Author Topic: STATS OF CLIMB RATE FOR SOME FIGHTERS (Read 1150 times)

juzz · « **Reply #15 on:** February 04, 2000, 10:03:00 PM »

K-4? Why not K-14? DB605L; 451mph at 37,500ft

janneh · « **Reply #16 on:** February 05, 2000, 11:09:00 AM »

juzz wrote:
"The G-10 has only slightly more power than the G-2/G-6 without WEP. The G-2 and G-6 have the same power, but the G-6 is heavier. The F-4 is lighter than the G-2, but has less power."

Nuff said. Now that's a good answer, isn't it ?

------------------
"Lentolaivue 21"
Flying for Bishops.

Pongo · « **Reply #17 on:** February 05, 2000, 01:56:00 PM »

Gramma,
That first site has info in it that really contrasts what I believe is commonly held.
The 109g5 had a 605D engine?
The 109g1 trop had 13 mm cowl guns,
15mm wing guns on the K4? etc etc etc
The guys who wrote those pages is quite confused.
The 605ascdm was used on some early g10s and i believe k4s. It was not as good as the 605d engine which was intended for both these aircraft.
The 605ascdm was used on the g6 and g14s as a high altitude faster variant. Aircraft so equiped were designated
Bf 109 G6as and bf 109G14as I believe.
In summary the G10 and K4 should be very similar in this game. If they changed anything I would hope it was make the g6 a G6as to show that important mid war version. Right know the engine in the G6 is the same as the one in the G2. Which is correct but kind of silly for the game. The g6 would not be a world beater with the better engine, it would just fall between the g2 and g10 nicely.

------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew

fd ski · « **Reply #18 on:** February 05, 2000, 06:51:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gramma:
Initial climb rate 4,823 ft./min. Climb to 16,400 ft was 3 minutes, to 32,800 ft. was 6.7 minutes.

That means that it climbed faster the higher it got ?

Whoever posted those stats obviously screwed something up...

If 109K climbed inially at 4823 ft/m that means that it had 2 more minutes to climb to 16400 - leaving it with 11577feet to climb which would average out at 5788 ft/min ?

That might be a 109k with 163's rocket attached...
or 109k that all the waffels are dying to have in all sims

------------------

Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
www.raf303.org

juzz · « **Reply #19 on:** February 05, 2000, 11:57:00 PM »

I've seen those same numbers too...

Bf 109K-4
Powerplant: DB605ASCM, 2030hp at 1,640ft, 1800hp at 16,400ft.
Speed: 378mph at S/L, 452mph at 19,685ft, 435mph at 24,610ft.
Climb: 16,400ft in 3 min, 32,810ft in 6.7 min, 39,370 in 10.2 min, initial climbrate 4,820fpm.
Ceiling: 41,000ft.
Armament: One MK103 30mm with 60rnds in spinner, two MG151 15mm with 220rnds in upper cowling.

Note:
1. Climbrate is somewhat excessive...
2. Max speed reached at 20k?
3. MK103, 2 MG151 in cowl?!

Can we get that K-4 please?

Gramma · « **Reply #20 on:** February 06, 2000, 12:33:00 AM »

In EAW I find the same data:
109K-4:
Climb rate: 4,820 ft/min
Speed: 452 mph

109G-6
Climb rate: 4,560 ft/min
Speed: 387 mph

wells · « **Reply #21 on:** February 06, 2000, 01:23:00 AM »

There's some original German documentation floating around here somewhere that shows the 109G6 at 396 mph at 21k (386 with climb power) and 322 mph at sea level with MIL power. Similarly, a K4 with the 605D engine is shown at 425 mph @ 31k with MIL power and 334 mph @ sea level. With GM-1 boost, the K4 is shown doing 445 or so at 11.7km (38k). None of this data shows any MW50 useage, which would surely boost the performance at lower altitudes, giving the 378 and 452 mph speeds. Apparently, there was enough aerodynamic refinements in the K4 (inner gear doors, retractable tailwheel) to give a 10-15 mph IAS increase over the G series.

Fishu · « **Reply #22 on:** February 06, 2000, 06:29:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by juzz:
Why did you do your tests from F1? Makes much more sense to start from a "sea level" airfield...

109 differences. The G-10 has only slightly more power than the G-2/G-6 without WEP. The G-2 and G-6 have the same power, but the G-6 is heavier. The F-4 is lighter than the G-2, but has less power. The powerloading of the F-4 and G-6 is similar -> climb times being similar.

Is there a way to calculate the optimum climb speed?

Isn't there quite a difference with superchargers? (really helps with altitude..)

juzz · « **Reply #23 on:** February 06, 2000, 07:16:00 AM »

He only went to 20k, that's still under the critical altitudes for any of the 109's I think, so it doesn't make too much of a difference. Wanna hear something odd? The F-4 can outclimb the G-10 at certain altitudes...

Gramma · « **Reply #24 on:** February 07, 2000, 04:24:00 AM »

Hey, Pyro, show us your performance charts about Bf-109g10 and Bf-109K-4. It's your game and our money, let's talk, baby.