Author Topic: Pyro- why no 109K4?  (Read 434 times)

Offline Starbird

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Pyro- why no 109K4?
« Reply #15 on: July 23, 2001, 10:07:00 PM »
Oooh. So thats where the spinner cannon was mounted. I thought they actually mounted the gun right under the engine. Didn't realise it was moved back so far. Never really saw any good pictures of the insides of a 109.  :)

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Pyro- why no 109K4?
« Reply #16 on: July 23, 2001, 10:21:00 PM »
No K6 were ever built. The wing was ready but never mated to the K4 airframe. same for K8 etc.

No 109 ever mounted 2xMG151/15 over the engine. Too big.

The Mk103 was modified to fit inside the engine, but it wasnt used during the war for various reasons like excessive weight etc.

There is some suggestion that possibly a single K14 was issued to pilots but it crashed on the transfer flight.

This had the new DB605L and 4 bladed propeller.

It had the 3xMk108 30mm and 2xMG131 13mm.

The DB605L and 4 blade prop test machines provided a stunning increse in performance at high alts over the DB605D and 3 blade prop.

Anyway this K14 delivery stuff is just a rumor and IM NOT ASKING FOR IT IN AH!!!!!, OK? clear?  ;).


Pongo most is common knowledge about K4 but ill dig up the specific references for the more obscure stuff.

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Pyro- why no 109K4?
« Reply #17 on: July 23, 2001, 11:39:00 PM »
Just a little bump  ;).  The technical info is fascinating, but I want to hear from Pyro eventually.