« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: Bf 109 G range and endurance  (Read 12909 times)

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« on: July 19, 2004, 07:07:53 AM »
Hi,

I guess I share these range tables for the Bf 109G (G-2 to be exact), since there`s so many misunderstandings about that in the literature (most books state high-speed cruise ranges only).

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/109/109G_range.jpg

I hope this will help to get a more correct picture of the 109G`s range, and I hope it will help to understand it wasn`t really an extremely limited range fighter, but more like a medium ranged one.

Data is for the Bf 109G-2/trop the British captured intact in the desert in the end of 1942. Thanks for the report, btw. ;)
Logged

Offline BUG_EAF322

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3153
      • http://bug322.startje.com
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2004, 09:10:20 AM »
Uber Uber
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2004, 07:35:24 PM »
Umm
Do you know more about that particular 109G-2?

Been looking for a particular 109 that was captured in Algeria in late November 1942

Would be most happy to know more.


Regards

Angus
Logged
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2004, 06:12:31 AM »
It`s a G-2/trop, the famous Black 6 that has been restored to become airworthy again, and was tested vs. Tempest V in the AFDU`s test to my knowladge.

I have the story on videotape taken on some warbird`s programme. 95% it`s the same plane, since the G-2/trop was captured in November IIRC.

But what is your special interest, it would be easier to answer (if I can) ?
Logged

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2004, 10:19:20 AM »
Over 1200 miles? 750 miles at 300mph. That is very good range.
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2004, 06:52:41 PM »
The one I refer to was captured on the 22th of November 1942 at Bone airfield.
It sustained damage from being hit in the engine and bellylanded right on the British field.
The pilot was captured totally unharmed.
If you like, I can email to you the whole story.
I have however not been able to find out what plane this was, nor the name of the pilot.
The date may be wrong, - the error might be up to a week or so (-2, to +5 days), hence making it difficult for ,me to make a match with LW loss records. (Which are also a bit incomplete at times, no wonder, this was a very tough and shifting warzone)

Anyway, would be nice to know ig you could help me there.


Best regards


Angus
Logged
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2004, 10:39:36 AM »
Are those Imperial miles or US?
Logged
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2004, 10:55:54 AM »
Do those ranges include the fuel used for climbout?  Or is that just a calculation of how far it could go if it somehow found itself at 18,000ft with 154 gallons?

The reason I ask is the range documents I have for the Mossie specify how much fuel is used for the climbout.

The 755 miles sounds entirely reasonable to me for a short range fighter witha drop tank.  It is pretty close to the Spitfire Mk IX's 850 miles.


The 1,250 miles seems, um, highly suspect.  Very highly suspect.  The DB605 would have had to have been insanely more fuel efficient than the RR Merlin in order for that to be possible.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2004, 11:18:42 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
The DB605 would have had to have been insanely more fuel efficient than the RR Merlin in order for that to be possible.


It was.
Logged
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2004, 11:29:15 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak

The 1,250 miles seems, um, highly suspect.  Very highly suspect.  The DB605 would have had to have been insanely more fuel efficient than the RR Merlin in order for that to be possible.


Yep, it was, plus the Bf 109 was less draggy so it could travel faster with the same power = better milage.

For a comparison, say the Merlin 66 consumed 895 liters to produce some 1950 or so HP at 25lbs, the DB605D put up with 650 lit/hour to achieve the same.

Scholz, the volumes are in Imperial gallons (=4.54liter).
Logged

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2004, 11:32:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
It was.

If it was that much better, why then did the 105 gallons on the Bf109E-4 not result in adequate range to escort from France to London?

Was the DB601 that much worse?

It seems, based on the numbers for the Bf109G-2 in that doument that the Bf109E-4 should have easily managed to cruise 400 miles and still have plenty of fuel for combat in the middle of it.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2004, 11:34:30 AM »
The 109E-4 had 30 minutes on combat power over London, before they had to RTB. However by Görings order they had to stay with the bombers, zig-zagging so that the bombers could keep up, and therby wasted a lot of fuel.
Logged
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2004, 11:41:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by VO101_Isegrim
Yep, it was, plus the Bf 109 was less draggy so it could travel faster with the same power = better milage.

Less drag than a P-51B/D or Mosquito?  I have never heard that.  I understood that those were the two most aerodynamically clean piston engined aircraft of WWII.  A feature of both was high cruise speed.

Yet this document would seem to indicate that the P-51D was no longer ranged than the Bf109G-2.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #13 on: July 22, 2004, 11:44:27 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
If it was that much better, why then did the 105 gallons on the Bf109E-4 not result in adequate range to escort from France to London?

Was the DB601 that much worse?


Yep, the 601`s consumption was worser than the later engines, but it`s easy to see that, it was a smaller engine, with lower compression ratio than the later ones.

Also keep in mind that all 109s had the same tankage, 400 liter or 88 imp. gallon, be careful wheter sources are stating in US or imp. gallon values.

Quote

It seems, based on the numbers for the Bf109G-2 in that doument that the Bf109E-4 should have easily managed to cruise 400 miles and still have plenty of fuel for combat in the middle of it.


The E-4 to my knowladge is reported to have 460 miles on internal, at economic cruise. Keep in mind that it was a lot more draggy than the later ones. The 109F-2 had almost the same power at Kampleistung, sill, it was some 40-60 km/h faster than the E-4 !

BTW 109s could stay quite a bit of time over England even w/o the fuel tank that almost doubled the tankage. The bombers were usually left unescorted when they themselves were late from the randevous over the Channel - which meant 109s had to circle without reason while waiting them, burning fuel unneccesarily.
Logged

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf 109 G range and endurance
« Reply #14 on: July 22, 2004, 11:51:16 AM »
Ok, that all makes sense between the DB601/Bf109E and DB605/Bf109G.

And now that you mention it I do recall that the He111/Ju88/Do17s had a tendancy to show up late.


The 105 gallons was US gallons.  I just grabbed that number from the AH website.  All fuel tankages there are in US gallons.

I am still skeptical of the 1,250 mile claim.  I'd bet it was a calculated number based on a much shorter flight test and doesn't include the fuel consumption used for the climb to 18,000ft.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 12   Go Up
« previous next »