109 E

[Debrody]

ok ok im just saying that the sit had cannons on its wing, and with the clipped ings it yould roll like crazy. So it maybe doesnt count AS much.
The 109F has the same wingspan as the E with rounded endings, or larger wingspan, like they added the roundigs to the old, existing wing?

[Krusty]

Less area, I believe slightly shorter.

[Debrody]

Thanks. Interesting, the F can turn almost as good as the E with less wing area and more weight then.
Edit: got it... the F has those lil things on the leading edge of the wing what open at slow speeds to increase the wing area (damn i dont know its name). maybe those make the difference.

[Krusty]

I've read the enhanced manuverability is rooted in that rounded wingtip. Less drag, more lift.

I don't know why, but I've heard it's based on the rounded tip, drag reduction across the frame, and the higher horsepower.

[nrshida]

Edit: got it... the F has those lil things on the leading edge of the wing what open at slow speeds to increase the wing area (damn i dont know its name). maybe those make the difference.

Leading edge slats Debrody. But the Emil had those too.

[Debrody]

Im outta ideas then... 

[Ardy123]

The 109 E has a different airfoil shape than the F-K models. the 109 e has a 2300 series airfoil while the F-K have a clark-Y airfoil.

[STEELE]

The Spit I had fabric covered ailerons.  The Spit V had metal covered.  The metal ailerons were retrofitted to some Spitfire II as well.  The metal ailerons help improved the roll rate.

I don't believe that metal ailerons could have helped the roll as much as it does in AH,
here's 3 good reasons:  f4u1-1a-1d              (all had fabric ailerons)
and they have always been known for excellent roll rate.   OTOH, Spit IX were fitted with longer-span ailerons.

[nrshida]

Don't the Corsairs have Flettner tabs though?

[Jabberwock]

Oops, this is what I originally wanted to post:  
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
RAE testing of the Emil vs Spit, scroll down to the Roll Rate section, theres a graph
Between 200-250 mph the Spit takes twice as long to bank 45 degrees!
1 second for the 109, 2 seconds for the Spit   

While relatively indicative of performance, time to bank is not the same as steady state roll rate performance. You cant say the 109's steady state rate of roll is twice that of the Spitfire at 200 mph based off a time to bank 45 degrees.

There are all sorts of factors than can slow/aid the onset of a roll or contribute to a slow initial roll rate. Everything from the gearing of the control column, the type of aileron, type of aileron covering, tension/slack and stretch in the control wires, the state of airflow over the wing and aileron. I believe one of the great assets of the Fw 190s outstanding roll was that it used control rods instead of wires.

IIRC, there is a RAE/AFDU or NACA paper dealing with roll rate on the Spitfire that has some interesting graphs on the delay between control column movement, aileron movement and the actual initiation of the roll. Its been a while since I looked at it, but IIRC (again), there is up to 1/3rd of a second delay before roll onset at some speeds. 

[Guppy35]

I don't believe that metal ailerons could have helped the roll as much as it does in AH,
here's 3 good reasons:  f4u1-1a-1d              (all had fabric ailerons)
and they have always been known for excellent roll rate.   OTOH, Spit IX were fitted with longer-span ailerons.

Spit IX had the same size ailerons as the I, II, V, XII, XVI.  The Spit VII, VIII, XIV has shorter span ailerons.  There was a noticeable difference in the roll rate for the Spit when it got metal ailerons.

Classic story from "Wing Leader" by Johnnie Johnson talks about this when the Tangmere Wing Spit IIs started to get retrofitted with metal ailerons.  They all didn't get the upgrade at once and during one particular 'break' in a fight, F/L Cocky Dundas admonished Wing Commander Bader with "We don't all have metal ailerons!"   The unmodified Spit IIs were having a hard time keeping up.

The issue with the Spit fabric ailerons was they apparently 'ballooned' out a bit at times slowing the roll rate.  This obviously didn't happen to Spits with metal ailerons.

[STEELE]

While relatively indicative of performance, time to bank is not the same as steady state roll rate performance. You cant say the 109's steady state rate of roll is twice that of the Spitfire at 200 mph based off a time to bank 45 degrees.


  

Absolutely, thats all that I have been testing is time to bank 45 degrees, and time to bank 90 degrees.  Any weight that's not centered in the fuselage will slow down time to bank, centrifugal forces and inertia are playing large roles.  Wing tanks, weight of wing guns & ammo are both big factors.  I can see how the metal ailerons of the Spit V would help roll rate at high speeds, but at normal speed I dont believe it could roll that much faster than the Spit Mk 1, like our version of the Spit V does.

[Karnak]

Steele,

Look at the link I posted at the bottom of the first page.  All your claim that metal ailerons couldn't have helped that much means is that the Spitfire I should roll better.  Due to the NACA chart we have roll rates for metal aileroned Spitfires with full span and clipped wings.

[Guppy35]

Quoting Johnnie Johnson in his book "Wing Leader"

We thought the most important difference between the Spitfire 2 and Spitfire V was that the former was fitted with fabric ailerons while the latter had improved metal type.  In the air the difference in performance was quite remarkable for the previous heavy stick pressures were greatly reduced and the rate of roll, at high speeds was more then doubled.  In other words the lateral manoeverability of the Spitfire was improved tremendously with the introduction of metal ailerons."

[Devil 505]

I build plastic models as a hobby. Here are some shots I took comparing the wings from the 109 E4 vs, 109 G2 (F similair)


As you can see, the wingspan is nearly the same. Also notice that the alerions on the G wings are shorter vs. the E wing.

Not quite exact science, but a good visual aid.