Author Topic: Anti-gravity device in Hartmanns 109? (Read 2383 times)

Pyro · « **Reply #15 on:** January 18, 2000, 11:30:00 AM »

Ooops, my bad. It's a bug that will be fixed in the next version. The AH G-6 has a 605A, same as the G-2.

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

"The side with the fanciest uniforms loses."

niklas · « **Reply #16 on:** January 18, 2000, 01:01:00 PM »

ok , i made some climb tests, too. I wrote down for every 1000ft altitude the corresponding climbspeed (read it from the vsi).

It´s really interesting to see the trend of the climbspeed. It doesn´t make sense to measure the time to 20K, because climbspeed varies a lot.
You can describe the trend of the climbspeed with certain points. Think yourself a linear interpolation between them.
The third number is how much ft/min climb a aircraft will lose (average) with every 1000ft more altitude

(all with 100%fuel, 100%, no wep, 1*20mm)
autospeed 160

109F
0ft......3500ft/min
4000ft...3500ft/min....0
14000ft..3250ft/min....-25
18000ft..3250ft/min....0
25000ft..2350ft/min....-128
28000ft..1500ft/min....-283

(note: very interesting imo that the F has a almost constant climb performance up to 18000ft)

109G2
0ft......3400ft/min
6000ft...3750ft/min....+58
20000ft..2675ft/min....-77
28000ft..1425ft/min....-156

(note: max. climbrate in 6000ft. critical altitude in 20000ft)

109G6
0ft*.....4000ft/min
6000ft*..4350ft/min....+58
21000ft..3200ft/min....-77
27000ft..2250ft/min....-158

(same as 109G2, but in every altitude about 650ft/min more climb. The * values are estimated with the help of the G2-values, cause the vsi-range is only up to 4000ft/min. )

109G10
0ft......3550ft/min
4000ft...3750ft/min....+50
7000ft...3550ft/min....-66
11000ft..3400ft/min....-37
23000ft..2750ft/min....-54
26000ft..2300ft/min....-150

(note: loses between 6000-23000ft not as much climb performance than the g2 and g6)

Pyro, our 109G10 has a DB605AS, right? It´s the only possible explanation for the low critical altitude of the G10.

What a pity. The engine is like in a porsche the heart of the machine. I think a G6 with a 605A will perform similar like a G2. Where will be the difference? Armment, external load, of course. But what else?

I really would like to see this:
109G2 with DB605A
109G6 with DB605AM or even ASM
109G10 with DB605D (with mw50 OR gm1! - crtical altitude without mw50 or gm1 28000ft, with gm1 33000ft)

I think this would be a great representation of the G-series!!

niklas

Pyro · « **Reply #17 on:** January 18, 2000, 02:23:00 PM »

The G-10 is with the 605D. Here's a comparison chart between the G-6 and G-10 in AH. Note, the G-6 does have a bug in it and is over-performing in this version.

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

"The side with the fanciest uniforms loses."

Hristo · « **Reply #18 on:** January 18, 2000, 02:28:00 PM »

nevermind

[This message has been edited by Hristo (edited 01-18-2000).]

niklas · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2000, 03:35:00 PM »

thx pyro

I think i came with my measurment to the same results.
Of course, exact numbers are a bit different. I only had the vsi and my eyes, till 20000ft a lot of fuel was already burned away, the influence of the autopilot etc.

Please don´t understand me wrong. I don´t say the G10 climbs some 100ft/min to slow in xxx ft, i´m just wondering myself why the climbperformance drops so much faster already at 23000ft. Shouldn´t this happen not below ~28000ft?? I mean, climbperformance drops quicker over 23000ft because engine power drops quicker, right?
I always thought that the late G-models ( and the K of course) were high altitude fighter

niklas

fd ski · « **Reply #20 on:** January 18, 2000, 03:38:00 PM »

Pyro - could you clarify whether WEP in AH designates GM1 or MW50 for 190's and 109s please ?

<snickering in the corner...

bug... heheheh....>

------------------

Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
www.raf303.org

Pyro · « **Reply #21 on:** January 18, 2000, 04:14:00 PM »

Niklas,

I have the G-10 peaking out on top speed at climb and combat power at about 26000 feet. At climb speed, performance drops out earlier than at top speed. I know this is less than you have on your K-4 charts, but as usual there is conflicting data on this and I had more evidence pointing the other way.

Fd-ski, the only 109 in AH with MW50 is the G-10.

------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

"The side with the fanciest uniforms loses."

niklas · « **Reply #22 on:** January 18, 2000, 05:05:00 PM »

thx pyro for this statement.

You know, i don´t have a problem with 23/26000ft in the main, because 99% of the action takes place below 20000ft.

But it will become important in a Scenario

niklas

juzz · « **Reply #23 on:** January 18, 2000, 07:38:00 PM »

Quote

I really would like to see this:
109G2 with DB605A
109G6 with DB605AM or even ASM
109G10 with DB605D (with mw50 OR gm1! - crtical altitude without mw50 or gm1 28000ft, with gm1 33000ft)

So if I understand correctly, what we actually have is:

Bf109G-2 with DB605A (13??hp at 100%, 1475hp at WEP)
Bf109G-6 with DB605A (incorrectly giving 1475hp at 100%, and ????hp with WEP)
Bf109G-10 with DB605D (13??hp at 100%, ~1800hp with MW50 WEP)

1. Why doesn't the G-6 have MW50? I thought that was one of the main "features" of that model? So it seems graphically, it's a late G-6 with the "Erla Haube" and bigger tail, but the engine is a normal DB605A, not DB605AM?
2. We need two WEP buttons. Firstly because the G-10's takeoff and emergency power is unavailable without using MW50 as well, and secondly because(I think?) the MW50 could be used at any power setting.
3. We want GM-1 too!

How does the F-4 maintain it's climbrate up to 18k? The DB601E must have been some engine to be able to do that? WarBirds' F-4 is the same, maintaining a vertical speed off the dial until about 20k...

fats · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2000, 08:09:00 PM »

Oh look a chart! Great. I had the WB charts for the longest time until I lost all my WB stuff with my HD. Hopefully there're more charts on the way.

//fats

leonid · « **Reply #25 on:** January 19, 2000, 05:25:00 AM »

niklas & Pyro,
Thanks for the info. I've always had a soft spot for the dreaded messer.

If I may ask a question, what were the advantages & disadvantages of:

[list=1]

GM1?
MW50?

juzz · « **Reply #26 on:** January 19, 2000, 06:16:00 AM »

1.GM-1 = Nitrous Oxide(N20)
Pro: Inhaling it can cause euphoric feelings.

Con: Inhaling too much will render you unconscious.

2.MW 50 = Methanol/Water(CH3OH) mixed in 1:1 ratio.
Pro: Drinking it will get you quite drunk.

Con: Drinking too much will poison and kill you.

janneh · « **Reply #27 on:** January 19, 2000, 07:14:00 AM »

leonid · « **Reply #28 on:** January 19, 2000, 07:56:00 AM »

juzz,
You bum, I'm still waiting

janneh,
What you smiling about?

------------------
leonid, aka grisha
129 IAP VVS RKKA

niklas · « **Reply #29 on:** January 19, 2000, 08:34:00 AM »

leonid, both methods increased the performance of a 109 in different ways:

MW50: The Pilot could open by hand a valve, that let the liquid pour out into the air. This made the 109 lighter, and performance increased.
Disadvantage: The diameter of the valve was small, thus it took a long time until the mw-50 tank was empty.
Advantage: Small amounts of mw50 could be used for the windscreen-wiper

GM1: In 109 with a pressure-cabin, the pilot could activate gm1. The cooled liquid poured into the pilotcabin, evaporated there and replaced the "normal" air.
Because N02 is lighter than air, you have now like in a Zeppelin a great lift effekt, and climb performance increased dramtically!
Advantage: very effective
Disadvantage: see juzz postings. Usually the pilots had to wear gasmasks all the time.

niklas