Hello Georg, thanks for the data, thats alot of stuff to work through, but very interesting. That should be sufficient to make a fdm of. > 2. Bf 109 > > First, I am *not* an experienced pilot regarding such overpowered single > engine aircraft. But I know all about possible "bad" effects such as > torque, P-factor and rotating-air-effect. Although I am very careful > regarding the recommended procedures and applying a lot of rudder I > cannot prevent that the left wing goes down when I try to lift the tail > wheel. I tried several flap/speed configurations but all the same. > you also have to apply a lot of aileron to the right. I hold the stick nearly half way to the right on take off roll. Also the tail won't raise by itself, you need to lift it (this is specific 109 behaviour)by pushing the stick forward (This is not common for tailwheel planes, i admit but this is how the original aircraft behaves). For the "empty" plane try to take off with reduced power (about 1 ata) and the stick hard to the right and a little pushed forward.
> Once the bird is airborne it flies very well for me (turns, rolls, > loops, etc). > > The second problem is landing. When I set full flaps, gear out the nose > goes down very heavily even with full (counter-) trim applied (used the > hud to control this). > So a 3-point-landing is not possible, only a very bad main-wheel landing > with some nice jumps :-( > The 109 "floats very long" (as someone who flew a 109 on airshows stated). I start the approach from downwind at 200 km/h and keep the descend rate at or beneath 5 m/s. A higher descend will increase the speed and make it impossible to reduce speed for a threepoint landing (stall is ca 150 km/h, full flaps. Don't try it faster) Actually you "stall" the aircraft to threepoint attitude (as she is "tail-heavy"). The nose down you noticed, gives at least a bit of view at the runway on final. When you take throttle back at threshold you completely loose sight on the runway, if not you are likely too fast and will overshoot. You need to make sure you are not too fast and youre descend rate is not too high (so the aircraft doesn't "fall through" near minimum speed). Ideally you approach the airfield at 175 km/h and a descend rate < 5 m/s. Throttle back, descend with stick slightly back. Vision to runway equals zero and hope it reappers on both sides of the cockpit. Float... float... When the nose begins to drop stick full back to threepoint, careful left/right braking AND Rudder to control direction. Believe me, i know the relief of being landed without groundloop or 90 degrees off the runway ;-) > So my question is wheather you can start and land it in the right manner? > Or: > - my bad flying-skills? - accepted, if so -> more training! > - some CG problem? > - other problems? > > Ok, today there are only some specialists who can fly the Bf 109 but > many years ago very untrained and very young pilots had to fly it - what > they payed with a very short life but mostly due to enemy contact and > not general flying problems. > I had similar thinking like you had but all the reports i read described pretty much the same Behaviour that you noticed. The number of Start and Landing accidents of any Bf 109 variant was higher than every other Luftwaffe aircraft. Most of these Accidents however didn't cost the pilots life but a new Gear leg and some Propeller blades. (There are a LOT of 109 pictures with only one gear and bended propeller blades in any literature i have). I believe flightgear models gear- behaviour on asphalt or concrete wich is not the preferred ground to operate a Bf 109 on. (In fact most Warbirds don't like too hard ground.) The WW2 Airfields were mostly grass, which allows more "slipping and sliding", so the Misbehaviour of the 109 was eased a bit. Technically the Bf 109 wing area is quiet small (nearly half of that of a Spitfire) to allow a high airspeed. Also the Gear Layout forgives little (Even the Spitfire Gear is wider). Another point is the Bf 109 wing is stalled in threepoint attitude (So you HAVE to lift the tail to have sufficient airflow on the wing. The Luftwaffe Experts could handle this but the lesser trained pilots later in the war had their difficulties. That resulted in the Bf 109 being named "Beule" (bump) or "Beulenpest" (bump-plague) and the increasing casualties due to Landing accidents. Relief came with the K-variant which featured a longer tail gear strut to lower the Angle of attack of the mainwing. I thought about doing a K Variant but that one doesn't have those nice "bumps" :-) > Thank you once again for the aircraft. I had some long and nice flights. > > Regards > Georg EDDW > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files > for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes > searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
