Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design

[MiloMorai]

turning in the Spit and 109, operational examples.

S/L Brian Lane, of No. 19 Squadron, got into a tight turning fight with an Me 109 on 15 September 1940:

    That German pilot certainly knew how to a handle a 109 - I have never seen one thrown about as that one was, I felt certain that his wings would come off at any moment. However, they stayed on, and he continued to lead me a hell of a dance as I strove to get my sights on him again. Twice I managed to get in a short burst but I don't think I hit him, then he managed to get round towards my tail. Pulling hard round I started to gain on him, and began to come round towards his tail. He was obviously turning as tightly as his kite could and I could see that his slots were open, showing he was nearly stalled. His ailerons were obviously snatching too, as first one wing and then the other would dip violently. Giving the Spitfire best, he suddenly flung out of the turn and rolled right over on his back passing in front of me inverted. ...he flew on inverted for several seconds, giving me the chance to get in a good burst from the quarter.

More at http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit1vrs109e.html

[Angus]

Brian Lane may have been flying a Cannon armed Spit I, or even a Spit II, FYI

[rshubert]

Originally posted by Angus
Hi all
Just popped in to tell you that I am prowling along with that RAF document.
It will basically list all fighter deploys to all RAF fighter units at all fronts (AFAIK)
So, not just the Spits, - hell gotta read it all to hair them out, so I'd better do all.
Many surprizes. Such as mk V's being deployed (although in little quantity) as late as 43/44, while griffon engined XII's had been around for a while!!!!
And XIV's in the far east actually!
One squad went all the way from Gladiators to Tempests in mere 4 years.
Feel free to ask, but warning, I'm only up to 41st sqn, gotta go all the way to 600+

You putting that on a spreadsheet, Angus?  Pretty Please?  For me?  I like spreadsheets.  With information.  And data.

Seriously, it would be really cool if you could put that on a spreadsheet.  Or a Gantt Chart.

Or, you could give me the information and I could put it on a spreadsheet AND a Gantt Chart.



shubie

[Crumpp]

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/color/1.jg1_color4.jpg


Here is a great example of the standard Luftwaffe finish of "Primed and Smooth-painted".  You can see the shine from the sunlight play across the glossy markings AND how it still shines on the smooth but matt RLM paints.  

Angus you know I want a copy of that doc as well!

[Angus]

cc, all in due time.
It's an XlS and be welcome to play with it.
My format there is anything but perfect, - am no good with XLS.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
For Barbi.

You should read this report, especially the last paragraph about 100 grade fuel and note the date of 11.39.

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit1-12lbs.jpg

Lets not hear any more about the lack of 100 grade fuel during BoB.

[/b]


Yep, Mike William`s private reality is that 100 grade fuel was 100% available and nothing else.


However, and as usual he`s 'facts' don`t match that of what reality and that of what can be read in official documents, ie. :

"The first bulk shipment of 100 octane fuel had arrived in Britain in June 1939 from the Esso refinery in Aruba. This and subsequent tanker shipments from Aruba, Curacao and the USA were stockpiled while the RAF continued to operate on 87 octane petrol. Having secured what were considered reasonably sufficient quantities of 100 octane, Fighter Command began converting its engines to this standard in March 1940, allowing boost (manifold) pressures to be raised without the risk of detonation in the cylinders. This initial increase in maximum boost from 6 lb to 9 lb delivered a useful power growth of around 130hp at the rated altitude.

By the time of the invasion of the Low Countries by Germany in May 1940 the RAF had converted approximately 25 % of it's total fighter force to 100 octane fuel use. The subsequent escalation in air activity and demands placed upon Fighter Command over the next two months put great strain on both the 100 octane fuel stockpiles and aircraft modified to use the fuel. Against the backdrop of total war the RAF found that it's reserves of 100 octane fuel was well below the level considered necessary for widespread use, for any sustained length of time.

Two actions were immediately undertaken by the British War Cabinet in May to resolve the looming crisis. Firstly 87 octane fuel was deemed the primary fuel
source to be used until further supplies could be discovered and delivered in sufficient quantities to allow the Merlin conversions to again take place. Those  existing fighters already so converted (approximately 125) would continue to use what supplies of 100 octane were available, but all other fighters that had not
been modified to continue with the use of 87 octane (of which there was more than adequate supply). The second action was for the British Government to contract the Shell Oil Refining Company to assist the British-controlled Iraqi Petroleum Company at Kirkuk to produce 100 octane fuel. This arrangement proved quite successful as production was quickly converted to 100 octane fuel.

The first Middle East shipment of 100 octane fuel arrived in Portsmouth on 12th August, with a further two deliveries in September and four in October. Although too late to allow widespread conversion for the use of the fuel the deliveries did ensure that from this point on Britain would not be lacking in 100 octane fuel levels. With the newfound supply RAF Fighter Command again embarked upon a Merlin II and III conversion to 100 octane use from late September, finally achieving 100% conversion of it's fighter force by the end of November in 1940.

- Addendum to 'Fuel Supplies to The British Empire And It's Commonwealth; Outlook, Ramifications and Projections For The Prosecution Of The War.',

Copied to the Australian Military Commission in England in February 1941, by Roll Royce to Lord Beaverbrook outlining past, current and proposed changes to the Merlin and factors that affect it's performance.


So basically the full conversion to 100 grade fuel did not happen until the end of the year until the BoB was well over (by british standards). Units in other theatres had to wait even further. Maybe about half the RAF fighters used 100 grade fuel during the battle, maybe even less.

Mike Williams also gives some of his fantasies about 100 octane fuel not being available at Rechlin, little he knows as the fuel was used in production engines in Germany for at least 2 years by then, 109s were just converted to 100 grade fuel just at the end of the Battle of France.



The BF 109E flight handbook states:

"Die Höhenruderkräfte und Flossenbelastungen werden bei hoher Fahrt sehr groß."  (The elevator forces and fin loads become very large during high speed)

 L.Dv.556/3, BF 109 E Flugzeughandbuch, (Berlin, December 1939), p. 19


It`s well known the 109 series produced high stick forces on the elevator at high speeds, yet not high enough to restict the the airplanes manouveribilty, which was still above what an avarage pilot could sustain.

ie. from several tests :




I find that a better solution than the overly sensitive elevator of the Spitfire, which could easily result in a broken airframe at high speed dives, and required very careful attention during turns.

ie. the Spitfire II manual of mid-1940 notes :



Strain on the muscles are better IMHO than strain to the airframe. Muscles don`t break, airframes do! The NACA`s report also critizizes the Spitfire for it`s

The risks of airframe failures were not theoretical, as seen below :

[Angus]

Nothing new here.
So, 100 octs were there in some use during the BoB ending up as full at the end of the year. All fits. The LW would at times be facing Spits that may have outclimbed and even outran them, as well as facing Spits that definately didn't.
Remember Galland's first encounter with Spits? They slipped away like eels were his words.
Now to the stuctural thingie.
This has been on these boards before.
The Spitfire was simply too good with elevators if you see what I mean, - with a shifting C.o.G. due to G forces the aircraft could enter a deadly narrow curve, breaking the aircraft. So, even without a high speed stall. There were luckily pilots who survived the situation (can quote some if you like) and the problem was fixed in the Mk V series by the use of bob weights.
So, the vertical control was basically so light that it had to be made heavier.
After that, not a problem.
This delicate quality must have teased many a 109 pilot, where the prey slipped away in a high pitched turn. I actually have a little film of such an incident

[Crumpp]

It`s well known the 109 series produced high stick forces on the elevator at high speeds, yet not high enough to restict the the airplanes manouveribilty, which was still above what an avarage pilot could sustain.

700 Kilometers per hour equals 434.96 Miles (statute) per hour

According to Gollob, the RAF did not take the 109 fast enough for the "unacceptable stick forces" to show up.

As for the 100 octane fuel.  It is obvious the RAF had it in their reserves.  How much was at the front is open to debate but I would say that some of at least was used at the front.

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Achieved over 150 victories in the FW-190 from 1943!

http://www.acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html#kittel

The list goes on!

Interstig Crumpp. It goes like :

1, Erich Hartmann  352 victories -  Bf 109
Gerhard Barkhorn  301 victories -  Bf 109
Günther Rall  275  victories -  Bf 109
Otto Kittel  267 victories -  Fw 190

Interesting trend!

Now I won`t go into details of the nonsense you came up. But you will love this graph :




One just have to look at it to see why 190s received 109 escorts, at 8000m, the latter are 35 - 100 km/h faster! The A-8 is beaten into the ground even by the lowest G-14.. the A-9 can berely match the G-14 though faster below 3000m...both Antons taken from Crummps charts. The common and ordinary G-14 pitted vs. the IX boosted to 150 octane is also of interest. Raises the question, wtf grippen is talking about when he starts drooling about the superiority of two staged allied engines at altitude.. just look at the /AS!

Note :The G-14/AS was created using the chart and the curves for the non-methanol /AS plane, so actually it should be much more like the ordinary G-14`s curve, ie. faster at low alts.

Appearantly 109s could pose a challenge to both foreign and domestic competition even in 1944/45!

The K-4 just reigns supreme.
Oh, and btw 1700 K-4s were produced, Crummp, 856 of them up to dec 31st 1944. Apprx. 450 of these were already issued to the troops by that time, supplemented by ca 535 of the 'bastard' G-10d, all fresh from the factories!


700 Kilometers per hour equals 434.96 Miles (statute) per hour
According to Gollob, the RAF did not take the 109 fast enough for the "unacceptable stick forces" to show up.

Hmm, what the f. could know about what the RAF did on the other side of the channel..?

420mph IAS the 109 was dived to, and found manouverable at, was close to the safe dive limits of the plane. Actually it`s a higher IAS number ANY 109 could attain in level flight.  If the stick forces were not unacceptable at this speed, they were not unacceptable at any speed.

[Angus]

Ahh, I see you pop up with the chart again.
For those who don't know, JL 165 for some reason is the poorest performing Spit IX on the fourthfightergroup website.
Izzy loves it....
So, for the record, some other mk IX's on the site are up to 20 mph faster.
Beware also that the handpicking includes high-alt Spits for sl speeds, and Low-alt Spits for ceiling, and then finally, for ultimate rollrate, pick the extended-wing-high-alt Spit

[Kurfürst]

BS, angie, the jl 165 does 397 mph on this chart. It`s what it should do according to the BRITISH datasheets for this type.

There are two tests of jl 165, in one it does 386mph (but it`s tropicalized), the other, done october 1943, the better one I picked it does 397 (clean).
The results of it match the results of Soviet tests of the IXLF almost 100%! The speed run was also done at some 150lbs below normal take off weight.The LF version was btw the most common type of Spitfire IX, about 80-90 of them were LFs!

The spitty sucked at speed even with 150 grade, that`s all angie, put up with it. Poor aerodynamics. Well, all relative, becuase the A-8 was even worser than it at altitude.

@crummp,

I just checked, a total of 180 A-9s, 353 D-9s were delivered from the factories to the 1st line daylight fighter units up to dec31 1944.

[Angus]

Truly, you present it with 25 boost.
Truly, also with a BIG red line, you present it with 18 boost.
At the same time,in service there were Spitties whose top speed at their given altitude were up to 95 mph faster!!!!!!
Truly, I notice the absence of a Griffon Spitty, such as the XII maybe, or the XIV.....
But what am I ranting, 25 boost and high grade fuel being scarcely available for the RAF, whose Spitfires were only available in penny-pockets anyway

Tell you what.

I'll also make a graph

[Crumpp]

Beware also that the handpicking includes high-alt Spits for sl speeds, and Low-alt Spits for ceiling, and then finally, for ultimate rollrate, pick the extended-wing-high-alt Spit

He is doing the same with the FW-190 data.  The FW-190A8 with the BMW 801D2Q was in service from late Dec 43 until Jul'44.  It's contemprary is the Bf-109G6 without any MW 50.

109's did not get the approval for MW 50 until Jun/Jul '44.  The exact same time period the conversion program for the FW-190A8 to the BMW 801TS began.

So the contemprary to the FW-190A8/801S or FW-190A9 is the Bf-109G14/Bf-109K4.  Izzy graph does not show the same speeds for the 109K at low altitude that the actual flight test graph does.

Good run down on DB601A and DB601AS ratings and operations is here:

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/index1024.htm

Crumpp

[Crumpp]

I just checked, a total of 180 A-9s, 353 D-9s were delivered from the factories to the 1st line daylight fighter units up to dec31 1944.

Probably fairly accurate.  The documents I have some conflicting elements as to whether the werknummer changes.  Only one (BMW document) says it does.  The Focke Wulf and RLM documents state that when the FW-190A8 is converted to the BMW801TS the designation stays FW-190A8 even though the aircraft is in fact no different from an FW-190A9 at this point.  This is evidence from recent crash excavations of FW-190A8's as well.  The data plates are clearly labeled FW-190A8/801S.

Comparing BMW's documents against Focke Wulfs and the Luftwaffe's almost 7000 801 series motors were produced in 1944.  Production for the 801D2Q was halted in July.  The differences between the 801D2Q and the TS are not very dramatic from the manufacturing standpoint.  Basically flowed and ported heads with chrome valves /combustion chamber were the biggest change.  Not the only, just the largest.

New werknummers and serial production of the FW-190A9's did not begin until October '44.  Three months after the conversion of FW-190A8' s to FW-190A9 standard began.  The frontline conversion had priority over the new manufacture for 801S motors.

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Crumpp
He is doing the same with the FW-190 data.  The FW-190A8 with the BMW 801D2Q was in service from late Dec 43 until Jul'44.  It's contemprary is the Bf-109G6 without any MW 50.


Nope.
The A-8 did not receive the increased boost of 1.58/1.65ata until mid-1944.
In fact the A-8 did not see service until April 1944:
"Die erste bekannten Verluste  einer FW 190 A-8 wurde am 8. April 1944 gemeldet...". That was WrkNr. 170 044 of 2./JG 1. See Rodeike`s 'Fw 190A/D Ta 152'.

The G-6`s were beginning to be equipped w. MW 50 in the start of 1944, the appearance of the G-14 in June/July just standardized things already appeared on the G-6. The G-14 was just a standardized G-6.

109's did not get the approval for MW 50 until Jun/Jul '44.

Source of this BS?

Knoke`s diary mentioned G-5/AS with methanol in April 1944, but there were planes around w. MW sooner than that, it was first tested on 109s in late 1943. Knoke participated in those tests. His plane was equivalent of the G-14/AS, plus it had pressurized cocpit.

The exact same time period the conversion program for the FW-190A8 to the BMW 801TS began.

Appearantly the A-8/TS and the A-9 appeared in only very small numbers.

Izzy graph does not show the same speeds for the 109K at low altitude that the actual flight test graph does.

Lolol, trouble is, my graph is based exactly on Messerscmitt`s performance graphs for the K-4, crummpy. "5026/27. 605 DB/ASB. Sondernotleistung m. MW. Serienschrb. 9-12159 fur K-4 mit Sondernotleistung." So cut the bs.