109 tail wheel

[bozon]

it seems the the tail wheel in the G6 and G10 does not fold when you raise the gears, while in the G2 and F4 it does.

is this right or is it a bug?

if it's right then why did Me engineers cancelled the raising tail-wheel at the later models?

Bozon

[DB603]

S!


 It is correct. Early models of 109 had retractable tail wheel, but to simplify the production it was omitted on later models. G-6 also had 2 types of wheels, tal and short ones, G-10 had the tall one.

[bozon]

thx DB

Bozon

[Hawklore]

Just like to ask something pertaining to this to see if my assumption is correct..

Knowing the reason that you said,

Didnt they also cancel it due to the shrinking of money,losing the war and to speed up production or am I just saying what you said, just more detailed?


Thanks,

[bozon]

I find the evolution of the 109 to be very interesting.

When the allied tried to build better, modern fighters they went through a lot of trouble to get the smoothest airframe and a lot of minor latest improvements.

The german on the other hand took the same old 109 from the beginning of the war and cluttered it with a lot of things that resulted in higher drag - those warts on the nose and the tail-wheel not retractable (G10,G6), not covering the gears completly when folded and not adding a bubble canopy.
this resulted in the G6 being a worse preformer then the older G2 - and not by a little.

It seems that Messersmidt's approach was: "what the heck... we'll just put in a bigger engine".
the G10/K4 could have been a much better plane with the engine it had and some 1944-5 standard features.

Bozon

[funkedup]

Yep the late model 109s are scabrous aerodynamic disasters.  It's incredible to look at a G-10 in person and imagine what that 2000 hp engine could have done with a better airframe.

My theory is that they didn't have the depth of industry to constantly increase production rates and simultaneously develop new fighters in a timely fashion.  USA had the luxury of several firms who were able to design first rate fighters and even more firms who could build those designs in the safety of the USA with no bombers overhead every day.

[Wmaker]

Originally posted by bozon
this resulted in the G6 being a worse preformer then the older G2 - and not by a little.

I've asked from couple of 109 aces if they could feel any performance difference between G-2 and G-6 (with DB605A-1) and they couldn't. They said G-6 was overall better aircraft and they preferred the increased firepower of the G-6.

[bozon]

I've asked from couple of 109 aces if they could feel any performance difference between G-2 and G-6 (with DB605A-1) and they couldn't

in AH at least, the G2 is about 10mph faster then the G6 (looking at the graphs). Climb rate is not much different, which makes sense, since all the warts and aerodynamic clutter would be more significat at high speeds and not at slow climbing speeds.
the weight difference is only about 100lb. But the overall "feel" is that G2 is a more nimble plane and the G6 is a more "stable" platform.

I'm no 109 expert. the move from p-47s to the seat of a 109 is pretty hard.

Bozon

[whgates3]

Originally posted by funkedup
Yep the late model 109s are scabrous aerodynamic disasters.  It's incredible to look at a G-10 in person and imagine what that 2000 hp engine could have done with a better airframe.

My theory is that they didn't have the depth of industry to constantly increase production rates and simultaneously develop new fighters in a timely fashion.  USA had the luxury of several firms who were able to design first rate fighters and even more firms who could build those designs in the safety of the USA with no bombers overhead every day.

they certainly had no problem in the production rates - i'm almost positive i've read in several places that german fighter production peaked in '44 - the same year the 1st production models of the FW-190d, Ta-152, Do-335, Me262 & Me163 were delivered (He162 production models 1st delivered Jan '45)

[GRUNHERZ]

All Bf109 up to the E had no retractible tailwheel.  The Bf109F introduced the retractible tailwheel. The wheel was made non retractible in the G4 because it was increased in size and would not fit into the current retraction bay, which was then faired over. This continued through all G models until the K series which introduced an entirely new retraction system and now had tailwheel bay doors.

Bf109G and to some extent later the K was not drastically improved because the RLM wanted to maintain high production levels. Improvements like the main gear outer doors planned for all G series, new aerodynamically superior windshield/canopy, four blade props and better engines were all delayed and canceled in favor of high numbers. This probably wasnt that big a deal to the Germans since technically speaking they were still very competitive in the west and generally better than most eastern front fighters in the east untill early 44.

I do wonder what a cleaned up 109 would do with a 2000+ hp engine. Even the still very draggy K4 was as fast and faster than mainline allied fighters at most alts, a few less bumps and it would probably be hitting 475mph or more. Tests with 4 blade props and DB605L engines in K4 showed huge speeed and climb increases at alt.

Oh well, nothing looks as cool as a Bf109G6 so all that stuff wasnt a waste in the end..