Messerschmitt Bf.109 Performance Chronology

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Denniss said:
A-series 109 were marked 6-3 to 6-18 in spain, at least one fell into republican hands after landing behind the frontlines due to exhausted fuel.
Click to expand...

Patrick Laureau (Condor-The Luftwaffe in Spain 1936-39) lists 6-3 to 6-18 as Bf 109 B, not A.

6-15 was the aircraft captured on 4/12/37 whilst with 1.J/88. It was Uffz. Otto Polenz' aircraft.

Cheers

Steve
 
So Lynn Ritger is the only one who thinks that those aircraft are As. I wonder why.

I can't quite make 15 aircraft, but there are 14 other known A series aircraft whose fate is uncertain produced by February 1937.

With the exception of 6-3, which was V5, delivered to Spain in December 1936, and V-17 and 18, delivered in July 1937, all the rest (V-4 to V-16) appeared in Spain in March 1937. This is one month after they were delivered from the factory and plenty of time to ship them to Spain. Is there any evidence that these were the A series production which Radinger Schick, Emiliani Ghergo, Mombeek, Laureau and others don't account for or has Ritger made a leap of faith?

I have read his argument set out in his Messerschmitt Bf 109 modeller's guide (part 1) and remain undecided This may well be a case where we'll never know for sure. Ritger does reproduce the production table, based on surviving Messerschmitt documents, also seen in Radinger Schick's book, which acknowledges that the fate of many A series aircraft is not known. It is certainly possible that they ended up in Spain.

As a young Rugby player I played in several selection games called 'Probables v Possibles'. You don't need to be a genius to work out who was most likely to be selected for the final XV ! I'd play Ritger's theory in the 'Possibles'.

Cheers

Steve
 
herman1rg said:
Interesting to see that the Rolls-Royce Kestrel was fitted, prototype only?
Click to expand...

Yes, and only the first prototype, V1, W.Nr.758, civil registration D-IABI. It was intended for the Jumo 210 inverted engine but delays led to Messerschmitt using an RLM provided Kestrel. The RLM obtained the British engine via contacts that Heinkel had with Rolls-Royce who in turn had purchased an He 70 from that company for use as an engine test bed.
V1 first flew on 28th May 1935 at the hands of Messerschmitt pilot Hans-Dietrich Knoetzsch. He crashed the aircraft at Rechlin on 15th October 1935. This ended his career at Messerschmitt and expedited the development of the next prototype.

V2, W.Nr.759, D-IILU, received the Jumo engine with its extra 100 hp and first flew on December 12th 1935.

Cheers

Steve
 
Shortround6 said:
According to some sources that Kestrel made the rounds. The same engine may have flown in the prototype Ju 87.
Click to expand...

The RLM acquired 'several' Kestrels according to Ritger. According to Lance Cole in his biography of Beverly Shenstone the deal involved an He 70 and four Rolls Royce Kestrels.

It is a rather convoluted tale, the Heinkel was re-engined with its Kestrel in Germany (Rostock), but not until early 1936. It was flown back to the UK on 26th March 1936. D-UBOF became G-ADZF and a British civil aviation certificate of airworthiness was issued on 6th April 1936 in London.

It wasn't a 'swop' either. Rolls Royce paid £13,000 pounds for the Heinkel and work undertaken on it in Germany. I don't know what the Germans stumped up for their engines.

I'd have to check the Ju 87 but the Arado AR 80 V1 was certainly powered by one.

Cheers

Steve

Edit Yes, Ju 87 V1 did indeed fly with a Rolls Royce Kestrel fitted. The prototype experienced severe over heating problems and the Kestrel was replaced, at the RLM's insistence with a DB 600 A engine prior to the loss of the aircraft which suffered a catastrophic structural failure during testing on 24th January 1936.
 
Last edited:
Hi Steve,

Your knowledge is greatly welcomed.

Everyone,

I have decided to approach the engine power slowly/carefully (Mostly because I am bf 109 ignorant). I went after information on the DB 601. From what I could find it appears the boost limitations on the A-1 and Aa models was 1.3 ata up until sometime later in 1939. It appears to me that the new 1 minute boost allowed up to 5,000m was 1.4 ata during the BOB.?

From the graphs I could find it looks like this:

DB 601A @ 1.3 ata/2,400 rpm: 990 PS (976 hp.)/T.O., 1,070 PS/2,100 m.(1,055 hp./6,890 ft.) and 1,025 PS/4,500 m.(1,010 hp./14,765 ft.) 1.3 ata had a 5 minute limitation. 1.15 ata being continuous.

DB 601A @ 1.4 ata/2,500 rpm: 1,100 PS(1,085 hp.)/T.O. and 1,175 PS/~1,800 M.(1,160 hp./5,900 ft.). 1.4 ata was a 1 minute boost.

In late 1939 the Bf 109 received automatic propeller pitch.?

OK guys its time to educate me on the facts, Jeff
 
I have never seen evidence (like a Luftwaffe manual) stating 1-min rating was available in standard Bf 109E, it may have been available in the /B bomb carriers for take-off. It did not only stress the engine but also consumed lots of fuel due to the very rich mix used (Überfettung).
V5 in Spain is the same myth (flying testbed in Travemünde/Rechlin) as Bf 109A did not exist or a B-2 did exist, All official Mtt/RLM data just points to 109B, B-1 and B-2 were unofficial designations used on the front to better separate the fixed-pitch-prop a/c from variable-pitch.prop a/c.
And again, /U3 was not a MW-50 designation, the /U3 was a recon modification.
 
To add to what Denniss has written.

The best evidence for the A series is an original Messerschmitt factory document, dated 25th August 1937, entitled "Delivered Bf 109 As and B-1s". This is where the Bf 109 As listed by Radinger&Schick (who found the document) and Lynn Ritger come from. If they are listed as As by Messerschmitt then we have to accept that they did exist.
A delivery document (Nr.138/38 of August 1938 ) mentions that 22 Bf 109 As were completed, so the RLM acknowledged the type too.

There are differences between the A and B-1 which I don't care to list here.

Another RLM document (LC 7/1 Nr. 183.8/38 ) dated 15th August 1938 indicates that production of the B-1 started at W.Nr. 1021 and that aircraft from W.Nr. 1010-1020 would be retro-fitted with the central MG 17. This would bring them up to the B-1 standard. Whilst this document is not clear about the original designation of these aircraft the lack of the central weapon was a feature of the A series.

There was never a B-2. There are no factory or loss records which use the term. Photographs taken for propaganda purposes of the delivery of 25 Bf 109 B-1s to II./JG 132 clearly show a mixture of the Schwarz wooden propellers and the later metal units.

V5 can't have been in Spain and been retained for the testing of the EPAD17, the automatic reload and firing mechanism for the cowl guns. Later it went to Rechlin.

Cheers

Steve
 
GregP said:
I thought Rolls-Royce traded the Kestrel for a German plane for use as a company hack.
Click to expand...

Rolls Royce bought the He 70 for £13,000 pounds as per my post above. It wasn't a swop for the four Kestrel engines, which the RLM paid for, but part of a trade agreement. It was indeed a flying engine test bed and as suggested above, I bet the RR engineers were grateful for it
Cheers
Steve
 
tomo,
Do you have information giving the date that the DB 601 began to use the new supercharger in service an what designation was given the the DB 601?
 
Sorry, I don't have exact dates. Sometimes the DB-601A with new S/C was called 'DB-601A-1', but that might be a post war 'invention'? As a rough bearing, in case the max speed at of the Bf-109E3, E4 or, less likely, E7 is at ~4.5 km, that might cue us that old S/C was used/installed. In case the max speed is at ~5 km, it is likely the new S/C aboard.
The difference from 4 ('static' engine with old S/C as depicted in tables/charts) to 4.5 km (aircraft is at high speed) is due to the rammed air entering the S/C intake. Ditto for difference between 4.5 km (static engine with new S/C) and 5 km (high speed) altitudes.
 
This is an attempt to finish up the information on the DB 601 as best as possible. The information I have found on the DB 601N shows that it was mainly used with 96 octane C3 fuel. The power output went like this: 1,270 PS/2,600 RPM/16,250-16,270 ft./boost?/3 minutes, 1,200 PS/T.O./1 minute.

Three sources gave me three different answeres for the DB 601E. I will list what I came up with and hope someone has THE ANSWER backed by a source for the information.

Source 1: 87 octane/B4 fuel: 1,350 PS/T.O., 1,300 PS/18,045 ft./1.42 ata.

Source 2: 96 octane/C3 fuel: 1,350 PS/T.O., 1,375 PS/16,728 ft./1.42 ata.

Source 3: 1,325 PS/T.O./1 minute, 1,400 PS/2,700 RPM/16,000 ft./1.42 ata. 1.3 ata has a 30 minute limit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
P-61 Performance
Replies
15
Views
942
Snautzer01
Bf 109 everything
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
special ed
S
J
Yak-9U Vs Bf-109
Replies
0
Views
753
Jerrybandit67
J
J
BF-109K-4 aerial victories
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
CHen10
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
882
Ivan1GFP
I
Menu
Log in
Register