From reading the discussion so far, I'm under the impression that the only way the BF 109 could ever compete on anything like equal terms with Allied aircraft such as the P-51D it needed vastly more horsepower. The air frame refinements found on the the later G and K models did very little in the way of overcoming its relatively inferior aerodynamics. The performance gap seems to have been closed somewhat by the implementation of over-boosting, using water-methanol injection and/or higher octane fuels, but 109 pilots were still left wanting.
I haven't seen any discussion here concerning the rather poor manufacture quality of late-war 109s, which must have also played some role in its apparent inferiority to the Allied fighters that it faced by 1944.
From
Spitfire Mk XIV versus Me 109 G/K:
Conditions in Germany during the last year of the war, however, were not conducive to aircraft achieving maximum theoretical performance levels. Hans Knickrehm of I/JG 3 recalled the condition of new Me 109 G-14/AS's received by his group in October, 1944:
The machines that were delivered were technically obsolete and of considerably lowered quality. The engines proved prone to trouble after much too short a time, because the factories had had to sharply curtail test runs for lack of fuel. The surface finish of the outer skin also left much to be desired. The sprayed-on camouflage finish was rough and uneven. The result was a further reduction in speed. We often discovered clear cases of sabotage during our acceptance checks. Cables or wires were not secured, were improperly attached, scratched or had even been visibly cut...
And I know it's a gaming forum but there's actually some intelligent conversation going on here, intermixed with both snippy and childish remarks too I'm afraid....
The K-4 Isn't Special
Some comments made in this thread:
.....All DB 605D and ASB-ASC engines were cleared for 1,98 ata at that time (i.e. the month before and after Bodenplatte)
"Chin bulges on the lower cowling - this was present only on aircraft with uprated DB 605 ASB/ASC engine (same engine, designated differently depending on fuel/boost used). These engines could operate on either B-4 / 87 octane fuel up to 1.8ata (ASB), or 1.98ata with C-3 fuel (designated as ASC). This particular aircraft has a C-3 fuel triangle, pointing towards that it uses the latter ASC rating.
I was under the impression that 1.8 ata was the highest boost setting ever approved for field use. Anyone have data to refute this notion?
And surely C3 fuel must have been used to a greater extent than most realize. I happen to see far too many photos to believe otherwise. But on the other hand maybe it was normal practice for B4 fuel to be used in place of the seemingly rarer C3, so these markings didn't necessarily denote the actual fuel used????
From a Wiki article on the DB 605 engine (
Daimler-Benz DB 605 - Wikipedia ):
The DB 605AM, running initially on C3 and MW-50, saw power improved to 1,800 PS (1775 hp) for takeoff. In mid-1944, the requirement for C3 was dropped and standard B4 fuel with MW-50 was used.
As early as 1942 Daimler had also been working on an upgraded D-series engine that could run on either C2 or C3 fuel. The first of these, which appeared in late 1944, were a small series of DB 605DM, followed by the main production series, the DB 605DB/DC. These engines were fitted with an adjustable screw stop which allowed the use of either B4 fuel with MW-50, or C-3 fuel without MW-50, in which case the engine was designated DB 605DB, or the use of C-3 fuel with MW-50, in which case the engine was given the -DC suffix instead...