Author Topic: 109 G-10 tip stall?????? (Read 1418 times)

Urchin · « **Reply #30 on:** September 26, 2004, 05:19:10 PM »

I'd agree with that to, from what experience I have trying to fight in both planes. The D-9 seemed a little more manueverable in AH1, and the A-8 seemed a little less than it is now.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #31 on:** September 26, 2004, 05:27:10 PM »

No sim I have ever seen conisderd thar 190A8 to be "nimble," In fact it's always been modeled as a heavy pig with the standard idea that it weas a bomber destroyer and not a fighter..

GODO · « **Reply #32 on:** September 26, 2004, 05:32:48 PM »

Well, EAW and WWIIF 190A8 were a delight to fly.
Warbirds and AH 190A8s are a rocks, D9 is a enormous rock.

bozon · « **Reply #33 on:** September 26, 2004, 05:48:54 PM »

Crump,
where is the other report from that web page? there were two of them, the other one was much more favourable to the P47.

The one you posted is the earlier one from 1943. I think this one was a P47 without water injection or paddle blade. Also, if my memory serves me right, the one you posted was done by the brits.

I can't reach the webpage:
http://www.lanpartyworld.com/ww2/

Bozon

Crumpp · « **Reply #34 on:** September 26, 2004, 08:06:59 PM »

It's kind of confusing actually Bozon.

Apparently the test was flown in Italy in December of 1943 according to this report:

I believe it is a detailed report of this test flight:

Consider though:

In 1944 the Jagdwaffe was flying FW-190A8 with the VDM 9-12157H3. A wide chord wooden prop or VDM hub 9-16176 with the blades 9-30341.10 and or 9-12153B. These are the really wide chord blades seen on the Dora.

Only the first batch of FW-190A8's were delivered with VDM 9-16176A which is the narrow metal prop seen on the FW-190A5.

So both A/C got a more a more efficient propeller.

Anybody good with Prop efficiency calculations? I have access to all three props for close examination. I can take measurements if someone knows what to measure and how to do the calculations. I will photograph and document the measurements.

BTW Your link does not work.

Crumpp

wrag · « **Reply #35 on:** September 27, 2004, 07:15:18 AM »

My $0.02.....

IMHO The 109G10 in AHII will NOT manuver as well as the 109G10 in AHI. None of the 109's do.

In AHI if I timed everything just so, I could preform a cut the throttle some, hard roll, allot of rudder, pull stick back, and almost reverse the direction of the 109 nearly within the length of the plane.

NO WAY in AHII. Now it stalls, or flops around, or worse just goes into a shallow dive.

Not talkin sudden pull just smooth control input with a rapid steady increase until the manuver is preformed.

IMHO The Hartmann Manuver (Erik Hatmann) is a NO GO in AHII in any 109.

Try it if you like, just push the stick forward and left and apply left rudder. It's been reported the actual manuver could also nearly reverse your direction.

Not talkin an Axis Allied bias here just something I've noticed.

Possible error in program input? or unadjusted/maladjusted flight variable?

The 109's are not as manuverable as before. Flaps on the 109's? I very rarely use em during combat! To me doing so gives away the 109's main weapon SPEED!

The E, F, and G2 don't seem quite as unstable as the G6 and G10.

Recall a report that claimed the 109's (all models) had very strong down rudder response. Was put in by Willie at the insistance of one of the German ace's.