A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Control Reversal in WWII



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old June 20th 04, 03:43 AM
Eunometic
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Control Reversal in WWII

In discusing the characteristics of how the Me 109K should be flown
against the P51 Mustang and P47 the issue of control reversability
came up. Would someone be able to expand on control reversability.

The Me 109 G10 and Me 109 K4 (G14 was a stopgap due to engine delays
in the G10)had a powerfull engine that allowed them to do a speed of
458mph and outclimbe all allied aircraft. However the old crate had
an old wing section that created enormous aileron forces for the
pilot; also becuase the the small Me 109 cockpit a pilot could
generate only 40lbs of joystick force could have generated 60lbs of
force in a P51. As a result only 2-3 degree of airleron deflection
was possible at 400mph the 109 had a roll rate of 45 degrees/second.
A FW190A and even a P47 could have managed nearly 180 degrees in that
time.

The issue of control reversability then came up. If power ailerons
were fited to the Me 109 they would have allowed a greater deflection
but would this have caused control reversability at some point as the
wing twisted and the ailerons acted more like trim tabs?

What causes reversability? Why is a slab elevator sometimes used?

I've also heard of WW2 pilots using trim tabs to pull out of a dive or
get an aircraft rightway up. What were they doing?

The P38 had a smaller turning circle than the Me 109 (presumably at
lower speeds of around 300mph) but its roll rate was even worse than
the 109 and this is how 109s escaped P38s and I note that some late
war P38s received power controls.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
You Want Control? You Can't Handle Control! -- Was 140 dead ArtKramr Military Aviation 0 March 2nd 04 08:48 PM
Tactical Air Control Party Airmen Help Ground Forces Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 January 22nd 04 02:20 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM
"Target for Today" & "Thunderbolt" WWII Double Feature at Zeno'sDrive-In Zeno Aerobatics 0 August 2nd 03 07:31 PM
"Target for Today" & "Thunderbolt": An Awesome WWII DoubleFeature at Zeno's Drive-In zeno Military Aviation 0 July 14th 03 07:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.