Me 410 data

[Debrody]

Wing loading less than the 190 is not a ringing endorsement of its turning ability.  The Mosquito's wing loading is significantly lower than the Me410's and it doesn't turn very well.  The flaps are just basic flaps, so I don't think much help will be had from them, but those slats looked larger than normal.

Yup, the Mossie cant turn as well, but still enough to easily kill ponies, jugs and have fun against 38s, jaks. Im not saying the 410s should change the world, dont let me wrong plz! Just wanna tell, it should be able to be  at least semi-competitive against the BnZ part of the planeset in a knife-fight. I cant tell you exact data, i have never been flying this, im just making comprasions between this one and the ones what are already modelled. Its just pure speculation, trying my lil brain and the short physics knowledge i got.
True, i wasnt counting in the extra guns. My bad, im sorry.
Anyway, im a masochist, i like to turn my ride against spixes : )  if once we get this one, i wont be afraid to take it to the limit   

[Scherf]

Scherf you sent Pyro the whole digital enchilada we've accumulated on the 410, right?   So I don't end up sending him stuff he's already got.

Trying to send the enchilada mate, however the email pipe is narrow at either end, trying to upload to a webspace. Are you able to send a CD Pyro's way? I can't even upload some of the files to the web space - I keep getting helpful messages that there's an error with the file.

[moot]

Lemme check something out.

[Pigslilspaz]

Totally different from any you've seen before, no doubt.

See here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zvkbIJWSRI&feature=player_detailpage#t=212s

Looks a lot like the SBD's dive brakes, except bars instead of panels.

[Volron]

How much difference is there between the BK 5 and the 5 cm KwK 39?  Other than the modifications to make it mountable in the Me-410.

[STEELE]

Shemp, was just drawing a very simple line to the same chart:
(Image removed from quote.)
The red line shows our actual G-6 (more or less accurately). Look the curve: it misses that step what the original one has, around 3-5km (9-15K). All the 109s has it.
Why is that? Almost looks like it has 2-staged supercharger, while i heard that the DB-6xx series had an one-staged, large supercharger.

Also what the heck is the me 109 hv1? Slow as hell, and "ohne waffen", unarmed.

Moot, the 410 wont be as a bad turner, based on its wingloading: its less that the 190, also has large flaps. The climb rate will be the real pain, not the turn ability.

I was under the impression the 410 climbed better than a 110.  Also, The large wing area of the 410 and the shape, besides the fact that it's wingloading is less than A8, will probably help its turn ability.
Look at the Spit 14, terrible wingloading compared to our other spits, but turns as well as a 109g2. (at least)  Moot brings up a great point as well, if the ground crew removed armor immediately, the weight will be significantly less than factory specs!
Lets not forget about this, as it should make quite a diff. in wingloading and performance (prime example is our armor-stripped, lightweight Finn Brewster)  

[Charge]

When making comparisons between Mossie and ME410 regarding their turning ability keep in mind that Mossie has a 13% thickness ratio wing and 410 has 18% thickness ratio which also explains some of its higher drag, but 410 also tolerates more AoA and the slats help it further. So in short a Mossie is able to fly a circle at faster speed but 410 can pull lots of angles for a snap shot (and bleed E like a pig in the process...).

With enough E I'd say they could be initially quite even in turning ability but in sustained turn the Mossie retains E better, i.e. not much different from 109/Spit case.

-C+

[Karnak]

STEELE,

You sure about that?  The Spitfire Mk XIV is a mediocre turner.  I think it slightly out turns the Bf109K-4 and Bf109G-14, but not other Bf109s.

[Debrody]

In a sustained turn, the spit14 is way above average, its huge engine pulls it around quick. Definiately gets any 109.
In a scissors, its a fail: large turn radius, medicore stall speed, very poor stability and stall behaviour. Even a k4 outscissors it.
Since i consider the long sustained turn as a homie move, i choose the K-4
 

[Lusche]

STEELE,

You sure about that?  The Spitfire Mk XIV is a mediocre turner.  I think it slightly out turns the Bf109K-4 and Bf109G-14, but not other Bf109s.

according to MOSQ sustain turn radius tests

turn rate: 109G2  20 deg/s, Spit 14 22.5
turn radius: 109G2  636.1 feet vs Spit 14 628.6 feet

at full flaps G-2 is marginally better in both-

[Krusty]

Debrody: From the previous page we were talking about the bomb racks. This is just an addition to that discussion:



When the role turned towards heavy fighter, they were removed as Moot said. When they needed to drop bombs, like the night raids on UK or against VVS ground forces, you might find them with racks.

[Krusty]

Might provide a bit of insight about the wing. This is some sort of stall/flutter test on the 210 (note the cranked outboard leading edge?).

Also note the position and gap near the flaps, for visual cue on modeling the 410 in AH. I know this is the 210 but the look should be similar near the flap seam.




EDIT: You can see part of the wheel so the gear must be down. Not sure it makes a difference, but interesting to note.

[Debrody]

Now it made me curious.
Heard the 210 suffered from real bad stability and flight characteristics problems, which were "mostly" solved on the 410.
Anyone has some info what are the exact changes between the two airframes?
ty

[Krusty]

The 210 did not have leading edge slats. The tail was too short, so it had some yaw instability with regards to spins. However many of the bad traits were due to faulty landing gear design, bad brakes, and such. It had many problems crashing during landing when the brakes simply failed to stop the plane like they should, or the gear itself just collapsed for no reason.

Messerschmitt was rebuked over these failings. Such a basic principle, but so poorly executed.

In regards to the fixes:

The engines were longer, the nacelles also longer, and this changed the balance of the plane as well as the center of gravity (guessing on that). The leading edges were changed to have slats. The tail was lengthened. The increased horsepower helped the handling (or so I have read) at slow speeds near the stall.

All of these changes were implemented into the 210 production models. It was really the first batch which was "bad" (and even then pilots still wanted it). The only difference that I can see the 410 added which the 210 did not already include is the straight leading edge of the outboard wings (the 210 had a kinked wing, the 410 did not). [edit: and of course the engine nacelles were shorter on the 210A, 210C, 210Ca models]

[Krusty]

Similar testing being done on the twin-tailed prototype (note the canopy is different from the previous pic)