MESSERSCHMITT ME 309 DEVELOPMENT & POLITICS | Mortons Books
The Me 309 was faster, worse to climb than the Bf 109G. But the Me 309 was at the beginning, whereas the 109 was at the end of its potential and perfectly established
Interesting.
https://www.amazon.com/Control-Windows-High-End-Throttle-Gaming-Console/dp/B0CFFXKVBT
We can gets premium Bf 109 G-2 in German TT again if you gets HOTAS from HORI.
I don’t see any numbers.
Sry man - i missed this part somehow, sry for that.
I am not sure if you got my main point of the prop pitch issue with 109s:
-
You can use the same engines in other aircraft and fly them with infinite WEP (= the whole match without overheating) - but this is only possible if you are able to limit the power output via prop pitch whilst having the rads on manual control.
-
The sole purpose of this exercise is to find a setting for infinite WEP with the lowest drag whilst using the maximum power output. So if you are open your rads too much you are too slow, so the additional power of WEP is sacrificed by higher drag.
-
Limiting the prop pitch at full power (= WEP) is usually way more effective to find a “set & forget” setting with the lowest drag but with the highest sustainable power output.
But, you can’t use this in 109s if you can’t adjust the prop pitch below 100% whilst using WEP - you kill your engine.
Having denied this option by gaijin is imho a major disadvantage for 109 pilots - and as written in another thread - killing your engine with full WEPping a whole match is not backed by reality.
It boils down that this is just an arbitrary nerf of 109s to protect USSR & US hardware.
That the same engines are fine outside German planes can be proven by 2 examples (+ a bonus):
-
U can fly the J 21a with the DB 605 engine with 75% prop pitch and 50% on both rads with infinite WEP
-
U can fly the SM 92 with 2 DB 605 engines with 75/80/85% prop pitch (Hot/Medium/Cold maps) and 50% on both rads with infinite WEP
-
Bonus: The B-18B with 2 DB 605 engines don’t need prop pitch adjustments - you can fly it with infinite WEP just with both rads at 50%…
Jeez $500 for a 109??? That’s crazy…
- 500USD for HOTAS with 3 prem props.
Calculated or what they measured on prototypes (different engine power and weight settings).
Calculated performance, August 1941, DB 603A engine
Height/speed
0 - 625 km/h
2 - 680 km/h
4 - 740 km/h
7 - 785 km/h
The performance measured on various prototypes, often with lower engine power or the radiator extended and fixed, showed that the speed was about 30-50 Km/h higher than the 1943 Bf 109G.
Climb rate was 10% lower, but the aircraft had about three times the armour protection of the Luftwaffe standard and far more powerful armament than the Bf 109.
The Me 309 was not accepted into service because of Messerschmitt’s policy ( they supported the Me 209), problems in the Reich with the DB 603 engines, and the need to produce established aircraft instead of developing new aircraft.
You sure? I’m pretty sure you could fly it with reduced prop pitch at 55-60%. I’d have to test it myself.
WEP time limits were entirely down to high temperatures, and the whatever minute limitations are reset after temperatures stabilize. IL2 and DCS love their oven timer engines.
You kill your engine as soon as you have higher PP rates. So no infinite WEP like with a P-51 C with 100% PP rads at 80%…Did a testflight in F-4 a few minutes ago…
Too bad you don’t write, is it all about Me 309 ? You want some more?
Well yeah, because unlike almost every other plane, the 109’s prop can increase its pitch much more. 100% PP for a P-51 is about 60% on a 109.
My beef is that the premium Bf-109E-7/U2 doesn’t have it’s correct armor modeled. From a book I have: The Warplanes of the Third Reich by William Green it states: “Further variants were the Bf 109E-7/U2, which had 5mm. armour bolted beneath the oil cooler, radiators, and fuel pump to reduce its susceptibility to groundfire in the close support role…”. They added this version of the plane as a rare collectible aircraft years ago but never modeled the armor. So it plays essentially like just a regular E-7 which isn’t very different from an E-4. I guess they never themselves ever found a conclusive source for the armor placement. But it irks me that they would add the aircraft in that case.
You only posted calculated performance, not what they actually achieved - and those numbers look mighty optimistic, being faster than the XP-47J in absolute top speed. Having the radiator extended is a given for high power applications; and at that point the prototype was unarmed.
30-50kph faster… at what altitude, with what engine, and what armament?
The radiator is interesting, it says that in the fight it was even supposed to be retracted and cooled by an internal cooling circuit. It would give minimal drag and is surely the reason for such high calculated performance. So it wasn’t planned to be pushed out to maximum size. No more on this matter has survived. It’s a pity. The book contains a few company drawings of the radiator with no descriptions - it is not preserved.
Armament varied as there were three versions of the Me 309, from the light fighter to the “Stuka” version.
Weight was ± 4 150 Kg, 254 kg was armour protection, originally it was calculated to be 96 kg.
A pressurized cabin contributed to the weight.
You lost me. :-)
I am coming from the point of “easy to use full WEP without overheating and without killing your engine” in (almost) every other plane than in a 109 - which is simply a disadvantage for 109 pilots if you have to fight mostly undertiered opponents (and you need every tiny bit of performance) - and it looks you want to open this old “EinheitsVerstellGeraet” (EVG) discussion.
The EVG was used in F and G models - and the maximum minimum PP was limited by it - even as the pilot had the opportunity to increase/ decrease PP manually - the system prevented blade angles (iirc ~20 to ~70% PP) no matter how long the pilot pushed the “thumb-button” - and Il-2 & wt disables these limitations - even as this is (at least from my pov) technically not possible.
So in other words: The MEC mechanism allows too high or too low pitch angles - as they have not implemented the technical restrictions which prevented this. That’s the reason why you kill your engine in a 109.
I mean you can still kill the engine with too much trottle, but this whole procedure (=to nerf 109 MEC usage) is a joke if the same engine with the same EVG (and imho the same VDM propeller) works perfectly fine in non-German planes…
In that case, sounds like evaporative cooling like on the Ki-64 and He 100. Very fragile, and really not suited for a combat aircraft. Even in that case, those numbers are way too high - at 750kph TAS, the XP-47J is the fastest piston engined fighter. Beating it by nearly 40kph with 1000hp less is… quite a claim.
It is mentioned in the text that surface cooling was considered for the Me 309 and perhaps at the time the radiator was retracted into the fuselage, but it is not known, the papers have not survived to this day. Certainly the Me 309 would have been very fast, probably one of the fastest piston aircraft. Because the beginning of the Me 309 is in the speed record - the Me 209 and Messerschmitt sacrificed some of the agility for speed by choosing a symteric wing profile with higher wing loading ( could it be a laminar profile??).
The DB-603 power would have been around 2000 hp, with MW/GM it would have been higher ( if it was developed enough to that form, but it had the potential).