109 it fly wrong

[Straiga]

Any of the 109s in AH and a many others, I just cant figure it how its flys.
 I set the autopliot and look at the trim settings and its at cruise speed. Elevators trim looks good, the rudder is neutral and airleron trim is set way to the right, showing the left airleron down and right aileron up but the ball is centered showing the airplane cordinated flying straight and level.
 Shouldnt the rudder be trim to the right also to be cordinated for the roll moment and then showing the ball centered, or was there a change in physics in the AH world that I should know about. When you use aileron, you get a roll moment but you also get a yaw moment with out rudder. Now one wing speeds up because of a decrease in lift and drag (right wing) and one wing slows down because the increase in lift and drag (left wing). Because of the roll the ball (yaws) moves to the inside of the turn with out rudder and with aileron still deflected rudder cant be neutrally trim ( 0 rudder deflection) to be cordinated (Ball Centered) you would have to use right rudder. There is no way but in the AH world.  Can anybody explain this to me.  

CYA

[Flyboy]

hmm, well im no expert. but doesnt the engine produce both roll and yaw?  

so the ailrons counter both roll and yaw, plane goes straight.

[straffo]

Afaik the real 109 had the rudder set on groud for cruise speed.
And had IRL no if I'm not mistaken other trim than elevator trim.

So if AH model a rudder already set for cruise even having aileron and elevator trim there should be no need to trim rudder.

[HoHun]

Hi Straiga,

Since propeller aircraft like the Me 109 are often designed asymmetrically to ameliorate propeller effects, a single flight condition is not sufficient to judge the model. Try changing the power setting and observing what trim changes are required to established straight flight at the new power setting. That'll be probably a good baseline for comparing it to real-world behavior.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[SELECTOR]

i thought 109 had fixed wing trim

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Straiga,

Since propeller aircraft like the Me 109 are often designed asymmetrically to ameliorate propeller effects, a single flight condition is not sufficient to judge the model.
Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Indeed the Bf 109s had assymetric vertical tail, that created lift sideways to counteract torque forces.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Indeed the Bf 109s had assymetric vertical tail, that created lift sideways to counteract torque forces.

But it still did stop LW pilots having one leg 'fatter' than the other from pushing on the rudder peddle to counter what trim adjustment would have been able to do.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
But it still did stop LW pilots having one leg 'fatter' than the other from pushing on the rudder peddle to counter what trim adjustment would have been able to do.

Why would it be neccesary, ie. there were fixed trim tabs on the rudder, set to give neutral trim in cruising conditions, basically no footload was neccesary during transits, but only in combat, where the speed and change changes were so rapid that trimming couldn`t be used anyway, at least not with an advantage, applying rudder was far more easier to do. Not to mention rudder forces were very light on the Bf 109s. I never heard any 109 pilot complaining about the lack of rudder trim. If it would be problem, they would change it in a week.

[MiloMorai]

That is correct, set for one particular cruising speed. If the speed was 15kph higher or lower than the set speed, the application of rudder was required. One direction for above the set cruise speed and the other direction for below the set cruise speed. Since LW pilots spent more time at speeds above the set cruise speed one leg would be more muscular than the other. (one does not cruise at economical cruise in a combat zone)

Imagine holding hard rudder for 5-10-15min while diving away from Allied fighters at twice the set cruising speed..

One does not make complaints about what is second nature to themselves. 109 pilots naturally applied the correct rudder correction required and over time, the muscles in that leg would increase through useage.

LW pilots testing Allied a/c, commented on how nice it was to have a cockpit trimmable rudder.

But I forget, the 109 was the perfect a/c.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Imagine holding hard rudder for 5-10-15min while diving away from Allied fighters at twice the set cruising speed..

How could that be possible, Milo? 15 min dive towards the ground? That would be... uhm.. 20 km/h dive speed (hypothesizing vertical dive from 5000m)?

 Ie. 'combat' cruise speed was ~400mph for the Bf 109s, so you say it could maintain 800 mph in dive? Nice feature...

BTW, I do to that in my car, ie. I have to apply constant force on gas pedal in my car. I wunder how many car owners suffer the same,  because they use the gas pedal constantly, and the clutch only occasionally... For hours! Horrible, unbearable experience, really.

LW pilots testing Allied a/c, commented on how nice it was to have a cockpit trimmable rudder.

Perhaps you could share us a quote?

(Oh jesus)

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Imagine holding hard rudder for 5-10-15min while diving away from Allied fighters at twice the set cruising speed..

How could that be possible, Milo? 15 min dive towards the ground? That would be... uhm.. 20 km/h dive speed (hypothesizing vertical dive from 5000m)?

:D All dives are vertical????? Show some intelligence for a change.

 Ie. 'combat' cruise speed was ~400mph for the Bf 109s, so you say it could maintain 800 mph in dive? Nice feature...

[/b]

Rudder trim was set for economical cruise speed. Now which model of 109 is that for. That ~400mph is faster than the top speed of some models.

BTW, I do to that in my car, ie. I have to apply constant force on gas pedal in my car. I wunder how many car owners suffer the same,  because they use the gas pedal constantly, and the clutch only occasionally... For hours! Horrible, unbearable experience, really.

[/b]

The force applied to the gas peddle is nowhere comparable to the force required on the rudder bar/peddle.  Dumb example. If you flew real a/c, you would know this..

LW pilots testing Allied a/c, commented on how nice it was to have a cockpit trimmable rudder.

Perhaps you could share us a quote?

Why, you would not believe it anyways as you do with anything that shows the 109 or anything German was not perfection.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Simply rudder trim was not seen as requirement for lightweight, short ranged interceptors in Germany. Rightly so. Rudder trim was to be installed at and above 5 tons weight.

It appears in the Milo Morai vs. Ubi Forum Moderators, the latter triumphed.  

Rightly so!

[GScholz]

The 109's rudder trim tab was adjustable on the ground. They could set it according to their mission profile. The maximum operational endurance (with droptank) was 1 hour 20 minutes, most of that time was spent climbing and cruising.

[MiloMorai]

gee Barbi, the Fw190 was not a light weight a/c nor as short ranged as the 109 and it did not have any cockpit adjustable rudder trim.  Even the light He112 had rudder trim.

The Russians showed more smarts than the Nazis by putting rudder trim on their light shortrange La a/c.

Care to look at some light a/c, that have cockpit trimming on all 3 axis control surfaces.

Now would you like to try coming up with another lame excuse?


The UBI Moderators are a joke and a farce, especially Tully. If Tully had a brain, he would be dangerous. I gave up on them a few months ago with their continued bias and preferential treatment towards certain posters who still are posting 'insulting, derogatory' posts.(see the P-51 thread in ORR for examples) There are enough ppl around to keep you in check with your Nazi Germany is uber BS propaganda and even more ppl that know what you post is mostly bs.


I noticed you made no comment on the doc Neil Sterling linked to that had production of 150pn fuel for which you claimed that ~only 6500t was produced.

"this 150octane is an possible-option, only ~6500t/year 150octane were produced. it was used to hunt v1's not to fight german fighters."

Yet British only production was

http://hometown.aol.co.uk/JStirlingBomber/150y.jpg

369,385t in a year (55.7% of total production) is a VERY long way from your ~6500t. Typical Barbi bs.

You did not make one of your usual insulting derogatory post to Neil S about the use of 150pn fuel used by operational Tempests. Why is that? Could it be because you said Tempests never used 150pn fuel. Barbi continues with his bs lies.

[Staga]

Milo Morai I don't know what is your problem but maybe changing medication could help