In case ayone didn't catch this the first time:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst  RAE did no test for either turn times or radius. The figures given by RAE for the 109E are rough estimates, with the Cl figures estimated from tests done to determine Cl on the Spitfire. Even on the latter, the Cl was determined, or rather again, estimated from stall speed tests. And, none of the RAE figures contain data for turn capacity of the Emil with its flaps deployed (the Spitfire didn`t have combat flaps, it was either up or down for landing). It think its quite reasonable to think that Messerschmitt AG had better understanding of the 109E`s Cl than RAE. |
So there wasn't an actual turn test for the 109E.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider The comments about the 109 being embarrased clearly refers to the 109 losing its sighting position which is quite understandable |
Firstly this coment comes from the 109G vs Tempest testing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst The Hawker Tempest Page Tempest V Tactical Trials
...
Turning Circle
The Tempest is slightly better, the Bf.109G being embarrassed by its slots opening near the stall. |
And second the 109F and later models no longer had problems with aileron snatching, lateral shutter, or high G jamming of the slats. Although the pilot could still feel and hear a shock from the slat deployment on later models iirc, there was no effect on the aircraft its self, so no change in sighting.
Linear Mode
