight models against both authentic test data, which he uses, and his own calculations which I bet he checked against or derived values from the data itself.

I could trust accounts more. No, I can't. Whose accounts would I use? Yours? Issys? Chimps? Hucks? If I try to use them all then the plane will be a mess of contradictions so then should I pick the ones I like? If I wanna do that, I can go make mods for micro-shaft wannabe-sims.

If there's a problem in the way the plane flies in the sim then I'd rather Oleg sorted it out. As far as the controls balancing... that is also up to Oleg. Maybe a decision has already been made. Maybe those weights are the way it works now or maybe something else or just maybe we will see a change in the patch.


Neal