Author Topic: I think I speak for all 109 flyers when I say... (Read 3002 times)

Krusty · « **Reply #30 on:** March 20, 2006, 08:05:59 PM »

Pyro just a quick clarification, please?

"Don't operate them at speeds greater than 250 km/hr, don't have them full down at speeds greater than 250 km/hr."

Does that mean you can't use any flaps until you are 250kmh/below, but once at that level you can pop full flaps right away? I mean, there's no incremental waiting?

I ask because I've not yet downloaded the patch.

E25280 · « **Reply #31 on:** March 20, 2006, 10:01:21 PM »

Didn't fly all versions, but did a couple sorties in G-2, G-6 and K-4. Flaps seem fine to me now. They came out at about 200 - much improved over the 120 or so it seemed like before.

Yeah!!! Thanks, Pyro, HiTech, Et. al.!!:aok

Glasses · « **Reply #32 on:** March 20, 2006, 10:10:02 PM »

LOL I knew it, if I had put a wager on that I'd be a ......not a wealthy man but I'd be a couple of bucks richer
Thanks for proving me right !

P.S. Besides..... what's a LW thread without a stereotypical Luftwhine?

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #33 on:** March 20, 2006, 10:22:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by bj229r
most planes have a HAND crank to deploy flaps..... did ANY WW2 pilots use flaps in middle of dogfights on a regular basis?

P-38 had a lever to deploy flaps and yes, they used them on a regular basis.

ack-ack

Mister Fork · « **Reply #34 on:** March 20, 2006, 10:32:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AWRaid
109s did indeed have a combat flap setting. I don't know of a single version of 109 with a single flap setting.

My two Luffwaffe books don't mention anything about 'combat flaps'. Lots on landing, flying, flight triming, fuel management, heat management, combat 'engine power settings', but nothing, not a word or anything on 'combat flaps'.

Just saying awraid.

JAWS2003 · « **Reply #35 on:** March 20, 2006, 10:52:24 PM »

See Rule #4

straffo · « **Reply #36 on:** March 20, 2006, 11:57:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by JAWS2003
See Rule #4

if and only if the surface is the same

eagl · « **Reply #37 on:** March 21, 2006, 01:40:10 AM »

Pyro,

I don't have a personal stake in the answer, but is it possible that through a translation quirk, the manual *really* meant that you shouldn't change the flap position above 250 and it shouldn't be at full above 250? "operate" can mean "fiddle with the switch". Case in point is the F-15E which has different speeds for max allowable with the gear down and max speed where you can raise or lower the gear. You can fly quite a bit faster than gear "operation" speed with the gear down if it's put down while still below the "operation" speed...

The same goes with the automatic flap retraction in the F-15E. The flaps should not be lowered when above 250, yet if they're left down they will (should) automatically fully retract by 300 knots.

If I recall correctly, one or more variants of the little cessnas (150, 152, 172) also has a flap rule where you can have the flaps down up to a certain speed but the flap "operation" speed is somewhat lower, interpreted as meaning you can't move the flap lever until you're below that "operating" speed. It's been 18 years since I was taught that rule and it's not even the same in all year models of whatever type it was, but it's another area for a discrepancy to arise.

Anyhow, since I've come across that discrepancy a few times in RL, I thought I'd bring it up to see if maybe there's a translation or flight manual interpretation issue behind this particular FM quibble.

Wilbus · « **Reply #38 on:** March 21, 2006, 02:37:22 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mister Fork
My two Luffwaffe books don't mention anything about 'combat flaps'. Lots on landing, flying, flight triming, fuel management, heat management, combat 'engine power settings', but nothing, not a word or anything on 'combat flaps'.

Just saying awraid.

Well that doesn't really mean a thing, does it?

Anybody still have the chart posted a while ago with the 109 flaps deployment speed? The one that showed 10 degrees at 480mph?

Anybody know where it came from?

Bruv119 · « **Reply #39 on:** March 21, 2006, 02:50:30 AM »

Flew the 109g14 last night.

I dont really fly LW planes but I took it up out of interest.

Landed 5 kills all a2a, cruising speed seems excellent, don't see a problem with the visibilty, amazing guns.

The K is also an awesome ride.

Wilbus · « **Reply #40 on:** March 21, 2006, 03:10:07 AM »

Gonna be real fun to get to test it. Just hope I get my internet set up soon so I can test it online. Will download tonight and try it offline, not always easy to feel the difference when flying offline though.

Karnak · « **Reply #41 on:** March 21, 2006, 03:20:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wilbus
Gonna be real fun to get to test it. Just hope I get my internet set up soon so I can test it online. Will download tonight and try it offline, not always easy to feel the difference when flying offline though.

Yeah, after being away for awhile I'll fly a favorite offline and think it feels soooo manueverable and go have my bellybutton handed to me seven ways to Sunday, wondering where my manueverabilty all went.

Offline is iffy at best.

That said, the Bf109G-14 felt, offline, vastly more manueverable than it was before. Spit XIV felt a bit better than I recall. Mossie felt more or less the same.

Still wish the Bf109G-14 had the 415mph at 16,500ft instead of the 404mph it got, but it is better.

Wilbus · « **Reply #42 on:** March 21, 2006, 04:50:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Still wish the Bf109G-14 had the 415mph at 16,500ft instead of the 404mph it got, but it is better.

It is moving in the right direction atleast. A few more patches and it might be up to speed

Gonna be fun to try for sure.

Any difference in the other 109's? How does the K4 feel?

As for flaps though, if they now work at about 200mph that may very well what we needed. Prolongen turnfights often end up at speeds bellow 200 but never low enough to get the flaps down (using the 165mph speed as before). A 35mph difference is quite big and can be decisive.

BlauK · « **Reply #43 on:** March 21, 2006, 08:13:47 AM »

Just adding to the 109 topic...

Is there any chance for the 109s' windshield view getting adjusted to same standards with P-51s...(with transparent 1-sided polygons in vertical frames representing the real view with refractions etc) or is this horse dead already?
Should we just get used to it and live with it?