Spitfire structural failures

[MiloMorai]

Guppy, some of the Luftluvers have no sense of humour.


Now phookat, a little history on Barbarossa Isegrim (Barbi)/V0101 Isegrim (Issy)/Kurfurst. In my first post to him, I questioned him, politely, on what he had posted in a thread on the old OnWar forum. His reply was very obnoxious and adversarial, tearing a strip off me, left, right, up, down and sideways. He is like this with anyone who disagrees with him. I do not say someone is having wet dreams, made references to the anus or insinuated that someone was a pedophile, unlike Issy.

Read Angus' post, last paragraph.


Like Guppy and some others here, I have a great interest in ALL WW2 a/c (Fw/Ta, Tempest, F4U being of special interest) without playing favourites. The problem is that some are just to fanatical about their favourite a/c (ie. the Luftluvers).

Never said the Spitty was a lousy plane, or a bad aircraft.

That is not how you come across, knocking it and any other Allied a/c whenever you can. I have nothing against the 109 neither:) but you put it on a pedestal, Issy,  twisting and manipulating facts to the 109s advantage. It had its good points and bad points. The problem is you will not admit to any of its bad points.

.........


Now with that out of the way. These dive tests in the 109, did they have mutli comb pitots tubes or was just the a/c's single pitot tube used to give the speeds?

...........

Crumpp, I have seen pics of OXEN  pulling a/c but never any pics of OXES pulling a/c.

[Crumpp]

Now phookat, a little history on Barbarossa Isegrim (Barbi)/V0101 Isegrim (Issy)/Kurfurst. In my first post to him, I questioned him, politely, on what he had posted in a thread on the old OnWar forum. His reply was very obnoxious and adversarial, tearing a strip off me, left, right, up, down and sideways. He is like this with anyone who disagrees with him. I do not say someone is having wet dreams, made references to the anus or insinuated that someone was a pedophile, unlike Issy.

Don't Push BS on folks,  You are nasty from the start with everyone who is even percieved as disagreeing with you.  Barbi is the same way. Your also willing to bend the facts to win whatever percieved personal vendetta is against you.

EXAMPLE:

Crumpp, I have seen pics of OXEN pulling a/c but never any pics of OXES pulling a/c.

I was in a hurry.....EXCUSE me but spelling mistakes happen.

Crumpp

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by VooDoo
Guppy, pretty damn cool profiles ! May I ask how are you shading drop tanks ?

PS Sorry for offtop .

I start em in Adobe Illustrator, then export to photoshop for the shading etc.

That seems to be the best way to get it done for me anyway

Dan/Slack

[MiloMorai]

Your excused Crumpp for the spelling mistake, but just had to point it out since you think you are so perfect.

That is no BS about Issy.
..................

Now can we get back to the thread's subject?

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by mw


I have a report by Gen. Kaithel  (sic) drawing on TAGL II Bf 109, A.1, Nr 1 lfd. 675/43 and the experiences of the Rechlin’s Beauvais wherein flight characteristics and limits of the 109 are described:   In the fighters at present in service, difficulties (compressibility) appear above all in the behavior of the elevators (...) at M = .76 .     The behavior of the 109 around its high axis deserves special attention.  With a free rudder the 109, particularly with blister armament and chiefly at great altitudes in high speed dives, tends to swing like a pendulum around its high axis, combined with a rolling movement.   The only correct thing to do is to counter this movement with the rudder (not with the ailerons).  On account of this peculiarity, trifles such as, for example inconvenient position of the pedal and in particular incompletely trimmed ailerons and rudder ruin the feel of the aircraft to uselessness.

Must be a very interesting report. Especially the part that complaining about 'incompletely trimmed ailerons and rudder', considering no Bf 109 types were equipped with aileron or rudder trim.

Oops, Mike, you made a mistake while making up that one. Appearantly you are so busy trying to prove what a unworthy piece of crap the whole 109 series were (and Guppy, why do we never see you complaining about that ? So don`t preach me about me trying to prove the Spit was something of a POS, `cos that I never did propagate, unlike that MW guy on his site about the 109 which doesn`t seem to bother you at all. I do feel though the Spit is massively overrated and overhyped, credited with many things it never truely earned. Best in everything, as in MikyWorld or in a tiny bit less extreme case, NashwanWorld ), you forgot to take care of such tiny details while forging the stuff you need in your little crusade.

BTW, the phenomenon you are describing is simple compressibilty, encountered by all figthers of WW2 roughly above .75 Mach. Similiar warnings of how to correct with controls can be found in Spitfire or Mustang flight manuals, so attempting  describing it as 'special problem' of the 109 that made it 'useless' (yeah of course Mike, keep on dreaming) is simply a pathetic move. Not to mention that this was the very reason 109s introduced enlarged tail units in `43, to increase controlabilty at high speeds those new 109Gs were capable of (not in your world of course:), as the older F series tail unit was not designed for those.

[Wotan]

Originally posted by Guppy35
Ok for the sake of clarification.  I have a long standing interest in Spitfire history that goes back far beyond flight sims.  I can claim some Spitfire pilot vets as friends.  

I also love the 109, in particular the Emil.  Don't know why, I just do.  I guess it's because the two planes share a common history in that they were there in the beginning and at the end.

Neither won the war, or lost the war.  They both played their part.  I'm sorry for the misunderstanding if you felt like I overreacted or somehow slandered the 109, the LW or what have you.

That was not my intent.

I do get tired of any thread concerning those aircraft having to turn into just what this one did, and apparently I played my part.  

It is not impossible for both the 109 and the Spit to have been great aircraft.  They are not mutually exclusive.

For fun I do aircraft profiles.  Spits, 109Es, Mustangs, Hurris and Jugs so far.

Enjoy some 109Es.  I imagine the 109 experts can ID the units without my having to list them
 

I guess there is some communication issue I am missing. I simply replied to the point about "war winning" made by you and Angus in the context of the thread.

 You took that as me feeling "insulted". I have explained in detail several times my reply yet you seem not to read it.

Read my original reply to "war winning" and the one above it. You will see that there's a straight line from the one point to another.

Correcting and or clarifying a point made in the context of the thread doesn’t equate to a response to some perceived insult.

I am completely indifferent to you personally and have no interest in the aircraft you like or hate. Its irrelevant to the point I replied to, which was “the LW lost” as it relates to the Spitfire and the subject of this thread.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Wotan
I guess there is some communication issue I am missing. I simply replied to the point about "war winning" made by you and Angus in the context of the thread.

 You took that as me feeling "insulted". I have explained in detail several times my reply yet you seem not to read it.

Read my original reply to "war winning" and the one above it. You will see that there's a straight line from the one point to another.

Correcting and or clarifying a point made in the context of the thread doesn’t equate to a response to some perceived insult.

I am completely indifferent to you personally and have no interest in the aircraft you like or hate. Its irrelevant to the point I replied to, which was “the LW lost” as it relates to the Spitfire and the subject of this thread.

Yes Wotan, we clearly are suffering a communication problem.  What you percieve me saying and what I was saying are two different things and we are going to have to disagree on what the message was.

You aren't going to convince me that I said something different than what I said, and I won't convince you either.  So it goes.

My apologies for my apparently poor communications skills.


Dan/Slack

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Must be a very interesting report. Especially the part that complaining about 'incompletely trimmed ailerons and rudder', considering no Bf 109 types were equipped with aileron or rudder trim.

Oops, Mike, you made a mistake while making up that one.

 

Was not the 109 fitted with trim tabs that were adjustable when on the ground? These were set for  a certain speed so would be 'incompletely trimmed' when above that speed.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
He is like this with anyone who disagrees with him. I do not say someone is having wet dreams, made references to the anus or insinuated that someone was a pedophile, unlike Issy.
 

....and yada-yada-yada.

Milo, you have been repeating this 'called someone pedophile' accusation countless times in these boards.

Every time you did I asked : where?

You can never answer that part. But keep repeating the same. For any intelligent person, that makes the issue clear.

Similiarly, you keep telling people like they were 4-year old ones, as a single authority, what I think, what I said, what are my interest (nazi germany part and the rest of the garbage.) Let me tell u a little secret: since on all boards you are busy  with this pathetic behaviour (=your life), you always succeed to gain a level of 'credibility' for yourself, that hardly makes me concerned about it.

To me, quite clearly, you must have a rather pathetic civil life. Probably no friends at all, your life circulating about desperately trying to make me feel discomfortful on some inet forums, with lowly tricks as seen above,  trying to get attention from others by posting troll threads and flamebaits. That`s your version of human relations.

For those who had seen your behaviour here or on other boards, it`s must be obvious by now why this temptation is so important for you, you got owned every time, and instead the aim of making me looking ridiculus, you only succeed in getting more and more isolated. It is growing with every single one of your failures, or cases when you are finally been banned from discussion boards as a result of your behaviour. That makes you feel even more itching for revenge, and there`s the diabolic circle you cannot escape from.

I guess we may disagree in many things with the other forum members, Nashwan and the like. One area we most possibly agree is you: just about everybody in this thread argues about everything, expect one : my description of you as a 3rd rate cretin. As the Romans said a long ago : Silence is not neccesarily mean agreement, but surely not means disagreement.  Think about that now, try to change it that and have a life.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by Angus
Now what just bothered me and Guppy I guess, was just Barbi.
Just keep bumping into Barbi about subjects like whether the RAF won the BoB, or whether the allies won air supremacy over europe, or whether the allied bombing campaign yealded anything or whether the LW always had unlimited fuel, or whether the allies were generally behind in any aspect of technological advance, etc, etc.
Maybe it's just me
[/B]

Yeah, maybe it`s just a case of you cannot see anything else when it`s a case of detail disagreement, and the actual statements of others who disagree with gets distorited into surrealities in your mind.

[MiloMorai]

Is that a self-description you just posted Barbi?

No proof because the Mods deleted several pages of the tread which had your gutter rants in.

[VO101_Isegrim]

No proof because the Mods deleted several pages of the tread which had your gutter rants in.

U-hum. And it disappeared without a trace. No URL of course. Mysterious. I mean, several pages which contained nothing else but, what was that, anus reference, gut rant, pedophile calling and sorry if I left out something that I alone posted. And you expect people to believe that.

You are a waste of time, LOL.

[GScholz]

The 109 won its last fights with the Spitfire. Israeli Avia S 199 (Jumo 211 powered 109G) vs. Egyptian Spit IX and XIV in 1948.

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by GScholz
The 109 won its last fights with the Spitfire. Israeli Avia S 199 (Jumo 211 powered 109G) vs. Egyptian Spit IX and XIV in 1948.

No Egyptian XIVs.  They did have IXs.  I think it's also fair to suggest that pilot skill might have had a bit to do with that

Dan/Slack

[VO101_Isegrim]

Yep, 'war is not about who`s right, it`s about who is left'.

109s left in service until 1967 IIRC, after some 30 years of service. Spits retired in the mid-50s I think.

I think what makes the 109 such a red carpet in the Spitdweeb eyes is that it took both the firsts and lasts away from their birdie, and has such an irritating long list of records held in speed, number of kills made, number of planes produced, number of years served, number of aces made, and number of countries it was employed by.  

But hey, why is it so humilating to be the 2nd best in such a company?