Trim settings, tail heavyness...

I believe the few sources I was able t find about late Bf109 models, including the G and K series, refer to them as tail heavy.

I even read somewhere ( sorry, I don't recall exactly where ) that full brakes could be applied during taxi and even landing rollout, without risking a prop strike.

In the present beta version of the K4, both during taxi and during landing rollout, I have to be cautious when applying brakes because the aircraft can easily prop strike.

I wonder if this is the way it should be ?

This can be related to pitch trim settings and some fine tuning that took place along the various updates ?

I have the feeling that there is less tendency of the nose to want to rise after getting airborne, specially if I set the pitch trim at +2 for takeoff, but then, I also use flaps ( up to the beginning of the 2nd mark ) and not more than 1.4 ATA for my takeoffs, so it can be my technique that is now closer to what was used in the real aircraft ?

The brakes (or CoG?) were only changed recently (in the past couple of months), before that you could slam the brakes on in the BF109 while taxing and it wouldn't nose strike.

I did have a quick fly in Nevada a week or so ago, and I found the 109 to still be very tail heavy during flight and stuggled to maintain level flight even with +2 nose trim at any power level.

We've had a couple of patches since then for both 1.5 and 2.0, and I've not flown it since.

FYI, a trim discussion isn't going to go anywhere based on feel though, we had a big thread that was eventually closed recently. Unless you can produce some proper documentation that show the DCS flight model is wrong, then it's a non-starter, as you should know considering you posted in that thread quite a bit.

In the present beta version of the K4, both during taxi and during landing rollout, I have to be cautious when applying brakes because the aircraft can easily prop strike.

I could be wrong but I believe I read somewhere that it is a known [unintentional] issue, along with the black smoke trailing following an abrupt change in manifold pressure.

I could be wrong but I believe I read somewhere that it is a known [unintentional] issue, along with the black smoke trailing following an abrupt change in manifold pressure.

I no longer notice the exhaust smoke, (flying 2.0 and latest update).

Yes, as javelina1 points out, the smoke is no longer an issue.

The problem with the nose being heavier than before or the brakes too effective is now a problem though.

From what I read, and I believe heard from Eric Brown in it's interview, the brakes could be applied at will when landing, to stop the aircraft without fearing a prop strike.

Yes, as javelina1 points out, the smoke is no longer an issue.

 

The problem with the nose being heavier than before o the brakes too effective is now a problem though.

 

From what I read, and I believe heard from Eric Brown in it's interview, the brakes could be applied at will when landing, to stop the aircraft without fearing a prop strike.

Noted; I still believe ED has acknowledged it as an issue. There's no way in hell that is the correct behavior. Tapping the brakes while at a low taxi speed (maybe 15km/h) results in a goddamn near front flip.

Bf-109 is tail-heavy on the ground, due to wheels axis is advanced with respect to the CoG.

The Bf-109 is not tail-heavy when flying. All fast planes are nose-heavy by design, and especially when the plane is gliding.

This is the weight and balance chart of Bf-109G2 trop

Thx for the details Otto !

Of course when I referred to tail-heaviness I was not referring to aerodynamically tail heavy :-) but rather - tail heavy on ground, and of course that has to do with the placement of the CoG relative to the main gear.

"even read somewhere ( sorry, I don't recall exactly where ) that full brakes could be applied during taxi and even landing rollout, without risking a prop strike."

Yes, it was talked about in the interview with that German WWII 109 pilot. He said that prop strike was a non issue in both the 190, and 109. It annoys me no end that the 109 is so easy to tip in DCS. My god the plane doesn't even look like it could tip when you look at the placement of the front wheels in proportion to the rest of the plane.

Is the effect a result of weight imbalance, or over-effective brakes though?

To my mind the 109 is already very easy to ground loop on take-off. If the CoG is shifted further aft, it might just become totally uncontrollable in a sim, so be careful what you ask for or you may just get it!

My comments are totally unsupported by evidence, and are merely a comment, so let's just drop it. Frankly, it would seem some of us have a very unhealthy fixation on the 109's weight balance and trim. Do you really think ED haven't heard you already? I think that the more that is said about it, the less likely we will see any meaningful response - we call the effect the law of diminishing return. We get that some of you are dissatisfied, but adding more and more threads, and raising the issue again and again no matter how we change the way we say it is not helping matters!

As a final note, impressions are one thing, memory deficiencies are another, and perhaps taking impressions as gospel may not be the correct approach here. Ask yourself why you need to be able to apply full brakes on the ground, and if it is so important that you want to upset the balance of the aircraft in all other flight regimes because of a few comments.

Unless you are real world Bf-109 K4 pilots, how do you know you're right in the slightest degree in what you say? Ask yourself why ED have produced the module this way, with the trim effects it has. Yo-Yo has his reasons, and if the trim issue was going to be resolved in your favour, it wouldn't have taken all these new threads to get the message across.

In short, don't you think it is time to drop it?

I believe it's probably due to an adjustment in the brakes efficiency to allow for engine runs without the aircraft starting to move.

The best option will probably be to set an axis curve, specially on cheap hardware like the one most of us use for rudder input, and use them without full deflection because that would correspond to the force applied by the pilot to arrest the aircraft during runnups.

* This is completely on feeling of the sim. *

Something I would like to mention is that I feel as if the brakes sensitivity may be off. I would be taxing in the 109K4 (can't reference if this is fixed or not) come across a 90 degrees turn and tail wheel is unlocked I would give it some gas and step on the right brake doing this would bring the tail off the ground in a manner I have never seen and risk either a prop strike or a very close call. This engine power is no where close to takeoff power and would be what I consider normal and safe for taxing. Has anyone had anything similar?

If anything I feel that the tail is too light on the ground or the brakes may be too strong. Any thoughts?