found interesting article on the net.....

[HoHun]

Hi Jab,

>The "meat" of the report--the performance evaluation--is completely accurate.    You can read this and have a good idea of how the Bf-109G-6 will fly, what it does well and what its limitations are.  

Are you aware that Carson is largely rephrasing a RAF report on a Me 109E-3 powered by a DB601A with an early-type supercharger?

On the G version performance, he merely provides the follwing performance data:

"However, in rate of climb the Me-109G was 200-500 feet per minute ahead of the Mustang upto 20,000 feet, then the '51 pulled ahead on up to 40,000 feet, while the Spit Fourteen would climb faster than any of them at any altitude from sea level up. "

"Speed, mph 354/12,500 ft. 387/23,000 ft."

The Aces High Me 109G-6 according to the help file graphs seems to match the top speed listed by Carson, but to generally outclimb the P-51D at all altitudes.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[J_A_B]

You may not realize it, but he DID test fly "liberated" 109G's.  The comments may be similar to the RAF's comments on the 109E, but at the same time they're still quite correct--the plane suffered from heavy controls, cramped cockpit, tricky ground handling properties, etc.

Interesting how you bring up the 109K, which if you recall was designed to fix many of the aerodynamic problems the G-6 posessed--it had a retractible tailwheel, the MG bulges removed, and several other important changes.  I would expect it to have lower drag than the "G"  Nobody would argue against the fact that the 109K fixed many of the problems associated with the 109G.

J_A_B