Me 109 ailerons and roll rate

[GregP]

Nobody COULD achieve full deflection at high speeds, though. That's the point. Numerous pilot reports make that pretty clear.

What we need is a roll rate comparison "as tested," not "as calculated."

 

[GregP]

Here's a flight test report of the Spitfire Mk I vs. Bf 109E/ Not exactly late-war, but useful.

Here is a roll-rate test attached.

I added the red lines. Looks like they are about even at 310 - 315 mph and, after that, the Spitfire is better, while the Bf 109E is better at speeds lower than 320 mph.

Of course, this chart is not for late-war machines, but it is a start.

Cheers.

Link to the test: Spitfire Mk I versus Me 109 E

 

[Juha3]

Here's a flight test report of the Spitfire Mk I vs. Bf 109E/ Not exactly late-war, but useful.

Here is a roll-rate test attached.

I added the red lines. Looks like they are about even at 310 - 315 mph and, after that, the Spitfire is better, while the Bf 109E is better at speeds lower than 320 mph.

Of course, this chart is not for late-war machines, but it is a start.

Cheers.

Link to the test: Spitfire Mk I versus Me 109 E

Yes, and for Spit British had an easy improvement, metal covered ailerons, the canvas covered ailerons of Spit Mk Is ballooned at high speeds and worsened the rate of roll, metal covered ailerons removed that problem.

The wing of 109 was IMHO surprisingly stiff for being a single spar wing with big openings undersides. A piece of good structural engineering.

 

[Juha3]

Of the copy of the Ribnitz' DVL study The influence of the elastic properties of the wing on the rolling efficiency of Me 109 F-2 by flight testing and calculations, a rough translation of its German title, found from the National Archives, IIRC, must have been originally Focke-Wulf's copy because Dr. Heinz Conradis, Tank, Otto Pabst and Hans Multhopp at least were all Focke-Wulf's men.

 

[Vincenzo]

Here's a flight test report of the Spitfire Mk I vs. Bf 109E/ Not exactly late-war, but useful.

Here is a roll-rate test attached.

I added the red lines. Looks like they are about even at 310 - 315 mph and, after that, the Spitfire is better, while the Bf 109E is better at speeds lower than 320 mph.

Of course, this chart is not for late-war machines, but it is a start.

Cheers.

Link to the test: Spitfire Mk I versus Me 109 E

what mean the Vi in the roll chart?

 

[Greyman]

Indicated airspeed

 

[Vincenzo]

Indicated airspeed

i've this suspect, so practically for the chart that 109 roll better of that Spit most time,

 

[GregP]

Right up until the Spitfire got metal ailerons , which was from May 1941 onward. After they got metal-covered ailerons, the roll rate was markedly improved from the Spitfire I chart.

 

[Juha3]

i've this suspect, so practically for the chart that 109 roll better of that Spit most time,

Yes, in the chart but You must remember that the 109 F-2 data is calculated/extrapolarated not flown with 66 lb stick force when the Spit and others are flown with 50 lb stick force and in fact in the DVL tests the test pilot(s) did not achieve even 50 kp stick force in that 109 F-2.

 

[Vincenzo]

Yes, in the chart but You must remember that the 109 F-2 data is calculated/extrapolarated not flown with 66 lb stick force when the Spit and others are flown with 50 lb stick force and in fact in the DVL tests the test pilot(s) did not achieve even 50 kp stick force in that 109 F-2.

Juha i'm tallking of the chart from the 109E Spitfire I comparation

 

[Juha3]

Hello Vincenzo
Thanks for clarification and I'm sorry of my misunderstanding! The metal ailerons made a big difference in early Spits.

Juha

 

[Vincenzo]

Hello Vincenzo
Thanks for clarification and I'm sorry of my misunderstanding! The metal ailerons made a big difference in early Spits.

Juha

surely, but at that point the Emil was relegated to fighter bomber and 2nd tier front