FlyingIron Simulations Bf-109G-6 Released 6/14

[gribouil]

It's getting more and more difficult to tell what's real and not real these days. No editing, no Nvidia filtering, just phenomenal. If you move the drone camera around the cockpit, you'll even see details like the brake cylinders, fully modeled and textured behind the rudder pedals.

Hello John,
I know it's not a G-2 (Trop) but will you reproduce "Black 6" livery?
Cheers,

Stéph.

[shotgunshack]

I can't say that the 109 is one of my favorite airplanes - quite the opposite. But FI really created a masterpiece. It's definitely their best work yet

Tim - great shots. Notice how subtle the stressed skin is under the wing of Tim's first pic..... other developers take note.

[shotgunshack]

Those are wonderful photos, DVJ! What part of the service did your dad serve, and what unit was he assigned?

With regard to the FlyingIron Bf 109G, I can continue to heap praise over everything. With an absolutely critical eye/attitude, these are just a few very small things that could improve it just a tad bit more (though it is already the most impressive WWII aircraft in the sim).

- Right now, the manual says to put the elevator trim to the +1 setting for takeoff. There has always been confusion over this among the flight sim and combat sim community as to just what that means. Is +1 tail-high/nose-down or tail-low/nose-up trim, and how to properly depict that on the indicator in the cockpit? At some point, somewhere, that became the often-quoted setting for the elevator trim for takeoff. However, in a book written by one of the individuals involved with the restoration and operation of Bf 109G-2 "Black 6" in the 1990s, he mentioned that the takeoff elevator trim setting was -1. Finally, several years ago, the question was answered by Volker Bau, one of the Messerschmitt Foundation pilots that flew "Red 7". He couldn't remember whether in the cockpit it read -1 or +1 when setting trim for takeoff, only that it is definitely tail-low/nose-up trim that is added (moving the elevator trim wheel aft), not tail-high/nose-down trim. As it stands right now, +1 trim in the FlyingIron Bf 109 is nose-down, so to be more accurate you should go against what the product manual says and use -1 elevator trim instead (and this seems to work better/feel better as well). If you want proof of what Volker Bau said with regard to trim, just watch this video (it helps to have closed-captions turned on): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDMzZOOIFro

- Right now, the sliding side windows of the standard canopy aren't functional. Just a small thing that, if they were working, I'd use them when taxiing on the ground, just for kicks. I'm sure there are good reasons for them not to be function as it stands right now (more coding, plus tying into the soundset, and affecting flight dynamics, if they really wanted to get into that). The canopy does open, as do the side wall cockpit vents.

- Right now, the airspeed has to be maintained a bit higher during the approach than what is used in the real aircraft, however the touchdown speed, when you settle onto the runway in a perfect three-point attitude, is spot on (about 150 kph, or slightly lower). With everything else about the flight characteristics appearing to be spot on, I'm willing to be fully content with it as it stands.

- Right now, there is no period/vintage pilot option. Again, I don't pretend to be flying in the 1940s, so this isn't necessary, but it would be an interesting option to have (to say, for instance, depict a modern pilot dressed in period garb for an air-to-air photoshoot).


Doing some more flying, I've noticed that the settings in cruise are all right in the ballpark, just as they should be. Cruise power used by the Messerschmitt Foundation is 1.05 ATA, which establishes RPM at 2100, which is spot on in the sim. At these power settings, and the radiator doors closed, the airspeed in level flight is about 430 kph, and the elevator trim setting is right at around 0, both of which are also true to the real aircraft.

....and the offset rudder appears to be modelled too.http://

[Paul K]

I haven't bought the 109 as yet, but I've watched some first impressions on YT. It warrants all the superlatives heaped upon it - Flying Iron at their best, and that's saying something. One niggle however; the interior engine sound. Inside, the engine doesn't ever sound much above idle speed, or maybe what you would hear during the taxi out to the runway. In the cruise, there is a powerful throaty purr on the outside (as you would expect), but inside it sounds like low revs and clatters like a tractor engine.

Based on these YT videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEF-KVO6Bws


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUyM2MhZOC8&t

[ColoKent]

I bought the 109, I LOVE the detail and implementation of the EFB for options/weapons/stores. Landing is a challenge....but doable. It's on takeoff that I have crashed over and over. I am using the right rudder/right aileron thing, but advancing power to 1.3 for takeoff sends me into a left hand ground looping turn every time (...and I thought the P-51 was HARD to take off!). Ah well...practice makes perfect, and I will keep at it. Once a paintkit comes out, I'm guessing there will be a plethora of repaints! Looking forward to getting my head wrapped around this one.

Kent

[Bomber_12th]

Paul, I can definitely see where you're coming from. As far as the cockpit sounds, which are real recordings and which I think match the various power-settings quite well, the real aircraft is quite rattly on the inside even at higher power settings as well.

Reference these videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGhMGQst4lo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jenWQy4Zm-w

Note too how it sounds when the throttle is brought to complete idle (such as after landing), which matches just perfectly with the FlyingIron '109. It really idles low, and you can just about count every cylinder firing off.

I do notice there is quite a lot of wind noise in the cockpit in the real world videos, and they likely have the cockpit wall vents open (which are typically always open on '109s flying today). You can open those vents on the FlyingIron Bf 109 too, and this will result in some greater wind noise as well (I don't know if any of the Youtubers have found those details yet).

[Bomber_12th]

Kent, with regard to takeoff in the '109, in the sim, just as in reality, the big thing to watch out for is to not put the power higher than you can compensate with rudder. You also don't want to have to be full right rudder when the tail lifts, otherwise there won't be any remaining to be used when it starts to veer anymore to the left. With the elevator trim set to 1-degree nose up (-1 on the indicator), flaps set 20-degrees, tailwheel locked, brakes off, stick to the right and slightly forward, I start to gradually increase power, rudder pedals just about full right to compensate. I only continue to increase power as I feel it can be controlled. Once there is enough airspeed on the dial, you can feel that you're not having to carry as much right rudder anymore and you can continue to increase the throttle to full takeoff power, gently raise the tail, and by 180 kph you're flying.

1.1 ATA seems to be a common takeoff power setting among DB 605-powered Bf 109 operators today, going back to when "Black 6" flew in the 1990s, which is quite a lot less than the power available.

The late Mark Hanna would joke that Walter Eichhorn's approach to take off in the '109 was to hold full right rudder and simply vary the throttle to control the swing.

[Bomber_12th]

Stéph, I'll look at the textures and see if I can start working on a depiction of "Black 6". As you say, "Black 6" is a G-2, so it doesn't have the cannon blisters on the cowls as the G-6 does, but other than that, it should look fairly reasonably accurate, especially with the tropical filter added (one of the tablet features). I have quite a lot of resource material on "Black 6", to get all of the details and stenciling right as well. The one I really want to do is Bruce Winter's restored Bf 109G-6, and do it completely faithfully in every detail to the real thing. For both of these, though, I would really like to have access to a layered paintkit, so that aspects of the weathering can be controlled.

This documentary from the mid 90s, and a couple other films from the time about "Black 6", originally sparked my interest in the '109. I've never been interested in the wartime history of the '109, my interest has always been about flying them today, and the individuals involved in preserving, restoring and operating them in modern years. I suppose for the same reason, I've never been interested in combat simulators, despite having great interest in warbirds.

[Bomber_12th]

[gribouil]

Fantastic news John!!!
Here is a link to a French website related to warbirds on which you will find several pictures of Bruce Winter's Bf109 and a very interesting (even if short) video of the first post restoration flight:

https://www.lecharpeblanche.fr/2022/...n-premier-vol/

You can clearly see that the pilot (Steve Hinton) is litterally dancing on the pedals!!!
Cheers,

Stéph.

[Bomber_12th]

I've followed the project (WkNr.410077) since it arrived at Midwest Aero for restoration back around 2012. Although I have yet to see it in person, I have a few online friends, such as the owner of Midwest Aero, as well as a couple colleagues I've worked with through Wabird Digest, who have been close to the project, and I've gleaned quite a significant number of photos of it, covering every detail, stencil, etc. I've been looking forward to finally putting them to use. Bruce Winter, the owner, who is a retired US Navy F/A-18 pilot, has accumulated well over 1,000 hours flying his P-51D "Happy Jack's Go Buggy", which was also restored by Midwest Aero, and he does just a wonderful job flying the Bf 109. Every detail around the cockpit is as it was researched to have looked when in operation, including the voids/open holes in the left side of the instrument panel, and with all of the correct colors, markings, German stenciling and placards, etc. It's a lot more authentic and fully equipped than any of the other Bf 109Gs (or converted Buchons) flying in the world.

[UnknownGuest12]

About the pilot....got a word from FlyingIron (great people there) saying that "will be working on a pilot model over the next few months which will be added to the 109 and 190." These are goog news.
Regards​

[Paul K]

Paul, I can definitely see where you're coming from. As far as the cockpit sounds, which are real recordings and which I think match the various power-settings quite well, the real aircraft is quite rattly on the inside even at higher power settings as well.

Reference these videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGhMGQst4lo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jenWQy4Zm-w

Note too how it sounds when the throttle is brought to complete idle (such as after landing), which matches just perfectly with the FlyingIron '109. It really idles low, and you can just about count every cylinder firing off.

I do notice there is quite a lot of wind noise in the cockpit in the real world videos, and they likely have the cockpit wall vents open (which are typically always open on '109s flying today). You can open those vents on the FlyingIron Bf 109 too, and this will result in some greater wind noise as well (I don't know if any of the Youtubers have found those details yet).

You're right, the clattery interior sound in the Flying Iron 109 is closer to what you hear in those videos than I would have imagined. But not quite - particularly in the second video. This is so subjective, isn't it ? I'll wait and see if the issue is brought up, and see what FI's thoughts are. There's no doubting the rest of the model though - a tour de force.

[K5083]

I've never been interested in the wartime history of the '109, my interest has always been about flying them today, and the individuals involved in preserving, restoring and operating them in modern years. I suppose for the same reason, I've never been interested in combat simulators, despite having great interest in warbirds.

I totally get this, but I hope you don't mean you don't use any of the combat sims as flight simulators. You'd be missing out. They have some nicely modeled planes. If I were to recommend just one, it would be IL2:Cliffs of Dover and its Tobruk expansion (but wait for a periodic sale on the latter). Of all the current warbird sims, they have the best combination of accurately modeled planes, reasonable systems depth, and interesting planes that haven't been available in the last few gens of flight sims. I generally turn off all the enemies and fly around, because I have no interest in learning air combat maneuvering and I hate having my beautiful virtual warbird shot out from under me. Besides being fun, they supply another useful data point for how the flight models of the different planes are interpreted.

August

[Bomber_12th]

I do have IL2: Cliffs of Dover and DCS, but I unfortunately haven't made time for them since MSFS2020 came out (just so much more visual immersive). As you mention, I never got involved with doing in combat in those sims, it was just about the experience of flying the aircraft. Flying the FlyingIron Spitfire Mk.IX and Bf 109G-6, they both feel essentially the same as I can remember the Spitfire Mk.IX and Bf 109K-4 being in DCS.

[Bomber_12th]

It's not pretty, but I thought I would record a simple flight around Duxford. I skipped the run-up, and also the aerobatics were purely thought up as I went (I've done better, more stable, loops just about every other time - the slats kept popping in and out because I wasn't as smooth as I should have been - usually they only slide out once, as you go around the top, and then back in as you enter the down line). The touchdown speed on landing is also faster than it should be.

[shotgunshack]

Very nice John

[Bomber_12th]

Thank you!

Since it seems to be rather common among operators of the DB-powered Bf 109s flying today to use the manual control of the electric propeller for various stages of flight, this morning I've been playing around with the same manual override of the prop in the sim. The switch to change between the automatic system and the manual override is just below the throttle quadrant. On the Bf 109 there is a rocker switch on the end of the throttle which, with the prop set to manual, you use your thumb to increase/decrease the prop blade angle. There is a well-known gauge on the instrument panel that looks like a clock but actually indicates the amount of degrees of prop blade pitch (every 10 minute line indicating 1-degree of blade pitch). The max setting on the gauge is the 12:30 position, indicating full fine 22-degrees, with the lowest setting being the 4:30 position, indicating full coarse 70-degrees.

On the FlyingIron model, with the prop set to manual, the prop pitch increase/decrease function is tied to the propeller axis binding. On my X52 throttle controller, I've always had the prop axis tied to the slider switch that you use with your thumb, so this works out really well. As the product manual outlines, it functions with the sim model by putting the slider in three different positions - 0-30% is decrease, 30-70% is neutral/off, and 70-100% is increase. Once you reach the setting you want, you center the axis/switch.

Among the various modern pilot reports I've read, it is usually mentioned that current operators set the prop to manual for takeoff with the prop pitch indicator set to the 12:00 or 11:30 position (to ease the amount of torque/p-factor on takeoff). Dave Southwood, in his pilot report about flying the Bf 109G-2 "Black 6", mentions that for aerobatic display flying they would use 1.15 ata (max-continuous power) and would put the prop control to manual and set it for 2400-2500 RPM, so as to avoid overboosting the engine. According to Southwood, this would mean setting the prop to the 11:05 position at high speeds, such as prior to entering vertical maneuvers, but it would have to be increased to the 11:20 position over the top of a loop. This resulted in a lot of head-in-cockpit time and having to make propeller adjustments throughout an aerobatic display, greatly increasing the pilot's workload. Again, during the landing approach, I've read that the prop is commonly set to the 11:30 position, in-case of go-around. In cruise flight the manual control can come in handy too as you can lower the RPM farther than the automatic system will, which will save you a bit on gas (for instance, in automatic, standard cruise is 1.05 ata / 2100 RPM, but in manual you can fly with a more economical setting of 1 ata and 1800-2000 RPM).

Last year at Oshkosh, Bruce Winter and Mike Vadeboncouer mentioned that, with Bruce Winter's extremely accurate Bf 109G-6, they hadn't quite gotten the automatic prop control working properly yet, with some more tweaking still having to be done at the time, so the prop/RPM was always being controlled/adjusted manually. Because the engines are so rare and expensive to overhaul, it was mentioned that they were using reduced power settings across the board (probably matching up with what other operators have stated, such as using only 1.1 ata on takeoff).

[Priller]

I'm so looking forward to repaints with historically correct markings!!

Priller

[StormILM]

This model is super! A handful to takeoff but when trimmed in flight and landing, I actually managed to not prang it which was a good thing! lol As far as the takeoff technique, the word Finesse is key!

[Spook48]

For the people that don't want to fly german markings , there is an english, aswell as an american livery on .to.

[DaveWG]

Another successful landing! Thought I'd nailed it that time, but bounced it.

[UnknownGuest12]

For the people that don't want to fly german markings , there is an english, aswell as an american livery on .to.

And finally you can find historical markings there, too. Many thanks to the author.

[Cazzie]

As has been stated in this post, if you can take it off, you can fly and land it! But it flies like a charm. Please excuse this Yank's use of historically correct markings. I shall not post them for download, because no. 1, they are forebitten at FS.to and pretty much throughout the web due to laws in many nations. If any of you want them, there are seven textures which need no .json replacement, just replace the original textures in their respective folders. I can .zip the seven and send it to anyone here who wants them. Send me a PM Notification here at SOH with your email addy.

CazzieAttachment 91120Attachment 91119

[Bomber_12th]

It doesn't really interest me, but here you can download the modified stencil textures which will now display the swastika in full: https://flightsim.to/file/56768/flyi...rical-markings

Cazzie, I like your version better, as the white outline is more accurate.

The restored D-FMBB (now D-FMBD today), one of the included paint schemes, has never had a swastika on the tail. Of the Bf 109s flying in Germany, three have partial swastikas on the tail, done the same way they are depicted in the FlyingIron historical paint schemes, which has to be the best compromise/solution. Otherwise, in Germany, the law can be interpreted that you can't display a swastika on an aircraft beyond museum display (the UK-based P-51D "Miss Helen" recently made a long-distance trip back and forth to Sweden, with a stop in Germany along the way, so the swastika kill markings on the canopy framing were covered over ahead of time).