PDA

View Full Version : Match : Spit vs 109



Metabaron2005
08-08-2007, 05:51 AM
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/7588/spitvs109tg5.jpg

Spitfire I versus Me 109 E
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Spitfire IX versus Me 109 G
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html

Spitfire XIV versus Me 109 G/K
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html

Reading this comparison (Spit I vs Emile) I'm astonished that the roll rate at 400 mph of these two fighters looks very low (only 11,25? per sec) as an aerobatic plane reaches easily 360? per sec.

Is that constraint, due to the non assisted flaps, implemented in IL2 ?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v127/raid-baron/LOGGO/Loggo03.gif

Metabaron2005
08-08-2007, 05:51 AM
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/7588/spitvs109tg5.jpg

Spitfire I versus Me 109 E
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

Spitfire IX versus Me 109 G
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html

Spitfire XIV versus Me 109 G/K
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html

Reading this comparison (Spit I vs Emile) I'm astonished that the roll rate at 400 mph of these two fighters looks very low (only 11,25? per sec) as an aerobatic plane reaches easily 360? per sec.

Is that constraint, due to the non assisted flaps, implemented in IL2 ?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v127/raid-baron/LOGGO/Loggo03.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
08-08-2007, 12:14 PM
And to think, I really believed it depended on the pilot.

FritzGryphon
08-08-2007, 02:41 PM
Roll rate does depend on the pilot, to an extent.

Roll figures are shown for a person of average strength exerting a constant pressure. Sometimes it will refer to the force used.

3.JG51_BigBear
08-08-2007, 05:04 PM
Modern aerobatic aircraft are a completely different breed from the Spitfires and 109s of WW2. Aerobatic aircraft are a fraction of the weight, carry a fraction of the fuel, and are a fraction of the size of the Spit and 109. Moderan aerobatic pilots are much better trained to withstand heavy g loads and constant, agressive manuevering. Modern aerobatic planes benefit from 60 years of continued aeronotic research and, like racecars, they are tuned to their individual pilot's needs and skills.

Aerobatic aircraft really have very little in common with the heavily laden war machines of World War 2.

VW-IceFire
08-08-2007, 06:48 PM
Generally speaking yes the roll rates are well modeled in the game (they aren't perfect) and if you've ever taken a Spitfire into a shallow dive the roll rate is hideous. Even after WWII they were still struggling to consistently make fighters that were good in the roll.

The early Spitfires had fabric covered ailerons which tended to balloon out at higher speeds and reduced the roll rate even further. Later Spitfire models (I think the Mark II and later but it could be the Mark V...I can't remember) replaced the fabric ailerons and although roll rate was still low it was better.