Fake report? question about report 5026/18

[adamliu]

As we all know, kurfurst has some really good info on bf109.
However, I had people telling me that the 5026/18 report on his website is fake
They said that he made it up
any one got more info on this?

 

[Denniss]

who said that and why do they think its fake?
Remember most of the data is for the experimental propeller with just onle line for the standard prop

 

[Koopernic]

who said that and why do they think its fake?
Remember most of the data is for the experimental propeller with just onle line for the standard prop

G.G Hopp is a genuine historian, used to post on this site.

Everything checks out. The New Me 109K4 had a retractable tail wheel and fully covered wheel covers that significantly reduced drag. The engine was better as well, not just in terms of power (1800hp to 2000) but altitude performance, and likely features such as the streamlined cowling and ERLA hood improved speed in tiny amounts as well.

The thin blade propeller(screw) 9-12199 added about 20km/h (12 mph) at 6000m(20,000ft) over the series production 9-12159 at the expense of some climb capability. The prop was highly optimised for high speed flight, but when climbing the aircraft was not in quite as high a speed flight and it lost some efficiency. The Me 109 almost certainly didnt see combat with this prop;

There was another prop, with swept back scimitar tips that added another 15km/h or so. I believe that was only an estimate.

The allegation probably comes from some upset gamer.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

kurfurst was a member on here, he got abusive and was banned, but he was pretty straight up and would welcome his return if he chilled out a bit. I would not believe he would knowingly put a fake document on his site, although I've seen him argue over the validity of other's posted documents.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

kurfurst was a member on here, he got abusive and was banned, but he was pretty straight up and would welcome his return if he chilled out a bit. I would not believe he would knowingly put a fake document on his site, although I've seen him argue over the validity of other's posted documents.

I wrote to him a while back, and told him he was welcome to return. Never heard back.

 

[xylstra]

G.G Hopp is a genuine historian, used to post on this site.

Everything checks out. The New Me 109K4 had a retractable tail wheel and fully covered wheel covers that significantly reduced drag. The engine was better as well, not just in terms of power (1800hp to 2000) but altitude performance, and likely features such as the streamlined cowling and ERLA hood improved speed in tiny amounts as well.

The thin blade propeller(screw) 9-12199 added about 20km/h (12 mph) at 6000m(20,000ft) over the series production 9-12159 at the expense of some climb capability. The prop was highly optimised for high speed flight, but when climbing the aircraft was not in quite as high a speed flight and it lost some efficiency. The Me 109 almost certainly didnt see combat with this prop;

There was another prop, with swept back scimitar tips that added another 15km/h or so. I believe that was only an estimate.

The allegation probably comes from some upset gamer.

American post-war propeller research carried on the German WW2 scimitar propeller work in an attempt to achieve supersonic flight on piston-engine power. Have seen a photo but know little else. More information everyone?? (NB pre-XF88/84).

 

[Jaivan]

Copies of this report are available in several public archives in USA (NASM ) and Europe (IWM, EADS), in microfilm and paper form.

Tell those "professional fake-report detectors" to look for microfilm reel 2617, and maybe they will stop spreading nonsense...

And FWIIW, Mtt project office issued other calculated-performance sheets about 1 month after these, with identical data (for example, A/IV/41/45 "Höchstgeschwindigkeiten" for 109 K-4 with DB 605 DC/ASC 1.8/1.98 ata on 19.1.45). Your buddies might want to check those, also...