Bf 109F info

[Angus]

Ehm, Viking, - are you well linked in the 109 loss department?
It's sad, there is lots of research being done in many places. There are some findings, but when most things are probably about to get tracked and settled, everybody involved from the times of WW2 will be dead.

[Viking]

No, sorry. Except for the Norwegian sites I gave you earlier I have no interest in LW losses.

This list looks promising though:

http://luftwafferesearcher.homestead.com/Online.html


I hope it is of some help.

[Angus]

That one looks interesting allright.
Chasing hitory....a lot of fun

TY

[Gianlupo]

I didn't read the whole thread, but I've noticed a reference to the G.55 Wiki page. Being the one who wrote most of that page, I can tell you that the part regarding German interest is based on the books reported at the end of the page (specifically, for what I wrote, Arena and Vergnano-Alegi).

As for the Luftwaffe requesting to phase out the 109, I'd stick with what 2BigHorn said: the RLM was very interested in producing the 55. You may say there's no difference with Luftwaffe or that it is just a subtle distinction, but that is what history says... and nothing is said about the 109.

About the page regarding Guidonia tests: is it possible to have a translation? And, btw, Viking:

"Turns very good. ... Stall characteristics similar to Spitfire."

Then it says that it climbed better than the 109 for most part of their envelope and turned better than it.... I'd kill to have a plane like that!

[Meyer]

Originally posted by Gianlupo

"Turns very good. ... Stall characteristics similar to Spitfire."

Then it says that it climbed better than the 109 for most part of their envelope and turned better than it.... I'd kill to have a plane like that!

Well it says that from SL to 2km the G55 was a little better, then from 2m to 5km the 109 gains advantage, and then the G55 again is somewhat better.. anyway the differences are say to be really small.

And yes the G55 was a little superior in "kurvenflug", but also a little slower.And as Viking said, roll rate was worse than the 109.

I didn't read the whole thread, but I've noticed a reference to the G.55 Wiki page. Being the one who wrote most of that page, I can tell you that the part regarding German interest is based on the books reported at the end of the page (specifically, for what I wrote, Arena and Vergnano-Alegi).

As for the Luftwaffe requesting to phase out the 109, I'd stick with what 2BigHorn said: the RLM was very interested in producing the 55. You may say there's no difference with Luftwaffe or that it is just a subtle distinction, but that is what history says... and nothing is said about the 109.

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. A question, do you know if  the Lw was interested in produce the G55 in Italy or Germany?

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Angus
Looking for a 109, probably a G downed at Bone, registered (take that with a grain of salt since the RAF intelligence officer was not there), date 22.nd of November 1942. Pilot and aircraft captured. Pilot POW.
Shores has this listed in his book Aces High.
Allied pilot was my old friend Tony Jonsson of 111 sqn RAF. (Spit Vb trop)

Never found a match. But there are many LW losses that I have not found anyway. MIA that need a reference perhaps?

 

Nothing mentioned in Fighters over the Desert during any of the November dated listings.  No mention of 111 squadron as well.

Strange.  That's Shores work too

[MiloMorai]

On the injected Jumo engine.

Olivier Lefevre (Butch2K), noted 109 expert:

There were issues with the injector on the Jumo G and the engine severely underperformed.

[Angus]

Originally posted by Guppy35
Nothing mentioned in Fighters over the Desert during any of the November dated listings.  No mention of 111 squadron as well.

Strange.  That's Shores work too

Indeed! Anyway, the riddle stands.
I have even browsed LW archives at the IWM, but they were very tatty. I checked the squadron's ops book at the PRO, but it was incomplete due to the absence of the 111 sqn "spy", - to his great frustration as he put it.
My best guess is a wrong date, - things were really hectic at the time and place, and if I recall right I spotted some events that did not match to the data I had. (I have the sqn leaders autobiography as well, and a lot of it is in a diary form)

[Viking]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
On the injected Jumo engine.

Olivier Lefevre (Butch2K), noted 109 expert:

There were issues with the injector on the Jumo G and the engine severely underperformed.

Ok, that might be a good reason to revert to the D. Does Butch have any sources for this? And when is his book coming out?

[Gianlupo]

Originally posted by Meyer
Well it says that from SL to 2km the G55 was a little better, then from 2m to 5km the 109 gains advantage, and then the G55 again is somewhat better.. anyway the differences are say to be really small.

And yes the G55 was a little superior in "kurvenflug", but also a little slower.And as Viking said, roll rate was worse than the 109.


 

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. A question, do you know if  the Lw was interested in produce the G55 in Italy or Germany?

The intention was to simplify the construction of the G.55 and to have both German and Italian factories to produce it. In fact, delegations of Italian designers were sent in Germany to review the design of the 55 airframe under the light of the more modern german construction techniques and to rationalize the Italian production system.

Btw, regarding the Centauro performance, what I wrote between quotes was what really mattered... think about it: a plane who climbs like a 109, dives like a 109, but turns better and has stall characteristics similar to a Spitfire! With 3 20mm and 2 12,7mm! Heck, even with 1 single 20 and 4 12,7 it would be a dream of a mid-war fighter!

[TimRas]

Originally posted by humble
The p-39 "order" is documented multiple places..

Just show one.

Originally posted by humble
Further the british combat tests showed the P-39 as clearly superior to the 109 at mid to lower alts.

The British rejected the P-39 eventually (unlike the P-40) and sent them "back to sender" or to Russia.

[Meyer]

Originally posted by Gianlupo
The intention was to simplify the construction of the G.55 and to have both German and Italian factories to produce it. In fact, delegations of Italian designers were sent in Germany to review the design of the 55 airframe under the light of the more modern german construction techniques and to rationalize the Italian production system.

Thanks for the info

... think about it: a plane who climbs like a 109, dives like a 109, but turns better and has stall characteristics similar to a Spitfire! With 3 20mm and 2 12,7mm! Heck, even with 1 single 20 and 4 12,7 it would be a dream of a mid-war fighter!

[/b]

Yes that sounds very nice, but it could also be put in this way: a plane that climbs to 8000m like a 190, turns worse and is also slower than the Fw

Also interesting is the fact that the visibility was regarded inferior to both german fighters..

But don't get me wrong, I think it was a very good fighter. But it doesn't offer substantial advantages over the 109/190.

[Viking]

Why was the G55 produced in so few numbers? Too close to the Italian surrender?

[Gianlupo]

Originally posted by Viking
Why was the G55 produced in so few numbers? Too close to the Italian surrender?

Yes. Only some tens were built before the Armistice; after it, production went on in North Italy but at very slow pace.

EDIT:

Originally posted by Meyer
Yes that sounds very nice, but it could also be put in this way: a plane that climbs to 8000m like a 190, turns worse and is also slower than the Fw

Rolls worse, maybe?

Also interesting is the fact that the visibility was regarded inferior to both german fighters..

Where does it say this? Trusting Viking's translation (I don't know German! ): "Good visibility to the sides and rear."

[Meyer]

Originally posted by Gianlupo




Rolls worse, maybe?

[/b]
Yes that too The report states that while the G55 is better than the 109 in "kurven" fight, it is worse than the 190. But, as I said before, that could mean a different kind of turnfight as we think

Where does it say this? Trusting Viking's translation (I don't know German! ): "Good visibility to the sides and rear." [/B]

Here: Die Sichtverhältnisse sind etwas
       schlechter als bei der Bf 109 G 4 und der Fw 190 A 5.

Viking quoted another part, where it says that the forward view is limited, but to the sides and rear is good.

I'm not that good in german either, but with an online translator you can get an idea: http://babelfish.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=de_en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fkurfurst.allaboutwarfare.com%2FTactical_trials%2F109G-4_Guidonia%2F109G-4_vergl_Estelle-Guidonia_de.html