Bf 109 everything (2 Viewers)

[tomo pauk]

Since every discussion about the what-if LW fighters often turns into disusing the laternative Bf 109s, let's make a dedicated thread for the fighter. So let's start the .. book from the middle of it

Yes, that's a good point, if you can make it work by using the 605. But how do you do something substantially better than the 109 while using the same engine? Some Mustang-level aero wizardry? Is Messerschmitt up to such a task?

Some suggestions:
- keep the clean basic 109F-4/G-2 layout (retractable U/C, no HMG installation, no gondola weapons in the West),
- add the wheel well covers,
- a decent within-the-wing cannon installation should be explored by 1942
- test the ram air intake in the position like the He 100 had, for the lower drag
- retrofit the DB engines on the captured Soviet fighters, and see just how good/bad the Bf 109 still is vs. the later designed fighters

 

[tomo pauk]

Looking at the different tables at the Kurfurt's site, the cleaned-up Bf 109g (improved MG 131 installation probably very similar - if not the same - as what the K-4 later gotten? specially prepared surfaces, wheel well covers? retracted tailwheel) was faster than the 'normal' 109 with 3 guns (cowl guns being MG 17, judging by the weight figure, but with fixed tailwheel?) by almost 30 km/h.

Things that the 109K-4 had that are mentioned here, like the wheel well covers, better HMG installation, retractable tailwheel, meant that the K-4 was faster by 20 km/h than the 109G-10 with same engine and firepower. There is really no reason why these improvements can be implemented much earlier.

 

[GTX]

A couple I sketched up years ago:

 

[MikeMeech]

A couple I sketched up years ago:

View attachment 804504

View attachment 804505

Hi
How would the MG synchronising gear cope with the six bladed contra-rotating propeller in your images?

Mike

 

[Zmauky]

Yes, from the last thread,

An early 'Me 209' instead of the Me 309?

Goal of the fighter Me 209 (ont to be confused with the racer with the same name) was to be a fighter that can take a big and heavy V12 engine, helped with a bigger wing than what the 109 had (both for the reasons of wing loading and the internal volume), as well as with the wide-set...

ww2aircraft.net

at least my opinion is that (for the Luftwaffe) the best solution is to improve the Me 109 after the F variant. Probably the fastest (and the most favorable due to production) solution is the Me 155 in the variant of an ordinary fighter with a cover of the G-2 variant, but only a motor-cannon in the fuselage and 2 x cannons in the wing roots. With this, we solve the performance (new - faster - airfoil), armament (3x20mm should be enough for fighter-fighter combat and also for early confrontations with USAAF bombers), and even (with the landing gear that expands inwards) we avoid all the problems of the landing gear of ordinary Me 109.
Of course, all the aforementioned aerodynamic improvements are not out of the question.

Admittedly, when we're already talking about weapons on the F variant, it would be ideal to have 3xMG 151/15. There are two solutions - either as Tomo suggested earlier in the wing root or the Japanese variant with the Ki-61-Id ( Ki-61-II ? ), which is to move the engine forward so that instead of the MG 131 (and their ugly beule) they fit into the aerodynamic cowling as on the F/G-2.
As the MG 151/15 is an almost ideal gun for fighter-to-fighter combat, it is likely that from late 1940 to 1942 the armament of 3xMG 151/15 on the Me 109F would have contributed significantly to maintaining air supremacy over North Africa.

 

[tomo pauk]

Hi
How would the MG synchronising gear cope with the six bladed contra-rotating propeller in your images?

Mike

The P-75 Eagle was also designed with the synchronised guns, same with the Ki-64.

at least my opinion is that (for the Luftwaffe) the best solution is to improve the Me 109 after the F variant. Probably the fastest (and the most favorable due to production) solution is the Me 155 in the variant of an ordinary fighter with a cover of the G-2 variant, but only a motor-cannon in the fuselage and 2 x cannons in the wing roots.

See here something that I've suggested years ago - the F-4/G-2 with small wing plugs, clipped wings, two cannons in the wing roots, no cowl MGs, while now the U/C legs can be more vertical when extended, like what the Spitfire had:
(click on the pic for the higher res)



Add the wheel wing covers and it should've been one speedy 109 with good/great firepower and a more forgiving U/C (this is perhaps the best thing).

Admittedly, when we're already talking about weapons on the F variant, it would be ideal to have 3xMG 151/15. There are two solutions - either as Tomo suggested earlier in the wing root or the Japanese variant with the Ki-61-Id ( Ki-61-II ? ), which is to move the engine forward so that instead of the MG 131 (and their ugly beule) they fit into the aerodynamic cowling as on the F/G-2.
As the MG 151/15 is an almost ideal gun for fighter-to-fighter combat, it is likely that from late 1940 to 1942 the armament of 3xMG 151/15 on the Me 109F would have contributed significantly to maintaining air supremacy over North Africa.

Spanish modified the wing of the 109 to take the HS 404 cannons, by installing an auxiliary spar between the main spar and the leading edge (one wonders if there was an engineer or two that were doing the similar job for the 109 to take the MK 108s in the wing that helped them post war?).
There is also an option for installing the MG FFM in the wings, be that with the 90 rd drums, or as a belt-fed weapon. Advantage of the MG 151/20 was that it fired faster and with extra 100-120 m/s of MV, as well as that it could fire sysnchronised; advantage of the MG FFM was that it was a much smaller and lighter gun (so it can fit more easily in the places the 151 requires greater effort to fit. The synchronized 151 still looses some ~10% of the RoF, so the advantage in the RoF is very much decreased.
Granted, the Bf 109 that has all 3 guns using same ammo eases the logistics.

 

[Holtzauge]

Another thing worth considering is to go with a light agile variant armed with a single 20 mm MG 213 which in terms of rate of fire would be worth almost two MG 151's. In addition, the central placement would add further advantages in hitting power, just as the lowered moment of inertia in roll would also add to the agility in the rolling plane and avoid having to redesign the wing. Such an aircraft with the nice bubble canopy solution GTX drew above and improved wheel covering would surely have provided a nice aircraft for the LW to tangle with the escorts. One thing I would like to add though, is a high pressure cooling system like on the Spitfire, with a boundary layer diversion in the radiator inlet. Although the former would require completely new radiator technology and engine modifications, since neither on the Bf 109 could apparently handle the high pressure cooling system used in the British fighters. However, if it could be done, it would cut back substantially on the drag due to the more compact and efficient radiator installation.

 

[Zmauky]

A good idea for the MG 213.
And the cooling - the higher pressure of the coolant enables its higher temperature (without boiling) and smaller radiators.I assume that an engine that is not designed for a higher coolant pressure can be raised for a test, but for longer use I'm afraid that new cooling channels in the engine need to be designed - that's a new engine.
If I'm not mistaken that was the reason for putting the DB engine on the Spitfire - to test the differences in radiator size. It is a pity that the (wartime) counterpart, i.e. the Me 109 with the Merlin, was not made (admittedly, there are documents in which Messerschmitt requests a Merlin engine).
And a small correction, the F model had a boundary layer duct. However, I think that in the G variant they had to throw it out because they needed to fit a bigger cooler in the same place (or start rearranging the flaps).

From

109F-G-K Radiator Flap Systems

 

[peceed]

The wing from the FW-190 (supposedly it had less drag) should have been taken and a new fuselage should have been designed to include a radiator. Supposedly the radiator in the FW-190D was only inferior to the one in the Mustang, so these are two great options to base the solution on.
The bubble canopy is a must!
The change should have been made for the new DB-605 engine, instead of creating a G version.

 

[GTX]

Hi
How would the MG synchronising gear cope with the six bladed contra-rotating propeller in your images?

Mike

Bah! To practically

 

[Shortround6]

A good idea for the MG 213.

Great idea, if you are willing to wait until 1948 or later.
This assumes the Germans are faster than the French, British and Americans who all took from 1945 to around 1953 to get revolver cannon into even trial service.
And they had some of the German engineers working for them.