Classics Hangar's civi Messerschmitt

Ken Stallings said:
Indicated or true?

Ken
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't such data always provided as indicated airspeed ? Since it's nearly impossible to give a true airspeed (it depends on altitude, air density, etc, no ?) for any possible situation...

Edit: learned something new again, thank you Mathias. Just ignore the message above, Ken ;).
 
That's the sea level figures from the handbooks, so it would be TAS.
We are not that far yet to provide exact data for different altitudes.
 
huub vink said:
Common give me a break! ;) Beta testing one aircraft at the time for Mathias is already worse enough :d

Huub
Click to expand...



crying_baby.jpg
 
huub vink said:
Common give me a break! ;) Beta testing one aircraft at the time for Mathias is already worse enough :d

But I believe the Bf110 will follow soon after the Taifun.

Cheers,
Huub
Click to expand...

Thanks for your aswer, Huub Vink, I'll be patiented

Me 108, Me110, all these planes are wonderfull ! In French, I say: "Que du bonheur !"
 
Impressive work as always! I really like the beveling on the panels. That will look really nice! :salute:
 
Mathias said:
That's the sea level figures from the handbooks, so it would be TAS.
We are not that far yet to provide exact data for different altitudes.
Click to expand...

That would be right at home for a high performance, complex GA plane today!

Most respectable!

Ken
 
Ferry_vO said:
Need help...? ;)

:wavey:
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer Ferry, but I think I can still manage ;)

I hope the true airspeed diagram below is still readable. Although it is for the more powerful 270 bhp version, I think the performance is quite impressive. From the documentation I have I conclude, the 240 bhp version actually wasn't much slower.

Cheers,
Huub

Bf108Speed.jpg
 
huub vink said:
I hope the true airspeed diagram below is still readable. Although it is for the more powerful 270 bhp version, I think the performance is quite impressive. From the documentation I have I conclude, the 240 bhp version actually wasn't much slower.

Cheers,
Huub
Click to expand...

That's because thrust has to effectively quadruple to achieve a doubling of speed. So, the difference between 270hp and 240hp would be very small due to that general rule. The airframe has more to play in that role as when speed increases, parasitic drag increases, which is just one reason for that general rule I mentioned.

Going faster has never been more efficient in aviation. :engel016:

Cheers,

Ken
 
BTW: I just noticed something from that big screenie just posted. This sucker has leading edge slats! That's mighty impressive and I did not before realize it did!

I bet that has a great positive effect on reducing stall speed.

Ken
 
Ken Stallings said:
BTW: I just noticed something from that big screenie just posted. This sucker has leading edge slats! That's mighty impressive and I did not before realize it did!

I bet that has a great positive effect on reducing stall speed.

Ken
Click to expand...

Well, as they are only on the outboard wingsection, not much reduction in stall speed BUT they work independent of each other with a primitive failure prone mechanism.
So you were in for a nasty surprise when they opened unevenly at slow flight, at low altitude a killer!
One report states that the german astronaut Furrer was killed during an airshow when he lost a slat on the 108 during a high speed/low level pass.
 
Hiya sg38,
from what you can read, the accident happened due to the pilot (Furrer was in the right seat) trying a badly performed barrel role at too low an altitude (20 meters) while continuing to lose altitude during the role.
The loss of both (!) slats was due to airframe overstress but not the cause of the accident.
According to a wittness the pilot, who had no aerobatic license, was known for exceeding his own limits as a pilot, if that makes sense.
Needless to say, the Me108 is not allowed for aerobatics either.
I'm not too sure if those slats are really as bad as sometimes stated. I have yet to see first hand accounts that proof that. As so often you can find a number of negative statements and speculations on those things from "the other side" but not from the producer, the RLM or the pilots that flew with those slats.
From what I understand the slats do quite a good job in keeping the wing from dropping in a stall.
 
Mathias said:
Hiya sg38,
from what you can read, the accident happened due to the pilot (Furrer was in the right seat) trying a badly performed barrel role at too low an altitude (20 meters) while continuing to lose altitude during the role.
The loss of both (!) slats was due to airframe overstress but not the cause of the accident.
Needless to say, the Me108 is not allowed for aerobatics either.
I'm not too sure if those slats are really as bad as sometimes stated. .....From what I understand the slats do quite a good job in keeping the wing from dropping in a stall.
Click to expand...

I've seen the crash video and it was an awful roll started from an only 5deg nose up attitude...no way to complete that one. Overstress occured most probably at the virtually last second during the desperate pull up attempt.
According to the german old timers quite a few had the slats locked in the retracted position (on the 109) to avoid the unwanted rolling motion during maneuvering.
IF they open evenly the inboard wing section stalls first so there shouldn't be any wing drop. A nice safety feature :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top