Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
There actually WAS an attempt at a low-back Bf 109. Here is a pic:
View attachment 284440
They fitted a captured AMerican radial (I think an 1820) and also did the semi-bubble canopy. It never made it into production ... but it DID exist and COULD have made it into service.
Bad Willy, bad boy ... shoulda' done it to the production birds.
What is in my opine a shame is that it didn't get easier to take off land, or check six out of. It's like Willie didn't give a crap, or the Luftwaffe didn't force him to fix those things (how did they not know).
I think that's V21. It's not low backed, it's high fronted if you know what I mean
It's a completely new fuselage, widened from frame 7 (roughly second frame in front of horizontal stabiliser). The cockpit was redesigned because of the big lump bolted on the front. There was also extensive redesign of the engine mounts (obviously) and the wing-fuselage join and fillet. It's not really much of a Bf 109 at all, apart from the wings.
It was built 1938-9, the engine was not captured, and was flying at Augsburg in mid/late 1939. It eventually went to the DVL (Braunschweig) where it was still flying in September 1940. It was probably superseded by the BMW 801 powered Bf 109 X which first flew on 2nd September 1940.
It was an experimental aircraft to compare inline and radial installations in single seat fighters. It was never intended as a production version, though the view must have been much better than the standard Bf 109.
Cheers
Steve
Gents,
Here is my two cents (bits) on what you can or can't do under G. First, Greyman you are pretty close on Eagle G technique. The way we are taught is to do something called an L-1. Basically BEFORE you get to heavy G, you tense your thighs, squeeze your abdominal muscles and force blood up to your noggin. It feels very similar to trying to take a growler when constipated. Guys who are tremendously fit from cardio (runners) have a more difficult time than weight lifters (veins are all large and soft). Taller is tougher than shorter due to the distance from the heart to the head being greater. Shorter is better (finally found truth to that statement). The goal being to keep the blood from pooling in your extremities. The G suit gives your abs something to push against, however if it (the top of the G suit)goes to high it squeezes the bottom of your lungs and can make it difficult to breath. I would turn down the top of mine (I'm 69" or 5 foot 9 inches tall).
Second, modern fighters (F-15, 16, 22, Typhoon, Flanker, Fulcrum) can all sustain heavy G. The Typhoon and F-22 can do it higher (big motors and smart wings). However, for the rest once below about 15-20K you have to be careful, with anything under 10k being an altitude where you can really hurt yourself with sustained G. And I'm talking 7+. I think my record was 7 for over 45 seconds.
When under heavy G in the jet (F-15) I would vary how I looked around. Once tapped (bounced) or the Basic Fighter Maneuver (BFM) engagement starts I would do a break turn (max performance pull to A/C or my limits whichever came first) and that was initially done looking forward, with my spine and neck straight up. Once the G went below about 7 I would lean forward a little bit (keeping my spine and neck straight), and rotate my head so as not to put any lateral stress on my neck (this type of turn is used to locate my adversary or bandit). Once I had him visual again, I would very my looking over the should tech depending on how far forward he was (deep six o'clock would be the lean forward, out to 7-9 o'clock I would just lean my head against the seat (if under heavy G)and just look up over my shoulder (which is the same as looking back).
The break turn was done to defeat any initial shots, the follow on maneuvers are done to deny him shots, force an overshoot to reversal (I get behind him) or to a separation (I leave). The goal is to survive, neutralize, go offensive or leave in that order.
Once established defensive in a fight you keep eyes on, with momentary looks into the cockpit to check airspeed and altitude. Now guys have helmet mounted devices and all that stuff is displayed to them at all times if they desire.
In WW2 dogfight timeframe I would be surprised if guys would get completely exhausted physically from G alone. The night before drinking, the poor heat, being dehydrated (this is huge even today) would be significant contributors in my book. I understand the lack of combat training, the adrenaline surge that comes on like a Tsunami when your life is on the line, and the subsequent drain upon survival. But, the planes didn't pull that many G's for greater than a few seconds, and you can hold your breath for those and be fine. Those guys were young, (20-30) and should have not had too much difficulty with them.
On the differences between pilots it's the same as between athletes. Some guys are just better than others. However, in a US fighter squadron the dudes who are good are under pressure to get everyone better, as the unit is only as strong as the weakest guy / gal. As far as planes go, some are easier to fly than others. The F-16 is fly by wire (FBW) and it takes max performing the airplane and makes it a simple event. In the Eagle it literally takes years to get good at it. FBW is the way to go. Some airplanes provide more feedback than others, and the Eagle was particularly good at giving it. You could tell your speed by how noisy it was / is, or by how much buffet you feel. Unlike a WW2 fighter, you could pull to your hearts content (once below your corner speed) and not worry about breaking anything or going out of control (with a few minor exceptions). Your second or third ride in the plane you used to go do tail slides. My IP told me to see how far I could slide backwards. The planes now are VERY forgiving.
The reason I bring that up is the P-51, Me-109, Spit references about turn performance. If one plane is easier to max perform than the others, even though it might not be the best performing (by a small margin), it would be odds on the favored in a fight. It sounds like the 109, even though it had snatching slats, was very forgiving and communicative. The longer and more defined the stall warning (point at which you stop turning and start falling) the better. A slight buffet followed by a stall / spin would not be good. Once the Brits figured out the Spit turned better, AND noticed the statistics from dogfights, (and got rid of the damn Vic formation) it would have been a good idea to concentrate training on A/C feel in the max performance turn arena. It's also very easy to look back at these events and make comments!
One thing I haven't heard much of is what type of training did the German and Brits do before getting turned loose in combat. I've heard a bit about "Clobber College" for the US guys, but not much from the rest.
Cheers,
Biff
In the case of the radial powered 109 someone had to realize the green house / bubblish canopy was better or they would have left it a "razorback" I would think. I would also think with it's more rounded fuselage there was a bit more room inside.
Cheers,
Biff