Well since another thread was closed whilst this issue was being discussed I thought it be an idea to have a thread for this issue specifically.
Now, and this goes to all sides, no snide remarks as the mods don't like it nomatter if it's just or unjust. We can discuss this matter without having to resort to name calling.
Onwards;
_______________________________________
Glider,
Eventhough Bill claims you have put things into context you really havent;
As explained the jolt/snatch and disturbance to the flight path was eliminated with the introduction of the F series, and thus the comment about the 109 being "Embarrased by its slots opening near the stall" can't have been refering to this. (Would've been a very odd way of refering to such regardless!) The comment only serves as the clear sign that the a/c wasn't flown to its limits, something which isn't unnormal as it was a foreign a/c with some unfamiliar advanced features not seen on any British a/c at the time.
Dave Southwood, 109 pilot:
"One interesting feature is the leading edge slats. When these deploy at low speeds or in a turn, a 'clunk' can be heard and felt, but there is no disturbance to the aircraft about any axis. I understand that the Bf109E rolled violently as the slats deployed, and I am curious to know the difference to the Gustav that caused this."
"
As further evidence the German, Soviet Finnish tests with the 109 all confirm the fact that the British didn't push their captured 109's to their limits. And then there's all the modern day pilots who fly the Bf-109 today confirming this as-well, all saying without a doubt that the Bf-109 Spitfire are VERY close when it comes to turn performance, AND that the P-51 is hoplessly behind by comparison.
And finally there's the aerodynamics, which fully prove that the British did NOT fly their captured 109's to the limit, even the most basic aerodynamics support this. (And when I'm talking basic I'm talking Wing-loading power-loading alone)
So you haven't put anything into context Glider, eventhough Bill oddly claims you have. Surely you must see this as-well now.
Now, and this goes to all sides, no snide remarks as the mods don't like it nomatter if it's just or unjust. We can discuss this matter without having to resort to name calling.
Onwards;
_______________________________________
Glider,
Eventhough Bill claims you have put things into context you really havent;
As explained the jolt/snatch and disturbance to the flight path was eliminated with the introduction of the F series, and thus the comment about the 109 being "Embarrased by its slots opening near the stall" can't have been refering to this. (Would've been a very odd way of refering to such regardless!) The comment only serves as the clear sign that the a/c wasn't flown to its limits, something which isn't unnormal as it was a foreign a/c with some unfamiliar advanced features not seen on any British a/c at the time.
Dave Southwood, 109 pilot:
"One interesting feature is the leading edge slats. When these deploy at low speeds or in a turn, a 'clunk' can be heard and felt, but there is no disturbance to the aircraft about any axis. I understand that the Bf109E rolled violently as the slats deployed, and I am curious to know the difference to the Gustav that caused this."
"
As further evidence the German, Soviet Finnish tests with the 109 all confirm the fact that the British didn't push their captured 109's to their limits. And then there's all the modern day pilots who fly the Bf-109 today confirming this as-well, all saying without a doubt that the Bf-109 Spitfire are VERY close when it comes to turn performance, AND that the P-51 is hoplessly behind by comparison.
And finally there's the aerodynamics, which fully prove that the British did NOT fly their captured 109's to the limit, even the most basic aerodynamics support this. (And when I'm talking basic I'm talking Wing-loading power-loading alone)
So you haven't put anything into context Glider, eventhough Bill oddly claims you have. Surely you must see this as-well now.