PDA

View Full Version : b109 concrete elevator response at high speeds



luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 10:16 AM
In as few words as possible, "is this accurate?"
The bf109 was regarded as a boom and zoom plane. Currently, the bf109g14 handles the best at high speeds. Why does the g14 handle better than the k4? Why do all bfs turn to concrete at speeds over 500kph? I could understand 650kph+ but 500kph?
Again, "is this accurate?"

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 10:16 AM
In as few words as possible, "is this accurate?"
The bf109 was regarded as a boom and zoom plane. Currently, the bf109g14 handles the best at high speeds. Why does the g14 handle better than the k4? Why do all bfs turn to concrete at speeds over 500kph? I could understand 650kph+ but 500kph?
Again, "is this accurate?"

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

NorrisMcWhirter
05-06-2004, 10:39 AM
Hi,

Don't waste your breath, mate - it's LW.

Cheers,
Norris

================================================== ==========

: Chris Morris - Blue Jam :
http://cabinessence.cream.org/

: More irreverence :
http://www.tvgohome.com/

: You've seen them... :
www.chavscum.co.uk (http://www.chavscum.co.uk)

Franzen
05-06-2004, 10:46 AM
Use your trim, it works for me.

Fritz Franzen

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 10:49 AM
Even if you are an exceptionally gifted virtual pilot, like myself, trim is still not sufficient to ensure victory.

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

Franzen
05-06-2004, 10:54 AM
Sure, there's much more to it but I thought you were asking about the elevator issue. I find the 109's are good for BnZ. Anything done in a 109 will take more practice and patience than something done in most other planes in FB. I know 5 or 6 guyz that only fly 109's and they are aces. It's very rare they get shotdone by anyone else outside there little group.

Fritz Franzen

Fritz Franzen

Dmitri9mm
05-06-2004, 10:54 AM
The bf 109 was notoriously known for stiffening up the controls at high speeds, so it seems quite realistic.
Another problem is that on the P-38 the elevator stiffens up in a dive at speeds exeed√¬*ng 600km/h. This is not realistic since the P-38 J introduced a hydraulic aid to the elevator controls, reducing the amount of force needed on the stick by 75%. Please model this in the game some day.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/tully_78th/legalsig.jpg
The n00b, the n00b, the n00b is on fire.
We don't need no Ponys let the ************ burn. Burn ************! BURN!

Franzen
05-06-2004, 10:57 AM
Sorry, I forgot to mention, the aces I referred to don't bother with BnZ too much. I use it sometimes but prefer to TnB.

Fritz Franzen

TgD Thunderbolt56
05-06-2004, 11:16 AM
I don't know how "realistic" they are, but there are numerous accounts of them "stiffening" to point of severe pilot trauma.



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 11:22 AM
at what speed? dont contribute if you dont know anything.

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

Franzen
05-06-2004, 11:26 AM
Hey Luftw4ffles, you catch more flies with honey. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz Franzen

TgD Thunderbolt56
05-06-2004, 11:29 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/1241.gif

7 posts...I wonder what your name was before. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

Zyzbot
05-06-2004, 11:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luftw4ffles:
In as few words as possible, "is this accurate?"
The bf109 was regarded as a boom and zoom plane. Currently, the bf109g14 handles the best at high speeds. Why does the g14 handle better than the k4? Why do all bfs turn to concrete at speeds over 500kph? I could understand 650kph+ but 500kph?
Again, "is this accurate?"

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I found this comment on the 109 elevator for what it is worth:

Elevator

This is an exceptionally good control at low air speeds, being fairly heavy and not over-sensitive. Above 250 mph, however, it becomes too heavy, so that maneuvrability is seriously restricted. When diving at 400 mph a pilot, pulling very hard, cannot put on enough 'g' to black himself out; stick force -'g' probably esceeds 20 lb/g in the dive. "

XyZspineZyX
05-06-2004, 11:54 AM
My opinion is that the 109 is simply "put under a spotlight" to exhibit this kind of behavior, and other planes that had similar problems (and that's just about ALL planes, except for a few late war speed demons that had good high speed elevator response) get a pass on it.

Even P-47s, the great divers they were, had stick force problems when pulling out of long, hard dives. But, nearly every plane besides the 109 (that's Spits, Yaks, MiGs, Lavochkins and P-planes) can go from a moderate speed dive to high vertical climb in about 2 seconds at moderately fast speeds. Meanwhile, with a 109, you have to "apply by mail for a direction change" and "wait a few hours" before any you get any kind of elevator response.

The effect is that you can't properly boom and zoom unless you are unseen. All an enemy has to do, if he's alerted to your presence, is pull up and loop just before you get into range. No need to even break turn (which is a more standard and historical response). There's no way the 109 can stay with a plane that pulls up, and by the time you do get any elevator authority, he's likely above or even looped in behind you.

Secondly, the pull up is so slowed, that you blow all the energy you've gained in the dive simply recovering, rather than using it to efficiently gain altitude or position. You certainly can't "work" a plane with an energy advantage because you can't hope to counter his breaks with upward pulls of your own, as was done historically. Double whammy.

Coupled with the fact that you usually can't SEE anything below you that's not *directly* below you and at close range (a big problem with this games' graphics system) and you've pretty much gutted the Bf109 of all its historical plusses.

Nice job, Oleg and crew.

Franzen
05-06-2004, 12:06 PM
Maybe I understand your problem Luftw4ffles. When I BnZ I don't verticly dive on my target. I use a bit of an angle and an arc. As I'm descending and picking up speed I also start pulling back on the stick and time myself to meet his 6 oclock high.

The method to my madness is simple; I like to keep control and energy. If the enemy does pull up or turn don't worry about it. Use you speed and energy to remain untouchable. Get your alt back and relax. He won't catch you because he lost too much energy to avoid you. Be patient and try again. If you're are in too much of a hurry to kill, your chances of being killed become much greater. Try to control the situation. My enemy usually gets to anxious and makes fatal mistakes. All I lost was a bit of fuel. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz Franzen

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 01:02 PM
Im not asking for advice about how to fly, trust me I dont need it(look at my sig). Rather, Im encouraging an intellectual discussion about history.

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

Franzen
05-06-2004, 01:16 PM
History or FM's in a pc game?

Fritz Franzen

BlitzPig_DDT
05-06-2004, 01:17 PM
The P-51 had heavy elevator controls. The pilots called it a true 2 hander.

The report that started this **** with the 109 was made from an Emil test flight. The F-K were redesigned and not much worse than the P-51. The biggest fault being the tight cockpit limiting the amount of body the pilot could involve in man handling the stick.

By and large, people are down on the LW. (indeed, anything WWII German) Anything that indicates a short coming in their products is remembered and in cases like this, simulated to the 9s. The short comings of our own stuff however, is not so well remembered. Much like the advantages of the LW stuff, our own equipment's short comings are overlooked and in risk of being lost to antiquity.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

perioikos
05-06-2004, 01:18 PM
In addition, the cramped nature of the cockpit, and the smaller size of the stick, meant that the control stick had a more limited travel range and that one couldn't exert as much force on the stick as was possible in other larger aircraft.

Franzen
05-06-2004, 01:22 PM
DDT, you have a very interesting point, sad but true.

Fritz Franzen

clint-ruin
05-06-2004, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The report that started this **** with the 109 was made from an Emil test flight. The F-K were redesigned and not much worse than the P-51. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Butch2k says:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=849101593&r=235103593#235103593

Necessary force for achieving deflection at speed and alt on Bf 109G-5
400 km/h @ 5500m @ 2.5‚? deflection &gt; 6kg
530 km/h @ 5500m @ 2‚? deflection &gt; 20 kg
610 km/h @ 4000m @ 1.4‚? deflection &gt; 28 kg


28 kilograms is 61.7 pounds.

I believe we have 50 pounds stick pressure modelled, or thereabouts, for most AC.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

Hartford688
05-06-2004, 01:29 PM
Per the test pilot Eric Brown the G had "extremely heavy" elevators..."thus although the Bf109G pilots tended to use a bunt into a steep dive as an escape manoevre in dogfights, they had some very heavy rudder and elevator control forces to contend with as speed built up and pull-outs at low altitudes had to be made with extreme circumspection"

Franzen
05-06-2004, 01:29 PM
Therefor making the 109 FM easier to fly at high speeds than in reality.

Thx Clint Ruin

Fritz Franzen

Xnomad
05-06-2004, 02:14 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Zyzbot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by luftw4ffles:
In as few words as possible, "is this accurate?"
The bf109 was regarded as a boom and zoom plane. Currently, the bf109g14 handles the best at high speeds. Why does the g14 handle better than the k4? Why do all bfs turn to concrete at speeds over 500kph? I could understand 650kph+ but 500kph?
Again, "is this accurate?"

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I found this comment on the 109 elevator for what it is worth:

Elevator

This is an exceptionally good control at low air speeds, being fairly heavy and not over-sensitive. Above 250 mph, however, it becomes too heavy, so that maneuvrability is seriously restricted. When diving at 400 mph a pilot, pulling very hard, cannot put on enough 'g' to black himself out; stick force -'g' probably esceeds 20 lb/g in the dive. "<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I remember correctly this quote is from a test on an Emil?

http://www.xnomad.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/sig.jpg

Abbuzze
05-06-2004, 02:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Elevator

This is an exceptionally good control at low air speeds, being fairly heavy and not over-sensitive. Above 250 mph, however, it becomes too heavy, so that maneuvrability is seriously restricted. When diving at 400 mph a pilot, pulling very hard, cannot put on enough 'g' to black himself out; stick force -'g' probably esceeds 20 lb/g in the dive. "<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If I remember correctly this quote is from a test on an Emil?
[/QUOTE]

If you are able to read german take a look at this official test.

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/structures/tails/109.05e43_report/05e43-p1.htm
Just klick on the right or left side to go fore/backward.
(it‚¬īs from http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/index1024.htm )

There is a simple solution for the nonablity of the 109 to pull out of steep dives... If you dive with the wrong trimset, you will be not able to pull out of the dive (just like the testpilot in this test) so you have to use the trimwheele to get the nose up, but this was dangerous, cause the 109 had a real good tim (it works like in jets today!!) So if you use the tim the plane react that violant that you have to press the stick FOREWARD(!) to be not blacked out!!!

With the correct trimsetting it was not a problem to pull out of a dive, with just using the stick... thats it.

Just forgot it: with a trimsetting of +1‚?45' it was not possible to pull out of a dive, they tried different settings and with a +1‚?15' a dive recovery with just the stick was possible...

Also interesting- both flightpaths
a) with the wrong timset and use of the trimwheel
b) with correct trimset and just using the stick
are identical, so the pilots tendency to be blacked out was the limitating factor- neither the stickforces, nor the durability of the 109...

I./JG53 PikAs Abbuzze
http://www.jg53-pikas.de/

http://mitglied.lycos.de/p123/bilder/Ilegalsig.gif
couldn‚¬īt restist http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

hobnail
05-06-2004, 06:03 PM
An interesting aside was that Adolf Galland stated that his preferred attack using the 109 with alt advantage was to dive behind and below the bandit and attack on the upwards end of the pullout. One can immediately see that this would reduce the loss of altitude advantage from the Bf109‚'s high ‚"sink rate‚"Ě on pullout.

Add to that that you‚'re already climbing when your victim becomes aware of you, rather than diving past.

BlitzPig_DDT
05-06-2004, 06:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franzen:
Therefor making the 109 FM easier to fly at high speeds than in reality.

Thx Clint Ruin

Fritz Franzen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Incorrect all around. The roll rates of some aircraft (for example) are based on 30lbs.

Furthermore, the late Gs and K become unusable at 400kph (it's very noticable there - that is not fast) and it's currently based on TAS, not IAS as well.

Which brings us back to - the 109 is unduly penalized. While simultaneously other planes get off the hook (in this area and others).

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

XyZspineZyX
05-06-2004, 06:38 PM
To address a couple points being made in this discussion...

1) You don't need to "dive vertically" on a target to get the concrete elevator. I have been at this for quite a while, and know enough to always throttle back and not exceed about 30 degrees in a "classic" B&Z dive. Doesn't matter; once you're above about 400kph (that's only 240mph) you start to feel the effects. I wouldn't argue it so much if we're talking 300 - 350 mph, as that's "fast" for all but a late war ride... but sluggishness at a speed that's a simple "level speed" and "attack speed"...well, it has the intended effect.

2) Those of you who are trotting out 109G statistics: the G has a very different fight envelope and handling characteristic than the Es and Fs. It is also quite a bit faster. The IL-2 109Gs have always had "wider, broader, but more powerful moves" than the earlier ones, and it is still that way. But, the effect of "elevator authority penalty" is felt throughout the family, and seems to be, on average, about 50 mph too soon in coming. Coupled with the fact that so many other planes get a total pass on this, you can see how dire the effect is: you can no longer use the plane in both bands of the vertical tactically as you once could. It can still rope a dope and spiral climb pretty well, but it can't be used *tactically* with diving as an attack component.

3) Lastly, using trim in the manner touted here is just not effective. Since the trim went from the "clicks detente" to the "time application", you cannot count on being able to dial in "tactical amounts of trim". If you're in a battle, you can't smoothly count "one one-thousand, two-one thousand" while holding trim up or trim down while you're trying to track enemy, look around, get a shot, etc. It was much easier (if also exploited by rotary gear) to know the numer of clicks in any direction to get the desired effect and you could keep track of it in combat. But not this "time trim".

BS87
05-06-2004, 06:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dmitri9mm:
Another problem is that on the P-38 the elevator stiffens up in a dive at speeds exeed√¬*ng 600km/h. This is not realistic since the P-38 J introduced a hydraulic aid to the elevator controls, reducing the amount of force needed on the stick by 75%. Please model this in the game some day.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hate to break it to you, but yoru wrong. The p38s realisticaly did suffer from this, because of compresability issues as a shockwave formed over the rear tailpane. This is why the P38L has diveflaps, to counter act this.

Slammin_
05-06-2004, 06:50 PM
As Aristo once told me, "You are going too fast!". Sounds simple, but really, there is never a need to dive a 109 so hard and fast that you lose elevator authority when attacking. Especially true with the K4.

BlitzPig_DDT
05-06-2004, 06:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BS87:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dmitri9mm:
Another problem is that on the P-38 the elevator stiffens up in a dive at speeds exeed√¬*ng 600km/h. This is not realistic since the P-38 J introduced a hydraulic aid to the elevator controls, reducing the amount of force needed on the stick by 75%. Please model this in the game some day.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hate to break it to you, but yoru wrong. The p38s realisticaly did suffer from this, because of compresability issues as a shockwave formed over the rear tailpane. This is why the P38L has diveflaps, to counter act this.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very true. It was caused by the combination of the central pod and the large gap in the airframe. An experimental version with a long pod tail cone fixed it, but never entered production.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

Papa_K
05-06-2004, 08:05 PM
These effects seem to show up only in specific aircraft.

Taking the P-38 example, since this has wandered over to that:

"A more serious problem was "compressibility stall", the tendency of the controls to simply lock up in a high-speed dive, leaving the pilot no option but to bail out. The tail structure also had a nasty tendency to fall apart under such circumstances, and in fact this problem killed a YP-38 test pilot, Ralph Virden, in November 1940. A USAAC major named Signa Gilkey managed to stay with a YP-38 in a compressibility lockup, riding it out until he got to denser air, where he recovered using elevator trim. This feat led to experiments that would eventually resolve the problem.
Kelly Johnson later recalled: "I broke an ulcer over compressibility on the P-38 because we flew into a speed range where no one had ever been before..."

That last sentence brings up a question (or two).

If the P-38 was flying at speeds "where no one had ever been before" to get this compressibility problem, why isn't this reflected in other in-game FB aircraft?

Could it be (and this may be wrong) that many earlier aircraft (in real life) couldn't reach those speeds, where compressibility becomes a real problem? Or, if they did, they just broke up?

The speed ranges where the in-game P-38 loses elevator authority could cause very similar, if not more severe, problems in other aircraft. But, we don't see that in the game.

Those aircraft that break up at high speed (in the game) do it well above the speeds where the P-38 loses elevator, and most of those aircraft have minimal pitch control problems prior to breakup. (Take the La series for example...)

As for the 109s, AEP has castrated them by increasing the "cement elevator" effect (again?).

Deja vu topic. We've been here before?

Papa_K

mortoma
05-06-2004, 08:18 PM
Most of the stuff written about extremely heavy elevator forces and the stick not having much leverage was concerning the Emil, not 109s later than that. The forces and leverage problems were largely cured with the F series and later.
LW haters in here love to endlessly squawk on and on about stuff like that and hope you are unaware that problems with elevators pertained mostly to the Emil. It only makes sense the Germans would improve something like that since it's easily curable by a tiny bit of redesigning, which is exactly what they in fact did. The G series had only a small problem with it and it was certainly no worse than American aircraft. Even though I'm American, anything I read of Eric Brown's tests leaves me laughing hysterically. I don't give his writings much credence whatsoever.

[This message was edited by mortoma on Thu May 06 2004 at 07:49 PM.]

Korolov
05-06-2004, 08:35 PM
For those of you having problems with the Bf-109 at speed, do what we P-38 jocks do - approach from a very shallow angle, so you still have enough control. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Face it, the Bf-109 has the best speed, best climb and best manuverability of the Axis planes. Just because it has some little high speed elevator problems, doesn't make it a useless plane!

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
05-06-2004, 08:38 PM
"The FW-190 has a high rate of dive, the initial acceleration being excellent. The maximum speed so far obtained in a dive is 580 m.p.h (934km/h), and at this speed the controls, although slightly heavier, are still remarkably light http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif."

From Eric Brown's test of the FW-190A-3 in 1942.

I'm just poking fun http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif, and I certainly don't have any complaints about the 190's elevator response in FB.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 09:19 PM
rofl. i dont even think that speed is possible in AEP. thanks for the laugh.

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

BlitzPig_DDT
05-06-2004, 09:38 PM
That is indeed a high speed, and testament to the 190's remarkable build quality and aerodynamic cleanliness.

It really is not much different from the La5/7 series and yet, but comparison in FB it's pullin' a drag chute.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

Korolov
05-06-2004, 09:44 PM
.... And at high speed, the Lavochkin series are the ones pulling a drag chute.

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

Hunde_3.JG51
05-06-2004, 09:47 PM
"rofl. i dont even think that speed is possible in AEP. thanks for the laugh."


Luftw4ffles, that speed is possible in FB at medium/higher altitudes (RL test was done/recorded at 16,000 feet, and remember to look at TAS), thanks for the ignorance...I mean laugh http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. I'm sure you are much more knowledgable than Eric Brown http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 10:05 PM
yeah, im sorry you are right, it is possible. but your fw will explode/fall apart. Eric brown is a noob. He claimed that the fw's view was 'half a ring better than the spitfire'. According to il2:fb, the official source of all documented aviation history, this is a clear cut inconsistency.
ps. whats sarcasm? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/351.gif

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

Hunde_3.JG51
05-06-2004, 10:14 PM
The 190 (along with many other planes) in FB can dive to very high speeds 1000km/h+ TAS without exploding at medium and higher altitudes.

Didn't realize you were being sarcastic, your post could have been taken two entirley different ways. I took it the wrong way and was inappropriate, but it doesn't come off as sarcasm.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

[This message was edited by Hunde_3.JG51 on Thu May 06 2004 at 09:24 PM.]

luftw4ffles
05-06-2004, 10:35 PM
fw starts to come apart at around 920 indicated. just tested it.

"If I had a penny for every online victory, I'd have a lot of pennies."

Hunde_3.JG51
05-06-2004, 11:51 PM
Which is why I said remember to look at TAS (true air speed) twice before. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/351.gif

I just tested and was doing 1,030km/h+ at 2,500 meters and pulled out with no damage after diving from 7,500m. Higher altitudes would probably result in even higher speeds.

http://www.militaryartshop.com/prints/bailey/warwolf.jpg

Formerly Kyrule2
http://www.jg51.com/

clint-ruin
05-07-2004, 12:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Franzen:
Therefor making the 109 FM easier to fly at high speeds than in reality.

Thx Clint Ruin

Fritz Franzen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Incorrect all around. The roll rates of some aircraft (for example) are based on 30lbs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Butch2ks data is wrong?

That 28 kilos is 61.7 pounds is wrong?

That most aircraft have 50 pounds stick pressure modelled is wrong? Other than one axis on one type of P-47, which would you say have 30 pounds stick pressure modelled?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Furthermore, the late Gs and K become unusable at 400kph (it's very noticable there - that is not fast) and it's currently based on TAS, not IAS as well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could you show us what you mean by 'unusable'? How much stick movement do you see and how much elevator deflection can be seen, and if you're really feeling virile, how many degrees per second do you get at each set speed? The first two things would be very very easy to get a track or screenshot of.

If there is a problem and it can be documented and shown this issue will roll a lot further than if it's just a bunch of guys screaming and yelling about bias.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

BlitzPig_DDT
05-07-2004, 06:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by clint-ruin:
If there is a problem and it can be documented and shown this issue will roll a lot further than if it's just a bunch of guys screaming and yelling about bias.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just like the 190 pit, right? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

You're still a waste of time.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

clint-ruin
05-07-2004, 07:22 AM
The 190 pit is actually a fantastic example of real data getting smothered beneath the fat, porksweat smelling rolls of a crowd of whiners piling on top. Best way to make the case is perhaps not to piss the developer off so severely that they bugger off for months.

So,

Butch2ks data is wrong?

That 28 kilos is 61.7 pounds is wrong?

That most aircraft have 50 pounds stick pressure modelled is wrong? Other than one axis on one type of P-47, which would you say have 30 pounds stick pressure modelled?

Why do you consider it a waste of time to support your argument with evidence? It's not like this would take very long to document as an issue. Kurfurst apparently had some success with his testing regime in getting the MW-50 timer fixed to work as claimed in the manuals of the original AC, or at least, so he says. There's no harm in trying.

On the other hand you could continue to make blanket statements, dodge when asked for evidence, and post personal attacks instead of any kind of actual answer. It wouldn't be so bad if you weren't such a completely ineffective flamer - painful to watch.

Let's try this again - once more, with feeling. And data.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/gwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

BlitzPig_DDT
05-07-2004, 09:16 AM
I shouldn't expect a commie to know how to read for comprehension. You are a waste of time.

I could take the time to hand hold you through what I stated, since you haven't a clue (but at least you admitted that by asking, for a change), but that too would be a waste of time because your only intention and desire is to try to "set me up" in some way. I won't play your game.

Naturally, you will try to come back with some sort of sarcastic remark about all this. You're transparent.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

Franzen
05-07-2004, 10:35 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gifIs name calling really neccessary? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

It totally ruins a good thread. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

You catch my flies(and respect) with honey(and respect) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz Franzen