Author Topic: Screenshots of the new Bf109G-14 (Read 2013 times)

Karnak · « **on:** September 27, 2005, 04:19:07 PM »

Now that is a gorgeous fighter. Very nice job all. It will surely make my favorites list.

1K3 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 27, 2005, 04:25:27 PM »

hmmmmmmm it looks like a 109G-6 but with ERLA HAUBE and a lightweight souped up engine!:D

hmmm... muscle plane

Karnak · « **Reply #2 on:** September 27, 2005, 04:27:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 1K3
hmmmmmmm it looks like a 109G-6 but with ERLA HAUBE

Yes, I noticed that. I'll bet you that is one reason the Bf109G-6 has the older style cockpit armor, to better show the progression of improvements beyond just performance increases.

Morpheus · « **Reply #3 on:** September 27, 2005, 04:33:21 PM »

The prop looks monstrous.

Maybe just the angle of the pic?

1K3 · « **Reply #4 on:** September 27, 2005, 04:36:24 PM »

anyone has the 109G-14 data on climb and speed?

Karnak · « **Reply #5 on:** September 27, 2005, 04:38:00 PM »

I think that is just the angle.

I am hoping the G-14 is the 109 that will really work for me. The G-10/K-4 was always heavier than I liked and the G-6 didn't perform as well as I'd like. I am hoping the G-14 will be around the G-6's handling coupled with more power and better cockpit visibility.

Wilbus · « **Reply #6 on:** September 27, 2005, 05:05:22 PM »

Love the G10 handeling as it is, but G6 does turn a bit better, almost 500 lbs weight difference acording to AH plane stats. Wounder if G14 will be heavier then the G6?

I might stay in the K4 though

Morpheus · « **Reply #7 on:** September 27, 2005, 05:08:36 PM »

can we test it tonight maybe?

test it.. yeah thats it.

Bruno · « **Reply #8 on:** September 27, 2005, 06:34:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wilbus
Love the G10 handeling as it is, but G6 does turn a bit better, almost 500 lbs weight difference acording to AH plane stats. Wounder if G14 will be heavier then the G6?

I might stay in the K4 though

Only slightly, a G-14 is only a G-6 (that's why it looks just like a G-6) with Water-Methonal injection (similiar in concept to Ami ADI). Any extra weight would come from the MW-50 tank and liquid etc...

All this means is a higher 'WEP' speed / climb (10 on 5 off 26 min total). At all other power settings it should be the same (or very close) as the G-6.

Its a great addition to AH.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #9 on:** September 27, 2005, 06:39:44 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Yes, I noticed that. I'll bet you that is one reason the Bf109G-6 has the older style cockpit armor, to better show the progression of improvements beyond just performance increases.

No, the G6 had the old style canopy and it had the clear armor. That was a cool G6 transitional feature between the old armor old canopy of G2-G4 and the new armor new canopy of G14.

Karnak · « **Reply #10 on:** September 27, 2005, 06:54:02 PM »

Was that true of all G-6s, or did it change from the G-2/G-4 style, through the intermediate style and end up using the Erla Haube armor in later production G-6s?

Bruno · « **Reply #11 on:** September 27, 2005, 07:00:47 PM »

Some G-6 (late models) had the Erla haube.

The progression went from armored head rest - armored glass head rest - Erla haube. All were used on the G-6. The current G-6 in AH is very close to what a G-14 would look like.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #12 on:** September 27, 2005, 07:19:55 PM »

Just to be 100% clear, i not talking about the less framed bubble like canopy but just of the thick clear glass head armor.

Not all G6 had glass armor, but by summer to fall 43 many did and certainly it seems most had it in 44.

What I'm saying is that it was very common on g6 and having it here in ah would further differentiate it from thje g2.

Kweassa · « **Reply #13 on:** September 27, 2005, 11:22:01 PM »

What about the bumps?

I was under the impression that the G-14s by mid-'44 had been using the new cowls that had covered the bulges completely.

Larry · « **Reply #14 on:** September 27, 2005, 11:41:27 PM »