The enigma of the Bf-109

[MiloMorai]

Angus, Barbi is so funny.

He mentions the odd a/c that returned full of holes but FORGETS the 100s that did not return. He really is too much.

Also he forgets that those a/c have to be fixed and given a complete checkout for any hiden damage before they can go on another op.

His selective, or is that faulty memory , forgets that  RAF fighters increased in numbers while LW decreased in numbers during BoB.

BoF
Number   Type   On-hand   Svcble   
45 2/3   Kampfgruppen   1607   1093   
10    Stukagruppen   378   316
1   Schlachtgruppe   49   38   
29   Jagdgruppen   1266   897
10 1/3   Zerstörergruppen   319   219

BoB, 13 Aug
Number   Type   Strength   Svcble
42 1/3   Kampfgruppen   1482   1008
9   Stukagruppen   365   286
1   Schlachtgruppe   39   31
26    Jagdgruppen   976   853
9   Zerstrergruppen   244   189
3   Nachtjagdgruppen   91   59
14   Seefliegerstaffeln   240   125

BoB, 7 Sept
Strength Summary
Number   Type   Strength   Svcble
43   Kampfgruppen   1291   798
4   Stukagruppen   174   133
2   Schlachtgruppe   59   44
27   Jagdgruppen   831   658
8   Zerstörergruppen   206   112
18   Fernaufklärungsstaffeln   191   123
6   Seefliegerstaffeln   52   33

[Angus]

Nice breakdown Milo.
Could you mail some of that stuff to me?
info@gardsauki.is

or burns@isholf.is


Thanks anyway

[Guppy35]

Originally posted by Kurfürst


From an 1943 report on the Griffon engined Spit XIIs that still had this problem for some time.

 

Just to clarify, the first Spit XIIs that arrived at 41 in February 43 did not have the modified carburator.   This was quickly rectified before they moved back to Hawkinge on Ops while 91 squadron transitioned to the XII.

To state they had the problem for some time is not accurate.

It does not indicate that the rest of the fighter command Spits were suffering from the problem.

Dan/Slack

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by MiloMorai
Angus, Barbi is so funny.

He mentions the odd a/c that returned full of holes but FORGETS the 100s that did not return. He really is too much.

I'm not sure what u guys are arguing about but waht u mention strikes me as pretty standard for how people try to promote the toughness of thier favorite planes...

[Halo]

Not only was the 109 among the most produced and longest lived WWII fighters, it now is among the most viewed and longest lived threads in Aces High.

[Angus]

AMEN

[Rino]

Originally posted by humble
I]The first Luftwaffe chief of the general staff, Gen Walther Wever, listed the need “to combat the enemy air force” among the Luftwaffe’s priority tasks.6 Prior to the Polish campaign, Gen Hans Jeschonnek, a later chief of staff, wrote that the most proper and essential task is the battle against the enemy air force, and it must be executed vigorously and at all costs. The second task, the support of the army, in the first days of the war cannot claim the same level of importance.[/I]


The support of the Army was NOT a luftwaffe priority at the beginning of the attack on poland. In fact the luftwaffe only had a single ground support plane (the JU-87) during the course of the entire war.

     They had more than one ground support aircraft, they also had
the HS-123 dive bomber.  If memory serves correctly none other
than Adolf Galland served in this type during the Polish campaign.

[pasoleati]

Milo, in later Merlins and Griffons manual leaning was not possible as the mixture was either OFF (no fuel flow) or ON (fuel flows but not adjustable by pilot).

Basically, advantages of manual mixture control is not worth the disadvantages in fighters.

[pasoleati]

Originally posted by Crumpp
I am sure you are all aware that both the 109 and the 190 had full manual control of all normal engine functions.

The difference is the 109 had the standard VDM automatic propeller control system linked to a manifold pressure regulator.  It was set on the ground and did not adjust for realtime conditions.  At "x" manifold pressure the prop would adjust to "y" rpm.  

This same system was a subcomponent of the 190's Kommandogerat which integrated it into the rest of the engine function along with airspeed and barometric conditions.

Both systems could be switched to full manual control.  However this was not recommended in the Fluzeug-Handbuchs.

All the best,

Crumpp

Crumpp, at least on the 109G there was no manual mixture control expect for stopping the engine. I don´t see that as a problem. Later Merlins and Griffons adopted the same principle. For some reason Americans kept putting 4-position mixture controls on their fighters even in 1945. Though e.g. the Hellcat is a favorite of mine, I have no envy for the pilot who has 8 engine related controls (throttle, prop, blower gear change, mixture, carb air inlet, oil cooler doors, cowl flaps and intercooler flaps) to manipulate in flight!

[Crumpp]

Crumpp, at least on the 109G there was no manual mixture control expect for stopping the engine. I don´t see that as a problem. Later Merlins and Griffons adopted the same principle. For some reason Americans kept putting 4-position mixture controls on their fighters even in 1945. Though e.g. the Hellcat is a favorite of mine, I have no envy for the pilot who has 8 engine related controls (throttle, prop, blower gear change, mixture, carb air inlet, oil cooler doors, cowl flaps and intercooler flaps) to manipulate in flight!

Your absolutely correct.  My point was only that the VDM automatic prop and manifold pressure were not the same level of detail or efficiency as the Kommandogerat.  

The VDM system certainly did however cut down on the pilots work load in relation to many fighter aircraft of the day.

The Bf-109 manual does warn the pilot to switch to manual control when diving form all out level cruise as the automatic control does not react fast enough to prevent over-reving the motor.  It also warns the pilot to constantly check his clock style pitch indicator to ensure it is working.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Your absolutely correct.  My point was only that the VDM automatic prop and manifold pressure were not the same level of detail or efficiency as the Kommandogerat.  

[/B]

I doubt you know the 109`s kommandogereat very well... your previous post demonstates it very well... a automatic/CS propellor not taking into account airspeed, just MAP ? Hello? Anybody at home, did you even think b4 typing this?

The 109`s automatism performed the exact same functions as the 190`s, the difference being that the 109`s was a mechanic solution, whereas the 190`s was electro-mechanic - and thus more elegant, modern, but the functionality is the same.

The Bf-109 manual does warn the pilot to switch to manual control when diving form all out level cruise as the automatic control does not react fast enough to prevent over-reving the motor.[/B]

In fact it says the exact opposite, which also makes sense... A pilot would find hard to adjust rpm in dive using the thumb switch.

It also warns the pilot to constantly check his clock style pitch indicator to ensure it is working.[/B]

Can you show this part about 'constant checking' or make a reference to it? Besides - that pitch indicator was usual thing in almost all German planes, just as in the FW 190.

[pasoleati]

I think Crumpp assumed that everybody would know this (that airspeed affects prop pitch)! BTW, which factors determined the mixture ratio in the DB 605? I know them, just a test. BTW, don´t use any refs, just your memory.

[Crumpp]

doubt you know the 109`s kommandogereat very well.

The 109 does not have a kommandgerat, Barbi.  It has the VDM automatic propeller and manifold pressure regulator, both SUBCOMPONENTS of the FW-190's Kommandogerat.

See the Ladedruckreglar:

The 109`s automatism performed the exact same functions as the 190`s, the difference being that the 109`s was a mechanic solution, whereas the 190`s was electro-mechanic - and thus more elegant, modern, but the functionality is the same.

Not even close. The 190's system did it all in real time adjusting the engine per real time conditions for optimal efficiency.  It really is a marvel of engineering.  If you make it to the museum, you can check out a real one yourself and compare it to the 109's system in the shop.  

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/kommandogerat1.jpg

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/kommandogerat2.jpg

The 109's was adjusted on the ground and it's output was table based as per it's ground adjustment.

In fact it says the exact opposite,

You are correct and I misread it.  It warns that when you dive to be careful as you will be dangerously close to over-revving the engine.

Manual must be used when:

When flying at economy cruise manual settings must be used.  If you are going to dive then you must switch back to automatic.

Flying a 0 pitch (descent setting) or if the governor fails.

Can you show this part about 'constant checking' or make a reference to it? Besides - that pitch indicator was usual thing in almost all German planes, just as in the FW 190.

You are right it is a standard instrument.  The warning is in the take off run up portion and mentioned several times throughout the manual Barbi.  

Your 109 paranoia is evident here.  All pilots constantly check their instruments to ensure they are working.  Only you would take it as slight!

I thought you had me on the ignore list?  You made it, please use it.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by pasoleati
I think Crumpp assumed that everybody would know this (that airspeed affects prop pitch)! BTW, which factors determined the mixture ratio in the DB 605? I know them, just a test. BTW, don´t use any refs, just your memory.

iirc boost, outside temperature and atmoshperic pressure. I`ll look it up now. The whole mixture system was fully automatic, no manual override at all, single lever operated!

Maybe crumpp can list us what functions could not the 109`s single lever system handle what the 190`s could.. He seems to think that BMW`s kommandogereat was some early form of an artificial intelligence, not even needing any adjustment just thinking them out on it`s own.

[Crumpp]

He seems to think that BMW`s kommandogereat was some early form of an artificial intelligence, not even needing any adjustment just thinking them out on it`s own.

Feel free to fantasize and make things up as you go.

Maybe Barbi you should read the following report on an early Kommandogerat and see for yourself.  

http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-192/

It was a lot more than mixture settings or the simple manifold pressure combined with VDM automatic prop of the 109 series.

The major difference is real time adjustment for the current conditions all combined into one control box.  In other words the systems balances itself to optimal conditions under real time.  Not just one system functioning independantly of another. Something the 109's did not have at all.

And yes, it is an engineering marvel.

All the best,

Crumpp