109 performance notes

[Bruno]

FTH for the G-14 (DB605AM) is 16400ft (5000m). In AH @ 16400 running at Emergency power (1.7ata 2800 rpm) 100% fuel, 1 x MG151/2cm top speed is 390mph.

If you click on the link justin_g provided (to MW's spit site) you see a chart with a line drawn for the 109G-6/R2. That's basically a G-14. It reaches a top speed of around 410-415mph @ 16400ft.

If anyone has a G-6/R2 or G-14 (non-AS all though all charts are welcomed) kennblatt please post it.

The only thing I recall on the 'web' for the G-14 was a capture report. It was a G-14 that was hit by AA and made an emergency landing in France. If you search the web you will find it (I will post the link tomorrow, I am headed out right now). Before I post in the Bug section I am hoping to come up with some better documentation to show HTC.

[Meyer]

Originally posted by Crumpp
I just checked and the DB605AM does do around 666 kph.  So there is not much point in posting it.

Meyer I cannot get your link to work.  I would like too as there are other documents I need to post.

Yes, i made a mistake with the link. sorry for the trouble. now it should work:

http://www.potato.com/

[Crumpp]

Here is some Bf-109G14 info.  

Can anyone answer why the 109 series flaps do not function correctly?  Has this been fixed?



 

All the best,

Crumpp

[Bruno]

Thanks,

The second image is for the a 109E but first chart, (hard to read on my end) seems to confirm what I expected and what Kurfürst had posted. In this case a G-14/U4 (3cm):

568km/h (352mph) 1740ps @ SL
665km/h (413 mph) 1700ps @ 5000m (16400ft)

[Squire]

Just for info what non-AS powerplants and fuel types could a 109G-14 conceiveably have?

DB605AM with C3+MW50 and what else? Or is that it?

[Bruno]

B4 all though C-3 could be used (not necessarily to increase boost beyond 1.7ata).

In fact here's a link to the captured G-14:

Captured Aircraft Report Me109G-14 W.Nr. 413601

it mentions:

This engine has the normal small supercharger and both engine bearers are of light alloy.  C-3 (100 octane) fuel is used but additional power for short periods is obtained from an apparatus known as the "MW 50", in conjunction with a boost pressure of 1.7 ata (equals British boost of +9.5).  This is a system of delivering methanol and water to the eye of the supercharger from a light alloy tank (probably of 35 gallon capacity) situated behind the normal fuel tank.

[Squire]

My last Q. would be concerning the fuel then, if its running at 1.7 ATA (as in AH2), lets say, does it make any difference in performance if its running on B4 or C3? If not, then it looks clear that the specs should be modified from what they are. Seems no other non-AS engine was used, and no other sub-type can be the reason for the difference in performance. It should be a FTH of 5000 meters.

Basically a process of elimination. Unless there is an "early" 109G-14 of some type or varient that you guys have not looked at yet. I couldnt find anything that suggested there was.

[Crumpp]

The second image is for the a 109E

Flaps mechanism is the same on all 109's.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Bruno]

My last Q. would be concerning the fuel then, if its running at 1.7 ATA (as in AH2), lets say, does it make any difference in performance if its running on B4 or C3? If not, then it looks clear that the specs should be modified from what they are. Seems no other non-AS engine was used, and no other sub-type can be the reason for the difference in performance. It should be a FTH of 5000 meters.

Basically a process of elimination. Unless there is an "early" 109G-14 of some type or varient that you guys have not looked at yet. I couldnt find anything that suggested there was.

No C3 wouldn't make any difference. Max boost was still 1.7ata.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by Crumpp
Flaps mechanism is the same on all 109's.

All the best,

Crumpp

Not so. The E had different flaps than the F, G, and K series. The E had a solid flap with an aerodynamic housing behind the oil coolers, but the F and later had a separate flap for that area, and the oil cooler flaps would change shape with the flaps position.

[Crumpp]

Not so. The E had different flaps than the F, G, and K series.

Flaps mechanism is the same on all 109's.

The flaps themselves are different but still most certainly strong enough to be lowered at similar speeds.

They were all lowered using same gearing differential and controls.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Thanks for the potato tip!

Here's the speed curve for the G-6/R2, it's the same thing as the G-14 performance wise (G6/r2 = recce G-6 with camera and 605AM with MW injection). The speed curve (2) for MW50 max power, the climb curve unfurtunately only for 30-min Kamfpleistung 1.3ata. The rest of the data on the chart is basically the same as the doc Crumpp just posted. (Dashed 3) seems to show normal G-6 (or G-8 recce) performance at 1.42ata.

The G-14 used only the 605AM, the G-14/AS either the 605ASM or later the 605ASC. AM and ASM could run on either B4 or C3, the power being the same, C3 being safer for the engine if the MW system fails. ASC was introduced in 1945, and would run on C-3 fuel, either for 1.8ata=1800PS or 1.98ata, 2000PS, a' la K-4.

[Bruno]

I posted this in the Bug Section.

It would be like saying "here is a Merlin 66 Spit graph" and showing the speed and climb of a Spitfire PR XI.

Not really, the G-6/R2 and G-14 differ only slightly, not enough to make any difference in performance...

The G-14 is mentioned in Mtt meetings minutes as the official name of the G-6/MW50 designation which was used internally by Mtt for the G-6 equipped with the MW-50 system (previously used on the recce G-6/R2 variant).

[Squire]

Yup, I realised that and removed the post. It should be the same given it was an armed recce a/c, more like a Spit FR XIVE in design. I though originally it was a "straight" Recon bird.

[Charge]

"Flaps mechanism is the same on all 109's.
The flaps themselves are different but still most certainly strong enough to be lowered at similar speeds.
They were all lowered using same gearing differential and controls."

IIRC in FGK models the ailerons drooped a bit as the flaps were lowered. Did the E have a same feature?

-C+