109G10 rotating mass

[ccvi]

Is the 109G-10's prop and other rotating stuff really that heavy as modeled? It seems to have very big gyroscopic effect. Any ideas?

[Terror]

Originally posted by ccvi
Is the 109G-10's prop and other rotating stuff really that heavy as modeled? It seems to have very big gyroscopic effect. Any ideas?

This thread will give you some idea of what causes the "gyroscopic effect" you mention:

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14348

Terror

[Staga]

Very powerfull engine with twice the torque of a Kenworth truck in a quite small plane...

[AKWarp]

The 109g10 used the DB-605 engine which was rated between 1435-2000 HP at sea level depending on specific version.  It used all sorts of pressure cooling, water/methanol/nitrous injection to increase HP and cooling and came with either a one-stage or two-stage compressor depending when it was built.

This engine produced huge amounts of torque and the 109 is a light airframe.  It suffers from this torque, especially in the roll rate.  Then again, 109's don't have the best roll rate to begin with.  The power of this engine is evident in the 109's climbing ability.  The 109g10 is one of the, if not the fastest climbing plane in AH.  That's why it's so popular for buff busting...it gets to altitude quickly.

[ccvi]

are you sure you know what you're talking about?

the gyroscopic effect does not depend on the engine's torque.

was the 109's prop larger than those of other planes? did the prop or the crankshaft have a larger mass than those of others? was the engine running at higher rpm? was the 109 a lot less heavy than other fighters?

i think it's NO for all those questions, and the big gyroscopic effect i seem to feel is just a result of the 109's bouncy nose, bouncier than others.

[Terror]

Originally posted by ccvi
are you sure you know what you're talking about?

the gyroscopic effect does not depend on the engine's torque.

was the 109's prop larger than those of other planes? did the prop or the crankshaft have a larger mass than those of others? was the engine running at higher rpm? was the 109 a lot less heavy than other fighters?

i think it's NO for all those questions, and the big gyroscopic effect i seem to feel is just a result of the 109's bouncy nose, bouncier than others.
 

There are MULTIPLE factors that effect the rolling/yawing effect of the 109.  Gyroscopic Precession is actually a VERY minor turning tendency and only effects the aircraft during longitudinal manuevers. (pitch/yaw)  The largest of the rolling tendencies is from TORQUE.  (Plus don't forget Slipstream, and P-Factor add a bit of rolling/yawing tendency too.)  Generally, the higher the power the engine the more torque effect on the aircraft.

If you are getting a "bouncy" nose, I would suspect either an undamped rudder input or "adverse yaw".  

The high power engine, climb specialized prop, and large tail surfaces are probably the major contributors to the 109's heavy roll tendency during slow/climb phases of flight.

Terror

[ccvi]

There are MULTIPLE factors that effect the rolling/yawing effect of the 109.

multiple effects effect the flight of all aircraft. i just don't want to discuss those, but the gyroscopic effect. nothing else.

terror, are you sure the 109 has large tail surfaces compared to other fighters? that might actually be the reason i'm feeling to much gyro effect. large tail surfaces make the 109 react violently to quick elevator changes (what i called bouncy nose), and that is the situation where gyroscopic effect can be felt.

but i wouldn't describe it as a "minor turning tendency" in case of the g10. sure, it's not a sustained turn but just lasts as long as pitch changes. but i feel more of that than of slipstream or p-factor at 300 mph.

btw: engine torque doesn't matter much because of the constant rpm; changing controler input parameters shouldn't effect the flight model...

i would really like to see the data used to calculate the angular momentum of the 109's rotating parts.

[hazed-]

I think it was Adolf gallands 'the first and the last' im not sure but in it there was a description of flying a 109 and it mentions how you vertually were constantly using one leg on the rudder due to the gyroscopic effects.Mentions how your leg would ache after long sorties.

wish i had the book to check it but im sure it was one of the bad points mentioned.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by AKWarp
it was built.

T  The 109g10 is one of the, if not the fastest climbing plane in AH.  

FYI: The Spit 14 outclimbs it to 20,000 feet.

[ccvi]

Originally posted by hazed-
I think it was Adolf gallands 'the first and the last' im not sure but in it there was a description of flying a 109 and it mentions how you vertually were constantly using one leg on the rudder due to the gyroscopic effects.Mentions how your leg would ache after long sorties.

wish i had the book to check it but im sure it was one of the bad points mentioned.

constantly having to use the rudder can't be gyroscopic effect (unless you're constantly flying loops). it probably was constantly neccessary at certain speeds, because the 109 didn't have rudder trim. slipstream effect differs with speed, it was probably overcompensated by alignment of the vertical stabilizer at high speeds.

[Terror]

Originally posted by ccvi


constantly having to use the rudder can't be gyroscopic effect (unless you're constantly flying loops). it probably was constantly neccessary at certain speeds, because the 109 didn't have rudder trim. slipstream effect differs with speed, it was probably overcompensated by alignment of the vertical stabilizer at high speeds.

I am not sure what to tell you.  I fly the 109 for Buff Busting and  I don't remember having an overly bouncy nose with it.  It does have a strong left roll tendency, but not a "bouncy" response from pitch change manuevers.  I also notice it has a healthy "left adverse yaw" when rolling right, but not anymore than the F4u-1.  Have you tried damping your pitch and rudder axis on your joystick to help this?  Do you have a "twist" joystick?  These can sometimes give unwanted rudder inputs.  

Terror

[Easyscor]

ccvi,

It sounds like you set your dead zone too low.  At any rate, you shouldn't be having this problem.

As for gyroscopic effect, you can experience a much more pronounced gyroscopic effect in a P51 on takeoff then in a 109G10.  In both planes, the AC tends to turn to the left on take off as the tail comes up off the runway under full power.  The trick is to apply power slowly.  btw, You can use the gyroscopic effect at the top of a climb to help flip your AC over on it's back but most of the time it isn't noticable.

I think I remember two other things about gyroscopic effect, the faster the disk spins, the stronger the gyroscopic effect but in propellers, the forces imparted to the blade passing through the air are much stronger unless the airfoil stalls.