# Bf109 with Pipe.



## beaupower32 (Dec 14, 2009)

I looked through the site and couldnt find any thing on this pituclar 109. Anyone have any idea what this is and what model 109 it is. I got this off the 109 Lair website, and I was curious if anyone here would have a Idea. Here is what is said from that website. 



> The following photos were sent to me by a friend in Texas whose father "liberated" them during his stint as a P-47 pilot during WWII. He has no more information to offer outside of the obvious fact that it's a modified Bf 109T with what appears to be a drainpipe mounted beneath the aircraft. Would anyone out there have any more on this particular aircraft?
> 
> Incidentally, the last four shots are of the aircraft after either falling into a flat spin with a dead engine, or lunching the engine during takeoff or landing...note the prop blades are not "wrapped" as they would be if they impacted the ground when still turning. Plus, the wreckage is fairly localized, and the rear portion of the canopy hood lies right near the wreck, indicating the pilot was likely still on board at the time of impact.
> 
> It was theorized for a while that this may have been set up to assist with deicing trials of the Ju 86P high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft; however, if the intention was to spray water on another aircraft and have it turn to ice, it stands to reason that the water would freeze in the carrier aircraft as it would be flying at the same altitude.


----------



## pbfoot (Dec 14, 2009)

for laying a smoke screen?


----------



## gumbyk (Dec 14, 2009)

For laying those chemtrails!!!!


sorry, I couldn't resist.


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 14, 2009)

gumbyk said:


> For laying those chemtrails!!!!
> 
> 
> sorry, I couldn't resist.



Dont tell GrauGeist!


I have seen different theories on this, anything from a smoke screen to inflight refueling, It looks like it can pivot on the hinge there at the base. so may be it can traverse 90 through 90 Degrees straight down.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 14, 2009)

Nice!

I'm guessing something to do with radio or magnetism waves. Based on the rear bracket, it looks like something that hangs down.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 14, 2009)

beaupower32 said:


> Dont tell GrauGeist!
> 
> 
> I have seen different theories on this, anything from a smoke screen to inflight refueling, It looks like it can pivot on the hinge there at the base. so may be it can traverse 90 through 90 Degrees straight down.



At the front of the tube there looks be a rotating de-icer spray bar. That would seem to indicate a fog or something similar apparatus.


----------



## Soren (Dec 14, 2009)

Right now I'm thinking the same as vikingBeserker. I don't think a long tube with the ability to be turned down vertical would be necessary to lay smoke or to try an pour water on another a/c, a small tube along the belly of the a/c could've accomplished that, so it has gotta be something else IMO.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 15, 2009)

gumbyk said:


> For laying those chemtrails!!!!
> 
> sorry, I couldn't resist.


You may not be far off the track there.

It could be for a specialized smoke generator. The rear bracket actually looks like an escutcheon that both locates the "boom" in the stowed position, and guides the "boom's" cable when it deploys.

I do recall where they were trying to come up with a rapid-deployment solution to obscure thier shore batteries...don't know if this was part of that or not.



beaupower32 said:


> Dont tell GrauGeist!


Too Late!






As far as the Bf109 model, that has to be an E...the perspective makes the wings look longer, but they're not right for a T or T-2.


----------



## Soren (Dec 15, 2009)

Why put a device like that on an e/c if you want to lay smoke? Seriously it doesn't make any sense. I you wanted just to lay smoke you could've had a pipe run from the belly along to the end of the tail. 

The only explanation I can ome up with is that either this was some sort of radio device or it was simply a part meant for another a/c design that was first tested in flight mounted to a Bf-109, wouldn't be out of place back then.


----------



## pbfoot (Dec 15, 2009)

The contrails thing might not be far off , at first I suggested the a/c might have been used for smoke screen but in reflection I think thats wrong the 109 had enough problem toting around enough fuel for itself let alone stuff for other apps . Could the aircraft have been used for investigating the reason for or how to hide contrails


----------



## unix_nerd (Dec 15, 2009)

chemical dispenser or smoke generator might be right - but then there hasd to be a tank for chemicals or smoke stuff...
I can't see anyone. 

This is an Emil series 109.


Maybe for towing something - a target tug or for towing a glider.
The hole thing is attached at the bomb rack. That is a structurally strong point.
The tail of the 109 was reportably not so strong. The firste F series the had trouble with the tail assembly which tend to break away at certain speed.


----------



## evangilder (Dec 15, 2009)

"Hey Hans?
Jah?
How do you think we could confuse historians, years from now?
Ve could take a gutter from my hofbrau and put it on a 109.
Jah, and mount it like it belongs.
hehe If ve could only hear them now..."


----------



## Crimea_River (Dec 15, 2009)

LMAO!


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 15, 2009)

Nice!


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 15, 2009)

Thats pretty funny!


----------



## Airframes (Dec 15, 2009)

It could always be an airborne bratwurst delivery system....dropped hot, ready to eat.............


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 16, 2009)

Airframes said:


> It could always be an airborne bratwurst delivery system....dropped hot, ready to eat.............


lol

I think its some sort of Radio Mast IMHO.


----------



## evangilder (Dec 16, 2009)

Ah, the weiner heater.


----------



## BikerBabe (Dec 16, 2009)

...mit sauerkraut und gemüse...


----------



## Capt. Vick (Dec 17, 2009)




----------



## Airframes (Dec 17, 2009)

Oder, eine Goulash Kannone ?


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 17, 2009)

Die Schnitzel Wurfer!!


----------



## Njaco (Dec 17, 2009)

Its a potty dump - early prototype


----------



## evangilder (Dec 18, 2009)

It's a phallic symbol, my airplane's got a bigger one than yours...


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 18, 2009)




----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 18, 2009)

Talk about flying high and carrying a big stick.


----------



## Airframes (Dec 18, 2009)

It's a dummy, telescopic, 88mm cannon. Extends in front and scares the s**t out of the enemy by its very appearance!!


----------



## Crimea_River (Dec 18, 2009)

I get the feeling nobody really knows what this thing is.


----------



## evangilder (Dec 18, 2009)

Where do you get that idea?


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 18, 2009)

Its a extended relief tube to they dont get piss all over the plane.


----------



## BikerBabe (Dec 18, 2009)

Naaaaaaaaah, it's a cigar holder for Dolfo's cigars, what else???


----------



## Soren (Dec 19, 2009)

Keep coming with the theories guys, we might hit jackpot in the end


----------



## evangilder (Dec 19, 2009)

It a test aircraft for a much larger Horn of Jericho. They want the Stukas to sound much meaner. The idea was conceived after opening a box of GI Cracker Jacks and getting the whistle inside...


----------



## Njaco (Dec 19, 2009)

Its one of those new hybrid Bf 109s? Uses Prune seed oil.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 19, 2009)

LMAO


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 19, 2009)

Dang...I just figured it out and I'm really surprised no one else saw this before I did...

It's that ever elusive *Sky Hook*!!

Problem solved...now on to the next mystery:
If Teflon is non-stick, how do they get it to stay on the pan?


----------



## B-17engineer (Dec 19, 2009)

It could've just been a very slow, incompetent worker

"Siegfried!" 
"Yes Sir!" 
"Why the hell is there F^%*^ pipe on your 109?" 
"I found it at Gunter's workstation. "


*The 109's test flight*

"Gunter it is your time to shine." 
"Yes sir. "
**Plane takes off and breaks up in mid flight** 
"What the hell happened? "
**Looks over at Sigfried's plane with pipe**
"Oh F*ck....Sigfriend...that was part of the structure...you idiot!"


----------



## Amsel (Dec 20, 2009)

Maybe its not actually a photo of an aircraft, but a photo of a model aircraft with a 'holder'.


----------



## Micdrow (Dec 22, 2009)

This is actually an age old question that has popped up on almost any website that deals with the luftwaffe and as far as I know there has been no answer to this question.


----------



## Bug_racer (Dec 22, 2009)

My guess would be its a pathfinder of some sort . 
Could possibly be some kind of amplifier ?

But , if its coming from exhaust :

It could be a way of testing exhaust gas flow over longer tubular distance , maybe for running external turbocharger ?


----------



## piet (Dec 22, 2009)

finaly a good reply dont know if its correct but like the idea

Piet


----------



## Bug_racer (Dec 22, 2009)

Is there any other pictures ?


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 22, 2009)

Bug_racer said:


> Is there any other pictures ?


Yeah...the first post in the thread.


----------



## Bug_racer (Dec 22, 2009)

Another theory is that the water was heated up by the exhaust . Created condensation within the exhaust causing excess pressure and causing the motor to loose power and the plane to crash


----------



## Airframes (Dec 22, 2009)

Could be getting close here. I wonder if it was something to do with experiments in eliminating contrails? Just a thought.
It might have been an invention of that well-known Prussian Professor, Doktor Vin Ebago, Dipl. Eng., where he came up with the idea of a portable, self-contained aircraft hangar. Press a button in the cockpit of the '109, and the tube opens, and a fully equipped hangar unfolds, complete with lighting, tool racks and a rest area in one corner. The hot tub and sauna were optional extras.


----------



## Njaco (Dec 22, 2009)

ummm, would testing a pressurized cockpit on a Bf 109 be out of the question?


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 22, 2009)

Njaco said:


> ummm, would testing a pressurized cockpit on a Bf 109 be out of the question?


It's a good guess, but they were testing the pressurized cockpits on the G models...


----------



## Bug_racer (Dec 22, 2009)

What year was that me109 released ?


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 22, 2009)

On the drawing board in the early 30's, it first flew in 1935 and was produced until 1945.

They were also built in Czechoslovakia and Spain after the war, the last postwar "Bf109" was built in the late 50's.


----------



## Njaco (Dec 23, 2009)

That looks to be a Bf 109E - probably 1938-1940. I would say 1940 or later as the swastika is not split across the tail.


----------



## Micdrow (Dec 23, 2009)

A while back this theory came up. Forgot where or who made the profiles but interesting none the less.


----------



## piet (Dec 23, 2009)

COOL!!!!
Piet


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 23, 2009)

Hmmm, perhaps one of the early version of the Mistol?


----------



## Micdrow (Dec 23, 2009)

vikingBerserker said:


> Hmmm, perhaps one of the early version of the Mistol?



Was more thinking along the lines of in filght refueling of a Bf-109 due to its short range problems.


----------



## gumbyk (Dec 23, 2009)

Micdrow, kind of what I was thinking.
But it must have been hard (almost impossible) for the 109 pilot to have positioned the line for the refuelling with it hanging below the aircraft like that. It looks like its almost in a blind spot.

Guess that explains the crash photos then...


----------



## Soren (Dec 23, 2009)

gumbyk,

I suspect that if this was the real application then it was the refueling a/c's job to connect, while the 109 just stayed steady level.


----------



## Micdrow (Dec 23, 2009)

Soren said:


> gumbyk,
> 
> I suspect that if this was the real application then it was the refueling a/c's job to connect, while the 109 just stayed steady level.



I would have to agree with you Soren, the 109 would have to fly steady and let the bomber or refuel align things up.


----------



## gumbyk (Dec 23, 2009)

I guess,
But it seems a bit bass ackward to me. Surely its easier to hold a big bomber on a nice steady straight and level flight than a small, agile fighter?


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 23, 2009)

Plus you would have to pump the fuel up-wards instead of pumping it down-wards with gravity helping.


----------



## Soren (Dec 23, 2009)

Either that or the 109 had a pump to suck up the fuel itself? Who knows..


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 25, 2009)

I found this on another site.A strange Bf 109E... [Archive] - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum




> From the HyperScale Plane Talking -forum thread (direct link given earlier by Modeldad).
> 
> "William
> German Navy used this 109-T for
> ...




If the device does not show a clear operational benefit to the Bf 109, was it flight testing something for another aircraft design. It was quite common at the time for bits of a proposed aircraft to be attached to other for aerodynamic trials. Someone I hope will recognise the device as a strut of a large aircraft, a proposed 'Mistel' or even a leading edge of a wing / strut etc.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 25, 2009)

That might be a good idea as to what the aperatus was, but it's definately not a T or T-2...


----------



## Soren (Dec 25, 2009)

I really dont believe it was for laying smoke, I mean why the moveable joint? You could accomplish what this william guy claims by simply having a pipe run along the bottom of the a/c, spewing smoke out the back. Also smoke dispensers back then were quite simply just cylindrical cans about the size of a really large cookie jar.

Could it be the testing of a part for another a/c, maybe. Or a refueling pipe, maybe.


----------



## BikerBabe (Dec 25, 2009)

Micdrow said:


> This is actually an age old question that has popped up on almost any website that deals with the luftwaffe and as far as I know there has been no answer to this question.



Has anyone ever asked the german airforce???


----------



## Airframes (Dec 27, 2009)

Although I don't think it is a smoke generator, more likely some equipment test-rig, it could be. Rather than just small cans, the Allies used RAF Bostons on D-Day to lay smoke screens across the sea in front of the beaches. The bomb bays were fitted with the rather large chemical tanks and generator, basically a heating element, and the smoke was 'dispensed' from a series of vertical pipes, in pairs, below the fuselage. The reason for the pipes being vertical was to allow the smoke to drop in a cloud, clear of the slipstream, to prevent it streaming behind in a 'thinner' trail, when it would have dissipated more quickly, thus negating any value.


----------



## BikerBabe (Dec 27, 2009)

Mail sent to the german airforce.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 27, 2009)

Soren said:


> I really dont believe it was for laying smoke, I mean why the moveable joint? You could accomplish what this william guy claims by simply having a pipe run along the bottom of the a/c, spewing smoke out the back. Also smoke dispensers back then were quite simply just cylindrical cans about the size of a really large cookie jar.
> 
> Could it be the testing of a part for another a/c, maybe. Or a refueling pipe, maybe.



Where is the movable joint? Certainly not at the front of the tube. Looking very carefully at that point one can see a sprocket with a chain that goes up the vertical fairing.


----------



## Njaco (Dec 27, 2009)

I'm not sure its movable either. That connection at the rear of the fuselage looks bolted on - which to me, is rather strange looking for a hanger.


----------



## piet (Dec 27, 2009)

Maby i'am seeing thingsdont like the look of that panelline no lines are to be seen on the rear section exept this one
So does this section look retouched in some way?

Piet


----------



## stona (Dec 27, 2009)

Whatever that is in the highlighted area it's not a normal panel line. As you say they are normally barely visible on the real thing (unlike the current fashion on models). I have no idea what that contraption is but of all the suggestions I'm backing the smoke generator,though why it would have to "hinge" down like that I have no idea.
Someone somewhere must know what it is!
Steve


----------



## pbfoot (Dec 27, 2009)

I'm no expert but can't believe they'd use the 109 for laying smoke screens , it barely carried enough fuel with its limited space


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 27, 2009)

I wonder if the panel line is some kind of strap or wire.

The front does look like a hinge to me. If on pic 1 below you rotate the red lines, it looks like a perfect match.

Not sure if on the front of it it's a sprocket and chain (blue line). When I looked at it the first time I thought it looked like the Air Log on the front of the V-1 (2nd pic). If it is a sprocket and chain, then I think it definitely could not be a hinge.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 27, 2009)

I went back and looked at the original images again...especially the wreckage photos.

With the discussion of the tail, I looked a bit more closely, and was surprised at what I saw. I blew up image #4 and noticed something very interesting.

That white "brace" is indeed a type of escutcheon and I still suspect to help locate the "pipe" as it retracts in the up position. You can see it clearly intact and still attached to the fuselage, facing upwards.

Also note that the *entire* tail assembly and fuselage from the cockpit back is twisted 180°, showing that escutcheon and the distinct joint between the tail and aft part of the fuselage. The "pipe" is also nowhere to be seen in the wreckage.


----------



## Soren (Dec 27, 2009)

Milosh said:


> Where is the movable joint? Certainly not at the front of the tube. Looking very carefully at that point one can see a sprocket with a chain that goes up the vertical fairing.



I see a joint. The opening also strongely suggesting a making of space for the pipe being pulled down in flight. I suspect a hydraulic system might have been used to pull the pipe down into position, seeing a rod connected to a hinge at the front of the pipe running from fuselage down. The rear attachment whích can be seen looks like a holster for the pipe, from which a wire probably runs to be used for hoisting the pipe up again.


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 27, 2009)

I found a few things on some other forums, and i will post here to get the brain thinking some more. 


Lucas Freeman


> Yes, it does very well seem to be attached between the gear. But comparing the forced perspective of the enlarged photo and the actual placement of the struts on the 109, it still places the attached piece between the gear but back towards the firewall of the engine.
> 
> What I do not understand is what the enlarged photo depicts as a non-aerodynamic addition to the aircraft. The front piece is wide open, like it needs the dynamic push of air to move whatever is inside the tube out. This could point to something smoke related, which could initially be started by the pilot reaching down, pulling some lever to activate a smoke pot (stored outside the cockpit for safety), and the smoke being pushed down the tube by the flow of air. (?) The end of the tube is near the vertical stabilizer and very close to the rudder, but movement of the rudder wouldn't truly affect a stream of smoke.
> 
> I hadn't even visited the web site when I first made my comments and it seems the author also is inlcined towards a drain of sorts. I am now tending to like the idea of smoke alot more. It's a nice theory... I wonder if we'll ever truly find out.






Gordon Alexander Rain


> O.K......my Farthing's worth.
> 
> I did a very large home remodel for an old german gentlemen about a year ago. As I was traipsing through the house I noticed a wall of pictures and badges and such. Looking a little closer I realized that they were all of WWII. He had many things mounted up there, amoung them a picture of the aircraft he used to fly for the Luftwaffe. It was, I believe he told me, a BF-109? Anyway, the reason for this long-winded answer is, that he had a picture of his aircraft (from a different angle) and it had a extremely similar device underneath it. Being the inquisitive WWII buff that I was, I asked him what it was. He told me that, at the end of the War, Germany was trying to burn all kinds of alternate fuels to put more aircraft in the air. The aircraft he was standing beside in the picture burned, of all things, coal oil!
> Might be the same type of aircraft......
> ...



Mike Still


> This makes some sense as a test craft. The FW 190F that the Smithsonian restored had a few gallons of coal-based gasoline in its tanks when the NASM team started tearing it down.
> 
> Note also that the photo shows the rig attached right over where the normal droptank rack would be attached anyway. The fully-enclosed attachment between the fairing and the pipe is a few inches behind the small propeller, and there is a lack of a clear ram intake into the rig. If you were going to make smoke, would it make sense to drain from the aircraft's internal fuel or oil?
> 
> Given the location of the pipe along the fuselage, it would be pretty improbable that this is some kind of reactive thrust system, especially because of the rudder proximity.





Now, if it did burn "coal oil" why did it need the long tube. Couldnt they just replace it with a normal drop tank, or would they need a entire different system to test it in case it didnt work.


----------



## GrauGeist (Dec 27, 2009)

Also notice that the "pipe" (or boom) doesn't seem to be round at the end tucked under the tail...it has more of an "L" shape and what appears to be rivets or bolts on the very end.

You can also see a slight gap around that "escutcheon" in this photo enlargement


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 27, 2009)

Nice catch Dave, I did not notice that at all.


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 28, 2009)

Correct me if im wrong, but doesnt the entire tail of the 109 move when it is being trimmed? If so, wouldnt bolting that to the tail eliminate the ability to trim the aircraft for level flight, unless the "pipe" has enough play to allow some sort of movement for the tail.


----------



## Soren (Dec 28, 2009)

The entire horizontal stabilizer was only trimmable on the F series onwards.


----------



## stona (Dec 28, 2009)

Soren said:


> The entire horizontal stabilizer was only trimmable on the F series onwards.



Yep,and rudder trim even later.


----------



## Airframes (Dec 28, 2009)

The tailplane (horizontal stabiliser) on the 109E could be manually set, on the ground, to one of three main positions. The opening for the adjustment, marked with the degrees of adjustment angle, can be seen just forward of the tailplanes, on the vertical fin, on 109E's. The diagonal support struts beneath the wings were ball-jointed where they meet the tailplane.


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 28, 2009)

Anti-Bomber?

Could this be some sort of device tested to bring down bombers. Just lower it in flight, and ram into the prop or wing of a bomber. It should break away and the fighter be able to return home. Maybe thats why it is missing in the crash photos, it had already collided into a bomber, but for some reason it caused the 109 to go down too. Just food for thought!


----------



## wheelsup_cavu (Dec 28, 2009)

Why would you want to get that close to the bomber formation though ?
It seems way to dangerous compared to other methods of bringing a bomber down.

Not an impossibility but it just seems to me that you would have to get too close to use it.


Wheels


----------



## beaupower32 (Dec 28, 2009)

It was just something I was thinking about. Most likely they would only use it in a head on attack, as the speed in which you they were closing at, the aircraft often came into a few feet of each other. I figured it was another crazy option the Germans thought of, but in the end, I really dont think it was used in the role.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 28, 2009)

stona said:


> Yep,and rudder trim even later.



Nope. There was a Flettner tab though.



> Soren: The entire horizontal stabilizer was only trimmable on the F series onwards.



The 109E had trimmable stab.


----------



## stona (Dec 28, 2009)

Milosh said:


> Nope. There was a Flettner tab though.
> 
> A Flettner tab on the rudder of which Bf109? I thought up until one of the late Gs they just had what was essentially a tab that was preset on the ground not any kind of servo tab.It pretty much amounted to a bent piece of metal. I claim no expertise in this area,just an interest!
> I've always associated servo tabs with balanced aileron control where the controls are actually connected to the tab and the control surface is free(as on the Sea Fury) but I make models not real aircraft so I may be displaying my ignorance. LOL
> Steve


----------



## vikingBerserker (Dec 28, 2009)

What if it was a drive to rotate the entire tail where the rudder is facing down. I know they did some experiments with this, possible test bed that only rotated it to the right?


----------



## Kurfürst (Dec 28, 2009)

stona said:


> Milosh said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. There was a Flettner tab though.
> ...


----------



## stona (Dec 29, 2009)

Thanks for that excellent picture and info Kurfurst. I knew they had some more sophisticated trim tabs on the later Gs but didn't know about the Flettner (servo) tab.
I still don't have a clue what the pipe on the original post was for though!
Cheers
Steve


----------



## Soren (Dec 29, 2009)

Did the 109E have a fully adjustabe horizontal stabilizer? AFAIK it didn't, and only the F series onwards had that.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 29, 2009)

Soren said:


> Did the 109E have a fully adjustabe horizontal stabilizer? AFAIK it didn't, and only the F series onwards had that.



Bf_109_E_Bedienung_Abwurfwaffe.pdf

found here, 
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/other-mechanical-systems-tech/new-bf-109-manuals-thread-17837.html


----------



## VERSUCH (Dec 29, 2009)

THE BF109E tail plane had 12 degrees of adjustment ,via the hand wheel located
on the left hand side of the cockpit beside the seat,its about 10 inches in diameter,
and has 4 alloy spokes with wood inlay(like a wood rim steering wheel).
It is mounted concentrically with the flap actuating wheel,and by winding both wheels together,
the pilot automatically compensates for changes of trim due to the flaps.
The rudder trim can only be set on the ground by bending the alloy tab,the rudder
helps as it has a slight aerofoil shape to counter act the touque of the engine and prop.
Despite this BF109 s still need of lot of left rudder to keeps them straight at higher speeds.
Regards Mike


----------



## Soren (Dec 30, 2009)

VERSUCH,

Did the Emil's entire horizontal stabilizer move when trimming as on later versions, it is my understanding that it didn't, the reinforcement struts preventing this.




Milosh said:


> Bf_109_E_Bedienung_Abwurfwaffe.pdf
> 
> found here,
> http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/other-mechanical-systems-tech/new-bf-109-manuals-thread-17837.html



But that's about releasable weapon systems Milosh, what does that have to do with the horizontal stabilizer? Atleast I couldn't find anything on it.


----------



## Kurfürst (Dec 30, 2009)

It did.


----------



## Soren (Dec 30, 2009)

To the same extend as the later models?


----------



## Milosh (Dec 30, 2009)

Sorry about that. Try this pdf Soren. Section 109-46, about40% into the pdf.

Bf 109E Parts manual.pdf


----------



## Soren (Dec 30, 2009)

Now that made more sense. Thank you. Gotta take a peak at the Friedrich's manual to see wether the adjustment range was the same.


----------



## Njaco (Feb 2, 2010)

found another pic at the "Eagles Over Norway" website...Apparently the webmaster has a larger pic.

Eagles over Norway


----------



## beaupower32 (Feb 2, 2010)

Intresting find, havent seen that angle before. I still have not been able to find anything about it.


----------



## BikerBabe (Feb 2, 2010)

Hi all. I've gotten a reply from a Hauptmann at the german air force, inquiring about the 109 in quesition.
Said Hauptmann sent me a mail, urging me to mail a certain section of the Luftwaffe archives - some department or others.
I'll keep you updated as soon as I get an answer, useful or not.


----------



## beaupower32 (Feb 2, 2010)

Yes deffently, We would love to be able to solve this mystery.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Feb 2, 2010)

Thanks Maria!


----------

