Turn rate hierarchy correlation from actual flight tests

[thorsim]

well the point i made before is that max flaps and back is not what you would be wanting in the first place,
and the guy in the video seemed to be in no real hurry, so 45 seconds i do not think is the time we would be looking at. 

as far as Rall not using them i am not surprised the 109 could turn very well yet it was not it's best attribute vs. it's opponents which i think was climb and acceleration due to the power/size of the plane, so an experienced pilot would probably choose another maneuver use the vertical and not get into a circle turning type of fight.

the 109 also has those slats to hold off the stall not just the flaps like it's opponents.

+S+

t   

I asked Rall if he ever used flaps in combat, and he shook his head and said "NEVER".
45 seconds is more than 2 circles in a Spitfire by the way.
Now compare that with the P51, just flick a switch.....

[killnu]

Read about Marsailles....he used flaps frequently...of course he flew rather unorthodox compared to other LW pilots.  Was a good read on his "technique".

[thorsim]

thanks, i'd like to ...

Read about Marsailles....he used flaps frequently...of course he flew rather unorthodox compared to other LW pilots.  Was a good read on his "technique".

got a title and author?

[Angus]

I'll have to look up if Marseille used the flaps, but he sure used the slats in low speed turns.
His setup allowed him to get a ton of kills, since he bat-turned with allied aircraft running on full power. The kills were HIS though, since he needed the rest of his mates to cover him while he took care of the "act".
BTW, his kills were mostly at very low G at very very short range.

[Ack-Ack]

Read about Marsailles....he used flaps frequently...of course he flew rather unorthodox compared to other LW pilots.  Was a good read on his "technique".

His use of flaps was almost unique to his attack style.  IIRC, when the British would enter into a Luftberry his preferrred method was to attack from below, coming straight up at them and he'd be in range as he approached the stall.  When he attacked from above, I don't think he would use flaps as he came down for a quick deflection shot on the British in the Luftberry.  

Diving alone into a pack of 16 P-40s and scoring 6 kills, 5 of them in just as many minutes, that is some excellent flying and gunnery skills.

Aren't there some reports that he shot down 17 RAF fighters in a single day?

ack-ack

[killnu]

Akak, I read the same on his approach to the luftberry....and yes, there was a report of 17 in one day.

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/marse/marse.htm
decent write up that sites some sources.

"Marseille was one of the few pilots who was able to totally master his Messerschmitt fighter through the full flight envelope. He would practice his techniques over and over again, often against men in his own squadron while returning home from sorties. He was so comfortable and confident in his flying abilities that he would often break standard rules of aerial combat  by pulling his power to idle and using flaps to help tighten his turns."

From another write up...mentions not flying to standards (cutting throttle and use of flaps).

[Ardy123]

Something else to take into account when comparing turn radius/rate is the shape of the wings airfoil. For example, the size of the wing or the power of the engine is not enough.  For example I have read in certain places the laminar flow wing cross section shape of the 51 caused problems at slow speeds or at sharp angles of attack. Also, for example thinner air foils work better at high speeds but fail to produce enough lift at slower speeds where a thicker wing produces much more lift and thus is able to turn tighter but at high speeds creates too much drag and even may cause the air to separate causing a loss of aileron authority.

for example
109g =  NACA 2r(1)14 - naca 2411
P51 = NAA/NACA 45-100

Also, a side note, the p51 wing foil design caused a whole new series of NACA designations using 6 digits instead of the old 4 digit numbers..

heres a link to some of the math around the shapes..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_airfoil

[Angus]

His use of flaps was almost unique to his attack style.  IIRC, when the British would enter into a Luftberry his preferrred method was to attack from below, coming straight up at them and he'd be in range as he approached the stall.  When he attacked from above, I don't think he would use flaps as he came down for a quick deflection shot on the British in the Luftberry.  

Diving alone into a pack of 16 P-40s and scoring 6 kills, 5 of them in just as many minutes, that is some excellent flying and gunnery skills.

Aren't there some reports that he shot down 17 RAF fighters in a single day?

ack-ack

That's how he did it. But his buddies had to cover him well while he performed his butchery, since he was slow in the air.
He was a good shot as well, but the method would have forgiven a worse shot, since he was firing almost at point blank.
The 17 RAF fighters shot in a single day has been the fuel for many debates. In short AFAIK the RAF didn't even loose 17 fighters that day, nor were all those lost in Marseilles area. But the SAAF was also there, and he may well have managed to ping 17 aircraft.

[FTJR]

Im with you there Angus, I think in his book, Full Circle,  Johnny Johnson did some research on that 17 Kills and found that the total aircraft lost on the day in question was less than that, and some of those lost were not of the types claimed. As to the SAAF, well i've never considered that any commonwealth squadron would be operating independently of the RAF. Did that happen?

[Angus]

I can look it up (I have "Full Circle"), but I do recall it from Duncan-Smith's book "Spitfire into battle". Will have a lookie though.