109 f-4 vs g-6

[Debrody]

Just made a comprasion.
f-4 climbs better, faster, turns way better also has longer range... the g-6 only have advantage in speed under military power. Those MGs really dont mean anything, if you cant hit with the 20mm, your target wont die...  Willy Messerschmidt did something really wrong.
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/scores/planeperf.php?gtype=0&pw=1&p1=13&p2=15&submitButtonName=Generate+Chart

[druski85]

Bold statement.  Stepping up to the G-6, I see a plane that is faster at most altitudes under both mil and wep. (16-22k exceptions) It also climbs significantly faster under 11k under both wep and mil, and has only a minor disadvantage way up in the clouds.  I think you are also underestimating the difference in hitting power and ballistics between the 7.6 and 12.7 mm guns.  I am fairly certain that if the G series was inferior, they would not have produced quite so many of them.  I'm certainly no 109 expert, though. 

[moot]

Definitely not negligible difference between 131s and 17s.  Especially centered as cowl guns are.

[Ardy123]

Bold statement.  Stepping up to the G-6, I see a plane that is faster at most altitudes under both mil and wep. (16-22k exceptions) It also climbs significantly faster under 11k under both wep and mil, and has only a minor disadvantage way up in the clouds.  I think you are also underestimating the difference in hitting power and ballistics between the 7.6 and 12.7 mm guns.  I am fairly certain that if the G series was inferior, they would not have produced quite so many of them.  I'm certainly no 109 expert, though.  

Our g6 is an attempt to find the middle ground on the 'g6'. The g6 was a smörgåsbord of field mods, etc... There were 6's with different canopies, different tails, different hub guns, different engine mods, different clearance for max manifold pressure, etc.. On top of that, ground crews were always moding them, tuning the engines better, etc... on and on it goes...

It was so bad the the G14 was really an attempt by the Germans to standardize the 'g6' but even some g14s had different engines etc... It is more like the k4 was more consistent in its specs.

Personally, if your going to go with a 'g' model, I'd go with the g2 or the g14. G2 in my opinion was the 'best' 109. G2 is much better than the in game g6, and the g14 has the 30 mm which changes the fight entirely.

[Debrody]

Maybe i understimate the 13mm guns, but as long as you cant hit with the 20mm, your opponent wont go down in either model. The g-6 is about 6-10mph faster at low alts, but its maneuverability isnt comparable to the f-4. I just cant understand it why was it in production when the Fritz could dodfight way better.

[Soulyss]

Maybe i understimate the 13mm guns, but as long as you cant hit with the 20mm, your opponent wont go down in either model. The g-6 is about 6-10mph faster at low alts, but its maneuverability isnt comparable to the f-4. I just cant understand it why was it in production when the Fritz could dodfight way better.

I am by no means a LW expert so I'm happy to be corrected here but it was my understanding that the 109F series was a little controversial in that it actually reduced the number of guns available to 3 (from 4 on the E series).  This was fine for the veterans and aces who had excellent aim but was seen as a step back for newer pilots.  I also think the mission profiles being flown changed between the F and G series.  By the time the G was introduced the LW was facing more and more heavy bombers over the continent and a premium had to be placed on firepower as a result the machine guns were beefed up and the option added for the 20mm gondolas.  I found a bit from Galland's book "The First & The Last" that seems to back this up.

The 2nd Fighter Wing, Richthofen, under it's commander, Egon Meyer, had already developed it's own technique for a frontal attack, but the results in aircraft shot down were still very small. The was chiefly a question of armament.  The ME-109 carried only one 20mm cannon and two normal machine guns.  This could by no means be regarded as sufficient in the fight against multi-engined bombers.  This armament, too, constituted an incomprehensible regression in the new ME-109F compared with the E series, whose production had stopped in the previous year.  The later had two 20mm cannons mounted in the wings and two normal machine guns.  The one cannon of the new ME109F was of course more modern, had a quicker rate of fire, a better trajectory, and what is more was centrally mounted over the engine and fired through the hub of the propeller.  Nevertheless there was conflicting opinions as to whether the new armament  should be regarded as a step forward or backward.  Molders shared Udet's opinion that one centrally mounted cannon was better than two in the wings.  I regarded one cannon as absolutely inadequate, particularly as I considered machine guns outdated for aerial combat, merely senseless fireworks.  One could hardly impress an enemy fighter with them any more, to say nothing of a multiengined bomber.  Naturally I recognized the advantages of centrally mounted weapons.  But if the armament consisted of one cannon only then I preferred two decentralized cannons, especially when I thought of the gradually declining standards in skill and training of the majority of our new pilots, which was unavoidable as the war dragged on.  Not every pilot was as good a sharpshooter as Udet or Molders.

He goes on to say

This problem of the ME-109 armament was also brought to Hitler's notice, how and by whom I do not know.  During a conversation he asked me for my opinion.  Did I consider the better armament for the ME-09 a cannon in the central axis or two in the wings? I did not ponder long: "Better all three." Hitler was pleased.  My answer corresponded with his ideas.  He used the fact that later development provd him repeatedly correct as an argument in his attempts to pt into practice odd ideas of his own in the field of armament and technics, against the advice of experts

Immediately after this conversation came the order to increase the armament of the ME-109F.  Two additional 20mm cannons were mounted below the wings.  These "gondolas", or "bathtubs" as we called them naturally affected the performance of the plane badly.  The aircraft defaced in this was was as good as useless for fighter combat.  But at least with three cannons she had now a firing power with which one could achieve something in the battle with the Flying Fortresses.

[Debrody]

Thank you, i think i got it now.  <S>!

[Grendel]

Thank you, i think i got it now.  <S>!

Mate, it is also question of production efficiency and equipment. G series of 109s were cheaper and faster to build, could be equipped with more modern radios and navigational aids, for example, and had in-built capability of much much more additional eqiupment for different missions.

P-51D was slower and poorer turner than P-51B - but it was still built and pushed to use, as it could perform its tasks better. Same with 109F vs. 109G. G was more usable and better fighter, even if it was worse _dogfighter_.

Cheers!

[BnZs]

P-51D was slower and poorer turner than P-51B - but it was still built and pushed to use, as it could perform its tasks better. Same with 109F vs. 109G. G was more usable and better fighter, even if it was worse _dogfighter_.

Cheers!

D is a better performer down low. Its a matter of engine tuning. The difference in top speed is 427 vs. 441-tiny, and largely caused by the bubble canopy, an innovation well worth it, I'd say. The much-spoken of "maneuverability difference" is marginal at best. Not a fight decider. And the D is far more adequately armed.

Too many compromises in the G6. The G2 trumps both the G6 and F of course. I agree that the 20MM is the "main show" and two HMGs in the cowl don't make up for the loss of performance.

[Oldman731]

Too many compromises in the G6.

The G6 is clearly the most difficult of all the 109s to get kills with.  But once you've spent some time with it, it's a sweet flying plane.  I much prefer it to the G2 because the 12.7s do add a noticeable effect.  The F is the easy-mode version, the Emil really is limited to early and midwar opponents, and the other two are just late-war monsters for people who enjoy that time frame.

- oldman

[Hap]

My thought about the 109's is they were, in later years, tweaked to help knock down bombers.  Don't suppose "dog fighting" as we understand it was part of the deal.

[Ardy123]

D is a better performer down low. Its a matter of engine tuning. The difference in top speed is 427 vs. 441-tiny, and largely caused by the bubble canopy, an innovation well worth it, I'd say. The much-spoken of "maneuverability difference" is marginal at best. Not a fight decider. And the D is far more adequately armed.

Too many compromises in the G6. The G2 trumps both the G6 and F of course. I agree that the 20MM is the "main show" and two HMGs in the cowl don't make up for the loss of performance.

The G6 and the G14 have the same power and climb rate when wep is not used. G6 has a better turn radius too. G14's only adv is climb and speed with wep, otherwise they are almost the same.

[JUGgler]

 This isn't about JUGS, damn I thought you might talk about what JUGS do to 109s 







                                                     





In all seriousness the G6 can't hold a candle to the K4, in other words: Bunnies in a K4 PWNS Bunnies in a G6 IMHO






JUGgler

[Debrody]

The G6 and the G14 have the same power and climb rate when wep is not used. G6 has a better turn radius too. G14's only adv is climb and speed with wep, otherwise they are almost the same.

That. The difference between the g-2s and the g-6s handling isnt as much tho, it mostly depends on the pilot, not the plane. The g-2 is about 7mph faster (with and without wep too) what is noticable. But still, the (turn rate)*(speed and climb) remained on the same level compared to the F.
Its interesting becouse while the spitires upgrades were pretty much effective and had only a minimal impact on the maneuverability, the 109G wasnt a really good way to improve the F. The K is a different story tho.
Btw, lol juggler  : )
Anyway, note that i only can "feel" the g-6s stall charateristics, im pretty lame in any other bird. But    me in a k-4 > me in a fritz > me in a g-6

[Masherbrum]

I prefer the F4.