Rudder Question - Doesn't it Drag too Much?

[HaHa]

I've really noticed that the rudder acts like a parachute. e.g. take any plane you desire - say a bf109. Go up to 15k, point the nose straight down and crank the rudder.. then go in "tiny" little spirals (still pointing down). I can keep the speed <= 300 the entire way down.. I realize the rudder should add drag but should it give this much drag?? Who needs flaps when we have these huge parachute like rudders  

This rudder analysis is one of the reasons why I figured out I was always losing E. During crazy maneuvers I tend to twist my twick = turn my rudder accidentally = huge E loss.

[wells]

Yep, you can slow down even slower than the sustained turning speed!  Meaning the rudder produces more drag than the elevator and wing combined!  Pyro had said that most of the drag was from the airframe, but then that airframe drag should be close to the same for both pitch and yaw, only in yaw, you don't have the drag from the wing!

[Daff]

OTOH, the planes got a glide-ratio that would make a modern glider jealous. (Almost anyway )

Daff

------------------
CO, 56th Fighter Group

[Saintaw]

Doesn't work in the Nikki though...

[HaHa]

Could an HTC guy please answer - this an important question since it significantly affects the flight model.

[MarkVZ]

Daff,
I completely agree with you that the planes in Aces High have a nearly impossibly good glide ratio for their weight and aerodynamics.  I have landed a full-scale Cessna 150 deadstick on more than one occasion.  I'm not talking simulated deadstick with the engine idling, I'm talking  cut the ignition and pull up to get the prop to glide to a stop, and land.  The planes in Aces High definately have better glide characteristics than a Cessna 150, which are very light, and have a much reduced wing loading in comparison to a P-51 or ME-109.  After seeing first-hand the sink rates and glide characteristics of a Cessna 150 and various other private aircraft, I find it just silly how hard it is to get one of these multi-ton fighters to sit down on the runway with full flaps and engine dead, prop stopped.  When you can glide an out-of-gas B17 for 25 miles, (one sector) it makes me wonder what's wrong with this picture.  A P-51 should become a brick when you want it to, with engine idling and full-flaps dropped, but it always seems to glide better than a composite competition sailplane in a good thermal  

------------------
Mark VanZwoll
33rd Strike Group

[JENG]

Cc also thought about the rudder drag... I know the 109 is known for it's excellent rudder control but maybe it's a bit to much (just my totaly naive opinion tho)

I use the rudder alot in dives in my 109 too keep it from compressing and overshooting... even full throttle and WEP and in a dive at 45 degrees (more or less) she won't gain much speed with full rudder deflection and a bit of opposite aileron.

There are notable differences tho... p38 and n1k come to mind.

Bout the gliding... I'm not a real pilot so I can't comment on that but when landing a spit I need to use full rudder skids on finals and even flaps (airbrakes in spit  ) to get it to flare a bit  

Bee

[wells]

A cessna is not exactly a 'clean' looking plane, fixed trike gear, boxy fuse, generous tail areas = lots of extra drag.  Gliders glide well because of their cleanliness, not so much their weight.  Weight doesn't hurt your glide for range, but it does hurt your endurance.  

Take 2 planes that have the same 'cleanliness' but one is heavier.  Both will glide at near the same angle (due to cleanliness) while the heavier one glides at a higher speed.  The heavier one will hit the ground first, but both will travel about the same distance over the ground.  A typical glider can stay airborne from 2000' for an easy 15 minutes (probably more).  Try that in a warbird...

[Hristo]

Leave the 109 rudder alone !!  

[MarkVZ]

Wells,
I never said the 150 was a "clean" airplane, but it seems to me that by comparison, the planes of AH have extraordinary glide rates.  They float in for landing like a Piper Cub would.  Maybe it's just that the runways are too short or something, making short landings very tough, but I think that something's not right when it comes to glide, and I find myself using full flaps, full rudder deflection, and idling engine to get one of these planes down, and I think that anyone who has flown a real P51 or 109 would laugh at that.

------------------
Mark VanZwoll
33rd Strike Group

[CavemanJ]

 

Originally posted by JENG:

Bout the gliding... I'm not a real pilot so I can't comment on that but when landing a spit I need to use full rudder skids on finals and even flaps (airbrakes in spit   ) to get it to flare a bit  

Bee

Check your landing speeds.  I'd wager you're coming in too fast if you're having problem with floating when you flare  

[StSanta]

On finals making my infamous high speed crash and burn approaches, I weave like mad to left and right applying full rudder to get to a speed where I can deploy my flaps.

bee, you saying you don't use full flaps when you land?  



------------------
StSanta
II/JG2

[HaHa]

*punt* looking for response

[maddog]

The best discribtion I've heard was in the USN "has the glide slope of a toolbox" I found this pretty damn accurate...
doc