Jump to content

Is the Spit quite right?


stratman59

Recommended Posts

Had all of the WW2 planes for a few months now. Been concentrating on the Spit only. After countless hours of takeoff and landing practice, I can occasionally takeoff reasonably tidily and occasionally land without touching a wing down. So, for a change of scenery, I thought I'd have a go in the BF 109. Now from what I read the 109 is a tricky beast due to the narrow undercarriage and the high power to weight ratio. What I found was that within an hour of practice I can do almost perfect takeoff and landings in the 109!

Now to me that means one of two things, the BF 109 is too easy or the Spit is not quite right, and yes both set on full sim modes with all assistance removed. This isn't a complaint as I'm loving both, just an observation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was your tailwheel locked in the 109? Try unlocking the tailwheel in the 109 and compare again. Also at what ata/ boost are you taking off in both planes? The undercarriage width of later 109s and Spits is pretty much identical.

Cougar, CH and Saitek PnP hall sensor kits + shift registers: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220916

 

Shapeways store for DIY flight simming equipment and repair: https://www.shapeways.com/shops/rel4y-diy-joystick-flight-simming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, tailwheel locked in the 109, as the manual advises at takeoff and landing. Why would I unlock it? I get what you're saying, that the locking tailwheel makes all the difference? Begs the question why on earth did they not engineer a locking tailwheel on the Spit back in the day? Superior German engineering I suppose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As "rel4y" said

what is the ata /boost that you are using to take-off?

Remember this fact:the runways in DCS are very long and featured for the jets airplanes.Don't need all the power.

Try to use boost at 8 only for the spit 30(3000) rpm

and ata 12 to maintain 25 (2500)rpm for 109.

Wait a few and will see that these babies take-off easily.


Edited by cromhunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you maybe miss reading my post? I have absolutely no trouble at all taking off and landing the 109, like I said, mastered within an hour or so practice using recommended procedures.

 

Trust me, I have read every post, every manual and watched every video regarding the Spit, yes I'm using 8 boost and all the right settings. After probably over 100 hours on the Spit I'm still, at best, 'messy' with both takeoff and landings. My question is, was the Spit really so much harder to handle than the 109 as DCS have made it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for misunderstood:)

So to get a good answer for a question about real handle between 109 and spit ,it seems that you have to wait for a pilot who was in command on these warbirds.

In fact i mean that on this forum it will be very difficult to find this very rare man:)

I was a real pilot for 35 years and never been on command aboard any warbirds.

So now why these airplanes would have been so difficult to fly in real?

Along the WWII pilots had their solo flights after only 15/20 hours of training,so you have 100 hours ,it must be enough:)


Edited by cromhunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think the Spit was any easier than the 109 to fly in reality?

 

There are lots of pilots notes out there from current pilots who have flown both, and from what I see, the high mortality rate from 109 take offs anecdotally may well be down to inferior training due to the pressure to get pilots to the frontline in WW2. The pilots state that they're both a handful, and that the 109 has issues with longitudinal stability.

 

They don't say that either one is easier to unstick, so maybe you're reading things through the eyes of what has been said in the popular media about them?

 

My money would be on the fact that neither is a perfect rendition in their flight modelling, but both are close. Also, bear in mind that they're both ongoing projects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, none of us have any real evidence as to the reality of flying either aircraft. I am talking solely about the DCS simulations of the aircraft. I purchased all four WW2 birds but thought I'd try to master the Spit before attempting any of the others. I was expecting the 109 to be far harder which is why I was so surprised at how easy the 109 was to get to grips with in comparison. Thus my thoughts that the Spit model may not be all that correct? I do take your point regarding both being ongoing projects, I love them both as they are in any case but it's nice to think things could become even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, seeing as no-one seems particularly interested in actually helping you.. and they're all just going after your attempt to compare one type against the other... ughhh...:doh:

 

I suspect there is one specific trick that you're missing.

The Spit isn't hard to take off, IMO. It took me probably 10 to 15 attempts to be confident. But it required doing specific things, rather then just trying to get a feel for it.

 

Now, you say you've read all the threads, so I'm not going to spell out the procedures for you again.

What I suggest is that you PM me, and we try to meet up on TS and then jump into a mission with external views so I can see what you're doing with the controls etc.. then we can see if anything appears to be amiss.

 

sound Ok?

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take off is fairly easy, quickly advance (but don't slam!) the throttle while countering the torque and you're good to go. Just give it a nose heavy trim (or stick forward) so it doesn't leap into the air too early. Taking off from 2 point attitude is my preference.

 

You won't need 8lbs boost either, that can actually be too much until you get used to it.

 

Landing is harder, especially due to the free castoring tail wheel, but really you just need to master flying about a foot above the runway with power on, then slowly drop the throttle and land in a 3pt attitude.

 

Done right, you won't bounce or slide, then it is just stick back and rudder to keep tracking.

 

Easy mode tip: Assign the brake lever to an axis. Apply about 15-20% *before* landing, then you'll have decent control with the brakes to help keep tracking true.


Edited by Buzzles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Spit pretty much takes off by itself with minimal control input necessary, and, as long as one sticks to the numbers and flares correctly, lands by itself as well, with bigger inputs and some brakes required only during second half of a rollout.

 

However, compared to other DCS warbirds, It's ridiculously rudder-sensitive, and I think this is where OP's (and other people's struggling with Spit) problem lies. That was my experience at the beginning as well. Whether it's realistic or not, the plane just requires smaller, yet much faster and more precise rudder inputs, with dabs rather than continuous presses.

 

Once you get the hang of it, it's not much less controllable on ground than others. Sometimes it's actually more controllable (109 with its abysmal rudder authority on takeoffs comes to mind).

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the offer Phil but I don't seem to have got my point across very clearly. After 100 plus hours I can take off fine (I'd say 90% of the time, the other 10% a little crab-like) and in most cases land, all be it a little frantically with a wing touching just before coming to a halt now and then. Mostly I must say from heeding your advice re stabbing the pedals.

My point was, why it only took me an hour or so to essentially master takeoff and landing in the BF 109 compared to 100 plus hours to do the same in the Spit? That's why I'm questioning if the Spit model needs a little work? Even allowing for the locking tailwheel issue was the Spit really that much harder to takeoff and land than a BF 109?

 

(I did initially have a software fault with my config which probably accounted for some of the time but even so)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot answer your question, but I can concur that I have the exact same experience.

 

The Spit, for me, was by far the most difficult warbird to learn to take off in. More than the Dora and Messers, both of which I got down pretty quickly. And, indeed, this is the reverse of what you would expect given the historical accounts/records, which just talk about how easy the Spit is to fly. Have said that, once you "get it" in the Spit, you "get it". For me, the trick was to have a gradual steady yet rather quick increase in throttle from start of roll to air, no holding at any particular boost, etc. So maybe the historical folks had better teachers than us, better intuition than us, better manual/documentation/reading than us, in addition to (probably) just being better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether it's realistic or not, the plane just requires smaller, yet much faster and more precise rudder inputs, with dabs rather than continuous presse

 

Also my experience: after realizing this fact and managing accordingly, take off went pretty well :)

Best regards, Willem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point was, why it only took me an hour or so to essentially master takeoff and landing in the BF 109 compared to 100 plus hours to do the same in the Spit? That's why I'm questioning if the Spit model needs a little work? Even allowing for the locking tailwheel issue was the Spit really that much harder to takeoff and land than a BF 109?

 

Oh, that's an easy answer:

 

You've basically already paid your dues in terms of hours training.

 

Both planes have similar charactaristics, so all those hours you spent practicing on the Spitfire first helped with general control of the 109.

 

I had the 109 first, I found it hard and put in a fair few hours until I got resonable. Got in the Spit, took off second attempt and landed (not well, but in one piece) on the first attempt and kept going since there. I've never found it hard like people claim.

 

The other difference is the lockable tailwheel, which makes the tricky bit of staying straight much easier in the 109.

 

Have you got the P-51D? If so, try it now, you should find it really easy, which'll probably be quite a far cry from when you first started using it.


Edited by Buzzles
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally agree Buzzles, all those dues paid in with the Spit no doubt paid dividends on the first attempt in the BF 109. Yes, I have the P-51D and the Dora but my tiny brain can only take so much in at a time, I'll give both of those a go over the next few weeks. One thing I love about this sim is the fact that you really feel like you're making progress. When I first tried the dogfight against the two 109's I thought they must be joking, now I can regularly save my wingman and take down both 109's with some ease, and not blow my engine up, progress indeed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point was, why it only took me an hour or so to essentially master takeoff and landing in the BF 109 compared to 100 plus hours to do the same in the Spit? That's why I'm questioning if the Spit model needs a little work? Even allowing for the locking tailwheel issue was the Spit really that much harder to takeoff and land than a BF 109?

 

Well that's why I asked you if you had locked the tailwheel. Early 109s didn't have it and it is significantly harder to handle that way. If I unlock it, I honestly don't see much difference in the handling of both planes in DCS. I think rudder forces are not yet implemented in the Spitfire, so compared to the spit the rudder of the 109 is absolutely useless. It will also make the spit overly sensitive to inputs. So in essence the answer to your question probably lies in locking tailwheels and rudder forces.

Cougar, CH and Saitek PnP hall sensor kits + shift registers: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220916

 

Shapeways store for DIY flight simming equipment and repair: https://www.shapeways.com/shops/rel4y-diy-joystick-flight-simming

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historically, the 109 rudder was at the limits of it's usefulness on take off. This is something quoted by Erich Brunotte, who flew both the 109 and 190. He says that differential braking was needed in taking off in the 109.

 

It would be useful for these analyses to dig out some of Hannah's interviews too. He flew both 109 and Spitfire. Winkle Brown may also be a useful source, though I don't remember him making direct comparisons in his assessments.

 

To answer a previous critic, I was not suggesting making comparisons is futile, I was saying that it is important to see the bigger picture, and not jump to conclusions based on flimsy evidence.

 

It's a bit like the arguments put forward as to the over effective dogfighting qualities of the MiG-15 based on anecdotal evidence of the numbers downed in the Korean war. Statistics often hide the facts. "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is an oft quoted, and very relevant comment. Just because a lot died in 109s doesn't mean they were harder to fly than their contemporary aircraft, it just means that statistically more died trying. Statistics cannot provide analytical evidence as to the reasons behind them, which are very often huge factors, and do not reflect assumptions that may be getting drawn from simple numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As suggested the nuances of detail versus the sweeping generalisations is a big factor here.

 

The theory that 109 are harder to takeoff is levelled at the series as a whole, however:

 

1) The Bf109K has increased vertical stabiliser surface and increased rudder area than most of the previous iterations (some late 109G sub variants not included)

 

2) I cannot confirm that earlier models lacked a tailwheel lock, but that would go some way to explaining the less unstable directional control of the K on the ground; as one who forgot to lock it prior to takeoff on a few occasions, it is considerably harder than the Spitfire in DCS. If the pilots of previous 109 variants had to manage without it - compounded by the smaller fin area - then I can well understand that it could have had a less than stellar reputation in this regard.

 

The same is true for the Spitfire; the ease of landing takeoff could be attrubuted to a great number of lower powered and lighter variants before we reach the IX.

 

Bear in mind that many Merlin 60-series Spits (particularly the MkVIII) recieved a broad chord rudder late in the war; this itself hints that the MkIX Spitfire was reaching the limit of directional stability and control with the fin and ruddder area as carried over from the Mk.V.

 

 

As for this....

 

 

Spit was easier to pilot? Thats probably why you can watch a spit crash landing during an airshow on youtube?

 

:doh:


Edited by DD_Fenrir
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with what he says. You are past the learning curve, thus making it easier to learn each new tail dragger.

 

I've found the key to a good t/o in the spit is to set the trim to 1+ deg. If you leave it at the default 2+ it stalls the airplane on t/o. On landing be sure to pull all the way back on the stick on touchdown, and use differential wheel braking. Don't rely on rudder authority alone.

 

Oh, that's an easy answer:

 

You've basically already paid your dues in terms of hours training.

 

Both planes have similar charactaristics, so all those hours you spent practicing on the Spitfire first helped with general control of the 109.

 

I had the 109 first, I found it hard and put in a fair few hours until I got resonable. Got in the Spit, took off second attempt and landed (not well, but in one piece) on the first attempt and kept going since there. I've never found it hard like people claim.

 

The other difference is the lockable tailwheel, which makes the tricky bit of staying straight much easier in the 109.

 

Have you got the P-51D? If so, try it now, you should find it really easy, which'll probably be quite a far cry from when you first started using it.

5800X3d, 32GB DDR4@3400, 6800 xt, Reverb G2, Gunfighter/TMWH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probab, that's about as ignorant and arrogant a post as I've ever read. Surprised by a so-called 'senior member'. There are literally dozens of posts on these forums questioning the accuracy of the Spitfire flight model. If you go back and actually read my OP you'll see I am not saying anywhere that I can't do it, what I did was compare the Spitfire with the BF 109 models in terms of learning curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...