Author Topic: MesserSpit (Read 4590 times)

agent 009 · « **on:** April 13, 2005, 01:57:31 AM »

For those interested in Merlin vs DB 601, this might be of interest. It's been round awhile, sorry if it's old news.

Re: Performance of Daimler-Benz engined Spitfire Vb?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reproduced below are four images of the DB605A engined Supermarine Spitfire Mk.Vb coded CJ+ZY...

Best wishes...

Peter Evans - moderator

Luftwaffe Experten Message Board
http://pub73.ezboard.com/bluftwaffeexperten71774
&
Luftwaffe Experten Mailing List
http://www.experten.fsnet.co.uk/experten.html

Edited
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted this brief account on another thread.

P/O (Sous Lt) Bernard Scheidhauer and P/O (Sous/Lt) Henri de Bordas of 131 Sqn departed Westhampnett early on the afternoon of November 18th 1942 to undertake a Rhubarb to the Normandy peninsular.

Making land fall at St Aubin sur Mer they picked up and followed the Caen to Cherbourg railway attacking several targets along the way. During the sortie they were met by light flak and purposely avoided Carentan because of the concentration of flak in the area.

At the small town of Ecausseville, de Bordas lost sight of his partner, he continued to circle for as long as he could calling out on his RT but to no avail. He returned to Westhampnett.

Scheidhauer's aircraft (EN830) had suffered some sort of damage and started to loose fuel, his RT had also gone US. For some reason he headed west instead of north, after crossing a stretch of water he sighted land which he mistakenly thought was the Isle of Wight.
Picking out a suitable field he place his aircraft down into a wheels up landing. Coming to rest in a field of turnips close to Dielament Manor, Trinity.

Climbing from the aircraft he was met by several locals who informed him of his navigational error, he was in fact in German Occupied Jersey and not the Isle of Wight.

Scheidhauer tried to destroy the aircraft, he attempted to acquire some petrol to set fire to it, but none was available, he smashed the instrument panel as best he could and gave away various items of equipment to the gathering crowd.

The Germans arrived after about 20 mins and he was taken prisoner finally ending up at Stalag Luft 111.

En830 was dismantled and shipped to mainland Europe:-
it reached Echterdingen minus guns and ammunition, with the gun ports closed. The radio had been replaced with ballast, but it still had its original Merlin 45 engine. Several flights were made by Daimler-Benz pilots before conversion was attempted. A decision was made to replace the instruments and the entire electrical system with standard German equipment, because the Luftwaffe used a 24 volt system, whilst the RAF used a 12 volt standard.

After the Merlin engine was removed, it was discovered that the Spitfire's front fuselage cross-section was very close to that of the standard Bf.110G's engine cowling. A new engine support was designed, and a standard DB 605A-1 engine (Wk-Nr 00701990) was mounted to the fire wall. The work was completed at the Sindelfingen Daimler-Benz factory, near Echterdingen.

A 3.0 m. diameter Bf.109G propeller was added, together with the carburettor scoop from a Bf.109G. This made the modified Spitfire's all-up weight, without armament, 6,020 lb. (2730 kg). The armament weight was an estimated additional 661 lb. (300 kg.). Its weight with armament, before the engine modification, had been 6,680 lb. (3030 kg.).

After a couple of weeks, and with a new yellow-painted nose, the Spitfire returned to Echterdingen. Ellenreider was the first to try the aircraft. He was stunned that the aircraft had much better visibility and handling on the ground than the Bf.109. It took off before he realised it and had an impressive climb rate, around 70 ft. (21 m.) per second. Much of the Spitfire's better handling could be attributed to its lower wing loading.

The Spitfire's wing area was about 54 sq. ft. (5m²) greater than that of the Bf.109. The Messerschmitt was faster at low altitude, but at 11,000 ft. (3350 m) the speeds evened out. The DB 605A engine gave better performance, according to the test group, than the Merlin, which was rated 150 hp below the German engine. It gave the Spitfire a ceiling of 41,666 ft. (12700 m.), about 3,280 ft. (1000 m.) more than a Bf.109G with the same engine and 5,166 ft. (1475 m.) more than that of a Spitfire Mk.V.

After a brief period at Rechlin confirming the performance data, the modified Spitfire returned to Echterdingen to serve officially as a test bed. It was popular with the pilots in and out of working hours. Its career ended on 14th August, 1944, when a formation of US bombers attacked Echterdingen, wrecking two Ju.52s, three Bf.109Gs, a Bf.109H V1, an FW.190 V16, an Me.410 and the Spitfire. The remains of the hybrid Spitfire were scrapped at the Klemm factory at Böblingen

A small piece of EN830's wooden prop still exists from the crash landing in Jersey as does Scheidhauer’s flying helmet.

I hope that this is of interest

Angus · « **Reply #1 on:** April 13, 2005, 09:22:56 AM »

Definately!
It has been here before, but I lost the link. Some short time ago I posted a link of hybrids, but I don't have it on this machine. Will look.
I was actually thinking of posting about the 109 Buchon, - Merlin powered.
Would love to know power and performance of that one.

bunch · « **Reply #2 on:** April 13, 2005, 11:41:33 AM »

spitfiremkv · « **Reply #3 on:** April 16, 2005, 10:44:50 AM »

I call it the 109fire

Angus · « **Reply #4 on:** April 18, 2005, 06:40:56 AM »

Oh, the link to the site, - same text:
http://www.unrealaircraft.com/hybrid/spitfire.php

Angus · « **Reply #5 on:** April 18, 2005, 06:53:34 AM »

The ever-populat 109-Spit comparisons get very interesting when one looks into this hybrid, because it eliminates some comparison factors, making them simpler, - such as Prop, Engine, cowling vs airframe.

Read a little closer into the text. The messer boys are going to love this one, hehe, or perhaps the Spit lads. Well, it explains a lot of things...

" Ellenreider was the first to try the aircraft. He was stunned that the aircraft had much better visibility and handling on the ground than the Bf.109. It took off before he realised it and had an impressive climb rate, around 70 ft. (21 m.) per second"

AND THIS

"The DB 605A engine gave better performance, according to the test group, than the Merlin, which was rated 150 hp below the German engine. It gave the Spitfire a ceiling of 41,666 ft. (12700 m.), about 3,280 ft. (1000 m.) more than a Bf.109G with the same engine"

So, the Spitfire has definately higher parasite drag due to the bigger wings mostly, then presumably the canopy. It's higher speed at higher altitude is explained with it's lower wingloading, leading to flying at lower A.o.A. when the air becomes thinner. (Crossing of curves) Same goes with the ceiling, eventually the 109 will stall out.
Anyway, look at this:
"It gave the Spitfire a ceiling of 41,666 ft. (12700 m.), about 3,280 ft. (1000 m.) more than a Bf.109G with the same engine and 5,166 ft. (1475 m.) more than that of a Spitfire Mk.V."
(That is the full text, you can see that the later part is clipped in the previous paste)
You can from this definately see that the DB 605 has a better alt performance than a Merlin 45, however the Spitfire airframe allows a better alt performance.
So, where does the Merlin 61 bring it

Kurfürst · « **Reply #6 on:** April 19, 2005, 08:59:20 AM »

I got those Messerspit performance graphs, trouble is that it appears quite some of the Spit`s equipemtn of several hundreds lbs worth was taken out, making the comparision to the original Spit a bit of apples and oranges.
It also has a Bf 109G graph for comparision, no subtype given but I presume it`s a G-6/trop or something like that, given the sucky performance and weight data (3100kg), doing just 620 kph (G-2 supposed to do 650, the G-6 630. A trop filter would kill 10kph speed according to my docs).

Angus · « **Reply #7 on:** April 19, 2005, 09:09:32 AM »

Firstly, it seems to have a very close weight to the original Spitfire.
Secondly, it is mentioned in the article that the performance comparison is with a 109G with the same type of engine, which I understood to be the same power+prop.
Anyway, compared to the initial climb of 109G on 1.42 I have, this hybrid is very well above.
Somewhere I saw something of Hurricanes with DB601's in them.
They were faster than the originals, however, those may have been powered with 2 blade props and a very early RR.

Angus · « **Reply #8 on:** April 19, 2005, 09:46:26 AM »

Ok, more data.
A fully loaded Spit V is about 6700-6800 lbs.
A 109G with DB605 running on 1,3 ata is from a sheet I've got, roughly 7100 lbs. That one is from late 1943.
Our Hybrid is lighter, 6020 lbs, estimated to be some 6680 lbs with ammoload.
The SL climb rate is 21 m/s for the Hybrid
The SL climb rate is some 17 m/s from the 109 graph.
For the Spit V, I don't know, - I have one number 14 m/s running on 9 boost at SL, topping with a better figure though, so maybe this is all logical.

Then these:
The one Hurricane fitted with a DB601A engine for comparison with the Merlin-engined version was tested early in 1941. The conversion was extremely successful, and experimental aircraft displayed better take-off performance and climb rate than either the standard Hurricane or the Bf 109 E-3 and was only slightly slower than the latter.
Here's the beast :

agent 009 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 19, 2005, 10:39:17 PM »

Interesting, a Hurrimess.

Ze vun-o-niner was not, ( I'm sure y'all know this ), desinged to have a massive 2000 hp motor up front like it eventually did. The D & E models had 950 & 1150-approx motors. Which weighed much less. One 109 pilot mentioned that the big motor altered the ceter of gravity, ( to the forward ), which widened turn circle.

It is still amazing that they got that big motor into such a small airframe & kept it competitive til 45.

Rall metioned, ( I know,Rall again! ), that he didn't like slats, would've preferred a larger wing instead.

I'll try & find this quote.

When I win the lottery I will make a 109 G-9 model with changed landing gear, extra guns in wing root, & Yak 3 type scoops-maybe. & a new front canopy piece. Heated cockpit & hydraulic boosted controls.

Call it either G-9 or K-5.

agent 009 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 19, 2005, 10:50:52 PM »

Here it is. Punch in Rall in Finland & the whole thing will come up. He mentions the 47 & 38 presented no real problems. Buhligen said the same in the book "The aces Speak" by Edward Sims. He said 38 was easy to burn, & 47 too heavy, certain maneuvers it just couln't do. Steinhoff said the 38 was the best though. The J model could outclimb & outturn Mustang.

First of all he didn't like the slats in the 109, he more of wished to have a larger wing than these slats on the 109 His favorite Messerschmitt was the Bf109F-4. He said it could tangle with anything the enemy could put up and was the best of 109's, not too heavy etc.

Later on he mentioned that the Russian pilots weren't some dumb target drones, but gave them a real challenge to tangle with. Especially the Guards Regiment's were tough and proud opponents. As interesting side not he said that in the Southern Front VVS had more than 1/3 of their planes of lend-lease types like Spitfire, P39 etc.

Conditions were rough, they had to live in tents and moved from field to another pretty often. He didn't call the fields airfields but "lawns"..usually they were a place made suitable for flight operations and were hastily made to accomondate a few planes. He gave great respect to the work mechanics did to keep the planes airworthy.

When asked about 109 vs. enemy planes he answered that the most dangerous plane in the west was P51D. He had flown the captured planes, including P38, P47 and P51. P51 was according to the ace fast, good guns and long range with pretty good maneuverability. 109 could still hold it's own against it.

Oh yeah, one last thing, he also said the F-4 could follow any fighter in the world through any maneuver.

Angus · « **Reply #11 on:** April 20, 2005, 03:52:50 AM »

Yeah, he loved the F4.
"Highly maneuverable aircraft" he said.
And yet, in a banking climb, one would not catch a Spitfire.
BTW, this DB605 MesserSpit has rather similar specs as a Spit IX with similar power. From the little data we have there we sadly only know ROC at SL, then at which alt it was faster than a contemporary 109G. So, sad to have so little of it.
BTW, there was also of course, the Spitmesser, - the Spanish Buchon. I wonder if there is some data available about it's power, weight and performance.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #12 on:** April 20, 2005, 04:03:03 AM »

The one really meaningful design difference between Bf109 and Spitfire is the wing.

hogenbor · « **Reply #13 on:** April 20, 2005, 04:43:12 AM »

I for one would be interested in data about the Buchons and the Avias.

All that that I really know about the Avias is that they had not so benigh flying characteristics, had unsuitable Jumos instead of DBs and that the Israeli's got some kills in them... against Spitfires too

Angus · « **Reply #14 on:** April 20, 2005, 04:51:49 AM »

While the Buchon runs on a Merlin..
Always thought the Avia ran on a licence built DB, well..
Will look and see if I find something.