Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Wildcat1 on July 14, 2011, 01:30:05 PM

Title: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 14, 2011, 01:30:05 PM
Someone told me a while ago that the difference between an Me 109 and a Bf 109 was that they were manufactured at different plants. Is this accurate?

Say you compare an Me 109F-4 to a Bf 109F-4. Would one have a certain advantage over the other? Drawback?

My random interest of the day :salute
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 14, 2011, 01:33:52 PM
There is almost no difference. Bf is the company name originally but Me was the designer name and there was plenty of history with the company and being bought out etc...

Even official paperwork has been shown to use Bf and Me alternatingly, and even on the same page sometimes!


EDIT: 109lair has a good page here:
http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/bf-me.htm
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: JOACH1M on July 14, 2011, 01:35:40 PM
BF is the serial # letter, and ME is the american name for the 109, there is no difference
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Wildcat1 on July 14, 2011, 01:37:34 PM
Cool, thanks guys :salute
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 14, 2011, 01:38:57 PM
Joachim, check out the url I linked. You might learn it's a bit more intertangled than you think. Nice read, though.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: JOACH1M on July 14, 2011, 01:39:56 PM
Joachim, check out the url I linked. You might learn it's a bit more intertangled than you think. Nice read, though.
Will do, I kind of generalized it.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Debrody on July 14, 2011, 01:44:46 PM
Sirs...
Bf: Bayerische Flugzeugwerke    its the first part of the name of the Messerschmitt aircrafts what was designed before '41
They changed it to "Me" after the main designer. Willy Messerchmitt
So theres no Me 109 F-4. Its Bf-109 F-4, but theres no Bf-109 K-4 couse thats a '44 design, so its a Me-109 K-4.
Same with the Bf-110 -- Me-410.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 14, 2011, 01:57:25 PM
Messerschmitt was also the name of the company, not the man. The Me was in reference to that, not the man.

BFW incorporated under the name Messerschmitt AG in 1938. Well before the war.

Any design predating that (design, not actual production) was originally bf, and any design after was me, however this is not a hard and fast rule as it is the same company and the same designer, same people etc.

The designation did not change from mark to mark. So if it's a bf109E, it's also a bf109K. If it's a me109E, it's also a me109K. The real story is that both are right. Neither is wrong. They were fully interchangable even on official Messerchmitt AG documents (the folks that made the plane)

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/bf-me.htm

^-- it will answer a lot of questions for you.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: 2bighorn on July 16, 2011, 03:41:23 PM
The real story is that both are right. Neither is wrong. They were fully interchangable even on official Messerchmitt AG documents (the folks that made the plane)

Official type designation by Reichsluftfahrtministerium for 109s was Bf.  Until the end of war.  First type getting the Messerschmitt identifier was Me 210.

True, Messerschmitt AG often used Me 109 designation, but this was solely because of Willy Messerschmitt's belief that 109s should get Me identifier since Flugzeugbau Messerschmitt  designed the 109 as contractor for Bayerische Flugzeugwerke. RLM awarded type to Bf though.

So, using Me identifier for 109 is wrong, though everybody knows what is meant by that.

Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 18, 2011, 09:41:11 AM
I think the point that is claiming one is wrong over the other is a mis-statement. Since both are used intechangably by both the manufacturers AND all levels of the purchasers up to very high levels, that you cannot simply say "Me is wrong" any more than you could "Bf is wrong" -- because it was used both ways at all levels of documentation. Therefore neither can be wrong.


^-- I think that breaks it down to the basic point.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: perdue3 on July 18, 2011, 11:15:41 AM
Willie Messerschmitt designed the airplane but couldn't produce it without the help of the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (Bavarian Aircraft Works). Therefore, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 is what we get. In 1938, Willie Messerschmitt merged permanantly with BFW and the name was changed from Bayerische Flugzeugwerke to Messerschmitt AG and planes then took on the prefix Me. This was during the production of the 109 and 110 but they decided not to change the name mid-production.

Hope this helps.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Oldman731 on July 18, 2011, 11:25:51 AM
Willie Messerschmitt designed the airplane but couldn't produce it without the help of the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke (Bavarian Aircraft Works). Therefore, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 is what we get. In 1938, Willie Messerschmitt merged permanantly with BFW and the name was changed from Bayerische Flugzeugwerke to Messerschmitt AG and planes then took on the prefix Me. This was during the production of the 109 and 110 but they decided not to change the name mid-production.


This was my understanding, too.

- oldman
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 18, 2011, 11:27:45 AM
Since nobody wants to read the link ( :P ), I'll post the contents here.

With due apologies to 109lair, and full credit to them, link to the direct source already given etc.

The rest of this thread is from the previously shown link:

Every so often, a verbal skirmish will break out over this seemingly contentious issue... "It's Bf 109!"  "No, it's Me 109!"  "Bf!"  "Me!!"  Frequently, this degenerates into name-calling, questioning of parentage, gnashing of teeth, and other such impolite and unproductive activities.  Well, today we will conclusively lay this dispute to rest once and for all...

Both terms are correct.


First, a little history is in order.  The 109 (8-109, if one wants to be strictly pedantic and refer to the aircraft with the 8- prefix assigned by the RLM to fighter aircraft) was first flown at the end of May 1935 at the home field of the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke in Augsburg, Germany.  Design of the aircraft was started in March 1934 under the direction of Dipl. Ing. Willy Messerschmitt, who joined the firm after a merger of his own company, Messerschmitt Flugzeugbau, with BFW as ordered by the Bavarian government. (1)  Emboldened by the success of his Bf 108, and anticipating certain defeat in the RLM's fighter design competition due to personal animosities, Messerschmitt "went for broke" technologically, incorporating a number of aerodynamically and mechanically advanced features into the 109 such as automatic leading edge slots, trailing edge flaps, flush-retracting landing gear, an aluminum alloy monocoque fuselage, and a fully enclosed cockpit.  The results of the competition, of course, are well known today... the 109 won handily due to the inherent superiority of the design, and the rest, as they say, is history.

With the competition decided, production orders soon followed, and further development of the airframe continued.  A stream of prototypes and production aircraft issued forth from the BFW factory, and the German propaganda machine wasted no time in trumpeting the superiority of the 109.  As part of the continued development of the aircraft, early production aircraft were sent to join the Legion Kondor in Spain, and comprehensively established air superiority wherever they appeared.  Unfortunately, these were not the type of accomplishments which readily lent themselves to positive publicity in the eyes of the world... such an opportunity presented itself in July 1937, however.

The Fourth International Flying Meeting was held at D?bendorf in Switzerland between 23 July and 1 August 1937, and the Luftwaffe's latest and greatest aircraft were on hand to show their capabilities.  Among the aircraft dispatched to the meet were five 109s, which swept the top spots in every event in which they were entered.  With the world press on hand to record the mounting successes of the latest Messerschmitt wonder, the propaganda value of the event was immeasurable to the German government.  Further glory was achieved on 11 November 1937 when Dr.-Ing. Hermann Wurster snatched the landplane speed record with an average speed of 379.38 mph on four passes over a 3km straight course. (2) 

With this run of incredible achievements, the management of BFW saw an opportunity to maximize on the positive publicity surrounding the achievements of their designer, and on 11 July 1938 incorporated the company as Messerschmitt AG (Aktien Gesellschaft), and Dr. Ing. Willy Messerschmitt was made Chairman and Managing Director.(3)  This is a significant turning point in our story of "Bf vs. Me"... heretofore, all aircraft designed under the auspices of the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke carried the prefix "Bf" before the type number to indicate the origin of the aircraft.  After the incorporation of Messerschmitt AG, all aircraft designed by the firm carried the prefix "Me", indicating the Messerschmitt factory (e.g. Me 210, Me 323, Me 262, etc).

So, the 109 would therefore only be called a "Bf 109", right?  Read on...


As always, things aren't always what they seem.  While it is undoubtedly correct to refer to the 109 as the Bf 109, the "Me" prefix was used interchangeably, and not just by outside sources such as American or RAF pilots or licensees such as Erla or WNF, as has been suggested... allow me to demonstrate below.

Exhibit A:  Page 1 of a 10 page factory report from Messerschmitt AG concerning high-speed stability tests on Me 109F W.Nr. 9928 (reproduced in full elsewhere here on the site, translation to follow at some point):

(http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/exhibit_a.jpg)

Exhibit B:  Page 8 from the SAME FACTORY REPORT, from the MESSERSCHMITT FACTORY, by the SAME AUTHOR (Kalinowski), referring to Bf 109F W.Nr. 9928... did it somehow miraculously become a different aircraft?!  No, it's obviously still the same aircraft.
But wait, there's more!

(http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/exhibit_b.jpg)

For my next trick, I present for your investigation and edification two documents scanned from Vol 1. of the Bethke/Henning Jagdgeschwader 300 books... this first example is an example of an actual Verlustmeldung, or loss report for I./JG300, as typed up at unit level and submitted to the RLM for accounting purposes; note the consistent use of the term "Bf 109" throughout (this is reflected in other Verlustmeldungen copied in the book)(4)
Click for a full-size version.

I'm not done yet... see below!  :)

(http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/exhibit_c.jpg)

And lastly, from the SAME UNIT, we have the following damage assessment form from I./JG300 concerning an Me 109G-6/AS or G-14/AS.(5)
Click for a full-size version.

Wow... Me 109!  Could this be the SAME THING as a Bf 109?  Why, it sure is!

(http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/articles/bf-me/exhibit_d.jpg)

And that's not all.  Allow me to quote from an 8 December 1942 German radio broadcast from Dr. Ing. Messerschmitt himself, as published in Armand van Ishoven's "Messerschmitt Bf 109 At War":

   "With extremely limited means I designed and built a series of sports and transport aircraft which, through their high performance, served as first steps towards a high performance fighter.  Soon after, when I received the assignment to develop a fighter, it was evident to me that it would have to derive from aircraft like the M23 and M29.  I then tried to equip an aircraft as small and light as possible with a powerful engine, in order to create a fighter that could out-perform anything then known.  This was proved clearly at the International Flying Meeting in Z?rich in 1937.  Since that time this aircraft has been developed constantly at a hectic pace to meet the new challenges, and improved upon over and over again, so taht to this day our enemies consider it the most successful fighter in the world.  In English circles now and then one hears the assertion that they have brought out an aircraft superior to the Me 109.  Nothing can better disprove this than the list of our victories.  From the steadily improving performance of the Me 109 in the course of this war, and its lasting superiority, you can see that we are actively maintaining this superiority into the future as well."(6)


So, what have we learned today?  We've learned where the confusion stems from between Bf and Me, we learned when the changeover occurred, and we learned that the terms are used interchangeably at ALL levels within the Luftwaffe... so they're BOTH right!

Thus endeth the sermon.  :)
 

(1)  Wings of Fame vol. 4, Messerschmitt Bf 109- The First Generation. David Donald, p.40.

(2) ibid.

(3) ibid.

(4)  Jagdgeschwader 300, Teil I.  Herbert Bethke and Friedhelm Henning, p.76.

(5)  Jagdgeschwader 300, Teil I.  Herbert Bethke and Friedhelm Henning, p.190.

(6)  Messerschmitt Bf 109 At War, Armand van Ishoven, p. 184.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: 2bighorn on July 18, 2011, 12:08:35 PM
I think the point that is claiming one is wrong over the other is a mis-statement. Since both are used intechangably by both the manufacturers AND all levels of the purchasers up to very high levels, that you cannot simply say "Me is wrong" any more than you could "Bf is wrong" -- because it was used both ways at all levels of documentation.

Official type identifier for 109 and 110 was Bf. Just because, on occasion and in error, Me was/is used, it does not make it right.



Therefore neither can be wrong.

From krustology magazine?







Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Krusty on July 18, 2011, 12:09:31 PM
No, from somebody that doesn't bother to read links or to read posts, and just wants to insult.
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: 2bighorn on July 18, 2011, 12:21:52 PM
No, from somebody that doesn't bother to read links or to read posts, and just wants to insult.

So, you added copyright infringement to your resume?

Here, refresher:
Official type identifier for 109 and 110 was Bf. Just because, on occasion and in error, Me was/is used, it does not make it right.



Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: Zeagle on July 22, 2011, 01:46:01 PM
HT could I get one of those new Krusty meters?  I don't think mine goes high enough...:devil
Title: Re: Me-109 vs. Bf-109
Post by: LLogann on July 22, 2011, 02:02:27 PM
That is a term used by the Allies.  With that being said, what Krusty posted is completely accurate.  We may never have been trivial with our nomenclature, but the German's were. 

So, you added copyright infringement to your resume?

Here, refresher:
Official type identifier for 109 and 110 was Bf. Just because, on occasion and in error, Me was/is used, it does not make it right.