Captured 109G14. Info needed.

[VooDoo]

Its a question about a 109G14 captured after D-Day and tested by allies. Im interesting in any info about this plane. Exact modification, conditions in test (I was told that it had no armor etc). Was it special hi-alt interceptor or so ?

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by VooDoo
Its a question about a 109G14 captured after D-Day and tested by allies. Im interesting in any info about this plane. Exact modification, conditions in test (I was told that it had no armor etc). Was it special hi-alt interceptor or so ?

Can you narrow it down a bit as in an FE number or RAF serial?  Who had it? Where was it tested etc?

Might want to go here:

http://www.luftwaffe-experten.co.uk/captive-index.html

Check their listings and see if you can nail down which specific 109 you are talking about.

Dan/Slack

[GScholz]

VD364 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-14/U4 - W.Nr.3114 or 2484? - unknown unit - struck of charge after landing accident May 1945

AM 229 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-14 - W.Nr.413601 - coded "Black 7" of unknown unit - fate unrecorded

FE-124/T2-124 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-14 - W.Nr.610937 - static display at Evergreen Museum

Unknown G14s:

[Nashwan]

Its a question about a 109G14 captured after D-Day and tested by allies. Im interesting in any info about this plane. Exact modification, conditions in test (I was told that it had no armor etc). Was it special hi-alt interceptor or so

If it had no armour, it's probably W.Nr.413601

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/index1024.htm Go to Articles - Evaluations

[VooDoo]

OK. Thats W.Nr.413601. Thanks everyone, especially Nashwan .

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by VooDoo
OK. Thats W.Nr.413601. Thanks everyone, especially Nashwan .

BTW, you hit the nail in the head about the high alt variant.. even though it has the normal altitude DB 605A with MW injection installed (AM). But from the werknummer block it`s appearant that it was originally a converted G-6/U2 light high altitude fighter which had GM-1 (this could be easily converted to use MW 50 instead) - see the other 109G the AFDU did many tests, the G-6/U2 from the 412 xxx blocks. This gives a clue why the plane has no rear armor and light alloy fuel tank, ie. it belongs to those specialized high-alt 109 fighters that were lightened this way to increase performance, and as that equipment had little use in their originally intended operational area. Probably they left it this state after the conversion. There was a short discussion on that with George, who originally provided the article for The Lair.

Not sure what tests were done with it (if any), the only doc in connection with this plane is the mentioned Brit report on it.

[VooDoo]

I was thinking about "mossie hunter". But still have no idea what its pilot wanted from light allied flak... Looks like germans were sending every available plane to front... Even w/o modifications (armor and selfsealing tanks).

[VooDoo]

see the other 109G the AFDU did many tests, the G-6/U2 from the 412 xxx blocks
Any details ? I have only 109G6/R2 data (605AM and MW50). 569 kmh S/L, 666 kmh max speed. Thats from 13 aug 44 - 1 nov 44 german tests.

[GScholz]

From what I read there only the MW50 tank was made of light alloy. It said nothing about the fuel tank not being self-sealing. I don't think the MW50 tank on any German plane was self-sealing, why would it be? MW50 is not inflammable, nor is it vital to the operation of the plane. A self-sealing tank would just add weight and reduce the capacity.

[Nashwan]

From what I read there only the MW50 tank was made of light alloy. It said nothing about the fuel tank not being self-sealing.

From the report:

Tankage. - The petrol tank was non-self=sealing, being made of light alloy.  It appeared to be protected only by a box of 7-ply wood.  On the other hand, the small priming fuel tank which is fitted in the upper part of the fuselage on the starboard side, some 4 ft. forward of the base of the fin, is self-sealing.

[VooDoo]

"Tankage. - The petrol tank was non-self=sealing, being made of light alloy.  It appeared to be protected only by a box of 7-ply wood.  On the other hand, the small priming fuel tank which is fitted in the upper part of the fuselage on the starboard side, some 4 ft. forward of the base of the fin, is self-sealing."

[VooDoo]

Damn... You was 2 minutes faster .

[GScholz]

I missed that part. Thanks.

[VO101_Isegrim]

Originally posted by VooDoo
see the other 109G the AFDU did many tests, the G-6/U2 from the 412 xxx blocks
Any details ? I have only 109G6/R2 data (605AM and MW50). 569 kmh S/L, 666 kmh max speed. Thats from 13 aug 44 - 1 nov 44 german tests.

The G-6/U2 would be a GM-1 carrying variant with same performance at SL as any other G-6, but massively improved high alttiude performance. However, I think the AFDU`s plane was converted back to normal G-6 standards, perhaps in a repair facility, as there`s no mentioning of the equipment associated with the /U2 conversion in the report. It was equipped with the tall tail unit w. flettner, and carried gondola cannons and a droptank when it landed in the UK by accident, and had an old type 3piece canopy. It belonged to a Wilde Sau nighfighter unit.

This was the plane the well known tests of the AFDU vs. Mustang III, Spitfire IX and XIV were done against. Certainly not the best choice to do fighter vs. fighter comparisons, but this was what they had airworthy..

[VooDoo]

This was the plane the well known tests of the AFDU vs. Mustang III, Spitfire IX and XIV were done against.
OK now I understand what plane you are talking about. Thanks.