However as posted above they were not cleared for general use until July '44 timeframe. None were fitted to Bf-109G6's.Absolutely nothing backs up this claim of yours. As usual, you keep stupidly parrotting what you would wish for..
If it came "fresh from the factory" the other possibility is Knoke has his dates mixed up. He is only a few months off.AHA! Poor Knoke, he mixed up the type of his aircraft, the boost of his aircraft, and the date in his
diary which he recorded 1-2 day within the events...
But we have Crumpp here to help out Knoke to remember "right"!
Third possibilty is these are Bf-109G6/U2's with GM-1 and Knoke has his boost systems confused. The U2's did come out in "early '44" according to Rodeike. After Jul '44 they were approved for MW-50 use and it was very easy to convert them. The 4th possibilty is that a blind 190 zealot, after being confronted with the real performance specs, makes up stories to twist the truth.
Fact is, Knoke`s unit received G-5`s with ASM engines with large superchartger, boosted with MW 50. This had been confirmed at least a YEAR AGO via
evidence of the Bewegungsmeldungen AND photographic evidence at butch`s board.
To qoute butch and ErichB from an old AAW discussion regarding
MW50 :
Butch :
"First use by unit in October 43 when some testing Gustavs were delivered to operational units, real deploiement in April 1944.
Keep in mind that the G-14 were designed around an MW-50 tank, add it the G-10, the K-4 and the G-6/U2 and G-6/MW50 and you get an idea of how common it was."
ErichB:
"Used in the spring of 1944 in II./JG 11 and I./JG 3, later in JG 1 and JG 300 as well as the NJG units NJGr 10 and NJG 11 until the G-14/AS and finally the G-10 were available."
Nice Power Point slide but it is FAR from original documentation. Please produce the doc saying 595 for the 109K4 because the flight test's just DO NOT show it!There`s a 2500x1200 pixel sized scan of an original Mtt document showing 595 kph at SL, with a low boost.
Crummp somehow cannot see it...1.98ata according to Butch2K, a Bf-109 expert, was not approved for use until Feb' 45.The very document he posted in regards of this notes the 1.98ata boost was forwarded to the troops, General Galland and engines were delivered at this setting.. the document notes the use of 1.98ata with recce aircraft. The DB/DC manual itself notes the use of boost in early December...
Fact is, no document come to light so far that would disprove the use of 1.98ata already in late 1944. Conclusions as opposed to this appear to be educated guesses, at best. I have yet to see evidence to the contrary. I trust the DB/DC manaul over butch, sry.
Frankly your willingness to manipulate the data severly undermines your crediability.Funny thing coming from you.
You lied about the A-8`s introduction, you keep lying about the introduction of MW into the G-6s, you keep calling Knoke a liar because, you keep lying about the engines fitted to the A-8, you keep lying about the production and availability of the a-9s...
According to Messerschmitt then ONLY the Bf-109K4 EQUALS the FW-190A8/801S. I`d like to see any evidence of the "A-8/801S". So far no evidence at all, and Rodeike (p270) mentions the A-8s were to receieve 801TU only. The 801TU had the same power as the 801D, in fact it was a 801d-2 only differing in armor thickness and accessories, therefore performance was also the same.
The A-8 did not receive the TS engines, according to Rodeike :
"in automn 1944 started the production of the 190 A-9, which in comparision of the 190 A-8 differed only in being fitted with the BMW 801 TU/TS powerplant of increased output."First loss of the A-9 did not came until 7th October, 1944, exact same time as the appearance of the G-10/K-4.
In Feb '45 the FW-190D9 was the 1.98ata 109K4's contemprary. Which, as shown on the graph, was slower at all altitudes than the 109K, especially above 5.5km. At 7km, the
fastest FW 190 was already 40 km/h slower than the 109K.
Same conclusion as the last thread that hashed this issue Izzy. Only the 109K4 equals the FW-190A. All other 109's are far behind the FW-190A in low altitude performance. As shown by evidence above, the 190A-8 did not appear until April 1944, the same month as the appearance of MW boost and large superchargers on the Bf 109 G-5 and G-6.
With these, the 109G did 560/568 kph vs. 565 kph of the 190A at SL, and 665/680 kph vs. 653/621kph at altitude.
Therefore the 190A was equal in SL speed to the 109G, and massively inferior to it at ALL other altitudes, the difference being as great as 60 kph at high altitudes in the 109`s favour.
Look again, the author is talking about Umrustsatz's. Your the one who appears not to know the difference. Nice twist again.
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/503_1104931320_g6mw50.jpgThe author talks about "G-6/R1", which he believes was a fighter bomber variant. Fact is, no such ever existed, only G-6 with Rustsatz I, which was not shown in the designation.
The author talks about "G-6/R3", which e believes was a long range fighter variant. Fact is, no such ever existed, only G-6 with Rustsatz III (droptank), which was not shown in the designation.
The author talks about "G-6/R5", which e believes was a 'heavy fighter' variant with gondola guns. Fact is, he doesn`t even have an idea what a G-6/R5 was, it was a recce variant with Rb 12.5/7.9 cameras... Gondola guns were Rustsatz VI, but again they DID not show up in the designation...
In brief, the author Crumpp is afraid to name and on whom he based his claims could not even tell apart Rustsatz kits and Rustzustand conversions, apart from mixing up gondola equipped fighters from converted fighter-recces...
Knoke's aircraft coming "fresh from the factory" makes it an umrustsatz as well. There were NO MW50 umrustsatz's produced for the G6 except a photorecon varient.
Until Jul'44 that is when the designation was changed to G14 and the existing Bf-109G6 were allowed to use MW-50. As stated before changing a U2 to a U3 was not a difficult mechanical job. Which is absolutely correct. GM-1 was introduced in "early" '44. Knoke recieved his in April '44. In Jul '44 they were allowed to convert to MW-50.
You keep parrotting the same BS like an idiot.
Yet there`s evidence of the use of MW in April 1944 on the Bf 109G in Knoke`s diary, and this was confirmed from both unit reports and photographic evidence.
Have fun with your new neighbours, you belong in the same class.
