PDA

View Full Version : Tell me about Me109F4 "late" - 1.42ATA



alert_1
07-05-2006, 05:01 AM
Me109F4 is my favorite "axis" plane with its well balanced performance vs. maneuvrability and I always wonder why evolution of F series and DB601 was discontinued, it seems to be ideal dogfigther for east front.
Now I learn on the forum that there actually was some developmnet and F4 "late" boosted to 1.42 was introduced(?) in service in '42.
Was this F4 as good as G2?

Bremspropeller
07-05-2006, 07:40 AM
Kurfy assumes that.

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 08:11 AM
Bf109F4 with DB601E at 1,42ata:

1350PS at takeoff - thats more than the DB605s 1,3ata rating (1310PS)

Topspeed at 6000m: 670km/h

So with this 1,42ata boost the Bf109F4 was slightly faster than a Bf109G2 at 1,3 ata (666km/h). Plus with the additional power it would also become slightly more manoeuvrable and be faster in climb-rates.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

RCAF_Irish_403
07-05-2006, 08:13 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
Me109F4 is my favorite "axis" plane with its well balanced performance vs. maneuvrability and I always wonder why evolution of F series and DB601 was discontinued, it seems to be ideal dogfigther for east front.
Now I learn on the forum that there actually was some developmnet and F4 "late" boosted to 1.42 was introduced(?) in service in '42.
Was this F4 as good as G2?

F4 is my favorite fighter right now....this thing is one bad MF'er

Ratsack
07-05-2006, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Bf109F4 with DB601E at 1,42ata:

1350PS at takeoff - thats more than the DB605s 1,3ata rating (1310PS)

Topspeed at 6000m: 670km/h

So with this 1,2ata boost the Bf109F4 was slightly faster than a Bf109G2 at 1,3 ata (666km/h). Plus with the additional power it would also become slightly more manoeuvrable and be faster in climb-rates.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Where do these data come from?

cheers,
Ratsack

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 09:56 AM
http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=7&L=1

and especially

http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=12&L=1

Feel free to browse through

Xiolablu3
07-05-2006, 11:37 AM
Originally posted by RCAF_Irish_403:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alert_1:
Me109F4 is my favorite "axis" plane with its well balanced performance vs. maneuvrability and I always wonder why evolution of F series and DB601 was discontinued, it seems to be ideal dogfigther for east front.
Now I learn on the forum that there actually was some developmnet and F4 "late" boosted to 1.42 was introduced(?) in service in '42.
Was this F4 as good as G2?

F4 is my favorite fighter right now....this thing is one bad MF'er </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, SpitVc vs 109F4 all the way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Although when the team ran out of 109G2's the other day I tried to fight Spitfire MkVIII's in one and the results werent too hot.

But there is a 2 year development gap so I guess its not that surprising.

alert_1
07-05-2006, 12:19 PM
Hmm..so "our" Me109F4 (41) with DB601 1200hp has max. speed 624km/h at 6000m while Me109F4 1.42 ata (1350hp) would be able to reach 670km at6000m? With only 150hp more? Or DB601E was able to keep higher output at alt?
Comes to my mind: why actually LW replaced very quickly all Me109F4 with G model even when F4 was almost better?

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by alert_1:
Hmm..so "our" Me109F4 (41) with DB601 1200hp has max. speed 624km/h at 6000m while Me109F4 1.42 ata (1350hp) would be able to reach 670km at6000m? With only 150hp more? Or DB601E was able to keep higher output at alt?
Comes to my mind: why actually LW replaced very quickly all Me109F4 with G model even when F4 was almost better?

No actually the DB601E has a T/O power of 1270PS at 1,3ata.
And why should the speed increase not be possible. The G2 at 1,3ata and 1310PS also reached 666km/h (after russian tests). The F version was replaced mainly because of the necessity to equip the plane with heavier armament through R├╝sts├┬Ątze. This was only possible by increasing the structural strenght of the design --> weight increase. But the stronger DB605 made up for that quite well

666km/h for the G2 isnt bad...

Abbuzze
07-05-2006, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Bf109F4 with DB601E at 1,42ata:

1350PS at takeoff - thats more than the DB605s 1,3ata rating (1310PS)

Topspeed at 6000m: 670km/h

So with this 1,2ata boost the Bf109F4 was slightly faster than a Bf109G2 at 1,3 ata (666km/h). Plus with the additional power it would also become slightly more manoeuvrable and be faster in climb-rates.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

DonÔ┬┤t mix it up.

Takeoff:
DB601E-@1.20ata-1200PS
DB605A-@1.30ata-1300PS

Combat:
DB601E-@1.42ata-1350PS
DB605A-@1.42ata-1475PS

Rated alt@combat:
DB601E-@1.42ata-1320PS @ ~4800m
DB605A-@1.42ata-1340PS @ ~5700m


I put a similar chart of the DB605A over the DB601E from Zeugmeister.de So there is still a performance difference and the 605A @ 1.30ata nearly matches the DB601E @1.42... and this is 30min performance vs. combat...

http://img313.imageshack.us/img313/7099/db601edb605aleistungskurve2ei.th.jpg (http://img313.imageshack.us/my.php?image=db601edb605aleistungskurve2ei.jpg)

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 12:38 PM
What did I mix up?

"Kampf und Steigleistung" (Combat and Climb power) is lower than "Start und Notleistung" (Takeoff and Emergency power)

Therefore Start (takeoff) und Notleistung of the DB601E at 1,42 ata is 1350PS. And Start and Notleistung of the DB605A at 1,3 ata is 1300 PS.

Stimmt doch Abuzze, oder nicht?

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 01:40 PM
bump

Bremspropeller
07-05-2006, 01:42 PM
Pr0n anyone ?

Bremspropeller
07-05-2006, 01:44 PM
http://media.urbandictionary.com/image/large/pr0n-38780.jpg

JG52Karaya-X
07-05-2006, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by Bremspropeller:

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif

anarchy52
07-05-2006, 04:24 PM
Perhaps Oleg wouldn't mind bringing the F4 to correct specs. 3D model is identical.

Abbuzze
07-05-2006, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
What did I mix up?

"Kampf und Steigleistung" (Combat and Climb power) is lower than "Start und Notleistung" (Takeoff and Emergency power)

Therefore Start (takeoff) und Notleistung of the DB601E at 1,42 ata is 1350PS. And Start and Notleistung of the DB605A at 1,3 ata is 1300 PS.

Stimmt doch Abuzze, oder nicht?

Sorry, I misunderstood you. Hast recht!

What makes me wonder was the value of the G2, with 1.3ata there are a lot of sources which say that the BF reaches around 620-625km/h with combat power. So the value with 666km/h are seems to be the figure with WEP. Anyone knows more about the russian test?


http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109gspeed.jpg
from:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit9v109g.html

JG52Karaya-X
07-06-2006, 12:46 AM
IIRC that test has been posted here not long ago. The Bf109G2 was equipped with R├╝stsatz 6 (2x20mm gondolas) - the Russians referred to it as the "five-pointer"

In speed/climb/zoomclimb tests the Bf109G2 was found to be superior to all Russian fighters it was tested against (Yak1/early La5/LaGG3/I185M82). Only in terms of manoeuvrability it was inferior to them but that was mostly due to the gondolas.

Badsight-
07-06-2006, 12:52 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
Comes to my mind: why actually LW replaced very quickly all Me109F4 with G model even when F4 was almost better? in 42 & 43 the LW were not DFing for air dominence - they were attacking bomber streams

the G airframe had a strengthened wing that could carry gunpods

it was a F4 that HJM was flying when his bail-out attempt failed wasnt it ? either way it was F model Bf-109s that he was using to shoot down Spitfire Mk5's . . .

JG52Karaya-X
07-06-2006, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Badsight-:
in 42 & 43 the LW were not DFing for air dominence - they were attacking bomber streams

That more or less started in mid-43. Anything before was not much more than a nuysance


it was a F4 that HJM was flying when his bail-out attempt failed wasnt it ? either way it was F model Bf-109s that he was using to shoot down Spitfire Mk5's . . .

It was a Bf109G2/trop

Bremspropeller
07-06-2006, 04:21 AM
The F-4 also could carry gunpods. However this wasn't much of a good idea since the F-4's wing structure was somewhat porked: wings tended to snap off at highspeed dive-recoveries (ask Wilhelm Balthasar).

The G-2's wing structure was much better suited for additional weight than the F-4's wing structure.

Also, the Gustavs could carry a much more widespread variety of ordnance.

anarchy52
07-06-2006, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by alert_1:
Now I learn on the forum that there actually was some developmnet and F4 "late" boosted to 1.42 was introduced(?) in service in '42.
Was this F4 as good as G2?

Take a G-2, reduce it's weight by ~270kg, increase it's speed to 540 @ SL and from 655 to 670 max speed. You would get quite fast and agile aircraft - faster AND more manuverable then G2 we have in game.

Pilots considered the Friedrich to be the zenith of 109 development. G series were a stopgap measure in anticipation of 109 follow-on: the Me-309 and later the Me-262.

Did anyone forward the info to 1c?

IIJG69_Kartofe
07-06-2006, 05:22 PM
LOL

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Xiolablu3
07-06-2006, 10:29 PM
Reading 'The First and the LAst' by Adolf Gallnd right now.

Interestingly, the German pilots nicknamed the 109 including and after the 109G, 'The Bulge' because they developed all sorts of unsightly bulges all over, which curtailed performance.

The 109F4 is like the Spitfire VIII, a real thoroughbred at the peak of its design, before it got heavier and less manouvrable.

JG52Karaya-X
07-07-2006, 02:12 AM
For me the G2 with 1,42ata (only cleared in late 43') is the peak of 109 design - the G6 is a borderline failure. It increased the firepower by exchanging the LMG with HMGs but at the same time crippled overall performance.

IMO the LW should have stayed with the G2 and waited until the introduction of the MW boosted engines with adding more and heavier armament.

Kurfurst__
07-07-2006, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by Ratsack:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Bf109F4 with DB601E at 1,42ata:

1350PS at takeoff - thats more than the DB605s 1,3ata rating (1310PS)

Topspeed at 6000m: 670km/h

So with this 1,2ata boost the Bf109F4 was slightly faster than a Bf109G2 at 1,3 ata (666km/h). Plus with the additional power it would also become slightly more manoeuvrable and be faster in climb-rates.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Where do these data come from?

cheers,
Ratsack </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It comes from the results of Rechlin flight trials, but, I tend to think after analysis with other tests and power difference that the 670kph figures are w/o compressibility correction (compressibility results in increased readings, peaking at TASmax, see the well known 190A-5 speed chart that shows the effect). This would mean the low level speeds displayed are still quite correct, but it's a bit more at altitude than it should - I think ~655kph would be correct for the F-4 at 1.42ata after compressibilty correction. But that's, of course, is just an educated guess, and in fact it may be that 670 kph is a correct figure for the F-4.

1,42 was introduced at around the end of '41/start '42 for the 601E, so in fact the F-4/1.42 and G-2/1.3 in 1942 had fairly similiar performance overall. At altitude, the 109G was definietely better (more power from DB 605, even at 1,3ata)

Re: the 'bulge' thing, as a matter of fact the early G-1,2,3,4 were just as, if not more clean than the 109Fs. The G-6 was backstep, but still far not as bad as say the difference between the MkV and IX Spits (those radiators, chiefly).