# Me 109 G vs Macchi 205 N Orione



## DIOGENIS (Sep 9, 2006)

The Daimler engined fighters debate:

Both fighters were powered by the DB 601 A-1 engine rated 1475 hp. (Italian version Fiat RA 1050 was built under license, and was identical with the original Daimler Benz powerplant)

The legendary Messerschmitt was among the top fighters of WW2.A closer look in the Macchi fighter though, may convince us that the Italian design was superior.

What is your opinion?

Ps
Kawasaki ki 61 I Hien was another axis fighter powered by the same powerplant (DB 601 A 1100 hp)which fought ''very well'' against a Me 109 E..


----------



## Glider (Sep 9, 2006)

The Ki61 fought 'very well' against most planes the USA could throw at it let alone a 109E


----------



## DIOGENIS (Sep 9, 2006)

Both aircraft weigh 2600 to 2800 kgs, with major differences in span (me 109 :9.04m, macchi 205:11.25 m).Possibly the me 109 could roll better , but the macchi fighter should be more manoeurable and perform better in higher altittudes due to it's lower wing loading.The slats in me 109's wings played a part in dogfighting, but on the other hand during the big war most succesfull fighters operated without them (in fact i don't recall any of them having slats) .


----------



## DIOGENIS (Sep 9, 2006)

The same with Macchi 205 N applies for the ki 61 also, but it was even lighter than the 205N, and with a bigger wing!


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 10, 2006)

Who knows? The MC205 N 'Orione' was completed only in a couple of prototypes, words are that it was better than the contemporary Bf109G and it makes sense, since the 'Macchi 200 Mk III' (or MC205V) was at least on par with the best of the bunch, having finally closed the gap on armament.

But production of the 205N never started because of the armistice and because the Germans decided to standardize production on their models that were also easier to build (and this makes sense too)

Btw the engine was the DB605, not 601.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 10, 2006)

Well I let history speak for itself on this one and in that case the 109G wins for me.


----------



## DIOGENIS (Sep 10, 2006)

My mistake parmigiano, DB605 indeed.


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Sep 10, 2006)

109 for me too. After all, the impact it had on the war was much greater than the Macchi. Italy wasn't involved in as many fronts as Germany was and their fighters weren't as numerous. But the Me was still up there right with it's biggest envy the Spitfire. I don't know what plane the allied pilots were more afraid of. 

I bet often what they met more in greater numbers. And that would be the Me 109.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 11, 2006)

Agreed, nice siggy there too.


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 11, 2006)

I think there is no doubt for '205N' vs '109G'.

Maybe a correct comparison could be 205V vs 109G-6: they were contemporary and the production (about 250) of 205V was enough to have some opinion on performances.

Of course we should limit the pool to pure performances evaluation (like when we talk about the Ta152), if we consider effective deployement, numbers produced, impact on the war etc. there is no comparison.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 11, 2006)

Has there ever been a comparison of the two in areas such as maneuverability, speed and so forth?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 11, 2006)

We can make a comparison off of performance:

Max Speed
Bf-109G-6: 398 mph 
M.C. 205: 399 mph

Cieling
Bf-109G-6: 38,550 ft
M.C. 205: 37,950 ft

Rate of Climb
Bf-109G-6: 3,345 ft/min
M.C. 205: ????

Range
Bf-109G-6: 447 Miles
M.C. 205: 530 Miles 

Armament
Bf-109G-6: One 30mm MG 108 cannon firing through hub.
Ammunition: 60 Rounds
Or
One 20mm MG 151 cannon
Ammunition: 150 Rounds
And
Two 13mm MG 131 machine guns above engine.
Ammunition: 300 rpg

M.C. 205: 2x 12.7 mm MG with each 400 rounds on cowling 
and 
2x 20 mm cannons with each 250 rounds in wings

Basically based off of performance they were pretty much equal. The only thing to go off of is maneuverability now.


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 11, 2006)

I have found this for the 205,

Tipo
Macchi Mc.205
"Veltro"

Motori
DB.605/A o RC.58

Potenza
hp 1.475

Apertura alare (wing span) 
m 10,50 (34,45 ft)

Lungh. tot.. (lenght)
m 8,85 (29 ft)

Alt. tot. (height)
m 3,05 (10 ft)

Superf. alare (wing area)
m2. 16,80 (181 sq ft)

Peso a vuoto (empty weight)
kg 2.524 (5.609 pounds)

Peso max (max weight)
kg 3.224 (7.164 pounds)

Velocità max (max speed)
km/h 650 a 7.400 m (403 mph @ 24.280 ft)

Autonomia (range)
km 1.040 (645 miles)

Quota di tangenza (ceiling)
m 11.350 (37.200ft)

The weight for Bf 109 G6 I have found is 2.700 kg (5.900 lb) empty and 3.400 kg (7.500 lbs) max.

Wing area is (should be? I've started to trust the sources like pre-owned car dealers...) 16,36 sqm or 179 sq feet

If so, wing load for the MC205 is 150 (empty) and 192 (max), for the 109G respectively 173 and 218 kg/sqm

The only rate of climb data I've found is for the MC202, 1.086 mt/min (3.563 ft/min): being the 205 about 100 to 300 kg heavier but with a lot more power (about 300 hp) the 205 should be equal or a bit better. (airframe was almost identical)

If the data are correct, the 205 should be a bit more maneuvrable, mainly because of a lower wing load, but the 109's slats were probably an advantage in low speed flight and we have no data about comparison of controls effectiveness.

Also to remark that several sources reports that the AR built DB605 was performing a bit worse than the original. Again a mess, because it seems that several MC205 were fitted with the German built DB605.

.. so, it looks pretty close to a tie, it looks that all the top fighters were in a narrow range and that the pilot could always make the difference. Hmmm... I believe to have already read this!


----------



## Chocks away! (Sep 12, 2006)

Bf-109 G is a rather general term. I went with the Gustav, because as far as performance is concerned, it's later versions were rather superior to the Macchi.


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Sep 13, 2006)

Thanks, DerAdlerIstGelandet. And yours shows what a great plane the Bf was.


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 13, 2006)

Chocks away! said:


> Bf-109 G is a rather general term.



I totally agree, that's why I wanted to be more specific (.. or picky! )

While the 109G evolved from 1942 to 1945, the MC205 was not developed after her first entry in 1943.

So, if the data we have gathered are somewhat reliable, MC205 and 109G6 looks very close in performances, hence 109G2 was a bit worse and 109G14 and G10 a bit better

Other general considerations are : 
- Cockpit visibility: the Macchi was better at least until the 109 adopted the Erla hood and removed the bulges for the MG 
- Armament : Macchi was better (a bit in terms of firepower and more in terms of number of rounds carried, and with the exception of the use vs heavy bombers for the 109g-Mk108 )
- Roll rate : 109G was likely better (I believe that having a substantial weight located in mid-wing like a cannon+ammo creates an inertia that impacts on roll rate)
- Maneuvrabilty: Macchi should be in slight advantage, because of the lower wing load and because of the asymmetrical wing construction that reduced the torque effect.

But all the above are in my opinion non-substantial in comparison to the development of the DB605 from 1943 to 1945: the Macchi remained with the 'basic' DB605A

What is also not shown by the performances is that, slave work or not, the 109 was much easier, simpler and faster to build than the Mc205.


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 13, 2006)

*BREAKING NEWS ! FOUND A SECRET DEVELOPMENT OF MACCHI 205 !*

The (until today) unknown *Macchi 205 F* was basically the standard 205V airframe fitted with a new experimental Italian engine.
The secret project was addressing the main problem of the Italian fighter: the lack of a locally developed high performance engine.

Apparently the prototype was extensively flown by the famous test pilot Michele Calzolari (*), who set an incredible string of speed records.

The 30 litre- 75 degree V12 with 4 OHC was credited of 3200 bhp, although the manufacturer always refused to declare the true power output, claiming that he did not wanted to give information to competitors. 

More to follow, for now see attached 2 pictures, one original 1943 in bw and the color one from the manufacturer museum in Modena.


(*) Later Mr Calzolari moved to Germany and translated the family name in 'Schumacher'


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 13, 2006)

Superb!


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Sep 13, 2006)

Ferrari was powering the Macchi????


----------



## DIOGENIS (Sep 13, 2006)

Imagine an all red Macchi 205 Ferrari - powered racer!

Anyway guys, thanks because I found very useful all the details and specifications provided.Also, I would like to explain my original intentions about creating the poll:
Two similarly powered aircrafts, therefore we are obviously talking about the G6 variant, and of course the impact of the Me 109 was unquestionably greater than the 205.What i needed was your point of view and info about the technical comparison of the two different designs.
I am a big fan of the 109 and found it difficult to accept that the italian design (based on my limited sources) was probably a better dogfighter or had an overall better performance.
Thats what i wanted to focus on, your opinion about the best design powered by the same engine! A fairly straight comparison


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Sep 14, 2006)

Imagine an all red Macchi 205 Ferrari - powered racer!


That would be cool!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 14, 2006)

Good stuff, that is really cool with the Ferrari engine!


----------



## Soren (Sep 14, 2006)

You're sure thats not a modern engine Parmigiano ? Like from the 80's or something like that ? The reason I'm asking is the Carbon fiber.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2006)

I tried to research that one but did not find anything.


----------



## Soren (Sep 15, 2006)

Well I can tell you this much, Carbon fiber wasn't invented before the 60's. And although I'm not 100% sure about this, it wasn't used on engines before the 80's.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2006)

Does anyone know what the N-1, N-2 and the C.206 varients were to be powered by?


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 16, 2006)

OK guys, was not clear enough it was a joke?!

Even with Mr Cazolari/Schumacher as a test driver?

I think the bw photo is from the 312T formula1, while the color photo I don't know.

Ferrari firm was established in 1947, the first Ferrari engine (1950) was a 12V but only 1,5 litre!

I wanted also to provide the draft of a racing-red 205 with an air scoop and aileron behind the cockpit,but I am too clumsy with the software...

Although Enzo Ferrari had a little to do with aviation: in the 1930's his firm (Auto Avio Costruzioni) was producing subcomponents for aviation, and the Ferrari symbol of the jumping horse was given to him by the widow of the WW1 italian ace Francesco Baracca (they were family friends)


----------



## Parmigiano (Sep 16, 2006)

... Back to real history..

In brief, the lineage of Macchi's was

MC 202 'Folgore'
Improved Mc200 frame with DB601 engine

MC205 V 'Veltro'
Stopgap solution: Mc202 frame fitted with DB605 engine. After a few produced with only 2x12.7 on cowling and 2x7.7 in the wings, the wing was modified to accomodate 2xMG151/20. (officially the MG were standardized on the Series III that was delivered in June 43, but many units of the series I were already carrying the 20mm cannons)

Production was about 180 aircraft before the armistice, plus another 100 in the Salò republic under German control. 
Several MC202 that needed an engine change were refitted with DB605 in 1943-44, they were known with the nickname 'Folgeltro', adding confusion to confusion. This machines retained the 202 armament of 2x12.7

The structural difference between Mc200, 202 and 205V was really small, no more than the differences between Spit I - V- IX or 109E-F-G, so it was basically an evolution of the base Mc200 design.
Was common practice to repair the 205 cannibalizing spares from older 200 and 202 frames

MC205N 'Orione'
This was Castoldi's definitive design for the DB605 engine, redesigned with a larger wingspan (wing area 19sqm instead of 16,8). 
It should have addressed the drop in maneuvrability of the 205V above 8500 mt
Also featuring an additional MG151/20 firing trough the hub, 109 like. 
The difference between N1 and N2 was only the armament : the N1 had an engine mounted MG151, 2x12.7 in the cowling and 2x12.7 in the wing bays, the N2 replaced the 12.7 with the MG151 in the wings. 

Only 2 prototypes completed

MC206
Interim design for a new 'high ceiling' fighter: was basically an enlarged MC205N airframe fitted with DB605 and redesigned wings, wing area was 21sqm and armament was 4xMG151 in the wings (Typhoon like) 
No completed aircraft known, doubtful if a prototype was partially built.

MC207 
The final design: MC206 airframe with DB603 engine
Only design.


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Sep 16, 2006)

OK guys, was not clear enough it was a joke?!


Well.......uh...........


----------



## Soren (Sep 16, 2006)

Parmigiano said:


> OK guys, was not clear enough it was a joke?!



I had a feeling it was something like that !


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2006)

Not bad!


----------



## DIOGENIS (Sep 22, 2006)

thx to you all for the info


----------



## wwii:)aircraft (Jun 12, 2010)

The mc205 has complete superiority by a long shot. Even though both fighters had the same engine, the mc 205 had many other qualities that gave it superiority. The Mc 205 had wide landing gear like the fw 190, it had very good cokcpit visibility, was more maneuverable and had better handling and a better dive. 

There where two variants of the Mc 205: the V and the N. The mc 205v was essentially a mc 202 with the DB 605 engine and increase armament of two 12.7mm guns and two 20mm cannons. The mc 205n was an mc 205v with an improved design that attempted to increase the fighter's performance. The N also have an increased armament of either 4 x 12.7mm guns and a 20mm cannon in the N-1 or 2 x 12.7mm guns and 3 x 20mm guns in the N-2.
Pefomance was not really improved in the mc 205N: top speed was 390mph at 22,965ft to the mc 205v's top speed of 399mph at 23,620ft (keep in mind that the mc 205N was heavier due to the increased armament).

When you compare the fighter to the Bf 109G, the mc 205 was basically superior to it in almost every way, not only in performance, but also in other qualities such as excellent handling, wide landing gear and a better armament (although the BF 109G can carry the same armament as the mc 205n, it would need to carry gun pods under the wings which reduce maneuverability and rate of roll). The only Bf 109 that would have a chance against a Mc 205 would be the Bf 109G-10, K, and possibly the G-14/AS. One simple way of showing how the Mc 205 was superior to the Bf 109G was how it was an overall improvement of the Mc 202, unlike the Bf 109G that lost some of the excellent qualities of the Bf 109F.


----------



## Kurfürst (Jun 12, 2010)

Kurfrst - Bericht ber Jagdflugzeug-Vergleichsfliegen bei der ital. E-Stelle Guidonia.


----------

