What about new 109's

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Kev367th
Irrespective of perked or not, it shouldn't be using 1.98 in that case, it would hardly be a 'representative' K-4.

Gotta keep thinking TOD not just the MA.

Well in that case we shouldn`t have +21 lbs boost Spit XIVs, which were even rarer than 1.98ata K-4s, and did not see much airal combat at that boost until Janurary/February 1945.

I find it very 'funny' that you ask for +21lbs Spitfire XIVs in the Spit thread, used by only 5 Squadrons from February 1945,
while you are against the 1.98ata K-4 which was used by 4x3= 12 Squadrons...

'Slight' bias, eh?

Given that at that time there were around 300 109Ks around on strenght, and about 150 of them in four Wings were using 1.98ata (50%),.it`s hardly rare or not representative or should not be included. Let`s not have MkXIV at all then, since it was so rare it was not a representive type at all, right?

[Bronk]

IF kufurst is correct. Then both planes  both planes should be implemented in there rare form.  Because we have the uber rare 3 cannon la7. Just my thoughts.



Bronk

[MiloMorai]

Actually it was a total of 142 on hand with only 79 servicable in the 4 Gruppen. So we have only 6 or 7 K-4s @ 1.98 per Staffel and even less if the Stabs have any. This is less than 1/2 of the servicable Spit XIVs in the ETO.

Well in that case we shouldn`t have +21 lbs boost Spit XIVs, which were even rarer than 1.98ata K-4s, and did not see much aerial combat at that boost until Janurary/February 1945.

The RAE commented on the Griffon 65 engine in Tech. Note No. Eng. 316 from July 1944 "Due to main bearing troubles, these engines are at present limited to + 21 lb./sq.in. boost pressure although they will be capable of operation at +25 lb./sq.in. boost pressure in the future".

So when has July 1944 become Jan/Feb 1945.

So out of the ~1700 K-4s built, the K-4 @ 1.98 represents only ~8% (with ~92% @ 1.80) of the build. This is in contrast to the greater percentage number for Spit XIVs which were 21lb boost.

[1K3]

Final verdict (for me)

* Give 109K-4 the 1.98 ata boost (and yes, these are limited)
* Give Spitfire 14  the +21 (and yes, these are limited)
* Perk them both

[Krusty]

I see no need for a G-4. We have the G-2 and the G-6. There's no real gap between them, performance wise.

However, I see a gap after the 1940 E-4. It cannot really substitute for a mid-range 109 until the f-4 entered the scene, as it is woefully obsolete compared to all other planes between the E-4 and the F-4. I think the slightly more powerful E-7/n with pointed spinner and drop tank capability would bridge the gap, and allow use in several theaters and fill an important role (that of the 109E after the BOB, it *did* serve on until 1942, let's remember)

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Actually it was a total of 142 on hand with only 79 servicable in the 4 Gruppen. So we have only 6 or 7 K-4s @ 1.98 per Staffel and even less if the Stabs have any. This is less than 1/2 of the servicable Spit XIVs in the ETO.

[/B]

Wrong.

The maximum number of Spit XIV was 120 in Europe, in 6 Sqns., by the end of 1944.This includes unservicable planes, as well as unit reserves -
vs. 300+ K-4s in service at the time, almost three times the number.

Each RAF Sqn would fly 12 planes into combat sortie, if those were available. 12x6 =72 operational planes (vs. about 200-250 operational K-4s).

Only 5 XIV Sqns were cleared for +21 lbs begining in 1945 :
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/2taf150_112044.gif

That`s 5 x 20 planes being modified = 100 XIVs,

vs 142 1.98ata K-4s, 42% higher.

but only

5 x 12 = max 60 flying operational sorties on +21 lbs (provided the planes were serviceable),

vs. 79 K-4s which we know were servicable.


The RAE commented on the Griffon 65 engine in Tech. Note No. Eng. 316 from July 1944 "Due to main bearing troubles, these engines are at present limited to + 21 lb./sq.in. boost pressure although they will be capable of operation at +25 lb./sq.in. boost pressure in the future".

So when has July 1944 become Jan/Feb 1945.

No more than +21 lbs was allowed even in OCTOBER 1945 :


"Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment
Boscombe Down
10 October 1945
Spitfire F. Mk. 21 LA.187
(Griffon 61)

Climb and Level Speed Trials

The relevant limatations at the time of the test were :-


Condition.................... .............  Boost lb/sq.in. R.P.M.  
Maximum for climbing (normal rating) +9 2600  
Maximum for combat (5 mins. limit *) +21 2750  

.....* A concession has been granted to allow combat rating to be used continuously on the climb at this Establishment. "


Moreover, there`s no evidence at all that +25 lbs was ever cleared but there`s evidence it was strictly forbidden.

Given the number of K-4s being about 3 times that of XIVs, and given that there were about 50% more K-4s operating on high boost than XIVs, it would make sense to model both at +21/1.98ata, and perk the XIV 50% with higher value than the 109K, also because on the whole, XIVs were very rare amongst Spits while 109Ks were rather common (25% of all 109 types was a 109K, XIV percantage amongst Spits was less than 10%)

[Kev367th]

120 in 6 sqns - thought you would have learnt by now (in fact it was 7)

1 sqn in the RAF INCLUDING unserviceables/reserves by the RAF's OWN figures is measured at 30 planes not 20.
You have been told this countless times but as usual continue to ignore it.

So were now up to 210 MINIMUM (ie 7x30). NB:Your own site including reserves list over 200

They won't be at 25, only 21. (do you bother reading ANYTHING)

Anyway this was about 1.98.
If MiloMorai is correct in that ata1.98 only became available the last few months of the war how many K4s were available in 1944 doesn't matter.
What would matter is how many were around then and out of them how many could use it. ( <100 around, how many could use it).
No point comparing end of 1944 strengths when what you would like was only available last few months of war (150 grade 1st used May 1944). So no it wouldn't make sense to model both the same.
Unless you can show that over 50% of the remaining K4's in the last few months used 1.98ata.

RE: WE know 79 were serviceable. Was this pick 1 figure for the best looking day? What was the average serviceable for the last few months when ata1.98 was available?
Because you can guarentee the 14's would be at full strength, i.e. 84 (7x12), and thats ASSUMING that no more operational squadrons went to the Spit 14 after 1944 (unlikely).

As I said - Picking 1944 figures and using them to justify the last few months of the war - doesnt work.
Post figures for the last few months when ata1.98 was available and we'll get somewhere then.

Even perking the Spit 50% higher puts the K4 at 10 perks, only you and Krusty accept a perked K4, everyone else wants it free.
Should be perked irregardless of 1.98ata or not.

[MiloMorai]

Kev took the data 'straight from the horse's mouth', Kurfy's own site on the K-4.

He list 7 Spit XIV squadrons as of 14th December 1944: #41 Squadron, #130 Squadron, #350 Squadron, #402 Squadron, #610 Squadron, #430 Squadron, #2 Squadron.

You might like to amend your Spit number.

Remember he sees only that which supports his agenda and ignore all that does not. He also at times has a comprehension problem and is easily sidetracked. ie his rant in reply to my post, and below.

So a test done from Mar to July 1945 means that 21lb was not authorized til Oct 45.  And this was for a Griffon 61, not the Griffon 65. Crasping at straws are we?

To refresh your memory:

The RAE commented on the Griffon 65 engine in Tech. Note No. Eng. 316 from July 1944 "Due to main bearing troubles, these engines are at present limited to + 21 lb./sq.in. boost pressure although they will be capable of operation at +25 lb./sq.in. boost pressure in the future".

[Kev367th]

RE: Kurfursts suggested perk rate -

Perk is not based on rarity alone, or the 152 would be considerably higher that it is. But rather on that and overall performance.

Bearing in mind -
"Perhaps it has to do with the 15-30 mph level speed advantage displayed by the 109K-4 over the Mk XIV Spitfire, at all practical combat altitudes from Sea Level all the way up to 24 000 ft, even when compared to Mike`s own estimation/imagination of it`s +21 boost performance."

Nice Kurfurst (from your own site), you just proved a K4 should be at least equal to Spit XIV in perks, thankyou.

Whats sad is that all the latest Spit/109 threads have been hotly debated but cordial, until Kurfurst showed up accusing people of lying etc. Posting data that it selective and in some cases contradicts his own site.

Another from his site -
Olivier Lefebvre, noted authority on the BF 109, has stated:

AFAIK 1.98ata boost was cleared late February but it seems to have been slowly introduced into service, I suspect the adjustments needed on the engine and the change of sparkplugs type (supply problems ???) took longer than expected. From other documents I know that C3 and B4 had severe quality problems beginning in late 1944. While it was not much of a problem with low boost, it had some serious effect on higher boost, so it might also have slowed down the introduction of 1.98ata boost. At least DB documents underlined the need for cleaner fuels than those in use at that time. You can safely assume that by March 1945 1.98 ata boost was being introduced, unfortunately I do not have much details for April 1945, but I doubt it would have changed much, given the situation.

So we can ASSUME 1.98 was introduced from March 1945, and on another thread hes complaining about 150 grade fuel we KNOW started use in May 1944. (admitted on his site surprisingly)

Be very wary about Kurfursts comparisons - While the data is usually very accurate he will take data from say 1942 and use it to justify his claims for 1944.
Check the 100 grade in Spit 1 thread. He uses 1944 8th AF fuel usage to try a disprove RAF 100 grade fuel usage in 1940, ignoring the fact 1944 aircraft were more thirsty and carried many times more fuel than a 1940 Spit/Hurri.
The same is happening here using 1944 strengths to justify a 1945 1.98ATA K-4.

We know 79 were serviceable - When? Which date? How many day before, how many 2 days after, or is it pick the date which best suits you?
I worked on helis for 9 years, out of 12 aircraft an average of 2 or 3 would be U/S on any given day, but someitmes it would be all 12 were OK, other days 6 might be down. So I could pick a good day and say we know 12 were serviceable.

Everything on your own site site Kurfurst shows there is NO reason to have a 1.98 K-4 in AH2.

To sum up
VE Day was May 1945, 'maybe' (a big maybe) K4 using 1.98ata at the earliest March 1945, more likely April (if at all).  

Anyone with sanity got something constructive to add to this interesting debate.

[Kev367th]

Sorry guys tried to delete last post , as the K-4 using 1.98 deserves it own thread, this should more correctly be kept to 109 lineup suggestions, rather than rare and fancyfull variations.

[Meyer]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Only reason went with the G-6/AS is that there is a large time gap between the G-6 and G-14. The /AS fills this hole.

Negative, G-6/AS didn't had MW50.

[Kev367th]

Originally posted by Meyer
Negative, G-6/AS didn't had MW50.

Prob Karnaks list is better then?

Thats what I like, I learn something new every day, thanks Meyer.

How is the MW50 modelled in AH2.
I believe there was enough carried for 26 mins, with a max duration of 10 mins?
Anyone ever been up long enough to see if you can exceed 26 mins?

[justin_g]

Considering service dates & performance differences

1940: Bf 109E-4 - DB601A-1 with 4.5km rated altitude = 360mph@16,400ft
1941: Bf 109F-4 - DB601E, limited boost of 1.3ata = 395mph@19,680ft
1942: Bf 109G-2 - DB605A-1, limited boost of 1.3ata = 391mph@21,650ft
1943: Bf 109G-6 - DB605A-1, limited boost of 1.3ata = ???
1944 early: Bf 109G-14[/i] - DB605AM(MW50) = 352mph@S/L, 413mph@16,400ft (new model, basically G-6 with MW50, tall rudder and "Erla Haube")
1944 late: Bf 109G-10 - DB605D(MW50) = 348mph@S/L, 428mph@24,500ft (de-tuned from current G-10 to realistic performance)
1945: Bf 109K-4 - DB605DB(1.8ata) = 370mph@S/L, 444mph @ 24,500ft (new model, but with similar performance to current G-10)

1. It would seem that more than half of the G-14 actually had the high altitude ASM engine, but keeping it with the medium altitude AM engine would allow it to substitute for the existing G-6 that had MW50 kits fitted in 1944.

2. The G-10 with it's high altitude D engine and MW50 would cover for the G-14/AS and represent the 109 in the latter part of 1944.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Kev367th
120 in 6 sqns - thought you would have learnt by now (in fact it was 7)

1 sqn in the RAF INCLUDING unserviceables/reserves by the RAF's OWN figures is measured at 30 planes not 20.

No, a RAF squadron is 12 planes, + 8 reserves.

[So were now up to 210 MINIMUM (ie 7x30). NB:Your own site including reserves list over 200

They won't be at 25, only 21. (do you bother reading ANYTHING

No, now we have an idition at the minimum, who is making up wet dreams about it, eh?

You keep ignoring the RAF`s own strenght reports, that say there were only 120 maximum at a time, and these included the unit`s reserves as well.

In fact that`s less than the number of Me 262 is service (160-200).

As for the 7 MkXIV sqns, no, 6 fighters, an one FR unit that used FRXIV in mix with Mustang Is. Hardly counts, it wasn`t tasked with fighter sorties.

nyway this was about 1.98.
If MiloMorai is correct in that ata1.98 only became available the last few months of the war how many K4s were available in 1944 doesn't matter.

Tell us why....

What would matter is how many were around then and out of them how many could use it. ( <100 around, how many could use it).

Well there were 142 109K-4s around that used 1.98ata, and that`s around half the K-4s.

One can see the use of 1.98ata was very common. More common then the use of +21 lbs boost.

No point comparing end of 1944 strengths when what you would like was only available last few months of war (150 grade 1st used May 1944). So no it wouldn't make sense to model both the same.

Unless you can show that over 50% of the remaining K4's in the last few months used 1.98ata.

But I already did.

As I said - Picking 1944 figures and using them to justify the last few months of the war - doesnt work.

Right. You were picking 1944 figures for +21 lbs boost for the XIV, so there should be NO +21lbs XIV at all, just perked XIVs at +18.

Unlike you, I picked figures from 1945, so 1.98ata is justified as a perked plane, because of it`s performance.

Post figures for the last few months when ata1.98 was available and we'll get somewhere then.

It has been already posted on the site that 1.98ata was available in January, at least in as much number as +21lbs in the RAF.

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Meyer
Negative, G-6/AS didn't had MW50.

Errr, this is half correct. It`s better to say that not ALL G-6/AS had MW50. They were conversions, and many of them were converted from G-6/U2, resulting in G-6/AS/U2. These /U2 machines most likely had MW50, while the other had.

Ie. The /U2 and /U3 designatation meant the installation of GM-1 or MW50 tank and system in the plane, and these could be easily converted to each other, just nozzles were changed afaik. Early MW50 109s were generally converted from G-6/U2.

There`s also evidence for G-5/AS w. MW50 from Knoke.