PDA

View Full Version : Daimler-Benz DB605DC and DB605ASC



jagdmailer
04-16-2004, 11:11 AM
Mr Maddox & 1C crew,

Can we please have historically accurate DB605DC and DB605ASC as appropriate in Bf 109G-10, Bf 109G-14, and BF 109K-4 ??

DB605DC @ 2000hp take-off & 1800hp at rated altitude for:

- Bf 109G-10
- Bf 109K-4

DB605ASC @ 2000hp take-off & 1800hp at rated altitude for:

- Bf 109G-14

These could be added to the current planeset in a similar way to the suggested increased boost Bf 109F-4 1942 Bf 109G-2 1943 and the MW-50 Bf 109G-6/U2 1944 as:

1. Bf 109G-10 1945 or Bf 109G-10/DC 1945
2. Bf 109G-14 1945 or Bf 109G-14/ASC 1945
3. Bf 109K-4 1945 or Bf 109K-4/DC 1945

Any other suggestions ?

Thank you,

JagdMailer

jagdmailer
04-16-2004, 11:11 AM
Mr Maddox & 1C crew,

Can we please have historically accurate DB605DC and DB605ASC as appropriate in Bf 109G-10, Bf 109G-14, and BF 109K-4 ??

DB605DC @ 2000hp take-off & 1800hp at rated altitude for:

- Bf 109G-10
- Bf 109K-4

DB605ASC @ 2000hp take-off & 1800hp at rated altitude for:

- Bf 109G-14

These could be added to the current planeset in a similar way to the suggested increased boost Bf 109F-4 1942 Bf 109G-2 1943 and the MW-50 Bf 109G-6/U2 1944 as:

1. Bf 109G-10 1945 or Bf 109G-10/DC 1945
2. Bf 109G-14 1945 or Bf 109G-14/ASC 1945
3. Bf 109K-4 1945 or Bf 109K-4/DC 1945

Any other suggestions ?

Thank you,

JagdMailer

Kurfurst__
04-16-2004, 11:35 AM
"Any other suggestions ?"

Can I have my K-10 with the two-staged version of the DC at 2.3ata, and the MK 103mot? And don`t forget the 4-bladed toothpick prop either... did I forgot about aileron Flettner tabs (well the superb HammerD K4 skin has them already)? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

Gee, if the K-4 is considered scary now, what would THAT be? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Seriously speaking, I would put up if Oleg would :

- correct the SL speed for the K-4, ie. it`s 580 km/h instead of 607 km/h (other altitudes are correct)
- wouldn`t forget to correct the WEP time bug
- and finally get rid of those skeleton-in-the-cupboard extra struts of the Erla canopy`s higher front and higher sides, that were left in from the old canopy when they modified it! With those the Erla gives worser view sometimes than the old 3-piece canopy...

As for the G-10 and G-14, we actually have those in all but name, ie. G-6/AS is actually a G-14/ASC, and G-10 behaves very much like as with 2000PS, too... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945

jagdmailer
04-16-2004, 11:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
"Any other suggestions ?"

Can I have my K-10 with the two-staged version of the DC at 2.3ata, and the MK 103mot? And don`t forget the 4-bladed toothpick prop either... did I forgot about aileron Flettner tabs (well the superb HammerD K4 skin has them already)? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

Gee, if the K-4 is considered scary now, what would THAT be? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Seriously speaking, I would put up if Oleg would :

- correct the SL speed for the K-4, ie. it`s 580 km/h instead of 607 km/h (other altitudes are correct)
- wouldn`t forget to correct the WEP time bug
- and finally get rid of those skeleton-in-the-cupboard extra struts of the Erla canopy`s higher front and higher sides, that were left in from the old canopy when they modified it! With those the Erla gives worser view sometimes than the old 3-piece canopy...

As for the G-10 and G-14, we actually have those in all but name, ie. G-6/AS is actually a G-14/ASC, and G-10 behaves very much like as with 2000PS, too... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

All joking aside, those Bf 109G & K with DB605DC and DB605ASC were available although late, unlike some others that were limited to prototypes or one-offs.

As such, they belong in this sim and I would personally like to see them in the game for the same reason as we need the Bf 109F-4 1942 and Bf 109G-2 1943.

Cheers,

JagdMailer

Kurfurst__
04-16-2004, 01:06 PM
Joking put aside, at least the two stage supercharged DB 605Ds seem to be a reality, ie. the JaPo 109K book mentions that they appeared from early 1945 onwards, and began to flow from the frontlines to rear Czech repair centers "in large quantities" from March 1945, identified from their distinctive pair of green-painted small sidemounted superchargers, ie. as on the development engine 605L. I wonder about the details, I guess I will have to contact the authors themselves.. but it seems possible, the 605L project was cancelled in November 1944, and possible they merged the two projects into one for practical reasons of production. Very interesting indeed, I wonder what performance the K offered with such engine, and this may also be a clue about the "K-14" pair of JG 52, in Czech land again, by "coincidence"...

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945

Willey
04-16-2004, 03:21 PM
Why so much different planes? It would be easier to just clean up the 4 crates we have.

G-6/AS - 605AS, no MW-50!
- higher rated alt than G-6 late, so better high alt performace

G-14 - 605AM
- just a G-6 late with MW-50

G-10 - 605DB
- The605D already incorporates the 603 charger, so it's practically what we have as G-6/AS (or should we call it G-14/AS? :winkhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif in performance. It's with MW-50 like the G-14, but a higher rated alt like the AS. 1800PS is enough for theis bird for sure. Then comes the K-4

K-4 - 605DC
- Just the same engine as in the G-10, using better fuel. Better aerodynamics, more efficient prop, therefore it'S the best of them. According to those TsAGI charts (!) it does ~611 on the deck and 725 at 6k. We have the 725 up there already, but just 580 on the deck. Kinda strange.

And for the B4/C3 availability freaks: There could be 4 K-4s. One ('44) with DB, and another ('45) with DC. The DB would still be better than the G-10, because of aerodynamics and the prop. But why not have a 2000PS K-4? If you don't like it, take the G-10 then http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif. I suggest them like this because they would differ much more in performance than they do now. So there'd be more sense having each of those 4 late 109s. Now most players practically just skip them all and take the K-4, or the AS if they prefer turn fight (...why the hell does it turn better?? ... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif)

jagdmailer
04-21-2004, 12:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Willey:
Why so much different planes? It would be easier to just clean up the 4 crates we have.

G-6/AS - 605AS, no MW-50!
- higher rated alt than G-6 late, so better high alt performace

G-14 - 605AM
- just a G-6 late with MW-50

G-10 - 605DB
- The605D already incorporates the 603 charger, so it's practically what we have as G-6/AS (or should we call it G-14/AS? :winkhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif in performance. It's with MW-50 like the G-14, but a higher rated alt like the AS. 1800PS is enough for theis bird for sure. Then comes the K-4

K-4 - 605DC
- Just the same engine as in the G-10, using better fuel. Better aerodynamics, more efficient prop, therefore it'S the best of them. According to those TsAGI charts (!) it does ~611 on the deck and 725 at 6k. We have the 725 up there already, but just 580 on the deck. Kinda strange.

And for the B4/C3 availability freaks: There could be 4 K-4s. One ('44) with DB, and another ('45) with DC. The DB would still be better than the G-10, because of aerodynamics and the prop. But why not have a 2000PS K-4? If you don't like it, take the G-10 then http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif. I suggest them like this because they would differ much more in performance than they do now. So there'd be more sense having each of those 4 late 109s. Now most players practically just skip them all and take the K-4, or the AS if they prefer turn fight (...why the hell does it turn better?? ... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

BUMP

JagdMailer

Cokol_88IAP
04-22-2004, 03:25 AM
Quite opportunistic always to demand the highest rated plane, that might have exist.

Checking all available curves and always demand the best for game? If so, do it for all AC, e.g. 640 SL for La-7, but it is 35 kph slower in game.

If you read the TZAGI book, not only the charts, it becomes clear, there is no reference to K-4. Only a G-10, which is a poor performer at sealevel according to them.
Kepp in mind, they used german sources as well, and we all know, that data of those docs are almost theoretical.
There are various german K-4 charts available yet, in not a single chart it performs 611 SL.

Props: I only got a reprint of curves, it becoms clear, that the best prop makes 727 at 8500m, ???but no change in sealevel. But this chart is questionable.

jagdmailer
04-22-2004, 09:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cokol_88IAP:
Quite opportunistic always to demand the highest rated plane, that might have exist.

Checking all available curves and always demand the best for game? If so, do it for all AC, e.g. 640 SL for La-7, but it is 35 kph slower in game.

If you read the TZAGI book, not only the charts, it becomes clear, there is no reference to K-4. Only a G-10, which is a poor performer at sealevel according to them.
Kepp in mind, they used german sources as well, and we all know, that data of those docs are almost theoretical.
There are various german K-4 charts available yet, in not a single chart it performs 611 SL.

Props: I only got a reprint of curves, it becoms clear, that the best prop makes 727 at 8500m, ???but no change in sealevel. But this chart is questionable.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cokol,

No opportunism in asking for engine combos that did exist on several aircrafts.

I have no interests whatsoever for the La or Yaks so no point in me asking for them. However, if you like them, why don't you ask for them yourself if they were indeed available.

Cheers,

JagdMailer

PzKpfw
04-22-2004, 12:07 PM
Data I have on the DB605DC:

DB605DC: Take-off and emergency w/MW 50: 2000hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata.

Without MW/50: Take-off and emergency: 1850hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.80ata.

Other sources staete 2000hp @ 1.98ata with the C engine was only possible with MW/50 @ 110% emergency power.

Janes 1945 AE gives difrent data for the DB605DC Ie.:

Take-off and emergency: 1800hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata @ S/L. 1800hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata @ 16,700ft.


Regards, John Waters

---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

----
The one that gets you is the one that you'll never see.

-----
"The damn Jerries have stuck their heads in the meatgrinder, and I've got hold of the handle."

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. December 26, 1944.

------
"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

jagdmailer
04-22-2004, 12:44 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PzKpfw:
Data I have on the DB605DC:

DB605DC: Take-off and emergency w/MW 50: 2000hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata.

Without MW/50: Take-off and emergency: 1850hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.80ata.

Other sources staete 2000hp @ 1.98ata with the C engine was only possible with MW/50 @ 110% emergency power.

Janes 1945 AE gives difrent data for the DB605DC Ie.:

Take-off and emergency: 1800hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata @ S/L. 1800hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata @ 16,700ft.


Regards, John Waters

---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

----
The one that gets you is the one that you'll never see.

-----


DB605ASC:

Year of availablility: 1945

C3 + MW-50

Ratings:

Take-off (0m): 2000hp

Max output at rated altitude: 1800hp @ 4900m


DB605DC:

C3 + MW-50

Year of availability: 1944

Take-off (0M) 2000hp

Max output at rated altitude: 1800hp @ 4900m


Source: Mercedes-Benz AG, Archives, Stuttgart, Germany

DB605ASC was fitted to at least Bf 109G-14/ASC & possibly Bf 109K-4.

DB605DC was fitted to at least Bf 109G-10 & Bf 109K-4.

Butch2K can provide info I am sure on actual "in service" dates, but I think the ASC became available in/around March 1945. Mercedes-Benz archive states 1944 for DB605DC availability.

Fuel availability was sure problematic at best at that time for the Luftwaffe, but I beleive most if not all of the aircraft in the game are currently modelled with best fuel available. Even if they were not, this is just a game after all, so if it was available, give it to me http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JagdMailer
Omega Squad

PzKpfw
04-22-2004, 04:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jagdmailer:


DB605DC:

C3 + MW-50

Year of availability: 1944

Take-off (0M) 2000hp

Max output at rated altitude: 1800hp @ 4900m
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok from reading Mermet, Janda and Poruba etc, it appears the DB605DC, B & C designations according to Mermett indicated fuel type, Ie, B4 or C3 and MW50 or w/o MW. Or according to Janda and Poruba the designations indicated maximum boost presure only.

According to Mermett an Daimler-Benz factory manual dated 5 December 1944, states the C designation, indicated use of C3 w/MW50, wheras the B designation could indicate use of B4 w/MW50 or C3 w/o MW50.

Apperently the DB605DC could be converted from a DB605DC to an DB605DB & from an B to C again, by adjusting a screw valve that controled MW50 flow to the engine.

This allowed the DB605DC to use either B4 or C3 fuel, depending on what fuel was available. and reflects the difrent performance data I listed as here Mermett, & Janda and Poruba agree on performance, Ie,

DB605DC: Take-off and emergency w/MW 50: 2000hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.98ata.

Without MW/50: Take-off and emergency: 1850hp @ 2800rpm @ 1.80ata.

Mermett states however that 2000hp @ 1.98ata with the C engine, was only possible with: MW/50 @ 110% emergency power.

Regards, John Waters

---------
Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

----
The one that gets you is the one that you'll never see.

-----
"The damn Jerries have stuck their heads in the meatgrinder, and I've got hold of the handle."

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. December 26, 1944.

------
"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".

Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

Kurfurst__
04-23-2004, 10:40 AM
2000 PS K-4s, G-14s and G-10s were a reality, they existed and saw extensive combat. "Not just "might".. and I dont see why it is opportunism... in fact its very likely that the two-staged 605D (605LD?? my own designation for it..) equipped K4s also saw service/combat, they would be stellar HA performers, ie. engine having no less than 9.5 km rated altitude! More powerful than the Jumo 213E at altitude...

As for the SL speed of K-4, 607 km/h is the official data with either the standard broad 3bladed or the 4-bladed toothpick prop. And not impossible, the broad 3 bladed prop was quite bad for low altitude speed, ie. comapred to the previous normal width prop it caused a lot more drag (it was designed to grab the thin air at HA ith lots of area), and produced about -10 km/h speed at low altitudes at the same power...

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/fat-furred%20tigerB.jpg

"We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field".
- Lt. Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. Febuary 1945.

"One day a Tiger Royal got within 150 yards of my tanks and knocked me out. Five of our tanks opened up on him at ranges of 200 to 600 yards and got 5 or 6 hits on the front of the Tiger. They all just glanced off and the Tiger backed off and got away. If we had a tank like that Tiger, we would all be home today."
- Sgt. Clyde D. Brunson, US Army, Tank Commander, February 1945