WW2 Aircraft in Texas Barn

[JimmyD3]

Interesting Photo's

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2014/August/Pilot/f_talltale

[Vraciu]

He was a big CAF guy for years.  They really screwed up losing his support....

Love seeing those Buchons lined up like that, wow.

I wonder if he has a CASA 2.111 in there....

[Vraciu]

His assesment of the 109, Spit, and Mustang sure seems to line up,with what we see in the game for the most part.

[Karnak]

His assesment of the 109, Spit, and Mustang sure seems to line up,with what we see in the game for the most part.

I don't see any assessment of the Spit there.   His take on the Mustang vs 109 does match AH.

[Vraciu]

I don't see any assessment of the Spit there.   His take on the Mustang vs 109 does match AH.

Watch it again.

4:04 - 5:15

He says the 109 will outclimb and outmaneuver a Spit all day long.  This jibes with what he is known to have said in the past.

[shake307]

I am curious.  Is that a spitfire made to look like a 109?  It sure looks like it to me

[GScholz]

To be fair, those Buchons, being unarmed, are probably lighter than a wartime 109G. And with the Merlin they have about the same power as a K-4.

[GScholz]

... But yes, the 109 was always better than the Spitfire with the same power. However, most of the time the Spitfire had more power available.

[Karnak]

Spitfire Mk I +12lbs boost vs Bf109E, very close.
Spitfire Mk V vs Bf109F-4, Bf109F-4 climbs very much better.
Spitfire F.Mk IX vs Bf109G-2, Bf109G-2 climbs better.
Spitfire LF.Mk VIII or LF.Mk IX vs Bf109G-6, Spitfire climbs better.
Spitfire LF.Mk IX or Mk XVI 25lbs boost vs Bf109G-14, Spitfire climbs better.
Spitfire Mk XIV 21lbs boost vs Bf109K-4, Spitfire climbs better.

And unlike AH there isn't any magical "5 minutes and the Spit's WEP shuts off" stuff either.

[Karnak]

... But yes, the 109 was always better than the Spitfire with the same power. However, most of the time the Spitfire had more power available.

Looks like the guy is comparing a Mk I (BoB veteran even) to the Buchons, so in this case the 109s have significantly more power than the Spitfire, unless the Merlins on the Buchons are significantly less powerful than I would expect of a late '40s, into '50s aircraft.

[GScholz]

The Buchon has a licence built Merlin 500/45 of 1,600 hp.

With those 1,600 hp the Buchon is a 413 mph bird, which is similar to a Merlin 66, 1,720 hp Spitfire LF Mk IX (or the Spit16 in AH). Rate of climb for the Buchon is about 5,500 fpm. This leads me to believe that the Buchon is lighter than a 109G but somewhat more draggy. That engine installation is particularly ugly from an aerodynamic viewpoint.

The 109s are smaller and has less wing surface, and are lighter than contemporary Spitfires. Less drag = more speed at the same power. Less weight = better climb at the same power.



These two birds have almost the same power. The 109K has 54 hp more. You can also see that the DB 605DB has a slightly higher full pressure height than the Merlin 266, but they're close enough for comparison. They are about equal in weight so they have very similar climb rates.

[Karnak]

So a 1600hp "109" against a 1030hp Spitfire.

[GScholz]

The Spitfire he flew in the movie was the Mk IX. To my knowledge there were no flying Spitfire Mk I in the movie.

[jolly22]

Why can't I find a barn with something like that in it! 

[Vraciu]

Looks like the guy is comparing a Mk I (BoB veteran even) to the Buchons, so in this case the 109s have significantly more power than the Spitfire, unless the Merlins on the Buchons are significantly less powerful than I would expect of a late '40s, into '50s aircraft.

He is comparing the Mark IX to the derated Buchon.