Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: RAM on March 16, 2000, 07:12:00 PM
-
Well It is my belief that Me109G-10 and K-4 had different engines,airframes, speed, acceleration, climbrate...and weapons too (didn't it have 2 cowl mounted MG151/15 15mm cannons?)
then why is everybody saying that 109G-10 is in fact the K-4?. I think they are quite different planes. am I wrong?
(Read as...I WANT 109K-4!!!! I WANT I WANT!!...but after my 190A-5!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
no, seriously...wich were the historical differences between Me109G-10 and Me109K-4?
thks in advance
------------------
Ram, out
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
(http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/images/Ram.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 03-16-2000).]
-
I think (based on Green's work) that I read that the K-4 was a standardization of all the field fixes. So there might be very little difference between a G10 and K4.
-
The K4 also had retractable tailwheel and inner landing gear doors to help reduce drag a little bit. Otherwise, they were pretty much the same airframe with the same engine. The K4 being a tad faster, that's all.
-
I recall that some of the G-10's had the same engines as the K-4 and where otherwise identical. There were several different specifications of G-10.
Also check out the official HTC speed numbers on the G-10. Sure looks like a K-4 to me!
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-16-2000).]
-
Alot of this is repeating the others posts but...
The G10 and the K4 were both powered by the same engine, the DB605D.
The MG151/15mm's were not used in the K4, or any other 109 production variant. This myth comes from a single source that was in error and it has propagated down thru many reference books. Otherwise the G10 and the K4 had the same armament options.
Here is the quote from Meserschmitt Bf109 in action on the differences in airframes:
Externally, the K was similar to the G10. The wider main wheels and the large rectangular upper wing bulges were made standard. The radio hatch in the left side of the fuselage was relocated forward and higher, the DF loop was moved back a panel, the tailwheel was made retractable with doors, and there were two external trim tabs on the rudder. As far back as the Bf 109F, there were experiments with a wheel well cover and this was finally installed on the K. The wheel well cover was frequently removed by units in the field, however.
So as Wells said, the major difference was the tail wheel, and on certain aircraft the outter wheel well cover.
Top Speed, now in every source I can find that lists both the G10 and the K4, they are typically within a couple of miles per hour, of each other. The Bf109 in Action book lists the top speed of the G10 as 452 mph at 19,685ft. It lists the top speed of the K4 as 452mph at 19,685ft. Which coincidentally matchs the Speed vs Altitude graph of the G10 on the AH help page.
Face it guys, the G10 is effectively identical in performance to the K4.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
-
aha...then Its ok (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
ponly wanted to know which were the differences (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
thks
-
hi vermillion,
you said, that g10 has top speed of more
than 450mph?
in my books i read following:
109 g10 DB605D top speed 685KM/h
109 K4 DB605 ASCM top speed around 720 KM/h
in 20k.
we have a g10 with db605D in ah, and i think
their top speed is about 425MP/h (in the game)
so the 109k4 with ASCM engine should reach
little about 450mp/h (like u posted).
but again, out g10 in AH can do 425, but not
450 MP/h in lvl flight.
i know, the K had some more engine versions
aviable, but the db605ASCM was the primary one.
if i'm wrong, let me know
------------------
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/109habicht.gif)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
uhh, did a test flight OFFLINE (something
with speeds different than online?)
i reached around 440mph after a little dive
from 23k to 20k. fuel 50%.
i'm really surprised, we have a 109k4 in
g10 art :-). so close gear doors, retract
tail gear and we have 10 mph more. with
use of polish we can even get some more 2mph :-) or i want the 109k14. met some really high buffs (37k)
vermillion, did these mg151/15 even exist?
hey, we should have the mg213 :-).
------------------
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/109habicht.gif)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://www.busprod.com/weazel2/)
[This message has been edited by HABICHT (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
OK, no MG 151 cowl guns.
But what about hub firing MK 103. Can someone tell was it there or wasn't for K-4 ?
-
The ACSM engine is the definitive db605 (non D) engine. From what I understand both the G10 and the K4 could show up with this engine early in there productions runs. The engine intended for the G10 and K4 was the 605D. With this engine they were mostly identical.
I would like a 103 option. I would like the G6 to have the acsm engine to diff. it from the G2.
But we are very well represented with 109s…
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
Habicht, the primary engine of both the G10 and the K4 was the DB605D. The primary engine of the G14 (which came before the G10 in production) was the DB605AS (which I am assuming is the same as the ASCM).
Now there may have been some K's equipped with the ASCM, but I have about 4 different sources which quote the D as the standard. Of course it could be an error (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I am just repeating what I can find in my books.
Now I don't fly the G10 much in the game, so I won't comment, but here is the chart Pyro has posted in the help section saying how the G10 should perform. If it doesn't perform as well as the chart says it should, bug it and get it fixed. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/images/109g10speed.gif)
Now on the MG151/15mm it is my understanding that the gun existed, but that it just wasn't used in production variants of the 109. If I remember right it was used on the Do-335. Can anyone else think of other planes it was mounted on ?
Hristo, the only thing I can find about the Mk 103 30mm being used in 109's is this passage from The Complete Book of Fighters
Late production Bf109K4's replaced the Mk108 cannon with an Mk103 of similar caliber, this being standardized by the Bf109K6 which also carried a pair of Mk108s mounted internally in the wings. Only a handful of Bf109K6's reached the Luftwaffe, but some 700 examples of the K4 had been completed when production of the Bf109 came to an end with the collapse of Germany in 1945.
Now how many K4's with the Mk103 were actually produced? I dont' know, and it indicates that the K6 production was very small. But hey, you can always ask Pyro for that gun loadout option (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
MG 151/15 was used in 109F-2, as hub firing cannon, AFAIK.
As for hub MK 103, I read about it in Green’s Warplanes of the Third Reich. Still, he mentions cowl MG 151/15 too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
…Later production Bf 109K-4s introduced an engine mounted 30 mm MK 103 cannon in place of the standard Mk 108, but the 2.5-in. diameter outer sheath enclosing the barrell of this weapon rendered a barrell change under operational conditions a somewhat onerous task. The MK 103 was also adopted for the next K-series variant, the Bf 109K-6, which, intended primarily as an anti-bomber weapon, carried two additional MK 103 cannon in underwing gondolas, but reverted to 13 mm MG 131s in place of the 15 mm…
Obviously some wrong info on MG 151/15 there, but what about the MK 103s ?
If AH 109 ever gets the MK 103, it will be some long range killer, better than P-38. having an option not to take cowl MGs might also be nice - MK 103 is a heavy cannon, and MGs would be an overkill anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
Yep Hristo, your right on the F2, I missed that model. Sorry. But it should be realized that the MG151/15mm cannon actually replaced the MG FF 20mm cannon, not the MG's which is what many believe on the K4.
Actually, if I remember right it was Green's Book (which is otherwise highly regarded), which started the whole MG151/15mm legend (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) I kept getting Eric Brown in my mind and I knew it was incorrect.
And I agree, a Mk103 in a 109 would be very deadly indeed.
I just did a speed test offline to check out the game flight model versus the chart that Pyro has posted in the help section. The Bf109G10, armed with the 20mm cannon, at 22,000ft recorded the following speed.
(http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/ah/109max.jpg)
Looks pretty close to me, right on actually.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
The 605D was pretty much the same engine as the ASCM (AS = larger supercharger, standard on D model, C = 96 octane fuel, M = methanol/water injection...again, standard on the D engine). Compression ratio was higher in the 605D engine (from 7.3/7.5 to 8.3/8.5). The left and right blocks had different compression ratios.
-
The DB 605ASCM was pretty common on Me 109K-4 and the oft-published stats of 378 mph at S/L and 452 mph at 19,685 feet were for an ASCM-powered aircraft.
However the horsepower ratings of the DB 605ASCM were almost identical to the DB 605DC which was used on the Me 109G-10. The DB 605D and DB 605DB were also used on the G-10.
As for the MK 103 installation, I find it highly unlikely because that gun is much longer than the MK 108 and even the MG 151/20. The barrel would be sticking quite far out of the spinner.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-17-2000).]
-
Its not barrel lenght that would stop it but reciever length. the 108 reciever is just about in the lap of the pilot, the barrel doenst even make it throught the engine. The control column is allready bent arround the reciever group of the 108..
there is probably no more room behind the engine...It would be fun though..
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
My books state nothing about the Mk103 installed in the engine hub. It only mentioned for the K6 and its wing guns.
------------------
Ltn. Snefens
RO, Lentolaivue 34 (http://www.muodos.fi/LLv34)
-
Back to the point of the original post (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Can we all finally agree that the performance of the Aces High Bf109G10 is very similar too, or equal to the performance of the what we would expect out of a Bf109K4?
That way when the next "I want a K4" thread comes along we can just point them here? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
-
As soon as we see exact power output figures of both DB 605D and DB 605 ASCM engines (higher octane fuel allows higher compression ratio etc etc.)
Moreover, I would like to have those inner gear doors (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
It's not a K-4 IMHO. If K-4 max weight is 3.330 kg, G-6 is 3.136kg and G-10 is 3.651 kg, so K-4 must has quite the same turn perfomance of G-6! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Elp (edited 03-18-2000).]
-
I would agree Verm. They would be nearly identical. Do we know if MW50 is modeled in the game? If not are we getting the extra fuel that could go in that location? or is the plane lighter for the lack of both?
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
The G10 has got the MW50 in this game. It is easily seen by its increase in performance from normal to WEP below 20000ft, when comparing to the rest of the 109's in the game.
------------------
Ltn. Snefens
RO, Lentolaivue 34 (http://www.muodos.fi/LLv34)
-
Hristo,
The 605DC (96 octane) uses 1.98 ata (59" Hg) to produce 2000 hp at sea level and can maintain that boost up to 5100m.
The 605DB (87 octane) uses 1.8 ata (54") for 1800 hp at sea level up to 6000m. (Note: these figures apply for 605DC as well as boost falls from 1.98 to 1.8 from 5100m to 6000m. Above 6000m, the DC and DB would be identical)
The 605AM uses only 1.7 ata (51") for 1800 hp @ sea level up to 4100m (small supercharger). The larger supercharger draws some extra power from the 605D, which is why the AM can make 1800 hp with slightly less boost. The boost on this engine drops from 1.7 @ 4100m to 1.42 @ 5700m, significantly less than the 605D. For the AS, with increased supercharger, the boost falls to 1.42 at 8000m.
-
Vermillion I agree!
-
Have 109K4s been ever equiped with gondolas?
-
Aper, look up earlier in the thread.
The "K" model with gondola's were the K6, which were Mk108 30mm gondola's.
Only a very very few were made.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
-
Rgr Verm
So as far as I understood K4 never ever carried wing cannons.
In K6 wing cannons were mounted internally (Mk-108) and in gondolas (Mk-103). Isn't it?
-
The left and right blocks had different compression ratios.
There must be some reason for this, yet I can't figure out what...
Any more info Wells?
------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)
jochen
JG 2 'Richthofen' (Aces High)
If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!
-
K-6:
(http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/Bf109K/bf109k6_1-sw-zeichnung.jpg)
from http://pweb.de.uu.net/pr-weiss.hh/bf109/index-800.htm (http://pweb.de.uu.net/pr-weiss.hh/bf109/index-800.htm)
"Our" G-10: http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/bf109g10_8.htm (http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/bf109g10_8.htm)
[This message has been edited by Elp (edited 03-22-2000).]
-
Jochen I found the different compression ratios strange also. I am guessing there was assymetry in the supercharger plumbing?
-
Aper, I was just going from that one little paragraph on the K6.
To be honest the K6 is so rare I have seen very little information on it, but admittedly I am not a 109 fanatic and lack a comprehensive indepth 109 library (I have a few, but not alot).
Looking thru my normal references, it seems like they generally agree that the K6 had wing mounted 30mm cannons. But some say mk103 and some say mk108. Some say wing mounted, and some say gondola's.
Nice picture Elp, Where did you get it?
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Desperately trying to figure out why Kamikaze Pilots wore helmets"
-
As far as i know, both rows of cylinders in the engine were filled with the same pressure.
But one row was closer to the supercharger. Whenever a liquid or a gas is flowing in a pipe, you have a loss of pressure. So they needed for the row that was a bit farer away a slightly higher pressure to compensate the bigger loss.
niklas
-
I belive this drawing came from 'Messerschmitt "O-Nine" Gallery' ( ISBN 0 91414 400 6) but I don't have the book (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
K-6 has 3 MK 108 cannons
K-8 has one modified MK 103 cannon firing through the propellor huband and 2 x 20 mm mg 151/20 or 2 x 30mm Mk108 wing mounted
Me K-8:
(http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/Bf109K/bf109k8_1-sw-zeichnung.jpg)
The Me K-4 had 2 x 20-mm in the underwing tubs ( JG 26 )
If you like our Bf 109G10 and , take a look at http://www.hyperscale.com/reference/bf109detailbg_1.htm (http://www.hyperscale.com/reference/bf109detailbg_1.htm)
-
LOL The pilot is going to have a heck of a time pushing the stick forward. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by Elp:
(http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/Bf109K/bf109k8_1-sw-zeichnung.jpg)
I WANT K-8 I WANT I WANT!!!
hehehe
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
(http://home.nikocity.de/bf109/Bf109K/bf109k8_1-sw-zeichnung.jpg)
Me too, me too !
Well, Mk 103 in K-4 would do.
-
Was the K8 actually produced? Even a prototype? I was under the impression that it didn't make it off the drawing board before the end of the war.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
How about a K-14 with DB605L then? 450mph at 37,000ft with MW 50. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Or: DB605D with GM1, which is almost as good.
-
I don't know if Me109K8 whit 103Mk saw combat or not. But K6 was build and flew at end of 44.
K-6 was an K-4 whit more two Mk108. K-6 used gondolas or gun-pods and not guns fixed in the wings.
Speed:
K-4.......728 km/h ( 452 mph )
weight....3374 kg ( 7438 lbs )
G-2
weight....3280 kg
K4 was only 94kg ( 207lbs ) heavier than G-2!
K-6.......704 km/h ( 437 mph )
weight....3596 kg ( 7927 lbs )
About Me 109K-14, 2 units were made and they were send to Jagdgeschwader 52 ( Caidin ). K-4 and K-14 has the same speed.
Squadrons that used 109K series:
Jagdgeschwader 77 "Herz As"
Jagdgeschwader 11
Jagdgeschwader 26 "Schlageter"
Jagdgeschwader 52
Jagdgeschwader 53
-
I don't know if Me109K8 whit 103Mk saw combat or not. But K6 was build and flew at end of 44. K-6 was an K-4 whit more two Mk108. K-6 used gondolas or gun-pods and not guns fixed in the wings.
Only the Bf 109 K-4 was put into production and saw operational service since late October 1944. All the other variants were only experimental and most of them weren't even realized as a prototype... These data are by now been ascertained fully. It is enlightening however to look at the Luftwaffe losses data for 1945 where only K-4 (no K-2, K-6, or K-8) are listed...
About Me 109K-14, 2 units were made and they were send to Jagdgeschwader 52 ( Caidin). K-4 and K-14 has the same speed.
Even if this was reported as late as the end of the '80s, further researches have ascertained that no prototype of the DB 605L was ever completed, so no K-14 could be realized, the only reason for its existence being the new engine... and IMHO Caidin wasn't an accurate source for anything more than fantasy and fictions, believe me! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Hope this is of some help.
All the best and ...L'E' BUNA !
_/_/_/_/
_/ Ferdinando 'veltro' D'Amico
_/_/_/'PR' of 4 Stormo Caccia
_/e-mail: veltro@warbirds.org
_/
-
Have any of you heard about Saburo Sakais problems with caidin. Samarai is a good book but apparently much of it was fabricated or made up by Caidin. Guy is definatly disreputable I believe.
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
I know Caidin sometimes made funny mistakes. But Pierre Clostermann in his book "Big Show" wrote about 109K-14 as used by Germans during the war. Also, he described a combat against 109K where the 109s were using this kind of armament:
2 20mm + 1 30 mm + 2 heavy guns
I belive he is talking about Me-109K6 ( "Tempest vs Messerschmitt" ).
So, according Clostermann, Me 109 K-14 and K-6 were used by Germans.
Sorry my english
-
There are performance charts for K4 with 605L engine...posted here somewhere!
-
Closterman is truly a great novelist, but when it comes to trusting him on the K14 Ill have to turn him down (cant remenber he wrote it though - are you sure?).
No reserarch that I am aware of shows K10 and K14 further than project stage.
Further on Closterman he himself claimed 23 kills wich is later downgraded some: I think the official number is 11.
Anyways the K6 will be a pig with those wingmounted cannons.I dont want it - trust me you wont either ;=)
danish
-
I know Caidin sometimes made funny mistakes.
Quite an amusing concept of "funny"... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But Pierre Clostermann in his book "Big Show" wrote about 109K-14 as used by Germans during the war. Also, he described a combat against 109K where the 109s were using this kind of armament:2 20mm + 1 30 mm + 2 heavy guns I belive he is talking about Me-109K6 ( "Tempest vs Messerschmitt" ). So, according Clostermann, Me 109 K-14 and K-6 were used by Germans.
I consider "The Big Show" the best aviation book ever, but from this to state that Clostermann had a such a deep and detailed technical knowledge of the German aircraft he met in the air, to be even able to determine the version and sub-variant, there goes a long, long way...
Most of the pilots didn't even remember what exact version of a plane they were flying (and I have interviewed a lot of them of several coutries), let alone know exactly what they were encountering in the air in split-second moments...! Please, get real! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Clostermann most probably collected the data after the war and, considering that the book was written in 1948, the sources he had available were rather poor...to say the least!
Just my 2 cents.
All the best and ...L'E' BUNA !
_/_/_/_/
_/ Ferdinando 'veltro' D'Amico
_/_/_/'PR' of 4 Stormo Caccia
_/e-mail: veltro@warbirds.org
_/
[This message has been edited by veltro (edited 03-26-2000).]
-
Veltro,
Please, give us your sources about Me-109 K series. Look, if you have some cool data about it whit you, you should share it whit us!
[This message has been edited by Elp (edited 03-27-2000).]
-
give us your sources about Me-109 K series. Look, if you have some cool data about it whit you, you should share it whit us!
Elp, my friend, bien sur!
We can start with "Messerschmitt Bf 109K" by Ing. Ales Janda and Ing. Tomas Poruba. Published by JaPo
This is a fabulous, one-stop reference for the Bf 109K. It contains reference photos, line drawings, scrap views, colour
profiles and much more. If you only have one reference for the Bf 109K, this is the one to look for! Number one work and first class stuff.
Then we can continue with "Messerschmitt Bf 109 F, G, & K Series - An Illustrated Study"
by Jochen Prien/Peter Rodeike
1993 Schiffer, ISBN: 0-88740-818-4
It was the culmination of a years of studies of two of the most talented German aviation researchers. Lot of photographs, historical and technical details.
Then there is "Les Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-1 a K-4 - Moteurs et Amenagements" by Jean-Claude Mermet, date and ISBN not quoted.
Self Published by the Author.
Probably the most revolutionary study of the latest years on late-series Bf 109s.
Last but not least there is the Close-Up n.16 CU 16 "Bf 109 K" By T.H. Hitchcock, ISBN: 0-914144-16-2, published in 1979.
Although the oldest of the four works, in it the author corrected some of the wrong statements about the "K" that had appeared in his world-famous "O-Nine-Gallery".
Apart from these books, a visit to the Bundesarchiv Freiburg, Germany and a check among the Luftwaffe loss data, aircraft delivery data and other original material for 1945 should be enlightening to realize that only the K-4 was operational... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
No particular "cool data", but only hard historical research and passion.
Hope this has been of some help.
All the best and... L'E' BUNA!
_/_/_/_/
_/ Ferdinando 'veltro' D'Amico
_/_/_/'PR' of 4° Stormo Caccia
_/e-mail: veltro@warbirds.org
_/
-
I believe you have information on the performance of the Me109 that I do not have, so please, give us a hand. Well, the subject of this discussion could be summarized in one question: is Me-109K4 far superior to Me-109G10?
The secondary discussion is: which variants of "K" series had really produced?
So, I ask you: according to yours bibliographical sources, could you make a comparison between the two models ( G10 and K4 )?
Thanks in advance (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
PS: are you talking about this book: http://www.eagle-editions.com/M_Bf109k.htm (http://www.eagle-editions.com/M_Bf109k.htm) ?
-
The same.
This was made clear by pyro long ago in beta. He chose the g10 because it wasnt in other sims but was equivilent to the K4.
All credible sources I have back up this position on the relative capabilities of the G10 and the K4
------------------
Pongo
The Wrecking Crew
-
this discussion could be summarized in one question: is Me-109K4 far superior to Me-109G10?
The secondary discussion is: which variants of "K" series had really produced?
The G-10 was in reality nothing more than a stop-gap project destined to bring many Bf 109 G-6 and G-14 up to K-4 standard, by equipping the old planes with a new DB 605D engine, new tail, new wings (where necessary) and a lot of other details. The result was a "patchwork" version that, however, operated up to K-4 standards.
The only visual differences between the K-4 and the G-10 were aestetical ones: change of position of the D/F loop and the fuel panel, retracting tailwheel, outside undercarriage retractable panels (deleted almost totally in the operational unis); the standard cannon of the G-10 still was the MG 151/20, while it was a 30mm MK108 on the K-4, but about 3,350 out of the almost 6,000 G-10s built were realized in the /U4 variant with the MK108 cannon, so also in this respect they were similar...
Notwithstanding the similarity, official data recorded by the General Luftzeugmeisters/C-E2 on 1 November 1944 reported for the K-4 an average advantage of 15/20 Km/h in speed, as you can see by the enclosed tables
(http://users.iol.it/f.damico/veltro/TabG10K4.jpg)
I am no engineer and I have no technical explaination for this, but it was apparently so. Hope these data can be useful. Personally, I don't know if such an advantage was mantained also in operational use ad if it would justify the introduction of the new variant...
PS: are you talking about this book: http://www.eagle-editions.com/M_Bf109k.htm (http://www.eagle-editions.com/M_Bf109k.htm) ?
Exactly! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
All the best and ... L'E' BUNA !
_/_/_/_/
_/ Ferdinando 'veltro' D'Amico
_/_/_/'PR' of 4 Stormo Caccia
_/e-mail: veltro@warbirds.org
_/
-
Thanks, Veltro, you help a lot whit Generalluftzeugmeisters data (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
We can conclude Me-109G10 and Me-K4 have the quite same performance, so K8's discussion is merely a historic one, becase if K4 and G10 are very similar, so G10 whit gondolas and K8 are similar too.
-
An interesting point is that our G10's performance (the Aces High one), actually matches the historical performance of the K4 listed in Veltro's table. Which is better than the historical G10 listed in the table.
So is our G10 a little too good, and needs tweaked down ?? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Just kidding guys.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
Carpe Jugulum
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
We can conclude Me-109G10 and Me-K4 have the quite same performance, so K8's discussion is merely a historic one, becase if K4 and G10 are very similar, so G10 whit gondolas and K8 are similar too.
Nice to have been of help... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
May I correct the above statement and add a part of my reply which remained in my keyboard? Good.
K-8 discussion was and is a "theorical" one, no K-8 being ever built.
To define once for all this matter:
K-2 = one prototype built;
K-6 = one prototype built.
These were the "other" K-series built, apart from the K-4. As for the sources, you already have them... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
All the very best
L'E' BUNA !
_/_/_/_/
_/ Ferdinando 'veltro' D'Amico
_/_/_/'PR' of 4 Stormo Caccia
_/e-mail: veltro@warbirds.org
_/