« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Looking for Messer-Spit data  (Read 1013 times)

Offline agent 009

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« on: September 23, 2005, 08:24:06 PM »
I posted this while back, but site has since dissapeared. Anyone got a source? Spit with DB 605 motor & ME 110 nose?
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2005, 02:27:51 AM »
°I'll try to find it.
If I remember it right, it outperformed the 109 with the same engine, at least in climb.
Which is rather to be expected.
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 hogenbor

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 677
      • http://www.lookupinwonder.nl
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2005, 03:50:43 AM »
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2005, 04:41:50 AM »
Hehe, right on.
This is interesting:
"
After a couple of weeks, and with a new yellow-painted nose, the Spitfire returne 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."
BTW, 21 m/s is 4130 feet/min.
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 Knegel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2005, 05:12:24 AM »
Hi,

the good performence is caused by missing weapons!

The DB605A SpitVb only had 2730kg, this explain the very good climbratio and high alt performence, its more a Spit1b with 1310-1400HP.

Nevertheless the 109G was faster in all altitudes up to 10700m(35000ft) alt.

Greetings, Knegel
Logged

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2005, 05:54:41 AM »
Well it had been crashed landed. Kurfurst always complains that the British tested damaged 109s. What did the Germans know about rigging a Spitfire?

EN830 was produced in Apr 1942.

Interesting comment: 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.
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #6 on: September 24, 2005, 08:42:55 AM »
The armament does not account for a lot of weight, and they had a ballast instead of the radio.
The 109 was faster on the deck, - normal, for it's smaller in span, - while the Spitfire wins up high, - to be expected because of lower A.o.A. at lower speeds, - that is IAS.
I have some well graphed data on a 109G, - I'll go compare :)
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 justin_g

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 260
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2005, 09:00:36 AM »
The aircraft was 300kg heavier with its guns fitted, and with the Merlin engine. A reduction in weight of 300kg(about 10%) would cause a noticeable difference in performance, especially climb.
Logged

Offline agent 009

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #8 on: September 24, 2005, 01:41:50 PM »
OK, so did the DB 605 powered Spit perform better than a Merlin powered Spit?

& which Spit is the contempoary one to compare to? 5 or 9?
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2005, 02:48:14 PM »
The Db spit did inded perform better than the original - with more power under the hood that was to be expected.
The teaser is that it also easily performed as good and better than a 109 with the same engine.
I am loing through my HD to find a good comparison - will post later
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 frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #10 on: September 24, 2005, 02:55:22 PM »
Spitschmitt must've been a great ride, excellent frame with an even better engine!
Logged

Offline Meyer

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #11 on: September 24, 2005, 05:06:33 PM »
Quote

The teaser is that it also easily performed as good and better than a 109 with the same engine.
           


As was pointed before, that Spit was 300kg lighter than a usual Spit V.... and wasn't any faster than the 109 with same engine, in fact was slower at most altitudes:

Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2005, 02:43:56 AM »
Nice doc.
Funny, it does not match with the text though.
"
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"

And you can not see the ceiling either.
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 Kurfürst

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 921
      • http://www.kurfurst.org
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #13 on: September 26, 2005, 07:37:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Meyer
As was pointed before, that Spit was 300kg lighter than a usual Spit V.... and wasn't any faster than the 109 with same engine, in fact was slower at most altitudes:

http://www.jagdgeschwader52.com/meyer/SpitVmitDB605Aspeed.jpg



Yep, and thats despite the difference of being a lightly loaded Spit missing 300 kg at least - I dont think this would change much at low altitudes, but at above FTH, being more lightly loaded definietely makes the aircraft quite a bit faster.

I wonder about the "109G" though. From the weight it seems like a 109G-6, but its even too slow for that (perhaps a poor example or a /trop one), for the official sepcs were 630 kph at 1,3ata for the G-6. For the G-2, the Finns measured 637 kph at alt with 1,3ata, but that was with a non-retractable tailwheel, whereas the Russians measured no less than 666 kph.. vs. this 620.
The original MerlinSpitV curves match or even exceed slightly the RAF figurs of 600kph max speed otoh.

Id guess the better cowling shape of the 605A also made a difference, I am not sure if theres such a big diffo between the Merlin 45 and the 605A when the latter runs at 1,3ata boost, perhaps at altitude.
Logged
The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site
http://www.kurfurst.org

Offline Knegel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 620
Looking for Messer-Spit data
« Reply #14 on: September 26, 2005, 09:02:32 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Nice doc.
Funny, it does not match with the text though.
"
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"

And you can not see the ceiling either.


Probably someone made a simple mistake and took the 11000m, where the DB SpitV got faster, as ft.

btw, the 4 x .30cal, 2 x 20mm + amo comes very close to 300kg!

Wingarea and wingload dont mean liftload and dont take the drag into account!

Good high alt performers(and slowspeed planes in general) had and have a high wingaspectratio(P38, Ta152, Me109H, Spit with long wintips, most bombers, Me410, He219), rather than a big wingarea. Big wings = higher drag,  high aspectratio = less induced drag + more effective wing.
Wings with a low aspectratio have advantages at highspeed(low level).

Greetings, Knegel
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »