Bf109G-10 Weight Problem

[gomwolf]

Before I know Bf109G-10 is lighter than Bf109K-4. Bf109K-4 is about 3,400kg(without R4).
Few days ago I asked to Kurfurst, he told me Bf109G-10 is not lighter than Bf109K-4.


But, I saw a thread.
A ace of lw use the G-10 and K-4 both. When he need combat with enemy fighter, he used Bf109G-10. When he need kill some bombers, he used Bf109K-4.
I can't remember well, but It has a source.


There is anyone who know about Bf109G-10's weight? Some kinds of references?

 

[Aozora]

Before I know Bf109G-10 is lighter than Bf109K-4. Bf109K-4 is about 3,400kg(without R4).
Few days ago I asked to Kurfurst, he told me Bf109G-10 is not lighter than Bf109K-4.


But, I saw a thread.
A ace of lw use the G-10 and K-4 both. When he need combat with enemy fighter, he used Bf109G-10. When he need kill some bombers, he used Bf109K-4.
I can't remember well, but It has a source.

There is anyone who know about Bf109G-10's weight? Some kinds of references?

Kurfurst isn't exactly the most reliable source of info on the Bf 109, but putting that aside, according to the old Monogram publication the G-10/U4's MTOW was 3,343 kg (/U4 meant it was equipped with the 30mm MK 108, so identical armamnet weight to majority of K-4s):

while according to the superb JaPo publication on the K series, MTOW of the K-4 was 3,362 kg, so the difference was marginal.

 

[davebender]

All Me-109 variants had a relatively good power to weight ratio. What makes you think they had a "weight problem"?

 

[Jabberwocky]

All Me-109 variants had a relatively good power to weight ratio. What makes you think they had a "weight problem"?

I think you've mis-interpreted.

The 'problem' lies in the conflicting accounts of the relative weights of the G-10 and K-4, not the actual weight of the aircraft themselves.

 

[gomwolf]

All Me-109 variants had a relatively good power to weight ratio. What makes you think they had a "weight problem"?

My english is not good for need. Jabberwocky's answer is perfectly right.


and... Thanks Jabberwocky!

 

[stona]

while according to the superb JaPo publication on the K series, MTOW of the K-4 was 3,362 kg, so the difference was marginal.

Which is what you'd expect for two aircraft which, with the same armament, are virtually identical.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Denniss]

And the standard G-10 weight was 3,297 kg, which is about 100kg havier than a G-6. Majority of this weight gain is the MW-50 system.

 

[Juha]

Before I know Bf109G-10 is lighter than Bf109K-4. Bf109K-4 is about 3,400kg(without R4).
Few days ago I asked to Kurfurst, he told me Bf109G-10 is not lighter than Bf109K-4.


But, I saw a thread.
A ace of lw use the G-10 and K-4 both. When he need combat with enemy fighter, he used Bf109G-10. When he need kill some bombers, he used Bf109K-4.
I can't remember well, but It has a source...

The answer might well be that because MK 108 still had its reliability problems when under higher G forces the pilot prefer MG 151 in fighter combats, normal G-10 was somewhat lighter, had more reliable and still entirely adequate cannon for fighter combat. Against bombers MK 108 had much more effective Minen shells and probably there would have been less hard manoeuvring, so K-4.