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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
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).
With the GM-1, the power of the DB-603 engine was to be 2,400 PS
Wich variant of DB603 was it suposed to get??
Spoiler
2 Likes
The Me 309 was to have various DB-603 engines, named A/H/G, also Jumo 213.
I will verify the predicted engine performance in 1940-1943. With the GM-1 there is talk of about 2,400 PS.
When tested, the DB 603 engine was not mature and its power output was often at 1,500PS.
The top picture is the armour scheme of the Me 309, the bottom picture is the periscope variant. Without the cabin, the drag of the aircraft is reduced
From 1944, the Bf 109 was to be replaced by the Me 309, which was to be produced in three versions - depending on armament and weight, from the lightest to the heaviest, the so-called Stuka version.
The nose gear was expected to be safer for pilots to take off and land, the large cockpit protection was supposed to better protect the pilot. The ejection seat was very advanced in its day.