Flight Replicas Messerschmitt Bf-109K-4 Released (Payware)

***Steven190*** · July 29th, 2012, 10:05

Here is my WIP, I only get a few hours per week to work on it.

This is Martin Deskau "Yellow 1" of II/JG3

Everything so far is at 100% values

***bstolle*** · July 29th, 2012, 12:10

Originally Posted by ottor

I'm having trouble getting the RPM down to 1800 in the cruise with MP of 1atm, flying at about 6000m.

The 109 FDE is a rather old one and I don't have my development and performance data anymore, hence I don't know if that's a valid RPM/MP combination, but from a FDE POV there's nothing in the air/cfg file which would prevent the RPM to be reduced as much as necessary.

***Ian Warren*** · July 29th, 2012, 14:22

Looking good Steven

, see if i can dig up a photo , be only B/w tho

**ottor** · July 29th, 2012, 20:04

Originally Posted by bstolle

The 109 FDE is a rather old one and I don't have my development and performance data anymore, hence I don't know if that's a valid RPM/MP combination, but from a FDE POV there's nothing in the air/cfg file which would prevent the RPM to be reduced as much as necessary.

Thanks for your reply Bernt. I was incorrect about the 1800 rpm, the checklist in the manual gives cruise settings as 1 atm with prop at 2000 to 2100rpm. Just in case it may mean something to you here is a screengrab of the numbers I'm seeing. Note that the prop rpm shown in my test gauge is close to those numbers, however the tachometer gauge in the cockpit shows a higher reading - perhaps that is displaying engine rpm? I also saw that the prop efficiency curves in the .air file are defined between 15 and 40 degrees - does fsx extrapolate those curves to 85 degrees?

Click image for larger version.

Name: 2012-7-30_12-34-30-53.jpg
Views: 259
Size: 92.6 KB
ID: 69897

Regardless, I'm still enjoying the plane! Thanks to all who have taken an interest in my (perceived) problem.

Cheers

**Wozza** · July 29th, 2012, 20:52

Originally Posted by ottor

Thanks for your reply Bernt. I was incorrect about the 1800 rpm, the checklist in the manual gives cruise settings as 1 atm with prop at 2000 to 2100rpm. Just in case it may mean something to you here is a screengrab of the numbers I'm seeing. Note that the prop rpm shown in my test gauge is close to those numbers, however the tachometer gauge in the cockpit shows a higher reading - perhaps that is displaying engine rpm? I also saw that the prop efficiency curves in the .air file are defined between 15 and 40 degrees - does fsx extrapolate those curves to 85 degrees?

Regardless, I'm still enjoying the plane! Thanks to all who have taken an interest in my (perceived) problem.

Cheers

Hi
Are you running in auto pitch or manual? as the gauge I did for auto pitch control was AFAIK never properly calibrated, the figure in there were just ball parkish
cheers
Wozza

**P38man** · July 29th, 2012, 21:00

Originally Posted by ottor

Thanks for your reply Bernt. I was incorrect about the 1800 rpm, the checklist in the manual gives cruise settings as 1 atm with prop at 2000 to 2100rpm. Just in case it may mean something to you here is a screengrab of the numbers I'm seeing. Note that the prop rpm shown in my test gauge is close to those numbers, however the tachometer gauge in the cockpit shows a higher reading - perhaps that is displaying engine rpm? I also saw that the prop efficiency curves in the .air file are defined between 15 and 40 degrees - does fsx extrapolate those curves to 85 degrees?

Regardless, I'm still enjoying the plane! Thanks to all who have taken an interest in my (perceived) problem.

Cheers

Hey Ottor what's that list thingy? Is it downloadable?

***bstolle*** · July 29th, 2012, 21:28

Originally Posted by ottor

1.Note that the prop rpm shown in my test gauge is close to those numbers, however the tachometer gauge in the cockpit shows a higher reading - perhaps that is displaying engine rpm?
2.I also saw that the prop efficiency curves in the .air file are defined between 15 and 40 degrees - does fsx extrapolate those curves to 85 degrees?

1. No, that's prop RPM being displayed. The performance is correct for the mentioned RPM displayed on the RPM gauge in the VC.
Your test flight gauge is showing different numbers due to various FSX limitations. It's not uncommon to cheat by using different numbers internally to achieve realistic behaviour/performance.
2. No it doesn't extrapolate. That's why there are different numbers on your test flight gauge and the RPM gauge. Back then I didn't use custom prop curves so we had to come up with a different solution.

**ottor** · July 29th, 2012, 22:19

Originally Posted by bstolle

1. No, that's prop RPM being displayed. The performance is correct for the mentioned RPM displayed on the RPM gauge in the VC.
Your test flight gauge is showing different numbers due to various FSX limitations. It's not uncommon to cheat by using different numbers internally to achieve realistic behaviour/performance.
2. No it doesn't extrapolate. That's why there are different numbers on your test flight gauge and the RPM gauge. Back then I didn't use custom prop curves so we had to come up with a different solution.

Thanks for the explanation Bernt. You understand these things much better than I.

Originally Posted by P38man

Hey Ottor what's that list thingy? Is it downloadable?

P38man it's just a little xml gauge I put together. If you'd like it, pm me and I'll email it to you.

Originally Posted by Wozza

Hi
Are you running in auto pitch or manual? as the gauge I did for auto pitch control was AFAIK never properly calibrated, the figure in there were just ball parkish
cheers
Wozza

Hi Wozza, I'm pretty sure I tried it in both settings. I have a feeling it is in auto on that screenshot. I'll take better note of it next time I fly.

Thank you all for your replies.

Cheers

ottor

**P38man** · July 29th, 2012, 23:53

Hey otter....thanks I would like the gauge !

However the PM system won't allow me to PM you.

Maybe you don't have enough posts or have disabled it ?

You could just post the XML text here I guess as an attached file?

***Steven190*** · July 30th, 2012, 04:49

Originally Posted by Ian Warren

Looking good Steven

, see if i can dig up a photo , be only B/w tho

I am using the photo and color plate from the Monagram book series of Luftwaffe color chips. If you want I will upload it. I usually just keep them. I may be done this weekend if time permits.

***Ian Warren*** · July 30th, 2012, 14:56

Originally Posted by Steven190

If you want I will upload it. I usually just keep them. I may be done this weekend if time permits.

Yes , by all means , upload it when you are finished and happy with it .. we need all the 109s we can get

**JIMJAM** · July 30th, 2012, 20:40

Well its taken me 3 days but Ive got 3/4 of FSX reinstalled after a HD failure.

Need some tips on handling this bird. I am a rw pilot with alot in taildraggers but the 109 is a handfull and the most tricky in my stable. I usually take off 1/2 fuel with ext dropped. My problem is premature liftoff. I think the poh says use flaps but I am now trying none. Also, am I correct in seeing -1 as all the nose down trim that you can get?
My trim on my Saitek is set on a hat switch and forward= nose down,back=nose up. All I can get pushing forwards is -1 or just 1 increment.
Anyways, even stick fowards I am getting mushy before the tail lifts much. Wheels off the deck before I want them and usually dangerously drop a wing. Only the engine's muscle and low fuel weight saves me. Tips? Do I need to fly with 100% fuel less the drop tank to add some weight?

***bstolle*** · July 30th, 2012, 23:45

Originally Posted by JIMJAM

1.I think the poh says use flaps but I am now trying none.
2. Also, am I correct in seeing -1 as all the nose down trim that you can get?
3.Anyways, even stick fowards I am getting mushy before the tail lifts much.
4.Do I need to fly with 100% fuel less the drop tank to add some weight?

1. With flaps up it's even more difficult to get the tail up.
2. If you are really using -1 you are actually trimming the plane tail heavy instead of nose heavy! +1 is full nose down and needed! That would explain your difficulties.
3. With full forward stick applied as soon as the ASI starts indicating (>110km/h 60kts) the tail comes up immediately.
4. At minimum weight (10% fuel) the tail comes up even earlier and there's no danger of a premature lift off either.

Nevertheless, check if your realism sliders are at max (fully to the right)

**JIMJAM** · July 31st, 2012, 06:47

Thanks for the detailed reply and also the wonderful aircraft. My first real paying job flying was draggin banners up and down Myrtle Beach in Cubs late 80s. Even stripped down and squeezing every bit of HP the Cub would muster,snagging a banner on a 100 degree day would raise your blood pressure. Add in a nasty cross wind and the intercoastal waterway just a few hundred feet away, its was a tough way to build hours.
I enjoy a challenge and must admit I jump around from planes,helis,jets so much I am only really proficent in a few. Some like this 109 require you to spend some ass in the seat. Another aircraft that I also humbled me was the F-104 Starfighter. Currently I run realism 100%,sensitive, Saitek X52 stick and rudder settings,no little deadzone and look forward to taming this little devil. I made my first "no bounce" landing last night which did not require a full stall and it brought a smile to my face which is what all this is really all about.