It's you that's doing that saying because the Spit XIV wasn't cleared for 25 lbs in the summe of 44 it wasn't cleared for it in 45. A sidetrack, but for your notice, there is a summer 1944 test of a Spit 21 on MW`s site, with Griffon 61, the same series engine as the 65, different only in gear ratio. The max. boost allowed is still +21 lbs. Besides, Neil also said that the Griffon 61/65 line was not cleared for +25, only later models.
Again, see Butch's post on this subject. I have quoted the order banning 1.42 ata to you in full in the past, and large parts of it here, and I know you have seen it yourself. You claimed the G-2 was derated after it saw service. Fact is, banning 1.42ata was in effect BEFORE any 109G saw any service.
WTF are you talking about? We were discussing the fact that several German engines were derated, which provisdes precedence to the decision to do the same to the DB in the K4, if it was ever rated at 1.98 before March 45. Nashwan, we are not before some orthodox english court, where you have to dig up some stupid precedent from 1437 about somebody who stole a chicken to use it as a precedent to prove that your neighbour owns you now, in 2004, fourty pounds... or, in your style, WTF you want to prove with your "precedences", which are debated in the first place ? I don`t really get your thinking. "WTF" a derating in 1942 would ANYTHING to do with a different engine in 44/45 ?
WTF are you talking about the Merlin 61 for, which didn't have it's rating changed at any time, as far as I can see, and only served for 6 - 9 months before being replaced by a new model. You brought up the engine derating matter, m8. I merely, and kindly, pointed out, it was nothing uncommon, nor a German "speciality", via examples of British engines that suffered from troubles and had to be derated in service, sometimes didn`t even got to be derated, as they could not be uprated in the first place.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Show me those references of them being downrated. Show me a reference that explicitely say the G-2 is downrated. So far you have come up with NONE, just parrot it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technical Sheet issued by the Quartermaster General (Air Equipment)
Berlin, 18th June, 1942
Subject: DB 605 engine in the Me 109 G
The takeoff and emergency output with a boost pressure of 1.42 ata may not at present be used.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great. Everthing is in place.
You have claimed the G-2 was derated after troubles in service. Basically your claim is that the G-2 arrived to the units with 1.42ata, then troubles occured, and was derated to 1.3ata. which you want to use a precedent to the K-4. Right? You made up some things about non-existent G-2 manuals, which you imply originally contained the 1.42ata (you did not press this line anymore, for it is clear to me, to you, and probably others you have never seen those manuals), again just to get a precedent.
To which I said, it is false, as the G-2 was not derated in service because of service troubles, simply because it arrived into service,
just like all DB 605A engine Bf 109Gs AFTER the prohibition of use of 1.42ata for the DB 605A.
So the timeline being :
October, 1941 : first 109G prototypes (DB 601 engines)
18th June, 1942 : 1.42ata boost is banned (see above). [Enabled on the 8th June, 1943]
"End of June" 1942 : two pre-prod 109Gs starting their 100 hour testing with test unit EJGr. West.
June, 1942 : G-1 and G-2 production commences
June/July*, 1942 : First G-1 received by 11/JG 2
mid-July : I/JG 53 receives first G-2
7th July 1942 : First G-2 loss
11th July 1942 : First G-1 loss
*It appears that no G-1 was in service with the 11/JG 2 in June, only in July, according to Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen of 11./JG2, which shows the first 15 planes arrived from the factory to the unit in July, and there was 0 G-1s on the end of June. Possibly the planes arrived in last days of June, and were accepted into the ranks in the first days of July.
As according the Prien/Rodeike.
You can argue more if you want. Fact is the G-2 was not derated in service, it arrived into service with the boost limited to 1.3ata and was cleared to 1.42 a year later.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Besides, in case of the FW 190A-3 and A-4, the problem was not with the engine, but with the airframe (the new BMW engine generated more power and heat than the engine mount was designed to handle. ) The solution was modifing the airframe to allow for better cooling, not the engine.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you accept it was derated in service?No, it was limited in boost in certain airframes. There`s a difference.
It hardly matters if it was derated because of engine troubles or airframe troubles (although I think Willaume mentioned that it was derated until the exhaust was chromed). It was still derated, which is futher precedence for the K4. No, it matters a LOT. You are trying to sell it as the ENGINE`s problem, which was
not. They installed a new, hotter engine in place of the BMW 801C, and the installation could not provide the airflow neccesary for COOLING.
Thus your "precedence" for the BMW 801 is also invalid for "German engine troubles", as there was no trouble with the engine itself. In fact, the problem was it was too good for the given installation.
I asked you before, I'll ask again, when was the Griffon 65 rated at 25lbs boost? Is it a typo or you just actually said you don`t know any example of a Griffon 65 ever rated at +25lbs boost?
Let`s praise the Lord, it only took 4 years for you to get that part.
All this is once again you attempting to change the point. We were discussing wether the 109K4 ran at 1.98 as early as December, and you claiming the manual proved it, me saying even if the manual said 1.98 in December, it wasn't proof that it wasn't downrated.It is certainly isn`t a proof it was downrated. It is a proof it was uprated. Simple, isn`t it?
If you want to prove it was downrated later on, give me the specific order, like in case of the DB 605A.
As precedence, I showed several other German aircraft that were derated. You showed two. In case of the BMW 801, it was proven false. In case of the G-2, it was proven false in the way you wanted to present it.
You showed two invalid precedence. (and pls, cut this freaking common law stuff about precences, it`s so weird to me. Give me proof, not f. precedences, analogies, whatever)
WTF do Spitfires have to do with that? If every Spitfire ever made was derated, how would that refute my argument about the K4? It has nothing to do with it. That`s one step ahead in your way of thinking, which was the purpose of my examples regarding Spits and Merlins. Right, it has NOTHING to do with it. You have to answer the specific question, not just evading all the time and start to talk about the DB 605 A and BMW 801 instead of the 605 DB/DC.
It's simply the case that any implied criticism of the 109 and you have to find a different aircraft to attack. Sad, really. Nope, it`s simple a way of proving your way of thinking wrong by applying your logic to other subjects. Tested on those, you yourself called your own logical approach faulty, as demonstrated above. The Spits were just ideal tools for that. I knew you would leave that without an answer.
PS: Angie, what`s so fun is putting one line stupid comments in a thread ? You show similiar symptonyms as a certain pet of mine.
