Author Topic: 109 vs 190 a different story  (Read 2735 times)

Offline Ruah

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2010, 07:48:43 AM »
I love my A5, but it needs others to work.  In strong, well communicating roups, the 190 is my choise, in furballs where I am alone in a mess of planes, the 109 seems to go further.


Kommando Nowotny
I/JG 77, 2nd Staffel
Mediterranean Maelstrom
HORRIDO

Offline PanosGR

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 534
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2010, 08:20:02 AM »
What makes you think it's "awkward and tiny"? It was obviously designed to be spacious enough to accomodate a 6ft tall man. So an offensive lineman from an american football team couldn't fit comfortably in it, so what? The cockpit on the A6M was designed for people of much smaller stature than the cockpit on the 109. If the 109 cockpit was so small that a person of average stature couldn't peform the functions needed, the plane would never have left the ground.

lol excuse me? did u bother to see the video below? the RAF pilot describes it as an "unbelievable small" cockpit. Now if my description of "awkward and tiny" disturbs you, at least u can trust a pilots one.

Offline gyrene81

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11629
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2010, 09:08:37 AM »
lol excuse me? did u bother to see the video below? the RAF pilot describes it as an "unbelievable small" cockpit. Now if my description of "awkward and tiny" disturbs you, at least u can trust a pilots one.
I did better than that, I read the British and U.S. flight test reports on captured 109s. It was described as "small" and "tight" when compared to the Spitfire and Hurricane in the British pilot reports.
The U.S. report submitted by Major Fredric Borsodi who flew P-40s, on No. 9338. Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-6/TROP which was captured in Tunisia in 1943:
http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/Bf109G-6_US_EB102/109G-6_US_EB102.html

Quote
a.    Cockpit layout.

               The cockpit is very small and cramped. The canopy is heavy, awkward to operate, and restricts the vision to a marked extent. The general instrument layout is good, the flight and engine instruments are well grouped and easy to read in spite of the cramped quarters. The seat and rudder adjustment is insufficient. The flaps are mechanically operated by a wheel
to the left of the pilot which is difficult to reach and awkward to operate.

At the end of the report he further states:

Quote
Conclusions.

        The ME-109G has a high rate of climb and good level flight performance. Its range is very limited as only 105 gallons can be carried internally and flights of over 300 miles leave little gasoline for reserve.

        It is very light on all controls below 400 KPH but the turning radius is poor compared to our fighters. At high speed the controls become very heavy. The airplane is stable and should be a good gun platform but the vision is very poor under all conditions.

        The cockpit is cramped but would not be too bad if the visibility were better.



British report on a captured 109-G2 from 1942:
http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/109G2_britg2trop/MET109Gtrop_tests.html#briefdescr

Quote
17.           The fuselage is clearly designed to be as small as possible to give the maximum performance, and consequently the cockpit is rather cramped for anyone over 6 feet tall. The controls are laid out so that all ordinary ancillary controls are worked by the left hand, the right side of the cockpit having only switch buttons. This layout, combined with the automatic setting of airscrew pitch and of coolant flaps for water and oil, simplifies the task of the pilot.

18.           Details of the controls, which are similar to those on some allied aircraft, are given in the German handbook of which a translation is held in the Enemy Aircraft Section, H.Q., M.E. A photo of the cockpit, consisting of three photos put together, is Figure 6. The rudder pedals are level with the seat so that the pilot is in a good position to resist acceleration; all ancillary controls are convenient to reach and to use.


In all published reports on captured 109s the cockpit is described in similar manner by pilots who were used to aircraft with larger cockpits. None say "awkward and tiny" or "unbelievably small". Obviously the British pilots were slightly smaller in stature than the U.S. pilots, maybe not so broad in the shoulders. When you're used to a 1972 Cadillac Fleetwood, getting into a 2009 Honda S2000 is going to feel "cramped".
jarhed  
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Offline Grendel

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 877
      • http://www.compart.fi/icebreakers
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2010, 01:22:37 PM »
Now if my description of "awkward and tiny" disturbs you, at least u can trust a pilots one.

Ok, let's see what actual 109 pilots said...

Me 109 F/G:
"You know the 109 is way tight and you have the cannon between your legs and there isn't very much left and visibility to the back is poor. The cockpit, as such, was very narrow, VERY narrow. You have as I mentioned, the cannon between your two legs in rather like in a tunnel, you know? Later on they made a steel plate to protect the head, backwards.  But they cut off the side through the back.  You know?  Because we had this steel plate, here. "
- Major Gunther Rall. German fighter ace, NATO general, Commander of the German Air Force. 275 victories. Source: Lecture by general Rall.

Me 109 G-2/G-6:
- Fit like a glove?
"Yes, fit in my hand right away."
- How comfortable was the Me cockpit? Did your glove fit well on the stick? I suppose the gauges were well positioned and it was easy to command?
"Yes, it fit like a glove."
- Was it a tight fit?
"You got used to it. Both shoulders were against wall, which didn't help when you had to look all around in a battle. But we weren't wearing too much either."
- How did you see out?
"The armored glass made it a bit difficult to see behind, you had to kick the rudder a little to get a view. "
- How about when doing a climbing turn, how well did you see behind?
"Surprisingly well. "
- Tightly strapped in your seat and still could look behind?
"The straps weren't so tight you couldn't move. Sometimes a lot. "
- Mauno Fräntilä, Finnish fighter ace. 5 1/2 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association: Chief Warrant Officer Mauno Fräntilä.

Me 109 G-2/G-6:
The cockpit was cramped and the visibility wasn't good. This was evident when landing in bad conditions, especially with the G-2's cabin. This was evident when landing while it was snowing and the landing field was covered with pure white snow.
- Aulis Rosenlöf, Finnish fighter pilot. Source: Hannu Valtonen, "Me 109 ja Saksan sotatalous" (Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the German war economy), ISBN 951-95688-7-5.

Me 109 G-6:
One thing that was absolutely good about it, was the wild performance of the aircraft. Other good points were the visibility during the flight, the sitting position, the cockpit wasn't unnecessary roomy, the impression of controlled flight and sturdy construction: no vibrations or shakings, the electrically heated flightsuit and gloves.
- Torsti Tallgren, Finnish post war fighter pilot. Source: Hannu Valtonen, "Me 109 ja Saksan sotatalous" (Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the German war economy), ISBN 951-95688-7-5.

Me 109 G:
Hemmo Leino's Messerschmitt 109 G being followed by two Yak-9s, while mr. Leino climbed from them using spiral climb:
"-How well could you observe those pursuers?
It could be done quite well. There was nothing. I did see when he would...I learned to notice that there, now he is about to shoot because he tightened his turn and it could be seen that he tried... Actually it was very amusing. I was not in any trouble.
- About looking down, could you stretch yourself to look down or were you tightly strapped in the seat?
We used to pull the belts tight"
- Hemmo Leino, Finnish fighter ace. 11 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Notice that mr. Leino tells he is tightly strapped in his seat, yet he was able to see the two Yaks on his tail. So he had both good neck - and good visibility backwards from the cockpit.

Me 109 G:
"I got about 150 hours and over 30 aerial combats on the Messerschmitt 109. It was a fine "pilot's airplane" and there was no big complaints about the technical side, as long as you operated it within envelope, inside the performance parameters. It is hard to find any negative things about the plane from pilot's perspective when taking the development of technology into account. But the heavy and visibility limiting hood of the G-2 should have been changed into the G-6 "Galland hood" earlier."
-Hemmo Leino, Finnish fighter ace. 11 victories. Source: Hannu Valtonen, "Me 109 ja Saksan sotatalous" (Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the German war economy), ISBN 951-95688-7-5.

Me 109 G:
"The Messerschmitt pilot's suit was electrically heated from the system of the plane and it was warm. As to gloves, you had to have your own. The Air Force mitts could not be worn in the cockpit."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- The travel of the control column of the Messerschmitt was fairly short, especially sideways, I think?
The cockpit was narrow and then the pilot's legs were on the way, there was not much space for the stick. When the pilot called "Long Jimmy" was flying, he had to keep his legs bent and it was told he held the stick with his arm under his leg. "
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- How well did you see out of the cockpit of a Messerschmitt ?
As we got the Galland canopies they were a little better, wasn't it? The frames were darn wide. The lighter canopy was much better, you could see much better from there. The G-2 canopy was a problem. I remember once we had been scrambled over the Gulf of Finland, we were flying around Seiskari island and there was a lot of planes in the air. The first leg of the flight went well, but then I got more and more oil on the windscreen. I sprayed it clean with petrol, but as soon as the petrol had evaporated there was oil blocking my view. I had to do it time and again, I saw many times a Messerschmitt and the enemy he was shooting at. Then the windscreen was again blocked. I sprayed, banked, saw nothing, then three or four planes, spray, again nothing visible. I was turning about for a while, then thought, "hell no, this is no good. It is useless to stay here". I flew to the base and the mechanics worked hard to eliminate the leak."
- Antti Tani, Finnish fighter ace. 21,5 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109:
"- How did the cockpit feel in the 109?
The cockpit was small, but one got used to it after a while. In the end it felt comfortable since you felt like part of the plane. The Spitfire's cockpit did not feel that much roomier to him either. The 262 cockpit however was larger in comparison. It also had a long flight stick, giving the pilot lots of leverage in flight."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz Stigler.


Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2010, 01:58:10 PM »
Me 109 G:
Hemmo Leino's Messerschmitt 109 G being followed by two Yak-9s, while mr. Leino climbed from them using spiral climb:
"-How well could you observe those pursuers?
It could be done quite well. There was nothing. I did see when he would...I learned to notice that there, now he is about to shoot because he tightened his turn and it could be seen that he tried... Actually it was very amusing. I was not in any trouble.
- About looking down, could you stretch yourself to look down or were you tightly strapped in the seat?
We used to pull the belts tight"
- Hemmo Leino, Finnish fighter ace. 11 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Notice that mr. Leino tells he is tightly strapped in his seat, yet he was able to see the two Yaks on his tail. So he had both good neck - and good visibility backwards from the cockpit.
............................. ....

Also notice that the enemy a/c were not in the 5 > 7 o'clock position directly astern and were below the 109.

Offline WING47

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 127
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2010, 11:06:41 PM »
     The 190 would out turn the 190 ant any speed????. Well theres some serious problems with that. I could easily understand high speeds, as the 109's controls were in a bucket of concrete at 350 indicated.Medium speeds possibly, because still the 109 was difficult, but low speeds, i don't think so. The 109 had approximately the same sized wing as the 190 but the 190 was a wopping 2000lbs heavier. The wing loading on a 190 is MASSIVE!!!! If a 190 out maneuvers a 109 then the 109 has some serious design problems.

Offline Plazus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2868
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2010, 11:30:10 PM »
Nice. Way to bump a 4 month old thread... :rolleyes:
Plazus
80th FS "Headhunters"

Axis vs Allies

Offline Ruah

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #37 on: November 02, 2010, 02:40:50 AM »
necro!!

anyway, you should read the post again, and the fact that this post came at th tail end of a very long post about the same question.  please - read before you post, and read the post before you necro it and not add anything new?

Kommando Nowotny
I/JG 77, 2nd Staffel
Mediterranean Maelstrom
HORRIDO

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #38 on: November 02, 2010, 12:32:41 PM »
If you look at a 109s cockpit, it is very small. The pilot had no room to move his arms a great deal. Thus he could not put as much force on the stick. This is a factor not modeled in AH

It wouldn't have mattered if the pilot had enough room in the cockpit, he still wouldn't have the strength enough to over come the forces over the flight controls at high speed.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #39 on: November 02, 2010, 12:48:42 PM »
     The 190 would out turn the 190 ant any speed????. Well theres some serious problems with that. I could easily understand high speeds, as the 109's controls were in a bucket of concrete at 350 indicated.Medium speeds possibly, because still the 109 was difficult, but low speeds, i don't think so. The 109 had approximately the same sized wing as the 190 but the 190 was a wopping 2000lbs heavier. The wing loading on a 190 is MASSIVE!!!! If a 190 out maneuvers a 109 then the 109 has some serious design problems.

It's because the documentary was incorrect and later corrected itself.  It initially said the 190 could out turn the 109 at any speed but later corrected itself when it clarified that it could "out roll" the 109 at any speed and it could. 

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline LLogann

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4947
      • Candidz.com
Re: 109 vs 190 a different story
« Reply #40 on: November 02, 2010, 02:29:18 PM »
And not read anybodies replies.......

Nice. Way to bump a 4 month old thread... :rolleyes:
See Rule #4
Now I only pay because of my friends.