WWII warplanes vs combat sim realism

Posted this on a thread but the guys were too busy flaming each other to
notice or give an intelligent answer. Trying again.........

I am having a debate on the subject of whether planes like the BF109 and
FW190 were really as unstable and prone to stalls and spins at the drop of a
hat as modelled in the PC sim IL2 Sturmovik, Forgotten Battles. I am saying
not and that the air war would never have been won if planes of that era
could barely fly. Does anyone know of real stories/reports on this issue or
maybe know some vintage pilots who flew them? I have already read of a
Mustang pilot who says the sim feels about right if the 'stalls and spins'
setting is turned off.

The debate extended into 'blackouts and redouts'. In the sim, a hard pull on
the stick and the screen goes black, very annoying and I believe
unrealistic. How many G's could those WWII planes pull without tearing off
the wings? Should 'blackouts and redouts' even be modelled in a WWII sim?

What was the "real" story?
(I'm not a pilot but I have flown a real plane. I know that PC sims are
unrealistic so nobody has to tell me that........)

I was fortunate enough to be able to afford to charter a Hawker Hunter out
of Thunder City, Cape Town, South Africa, I was very at home on the stick
and was immediately capable of basic flight manouvres, thanks to playing
flight sims. It took only seconds to get over the initial tendency to make
'too big' movements. That's because I got a serious fright when I yanked on
the stick, the Hunter is as agile as a cat!. The pilot only took over for
the seriously rough aerobatics (and of course take off and landing). So,
unrealistic as they may be and although they will never make me a pilot, PC
flight sims do teach you something.

I blacked out at around 5 G's in the Hunter and the pilot reckons he has
bult up a
tolerance quite a bit hight than that (I'm glad, otherwise who would have
been watching where we were going?!)

wrote in message
...
Posted this on a thread but the guys were too busy flaming each other to
notice or give an intelligent answer. Trying again.........



The debate extended into 'blackouts and redouts'. In the sim, a hard pull
on
the stick and the screen goes black, very annoying and I believe
unrealistic. How many G's could those WWII planes pull without tearing off
the wings? Should 'blackouts and redouts' even be modelled in a WWII sim?

I think that blackouts probably do belong. I read in a book (it was a
serious BoB analysis, if I can find the title I'll let you know) that when
the RAF captured an Bf109 they found that the pilots could take more "G" in
it without tunnel vision / blackout. The reason? The rudder pedals were
mounted higher in relation to the rest of the body on the Bf109. Hence less
blood rushing to the feet. A small detail, but that could be the one that
decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......



I blacked out at around 5 G's in the Hunter and the pilot reckons he has
bult up a
tolerance quite a bit hight than that (I'm glad, otherwise who would have
been watching where we were going?!)

OK, 3.5 G in a Glider is all I have managed to pull and then not for very
long (for obvious reasons!). 5G in a Hunter, now envy is a really bad
thing........ Must have been a great trip!

Mark

decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......

Incorrect.

Having guns or not doesn't have anything to do with the strenght of the
wings. 109s from A-E had wing weapons, again one of the K models was
designed for wing weapons. The wings were also one single structure,
which made it possible to make them very strong.

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose
them easily?
He has never heard of a 109 loosing its wings from his experience or
others. The wings could withstand 12 g's and since most pilots could
only handle at most 9 g's there was never a problem. He was never
worried about loosing a wing in any form of combat."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz
Stigler.

"The maximum speed not to be exceeded was 750kmh. Once I was flying
above Helsinki as I received a report of Russkies in the South. There
was a big Cumulus cloud on my way there but I decided to fly right
through. I centered the controls and then something extraordinary
happened. I must have involuntarily entered into half-roll and dive. The
planes had individual handling characteristics; even though I held the
turning indicator in the middle, the plane kept going faster and faster,
I pulled the stick, yet the plane went into an ever steeper dive.
In the same time she started rotating, and I came out of the cloud with
less than one kilometer of altitude. I started pulling the stick,
nothing happened, I checked the speed, it was about 850kmh. I tried to
recover the plane but the stick was as if locked and nothing happened. I
broke into a sweat of agony: now I am going into the sea and cannot help
it. I pulled with both hands, groaning and by and by she started
recovering, she recovered more, I pulled and pulled, but the surface of
the sea approached, I thought I was going to crash. I kept pulling until
I saw that I had survived. The distance between me and the sea may have
been five meters. I pulled up and found myself on the coast of Estonia.
If I in that situation had used the vertical trim the wings would have
been broken off. A minimal trim movement has a strong effect on wings
when the speed limit has been exceded. I had 100kmh overspeed! It was
out of all limits.
The Messerschmitt's wings were fastened with two bolts. When I saw the
construction I had thought that they are strong enough but in this case
I was thinking, when are they going to break
- What about the phenomenon called "buffeting" or vibration, was there any?
No, I did not encounter it even in the 850kmh speed."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview
by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Given that 109s were routinely dived at 800-900 km/hour speeds that
certainly shows that if there was some weaknesses in the plane, wings
werent' them.

jok

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote:

decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......

Incorrect.

Having guns or not doesn't have anything to do with the strenght of the
wings. 109s from A-E had wing weapons, again one of the K models was
designed for wing weapons. The wings were also one single structure,
which made it possible to make them very strong.

[...]

Given that 109s were routinely dived at 800-900 km/hour speeds that
certainly shows that if there was some weaknesses in the plane, wings
werent' them.

It's not so much the case the wings were actually breaking off the
Bf 109 [E] during hard maneuvering, but a psychological belief that
it could happen due to the very well known high wing loading.

You've quoted some 109 pilots that indicated this belief wasn't a
concern to them, but I've heard/read the story enough to think there
must be some basis for it in fact.

At least during the BoB period (109 Emil).


SMH

About a year and a half ago I finished up most of a digital remastering of a
narration of combat footage by a friend and P-47 pilot of the 78th who few 105
missions out of Duxford.

I had heard that the physics model in the Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator for
WWII was excellent and I used it to get some gun and engine sounds. For fun I
added a gun film placard with "Wrongway Springer" at the end of the combat
sequences and a section where I use the simulator and "attacked" a 109 from the
rear. There is some good maneuvering and use of WEP to avoid stalls, fragments
flying by, etc before the 109 goes down. I suppresed the color to make it look
like the other footage.

The very experienced pilot just said he didn't remember that sequence and where
did I find film with a view from the cockpit and showing the instruments and
with sound? I explained and he thought the realism was amazing.

I'm still trying to get a good sound recording of engine noise from inside a
maneuvering P-47. I think it is unlikey I will find a modern recording of gun
sound!

-- Charlie Springer

I'm still trying to get a good sound recording of engine noise from inside a
maneuvering P-47.

I might be able to help in this department.
VL

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...
decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not
designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......

Incorrect.

Having guns or not doesn't have anything to do with the strenght of the
wings. 109s from A-E had wing weapons, again one of the K models was
designed for wing weapons. The wings were also one single structure,
which made it possible to make them very strong.

The wings do however have to be redesigned to carry the guns and the
ammunition. This in turn places stress on the wing. The early 109s with
wing mounted guns had to have an ammuntiion feed belt that went from the
gun, to the wingtip and back round again!

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose
them easily?

snip

I was quoting Len Dieghtons book "Fighter":

The Messerschmitts weak wings were providing it's pilots with a new problem.
The Spitfire pilots had discovered how to make use of the superior strength
of the spitfire wings. Faster in a dive, the Messerschmitts were being
overtaken because they pulled out in a shallow curve, nervous that they
might rip their wings off.

A little later:

(this) gave rise to the widely held belief that the Bf 109 could not turn as
tightly as the Spitfire. In theory it's turn was tighter, but few pilots
were prepared to test this to it's limit.

The Spitfire wing probably was a little stronger as it's main spar is
effectively a leaf spring, capable of taking some stress and recovering.
Part of the Bf 109s reputation may also come however from it's very narrow
undercarraige, and the amount of taxi and landing accidents that resulted.
Certainly the Fw 190 resolved this issue with a very wide undercarraige!

Mark

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...
decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not
designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......

Incorrect.

Having guns or not doesn't have anything to do with the strenght of the
wings. 109s from A-E had wing weapons, again one of the K models was
designed for wing weapons. The wings were also one single structure,
which made it possible to make them very strong.

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose
them easily?
He has never heard of a 109 loosing its wings from his experience or
others. The wings could withstand 12 g's and since most pilots could
only handle at most 9 g's there was never a problem. He was never
worried about loosing a wing in any form of combat."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz
Stigler.

snip

The reference that I was using was Len Deightons book "Fighter" which
examines the Battle of Britain. When discussing tactics he asserts that the
Bf109 pilots used the tactic of diving away as the Bf109 engine maintained
power during the dive unlike that generation of Merlin. However the 109
pilots tended to pull out of their dives in a shallower curve, due to fears
over the wings. The spitfire pilots would continue the dive longer and then
pull out harder, so overhauling them and pushing home their attack. This is
of course a generalisation, and it is not a claim that the Bf109 was a bad
aircraft.

I do wonder how much of this stemmed from the narrow undercarraige, which
while it allowed wing removal while the aircraft sat on its own wheels, also
forced a narrow undercarraige. Presumably if the thing toppled over the
main area of damage would be the wings. Something like 5% of Bf109s made
were reportedly lost in landing accidents. One would assume that a
contributing factor was the narrow undercarraige. Something that was
certainly looked at in the Fw190, which had one of the widest fighter
undercarraiges of the war!

In summary the Bf109 could probably take a lot of stress and it is not as
though they were falling out of the sky due to wings falling off. However
in all likelyhood the pilots did have a concern. It could be one of those
cases where perception is everything....


Mark

Mr Irvine, Mr. Kauppinen,

I have also read the book(s) "Fighter" and it is a great reference, too, but
I also have re-printed Me-109E-3 flight manual in Serbo-Croatian(!) language
and I have read RAE evaluation on Internet.

Firstly, the figther's name for export was Me-109. The manual is the
re-print of the original manual for Yugoslav Kingdom (1918-1941) called
"Me-109 manual". I do not have it handy, but I remembered few things;

Max speed: 570 kph
Max allowed dive speed: 750 kph

Dive procedu

1) Turn the trim whell up so the plane is "tail-heavy", take off the
throttle, propeller pitch 12 (I -might- be mistaken for the last one-sorry,
it comes from the memory);
2) Depress stick "down";
3) If aircraft is diving on it is own, abort dive emmidiatelly
4) max allowed dive speed is 750 kph.

Taking the plane out from the dive:
1) DO NOT (bold letters!) pull on the stick!
2) since the aircraft is wheel-trimmed "tail-heavy" (i.e. up), leave the
aircraft to bring itself from the dive (black-on white manual statement!)

So, there was some worry... but for the tail, not wings!

From the RAE evaluation of the captured Bf-109;

quote
Safety in the Dive
During a dive at 400 mph all three controls were in turn displaced slightly
and released. No vibration, flutter or snaking developed. If the elevator is
trimmed for level flight at full throttle, a large push is needed to hold in
the dive, and there is a temptation to trim in. If, in fact, the airplane is
trimmed into the dive, recovery is difficult unless the trimmer is moved
back owing to the excessive heaviness of the elevator.
....
Elevator
This is an exceptionally good control at low air speeds, being fairly heavy
and not over-sensitive. Above 250 mph, however, it becomes too heavy, so
that maneuvrability is seriously restricted. When diving at 400 mph a pilot,
pulling very hard, cannot put on enough 'g' to black himself out; stick
force -'g' probably exsceeds 20 lb/g in the dive.
end quote

It is strange that RAE experts didn't have 109's flight manual and made such
errors in handling, especialy they have sold Hurricane I fighters to
Yugoslavia after Yugoslavia has obtained Me-109s!

Book "fighter" also describes the Bf-109 that it has the tighter circle. It
is not true, but it has the best instantenuos turn rate-Huricane is the
second, and Spitfire on the third place. But, due to the high wing loading
(no matter that the slats are installed), Bf-109 bleeds speed very quickly
in turns.

Since Mr. Irvine and I are reffering to the same source and same plane
version, it should be noted that these information are valid for the
Bf/Me-109E-3 ONLY.

--

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA
Mark Irvine wrote in message ...

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...
decides the fight! Alas for the luftwaffe the Bf109 wings were not
designed
for guns etc so were not terrifically robust, the pilots were often
more
worried about the wings falling off than blacking out......

Incorrect.

Having guns or not doesn't have anything to do with the strenght of the
wings. 109s from A-E had wing weapons, again one of the K models was
designed for wing weapons. The wings were also one single structure,
which made it possible to make them very strong.

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose
them easily?
He has never heard of a 109 loosing its wings from his experience or
others. The wings could withstand 12 g's and since most pilots could
only handle at most 9 g's there was never a problem. He was never
worried about loosing a wing in any form of combat."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz
Stigler.

snip

The reference that I was using was Len Deightons book "Fighter" which
examines the Battle of Britain. When discussing tactics he asserts that
the
Bf109 pilots used the tactic of diving away as the Bf109 engine maintained
power during the dive unlike that generation of Merlin. However the 109
pilots tended to pull out of their dives in a shallower curve, due to fears
over the wings. The spitfire pilots would continue the dive longer and
then
pull out harder, so overhauling them and pushing home their attack. This
is
of course a generalisation, and it is not a claim that the Bf109 was a bad
aircraft.

I do wonder how much of this stemmed from the narrow undercarraige, which
while it allowed wing removal while the aircraft sat on its own wheels,
also
forced a narrow undercarraige. Presumably if the thing toppled over the
main area of damage would be the wings. Something like 5% of Bf109s made
were reportedly lost in landing accidents. One would assume that a
contributing factor was the narrow undercarraige. Something that was
certainly looked at in the Fw190, which had one of the widest fighter
undercarraiges of the war!

In summary the Bf109 could probably take a lot of stress and it is not as
though they were falling out of the sky due to wings falling off. However
in all likelyhood the pilots did have a concern. It could be one of those
cases where perception is everything....


Mark

The reference that I was using was Len Deightons book "Fighter" which
examines the Battle of Britain. When discussing tactics he asserts that the
Bf109 pilots used the tactic of diving away as the Bf109 engine maintained
power during the dive unlike that generation of Merlin. However the 109

While being just armchair enthusiast, I wonder how much of this "wing
failure" myth is based on hollow claims - or facts. I don't know for
fact, but were 109 pilots themselves really worried of wing failure in
dives? I don't remember reading any such accounts. It could be the
greener pilots were worried, but were those who were more familiar with
the plane? And how mcuh changes there was between various subtypes? In
BoB 109 E-4 to E-7 were standard types. Was there some real problem with
them? I haven't at least heard of such. Early 109 Fs had weak tail
structure and several planes were lost, when tail ripped off. Later Fs,
Gs and Ks had no such problem. Several Finnish 109 G pilots had dived
regularly 750-900 km speeds in vertical dives when disengaging and they
haven't been worried about the plane.

I do wonder how much of this stemmed from the narrow undercarraige, which
while it allowed wing removal while the aircraft sat on its own wheels, also
forced a narrow undercarraige. Presumably if the thing toppled over the
main area of damage would be the wings. Something like 5% of Bf109s made
were reportedly lost in landing accidents. One would assume that a
contributing factor was the narrow undercarraige.

Actually,

The width of undercarriage in Me 109 E is 1,97 meters; 109 G 2,06 meters
and 109 K 2,1 meters. However - Spitifre's undercarriage width was 1,68
meters.

Nothing unusual with the undercarriage there.

The real problem was the center of gravity behind the undercarriage.
This made it possible to brake unusually hard in landings, but it also
required the pilot to keep the plane straight in takeoff and landing. If
this failed the plane could get into quickly worsening turn until the
other undercarriage failed or the plane drifted off the runway.

jok

I'm putting together an article about various aspects of the 109 with
pilot commentary. Here's some quotes about 109s diving:

- The Me 109 was dived to Mach 0.79 in instrumented tests. Slightly
modified, it was even dived to Mach 0.80, and the problems experimented
there weren't due to compressility, but due to aileron overbalancing.
Compare this to Supermarine Spitfire, which achieved dive speeds well
above those of any other WW2 fighter, getting to Mach 0.89 on one
occasion. P-51 and Fw 190 achieved about Mach 0.80. The P-47 had the
lowest permissible Mach number of these aircraft. Test pilot Eric Brown
observed it became uncontrollable at Mach 0.73, and "analysis showed
that a dive to M=0.74 would almost certainly be a 'graveyard dive'."
- Source: Radinger/Otto/Schick: "Messerschmitt Me 109", volumes 1 and 2,
Eric Brown: "Testing for Combat".

- 109 didn't "compress" but the elevators became heavy. When adjusting
trim the entire horizontal tail plane moved and reduced the force needed
to pull out.

Me 109 G:
"The maximum speed not to be exceeded was 750kmh. Once I was flying
above Helsinki as I received a report of Russkies in the South. There
was a big Cumulus cloud on my way there but I decided to fly right
through. I centered the controls and then something extraordinary
happened. I must have involuntarily entered into half-roll and dive. The
planes had individual handling characteristics; even though I held the
turning indicator in the middle, the plane kept going faster and faster,
I pulled the stick, yet the plane went into an ever steeper dive.
In the same time she started rotating, and I came out of the cloud with
less than one kilometer of altitude. I started pulling the stick,
nothing happened, I checked the speed, it was about 850kmh. I tried to
recover the plane but the stick was as if locked and nothing happened. I
broke into a sweat of agony: now I am going into the sea and cannot help
it. I pulled with both hands, groaning and by and by she started
recovering, she recovered more, I pulled and pulled, but the surface of
the sea approached, I thought I was going to crash. I kept pulling until
I saw that I had survived. The distance between me and the sea may have
been five meters. I pulled up and found myself on the coast of Estonia.
If I in that situation had used the vertical trim the wings would have
been broken off. A minimal trim movement has a strong effect on wings
when the speed limit has been exceded. I had 100kmh overspeed! It was
out of all limits.
The Messerschmitt's wings were fastened with two bolts. When I saw the
construction I had thought that they are strong enough but in this case
I was thinking, when are they going to break
- What about the phenomenon called "buffeting" or vibration, was there any?
No, I did not encounter it even in the 850kmh speed."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview
by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- The vertical dive was how to disengage.
Jussi Huotari: That was the remedy.
Antti Tani: That is how I survived when attacking two of them and losing
the first round. They had more speed because I was coming from a lower
altitude.
It was nothing special, the (Yak-9) planes were climbing and began to
turn back. I had planned to get to shoot at them as they have lost their
speed in the turn. But I was not in the right position. I turned at them
and pulled the nose up - and I lost my speed, I had to turn below them.
I had to push the stick to get behind them, and as they dived at me I
dived right down. I turned with ailerons a couple of times, and had full
power on.
Then I started recovery from the dive, of course in the direction of
home, then checked the dials, the reading was eight hundred plus kmh.
Then I started pulling the stick, pulled harder as hard as ever: never
in my life did I pull so hard. I pulled with right hand and tried to
trim the horizontal rudder with my left hand. But it did not budge, as
if it had been set in concrete. But by the by the nose began to rise,
but terribly slowly. As my angle was about 45 I heard over the radio as
Onni Paronen said, "hey lads, look, a Messerschmitt is going in the
sea!" I wanted to answer back but I could not afford to do anything put
pull with two hands. As soon as I had returned to level flight and had
been able to breath normally for a while, I in a way regained
consciousness. I pushed the transmitter key and said "not quite". It was
a close shave.
- It was so hard that you almost blacked out?
Antti Tani: I felt I was on the edge, pulling as hard as I ever could."
- Antti Tani, Finnish fighter ace. 21,5 victories. Source: Interview by
Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Jouko "Jussi" Huotari, Finnish fighter ace. 17 victories. Source:
Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G-6:
After landing Me 109 with damaged rudder trim tab, which shook the
rudder heavily in flight:
"Antti Tani: It had to be strong, both the rudder and the pedals, they
withstood the damn shaking without any further damage.
Jussi Huotari: The Messerschmitt was a very tough aircraft. You could do
vertical dives and the tailplane hang along..."
Antti Tani: But Mäittälä, what happened to him, he lost the tailplane?
Mäittälä dived like that, and being a strong man he was able to pull
harder than I did. And so the tailplane was ripped off
- The day before a similar dive and recovery had happened to the same
plane. Two steep dives in succession and a strong pilot pulling the
stick each time, so...
Antti Tani: It certainly was a risky job. It must be that I remember him
because I did a dive like that and remembered his tailplane had been
ripped off. I, too pulled as hard as I could, because I thought that I
am going to die if I don't."
- Antti Tani, Finnish fighter ace. 21,5 victories. Source: Interview by
Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
- Jouko "Jussi" Huotari, Finnish fighter ace. 17 victories. Source:
Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G-6:
"The story of Valte Estama's 109 G-6 getting shot down by a Yak-6 was
also an interesting one. Their flight of nine planes was doing
high-altitude CAP at 7,000 meters (23,000').
(snip) So it happened that the devil fired at him. One cannon round hit
his engine, spilling out oil that caught fire. Estama noticed that it
wasn't fuel that leaked or burned, just oil.
He pushed the nose of the plane and throttled up. His feet felt hot, but
the fire was extinguished and there was no more smoke. The speedometer
went over the top as the speed exceeded 950 km/h. The wings began to
shake and Estama feared the fighter would come apart. He pulled the
throttle back, but the stick was stiff and couldn't pull the plane out
of the dive. Letting the flaps out little by little gradually lifted the
nose. The plane leveled at 1,000 meters (3,300').
Clarification of the escape dive: "It didn't stay (vertical) otherwise,
it had to be kept with the stabilizer. I trimmed it so the plane was
certainly nose down. Once I felt it didn't burn anymore and there was no
black smoke in the mirror, then I began to straighten it up, and it
wouldn't obey. The stick was so stiff it was useless. So a nudge at a
time, (then straightening off with trims).
Then the wings came alive with the flutter effect, I was afraid it's
coming apart and shut the throttle. Only then I began to level out. To a
thousand meters. It was a long time - and the hard pull blacked me out."
- Edvald Estama, Finnish fighter pilot. Source: Recollections by Eino
and Edvald Estama by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"-Many claim that the MT becomes stiff as hell in a dive, difficult to
bring up in high speed, the controls lock up?
Nnnooo, they don't lock up.
It was usually because you exceeded diving speed limits. Guys didn't
remember you shouldn't let it go over.
We had also Lauri Mäittälä, he took (unclear tape), he had to evade and
exceeded the speed, and the rudders broke off. He fell in a well in the
Isthmus. He was later collected from there, he's now there in Askola
cemetery.
The controls don't lock up, they become stiffer of course but don't
lock. And of course you couldn't straighten up (shows a 'straightening'
from a dive directly up) like an arrow."
- Väinö Pokela, Finnish fighter ace and Me 109 trainer. 5 victories.
Source: Interview of Väinö Pokela by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

Me 109 G:
"- How fast could you go with it? How fast did you dare to fly in a
dive, what was the limit?
It was ... 720 (kilometers/hour), if I remember right. You weren't
supposed to exceed it but we did it many times. And as the air was thin
up there, so we often had to go vertical when escorting a photographing
plane."
- Väinö Pokela, Finnish fighter ace and Me 109 trainer. 5 victories.
Source: Interview of Väinö Pokela by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

"- Are the stories true, that the 109 had weak wings and would loose
them easily?
He has never heard of a 109 loosing its wings from his experience or
others. The wings could withstand 12 g's and since most pilots could
only handle at most 9 g's there was never a problem. He was never
worried about loosing a wing in any form of combat."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz
Stigler.

Me 109 F/G:
"- What's the fastest you ever had a 109 in a dive?
I've taken it to about 680 to 750 km/hr at which point you needed 2
hands to pulls it out of the dive."
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz
Stigler.

"During a dive at 400 mph all three controls were in turn displaced
slightly and released. No vibration, flutter or snaking developed. If
the elevator is trimmed for level flight at full throttle, a large push
is needed to hold in the dive, and there is a temptation to trim in. If,
in fact, the airplane is trimmed into the dive, recovery is difficult
unless the trimmer is would back owing to the excessive heaviness of the
elevator."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling
trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.

"My flight chased 12 109s south of Vienna. They climbed and we followed,
unable to close on them. At 38,000 feet I fired a long burst at one of
them from at least a 1000 yards, and saw some strikes. It rolled over
and dived and I followed but soon reached compressibility with severe
buffeting of the tail and loss of elevator control. I slowed my plane
and regained control, but the 109 got away.
On two other occasions ME 109s got away from me because the P 51d could
not stay with them in a high-speed dive. At 525-550 mph the plane would
start to porpoise uncontrollably and had to be slowed to regain control.
The P 51 was redlined at 505 mph, meaning that this speed should not be
exceeded. But when chasing 109s or 190s in a dive from 25-26,000 it
often was exceeded, if you wanted to keep up with those enemy planes.
The P 51b, and c, could stay with those planes in a dive. The P 51d had
a thicker wing and a bubble canopy which changed the airflow and brought
on compressibility at lower speeds."
- Robert C.Curtis, American P-51 pilot.