109 K-6?

[EagleDNY]

A few other threads are discussing 109 performance and issues, so I won't go into a whole lot of detail here.  Lets just say that opinions vary on the loss of the G-10 vs the gain of the G-14 and K-4.  

One thing this 109 fan would like to see is the 109 K-6 with the 2 x 30mm Mk103 gondolas and the DB605DC (2000hp) powerplant.  

The 109K-6 might make a good "slightly perked" variant, like the Spit XIV or the F4U4.  The best of the series, so you ante up a few perks to fly it.

I think it will definitely add to the "pucker factor" on both sides of a bomber interception - facing 3 x 30mms is brown trousers time in the bomber, but it doesn't take too many .50 cals to be able to laugh at the spiraling death of perk points either.

I would also like to add my kudos to HT and the gang for the 109 cockpits - I think they are excellently done and definitely add to the game.  

EagleDNY

[Tarmac]

I've read about late model K's that had modified MK103's in the spinner, but I thought it was always MK108's in the wings.

[EagleDNY]

Well the Jane's I'm using as a reference has 1 x Mk108 in the spinner and 2 x Mk103s as gondolas.  They could be wrong, but I wouldn't want to bet against Jane's.

[Hornet33]

OK with ALL the other planes that HTC needs to bring into this game I have to ask.

Do we REALLY need anouther version of the 109?? Aren't the 6 or so that we have enough already???

Sorry I'm not trying to flame here but I just feel that we need more different planes in the game instead of trying to get every version of the 109 and spitfire that might have seen combat.

[Karnak]

The MK103 would be in the cockpit if you tried mounting one through a Bf109's engine block.  There may have been mockups, but I'd really have to see some evidence to believe that the Bf109 ever used any MK103 in combat.

[EagleDNY]

Game-wise I think it makes more sense to have variants that people can actually fly and have some fun in.  Yeah, we have a Spit I, but how many people actually take that or a Hurri I up?  Dare I even mention the C.202 or the  A6M2 - hanger queens to the extreme.

In the 109 series, I've pretty much seen that the 109G6 and 109E are for those with suicidal tendancies only.  There are plenty of variants that see little or no flying time - I think it makes more sense to put in interesting variants that people might actually fly.

The 109K6 would be a variant that would see some use, unlike some others, and wouldn't be very hard to model or add to the game.  Basically, its a K-4 with the upgraded powerplant and the option for the 2 x 30mm gondolas.  109 afficionados (even the suicidal ones) would be a lot more likely to take up a K-6 than a G-6.  

Throw us 109 geeks a bone now and again

[EagleDNY]

I'm seeing sources saying the K6s gondolas are 30mm mk.108s as well.
Jane's might be wrong - I'll do some more looking and post any photos I can find.

EagleDNY  

[EagleDNY]

OK - I changed my mind - bet against Janes on this one.

The Mk.103 30mm cannon is 2.3M (about 7 ft) long - much too large to be put in the gondolas of a 109.  The Mk.108 is only a little over a meter in length, and multiple sources are showing that as the 109K6s wing mount.

OK then - I'll be happy to settle for the K6 with 3 x 30mm Mk.108s.  It'll still be brown-trousers time in the bomber, and I can still get the correct pucker factor when the .50 cals start hitting my little K6.

EagleDNY

[Debonair]

I've seen photos of a 190 with MK103 gondola, dont remember where.  probably same place I dont remember where from the other thread.

[Tarmac]

Originally posted by Karnak
The MK103 would be in the cockpit if you tried mounting one through a Bf109's engine block.  There may have been mockups, but I'd really have to see some evidence to believe that the Bf109 ever used any MK103 in combat.

You're right, not used in combat, but it was tested and a modified version fit.  Here's what I found with a quick search:

This brings us to the MK 103, which many sources state was used as an engine cannon in some of the later series planes. The truth is that the MK 103 was a massive gun which would not fit in the small space available between the back of the engine and the cockpit. To give some comparative figures; the MK 108 weighed 60kg and was 105cm long, whereas the MK 103 weighed 141 kg and was 235 cm long. About 133cm of the length of the MK 103 was too wide to fit within the narrow tube running between the cylinder banks, so had to be mounted behind the engine, and this was simply impossible.

Despite this problem, the idea of arming the Bf 109 with such a powerful weapon was attractive, so Rheinmetall-Borsig started work on a modified version which would fit, designated the MK 103M. The gas-operating mechanism was slimmed down which enabled the gun to be mounted some 30cm further forward, leaving just enough space to squeeze it into the plane. The MK 103M was reportedly test-flown in a K series, but reliability was poor and the gun was not adopted for service. By this time, however, plans had been drawn up for its installation in the K-8 and K-10 models and these plans later came to light. It was probably this which led researchers to believe that some versions of the Bf 109 were fitted with the MK 103.

Such was the confusion in 1945 Germany that some still believe that there is a possibility that some Bf 109Ks might have found their way into action armed with test versions of the MK 103M, but no evidence to support this has come to light, so we must assume that it didn't happen.

Tony Williams

from http://www.bf109.com/twgunsarticle.html