The Best Bf - 109 Variant ?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I am completely thrown off of track now!

 

[CharlesBronson]

This is the BF-109 V-13.

Used as a record aircraft, this special version had a very overhauled DB-601 engine, It was feeded by a mix of 85 % 96 octane "C3", and 15 % methil alcohol. The compresor was also reinforced to achieve a maximum output of 1650 Hp.

This craft won the price when it manage to achieve 611 Km/h, the new world speed record in late 1937.

A close up of cockpit.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

wow shiney..........

check this out.................

SUPERMARINE HIGH-SPEED SPITFIRE - Single Supermarine Spitfire I (K9834) diverted from RAF contract in 1938 and modified (as Supermarine Type 323) for attempt on World Air Speed Record for landplanes. First flown December 14, 1938, and speed of 408 mph (656 km/h) achieved at 3,000 ft (914 m), but record objective abandoned in 1939. Fitted with Merlin XII engine and three-bladed propeller, and single F.24 oblique camera behind cockpit, used by PRU at Heston (later Benson) for one operational sortie and then as station hack throughout war. Span reduced to 33 ft 8 in (10.25 m).

Source for picture and text- www.jaapteeuwen.com

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Good stuff, that was back when the planes were still sleek and clean.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

damn right..........

i am a hugh fan of the shuttleworth collection as well............

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The what?

 

[KraziKanuK]

This is the BF-109 V-13.




Used as a record aircraft, this special version had a very overhauled DB-601 engine, It was feeded by a mix of 85 % 96 octane "C3", and 15 % methil alcohol. The compresor was also reinforced to achieve a maximum output of 1650 Hp.

This craft won the price when it manage to achieve 611 Km/h, the new world speed record in late 1937.

Radinger and Schick in their 109A-E book say only 50% was C3 fuel.

 

[CharlesBronson]

To be or not to to be, that is the question.

I honestly think that is a huge proportion, 15 % seems more adecuate.

 

[the lancaster kicks ass]

Alder, the shuttleworh collection is, well, a collection over here in england, they specailise in pre WWII aircraft and have some of the oldest flyers in the world, some of their planes being pre-WWI, they have some true classics from the "golden age" of aviation, and some extremely unusual types, check out the link..............

http://www.shuttleworth.org/shuttleworth/index.htm

 

[KraziKanuK]

To be or not to to be, that is the question.

I honestly think that is a huge proportion, 15 % seems more adecuate.

CB, during the war when MW50 injection was used, it could be ~25-30% of the fuel to get ~200hp more. 150 l/h of MW50 > 480-580 l/h fuel

This 601 engine produced at least 5-600hp more than what it was capable of for long term reliable operations in 1937.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I was searching through some of my books and I still am but I can not find anything on the correct mixture.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, I think if even 15% of the fuel mixture were actually MW50 fluid (50% methanol, 49% distilled water, 1% top oil), power would go down not up. A cylinder has a maximum fuel charge it can burn, if the mixture is any richer than that, it is not going to have enough oxygen to burn all the fuel and power will go down. The MW50 fluid is only useful to prevent detonation, in and of itself it provides little power increase (there is a little from water expansion, but more fluid is injected than the small amount that provides this benefit).

My one venture into alcohol/water injection on car engines showed that maximum water injection levels were far less 10% the flow of the fuel, any more and power went down. A pint of alcohol/water would last through more than a gallon of gas, probably 2, when drag racing at the raceway. I don't have exact figures because we just adjusted the screw until the power was maximized and marked where to set it.

BTW: using water injection messes up the rings and valves! An expensive lesson learned.

=S=

Lunatic

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Thanks for telling me that about the rings and valves, I know not to try it!

 

[DJ_Dalton1]

Who?

Nice pics by the way.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=61962#61962

I suspect it is just another nick for Dalton.

=S=

Lunatic

How could you suspect it was me? First off, I refute your silly contentions far too easily and leave you crying like a little girl having lost her baby doll. Soren doesnt dispose of you as efficiently. Also, I don't argue the contestable points, like turn rate. I pick my battles. I remember when you tried to tell me the Sillyfires could outdive 109's and I've seen you contend 109's in a dive were frozen ropes when it was the Mustangs that couldn't handle the G's and pressure. Sure they could Runstang a 109 but thats all they could do.

Your Pig51 Meredith Effect still has me guffawing! LMAO

 

[KraziKanuK]

I see the troll is back.

The only place the 109 could outdive a Spit was below 10,000ft.

109G
Up to 3 km(9,842 ft.) 750 km/h. (466 m.p.h.)
At 5 km (16,404 ft) 700 km/h. (435 m.p.h.)
At 7 km (22,965 ft) 575 km/h. (357 m.p.h.)
At 9 km (29,527 ft) 450 km/h. (280 m.p.h.)
At 11 km(36,089 ft) 400 km/h. (248 m.p.h.)


Spit IX
Between S.L. and 20,000 ft. - 450
20,000 and 25,000 ft. - 430
25,000 and 30,000 ft. - 390
30,000 and 35,000 ft. - 340
Above ..................35,000 ft. -310

Nice of you to leave out this:

"At its rather dissapointing low-level crusing speed of 240 mph (386km/h) the Gustav was certainly a delight to fly, but the situation changed as speed increased; in a dive at 400mph (644km/h) the controls felt like they had seized! The highest speed that I dived to below 10000ft (3048m) was 440mph (708km/h) and the solidity of the controls was such that this was the limit in my book. However, things were very different at high altitude, and providing that the Gustav was kept where it was meant to be (ie: above 25000ft / 7620m) it performed efficiently both in dogfighting and as an attacker of bomber formations. To give some idea of its performance, O meansured 384mph (618km/h) in level flight at 23000ft (7010m) which conformed pretty well with the officially claimed maximum speed of 386mph (621km/h) at 22640ft (6900m)."

 

[DJ_Dalton2]

I see the troll is back.

Krazy Kannuk I deleted your fictional dive speeds out because they are made up numbers and not comparative in any way. If you want to print them again you may, but they are circular file material.

I obtained the full text of the "Central Fighter Establishment" comparative trial between the previously referred to Bf-109G-6/U2 and several allied aircraft including a Spitfire IX, Spitfire XIV and a Mustang III. It is attached below. In this report the CFE clearly concluded the gondola 109 left a IX in a dive and the XIV struggled with it. Whats even more revealing is that in the CFE report the unserviceability of the 109 is mentioned. (They didn't know how to maintain it and yet with gondolas it outperformed their aircraft in many respects.)

The text you cite below are the writings of the English test pilot Eric Brown. He actually thought he was test flying a Gustav used as a front line fighter or at least thats what he wrote. He did mention the Gustav he tested was the Bf-109 in question, werk no. 412951 and that it was an all around plane. I'll attach his commentary below as well. It did pretty well for carrying those unwieldy pods didnt it?

So, I have not left out anything and if you read the attached files you'll get an understanding about why the British were so sensitive about this issue. The Americans had to pull their fat from the fire.

Nice of you to leave out this:

"At its rather dissapointing low-level crusing speed of 240 mph (386km/h) the Gustav was certainly a delight to fly, but the situation changed as speed increased; in a dive at 400mph (644km/h) the controls felt like they had seized! The highest speed that I dived to below 10000ft (3048m) was 440mph (708km/h) and the solidity of the controls was such that this was the limit in my book. However, things were very different at high altitude, and providing that the Gustav was kept where it was meant to be (ie: above 25000ft / 7620m) it performed efficiently both in dogfighting and as an attacker of bomber formations. To give some idea of its performance, O meansured 384mph (618km/h) in level flight at 23000ft (7010m) which conformed pretty well with the officially claimed maximum speed of 386mph (621km/h) at 22640ft (6900m)."

I want to thank my new friend Peter Evans at

http://p069.ezboard.com/fluftwaffeexperten71774frm90.showMessage?topicID=41.topic

for being kind enough to provide me with the full text of CFE-3, which is the report for the Bf-109 in question. I'll try to attach the salient parts of the report but if my attempt fails Peter has the document in his files. (The zip file transfered and is below.)

Everyone is free to draw their own conclusions, but Peter's document is dispositive to me that the subject aircraft was tested with under wing gondolas. In support of that conclusion I would cite the report under "Brief Description of the Aircraft". Initially, the report states under paragraph 2:

"The Me-109G/6 is a small single wing, single seater, single engine, short range fighter…"

This is certainly true, however the report further clarifies the nature of the fighter tested in the tactical trial by stating the following under paragraph 4:

"The armament consists of 2 x 13 mm machine guns mounted above the engine, 1 MG 151/20 mm cannon firing through the airscrew hub, and 2 x 151/20 mm cannon in under wing gondolas".

Additionally, the photos of this tested aircraft depict it configured with under wing gondolas. No mention is made in CFE-3 that said gondolas were removed for the test on the contrary the description of the tested plane indicates a gondola configuration.

What does it all mean? Well it means the Bf-109G-6 was capable of performance significantly exceeding that indicated. It means that the aerodynamics, climb rate and speed of the 109 tested was significantly under reported. It means the Bf-109G-6 was probably at least an even odds match for the Spitfire IX and it probably means that the Spitfire XIV was not superior in all respects. (Significantly, the 109G-6 was not the pinnacle of performance in the 109. The G-14, G-10 and K-4 exceeded its performance in that order.)

But what it really means is that the German Experten of WWII did not amass their mind numbing records with inferior planes.

 

[KraziKanuK]

LOL, you dispute factory dive speeds, for both a/c?

Your new friend(??) almost closed the thread because you could not conduct yourself in a proper manner.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Wow this one got pretty heavy here.

 

[CharlesBronson]

This is a weird one. It is the a Bf-109, The BF-109 V-21 to be accurate.

The completely new look is due it was equipped with an american Pratt Whitney R-1830 two row radial. This 1200 hp engine was used to test the two row emplacement because there is no available german
two row radials designs at that time (July 1938)
The first BMW of this tipe, the 18 cilinder BMW 139 was a failure as probably you now.

The cockpit seems completely new also.

Funny thing, but we could say that this BF-109 was a prototipe for...the Focke-Wulf FW-190A.!!

 

[DJ_Dalton2]

Very little of the above plane looks like a 109. The rudder and undercarriage. 1938 thats apparently the early squared wings. The oddest thing is the fuselage. its got a "bubble canopy".