Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: wastel on February 03, 2000, 03:41:00 PM
-
OFFLINE
take off F1, every plane 100%, without wep
climbspeed 175, time from f1 alt to 20k
109G10 5 min
G6 5min 16sec
G2 5min 4 sec
F4 5min 14sec
SPIT9 5min 16sec
C.205 5min 33sec
LAGG5 5min 18sec
N1k2 5min 49sec
PONY 6min 50sec
can someone explain me the "too" small difference in 109 times.
g2 nearly to g10? g6 nearly to f4?
between the G-series, weight wasn't so different to explain these times.
personally think, that the G10 and G6 are still underpowered.
are there any stats of top speeds in same
altitude for the AH FL planes. woud be very
interesting.
wastel
-
Wastel....
Im not sure that info of yours tells the whole story. The later G series of 109s have significant increases in horsepower due to MW50 and WEP. Dont know if the F4s increase in horsepower under WEP is comensurate with the 109s.
-Ding
-
I would also add that the optimum climb speed for every aircraft varies. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Hmmmm...
Mino
-
What Dolomite said...
Until all are time at individual best climb, you're not really comparing much.
-
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?
-
Is there a way to calculate the optimum climb speed?
There is a way, but it's a multi-step process and kindof time consuming, but as a general rule, try something like this...
sr(Vmax / Vstall) * Vstall
sr = square root
If you have a plane that flies at 300 IAS and stalls at 100 IAS, then you'd use around 170-175 for climb. As you climb higher and higher and you can only attain 200 IAS, then your best climb is reduced to about 140 IAS. Eventually, near the ceiling, the best climb is also the max and stall speed of the plane! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
The multi-step time consuming way would be plotting the power curve, yes?
-
Yeah, figuring prop efficiency, plotting the thrust and drag curves.
-
109 K-4
Maximum speed 377 mphs at sea level, 452 mph at 19,685 ft. Initial climb rate 4,823 ft./min. Climb to 16,400 ft was 3 minutes, to 32,800 ft. was 6.7 minutes.
109 G6
Maximum speed 387 mph at 22,970 ft., 338 mph at sea level. Climb to 19,000 ft in 6 minutes. ( Mike Spike says the 109g6 could do 4,560 ft/min, Luftwaffe Fighter Aces, p.165 )
109F-3
Maximum speed 390 mph at 22,000 ft. Cruising speed, 310 mph at 16,500 ft. Maximum climb rate 3,320 ft./min. at 5,000 ft.
http://members.aol.com/bf109gust/ (http://members.aol.com/bf109gust/)
Take a look at Hoof's page about 109k-4 http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/Bf109K4.htm (http://www.rdrop.com/users/hoofj/Bf109K4.htm)
We could notice a diference between WB and AH model. I suppose the 109G-10 and 109k-4 had the same performance in r/l.
[This message has been edited by Gramma (edited 02-03-2000).]
-
I believe our G-10 and WB K-4 have different engines (B4 fuel vs C3 fuel).
At full WEP there should be 150 hp difference.
Am I right, anyone ?
-
Don't think so Hristo.
From way back in early beta days, when the G10 vs K4 discussion was raging, Pyro made a few comments on that.
[note this is my paraphrasing of what I remember of his comments]
He basically said that the G10 and the K4 had the same engine, and that performance was extremely similar.
Yes there was some external differences, such as the tailwheel, but in respects to the FM you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
And so he chose to do a G10 rather than a K4 to be different.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"
-
Hmm, weren't Hoof's data based on WEP performance ?
Anyway, as far as I know, our G-10 uses standard D 605D engine.
From Warplanes of the Third Reich:
“…The standard DB 605D engine, using 87 octane B4 fuel and methanol-water (MW 50) injection, provided 1850 h.p. for take-off and 1600 h.p. at 19 685 ft…”
The 109K-4 used DB 605ASCM or DB 605DCM engines.
“…Daimler-Benz DB 605ASCM 12-cylinder liquid-cooled inverted-vee rated at 2000 h.p. for take-off, 2030 h.p. at 1640 ft, and 1800 h.p. at 16 400 ft…”
Same book gives 452 mph top speed of the K-4.
I agree it feels like WB K-4. The torque is more pronounced, however, but so it seems on most other 109s.
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 02-04-2000).]
-
The G10 was intended to have the 605D engine the same as the K. G10s and maybe K4s? where also delivered with the 605Asm engine as well..This is the engine that the G6 in AH should have to diferentiate it from the g2.
That would make a nice progression through the mid to late mark 109s needing only a bf109E4 at some point to complete the wartime marks..
------------------
Pongo
-
I found this data:
Bf-109G10
The fastest sub-type of the Bf 109 G-series was the Bf 109 G-10 which, powered by the Daimler Benz DB 605 D engine and aided by GM-1, attained 689 km/h (428 mph) at 7400 m (24250 feet). Climb to 6100 m (20000 feet) was effected in 6 minutes
Bf-109K4/K6
Bf 109 K-4 and Bf 109 K-6, powered by the Daimler Benz DB 605 ASCM/DCM:
Maximum speed at sea-level was 607 km/h (377 mph), and at 6000 m (19685 feet) was 727 km/h (452 mph). Climb to 5000m (16400 feet) took 3
minutes, and to 10000 m (32800 feet) took 6.7 minuts.
It looks like 109G-10 and 109K-4 had very different performance.
Take a look at http://frhewww.physik.uni-freiburg.de/~jaensch/109/index.html (http://frhewww.physik.uni-freiburg.de/~jaensch/109/index.html)
If you like Daimler-Benz DB 605 stuff: http://w1.1861.telia.com/~u186104874/db605.htm (http://w1.1861.telia.com/~u186104874/db605.htm)
PS: Pyro, could we have a K-4 variant (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
K-4? Why not K-14? DB605L; 451mph at 37,500ft (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
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 ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
"Lentolaivue 21"
Flying for Bishops.
-
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
-
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 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
(http://www.raf303.org/banner.gif)
Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
www.raf303.org (http://www.raf303.org)
-
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? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
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
-
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.
-
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..)
-
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...
-
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.