Author Topic: why did the 109g-6 suffer so bad from only a 107ibs extra from the 109g2 (Read 2828 times)

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #15 on:** January 28, 2004, 04:11:42 PM »

wow cool how are you shure what test they used?

Urchin · « **Reply #16 on:** January 28, 2004, 04:23:18 PM »

Actually I don't fly the G-6 or the G-2 much, so I don't really know if they are similar or not.

Flew the G-6 some today, my impression is that it is slower and less manueverable than a G-10. Dunno how it stacks up to the G-2, but it probably isnt favorably. All in all, there isn't any reason to fly a G-6, anything it can do the G-10 can do better.

Angus · « **Reply #17 on:** January 29, 2004, 01:39:07 PM »

Right now, I'm reading Gunther Rall's biography. He comments on the 109G series as being "overdeveloped". Well, they are fast and climb good (18500 feet in 6 minutes, that is 1/6 slower than our AH 109G2, but I don't know which exact model he is referring to). Anyway, his words are that 109F was the finest, and after that the plane just suffered from heavier loads with more power.
Landing was difficult, the U/C was weak, and the plane behaved badly at low speed.

wastel1 · « **Reply #18 on:** January 29, 2004, 02:43:46 PM »

don't count on these statements.

i can say you book where an eperte describes how he turnfough at low level in an G10/R6 against an la5...and he won in that turnfight.
now ..should an g10 now outturn an la5...??? no

wastel

HoHun · « **Reply #19 on:** January 29, 2004, 03:33:33 PM »

Hi Angus,

>Anyway, his words are that 109F was the finest, and after that the plane just suffered from heavier loads with more power.

Well, here's a quote from Nowarra:

>Hermann Graf von der 9./JG 52, der gerade seinen 111. Abschuß erzielt hate, schrieb am 10.7.1942 in sein Tagebuch: "Aus Deutschland waren neue Me 109 angekündigt, solche der G-Serie. Die Herren vom Geschwaderstab wetterten über
diesen Vogel. Er sei schlecht, der Motor tauge nichts, und so weiter: Meine Staffel mußte als erste dran glauben. Es ging also zurück nach Charkow zur Umrüstung. Schon beim ersten Flug war ich von der Maschine aber hellauf begeistert. Sie war bedeutend besser als die frühere 'F'."

Summary: Graf's diary entry tells us that the Me 109G had a bad reputation before it even arrived at his unit, but the first flight made him greatly enthusiastic about the G series. He states that it was considerably better than the F.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Angus · « **Reply #20 on:** January 29, 2004, 07:18:15 PM »

I read German.
Well, some guys just like the faster birds

Anyway, where did you find stuff from Herman Graf? Would really love to see some!
(been looking at quotes from Graf, Barkhorn, Nowotny, etc)

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #21 on:** January 29, 2004, 08:20:39 PM »

Unfortunately Gunther Rall's book is somewhat dissapointing. Some woman wrote it and she knows nothing about air combat.

FWIW it's known Rall liked the G2 the best...

Angus · « **Reply #22 on:** January 30, 2004, 05:10:12 AM »

Here you go:
"Although the mass produced G version accounted for almost two-thirds of all 109s built, it proved in Rall's view to be a mixed bag because of its over-development, loss of maneuverability and all the worst characteristics of the earlier version. In spite of Rall's opinion of its shortcoming it was his favourite model."
P 148

Later on same page:
"Its more powerful engine ment higher power settings whose initial climb rate sent it soaring to 18700 feet in six minutes but at low speed the plane was difficult to handle"

"Most of us considered the 109G over-developed. Poor landing characteristics added to its woes"

And here is an interesting bit:
"Piloting his new fighter plane on May 5 Rall shot down his first Spitfire piloted by the VVS. Pleased with the victory Rall quickly filled out a report but was immediately told to keep it quiet.
"Orders were issued that same evening that we were not to reveal Spitfires were now engaged on the eastern front. Apparently, it would make our pilots nervous""

Hehe, NERVOUS about the little Spitty. But Rall flew many allied types, so what did he think of them?

In the BoB (P 53), fighting against Spitfires Rall remarks:
"The elliptical wings on the Spitfires had fantastic characteristics, great lift. They were very maneuverable. We could not catch them in a steep climb"

I wish he had written the whole book himself, but there are many straight quotes

HoHun · « **Reply #23 on:** January 30, 2004, 02:32:58 PM »

Hi Angus,

>Anyway, where did you find stuff from Herman Graf? Would really love to see some!

I quoted Heinz J. Nowarra, "Die 109", ISBN 3-87943-620-7.

There's also B. K. Joachim, "Oberst Hermann Graf: 200 Luftsiege in 13 Monaten", ISBN 3-8118-1455-9.

If you read German, don't miss the latter, it's a bargain at ca. EUR 5.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #24 on:** January 30, 2004, 04:48:22 PM »

"Die 109"

Now that's my kinda book!

TBolt A-10 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 31, 2004, 03:57:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
"Die 109"

Now that's my kinda book!

Is it in English?

TBolt

wastel1 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 31, 2004, 06:39:13 AM »

"die 109" has lots of failurs in it...which are copied and copied.

it is moderate, but sucks in technical /perfomance details

wastel

VO101_Isegrim · « **Reply #27 on:** January 31, 2004, 02:52:27 PM »

The Reichlin figures for the 109G1 with 100% power and no gondolas are

525 km/h at 0m
642 km/h at 6km
649 km/h at 7km

That gives about 12 - 13 km/h gain from removing gondolas

The drag docs atteched to the Rechlin tests state -8 km/h speed loss for the G-1 at 1.3ata at SL. I would expect more loss of speed at altitude (loss of ram etc.). In fact Soviet tests done with G-2 at 1.42 ata show 665 km/h w/o gondolas, and 650 km/h w. gondolas both at 7000m, ie. -15 km/h at FTH, which goes well with the rule of thumb of 50% more speed loss at FTH than at SL.

More like 632 km/h

G-6`s max. speed was 640 km/h (1.42ata) and 630 km/h (1.3ata) at 6600m according the GLC charts. However I believe those are for the old canopy, the Erla canopy improved aerodynamics somewhat, so would except circa 650 km/h for a late G-6.

now add the takeoff&emergency power (5min max)
=650-655km/h for an G6

Increasing allowable boost reduces critical altitude, and doesn't increase the speed by very much.

Maybe true for Spits, but not for 109s or 190s. There boost was linked to RPM on those planes, both were increased at the same time (from 1.3ata/2600RPM to 1.42ata/2800RPM) and amount, so there was no reducement of critical altitude, as the supercharger`s capacity was increased linearly with boost, and could provide enough oxygene. On British a/c, the reduction of FTH when boost alone is increased is because the engine RPM remains constant, and so is the superchargers`s RPM (which is fixed ratio to the engine`s RPM).