Late Hundert Neun ID

[stona]

Lovely little 'Gustav' you've got there.

I'm afraid you will always find conflicting information about late war German production and the various types/sub types of Bf109 are a real minefield. As you will be aware even identifying some types can be contentious. I've looked at lumps,bumps,fillers,tails,wheels,various fairings etc until I'm cross-eyed and given myself a head ache!
I admire your attempt to sort it out,I've been trying for years. All you can do is read up as much as you can and at least have an informed opinion,someone will always have a different one.
Cheers
Steve

 

[Ratsel]

How many 'much more'? Please note those numbers are for new build (ie from scratch) a/c and does not include the numbers re-manufactured using old airframes.

Example: Your first link showed 177 built Mtt-Reg G-10's, the number is closer to double that ( around 350 NEW units W.Nr. allotted 130 000 - 130 600 source: Prien others). Rasmussen on 12o'clock high has unique insight and information about this subject that us mere mortals cannot access.

 

[kettbo]

Stona,

Thanks! I have not built a kit in years!

I began with drawing of the G-14 in Squadron/Signal Messerschmitt Bf 109 in Action part 2 by Beaman, page 39. Shows three trim tabs on the rudder.

Page 36 shows a late G-6 with tall tail, single tab, and the Erla Haube canopy. Aside from that, the drawings are the same by me. So, unless something comes up, the plan is to install multiple rudder trim tabs. Anyone wanting an earlier (late style) G-6, file/the extra tabs off. For me, shortening even a dozen tails and scribing the angled rudder of the F and common G tail is not a challenge. Betting the market would want a short tail version as fodder for Mustang grazing. Would also want to plug in a streamlined cowl for those wanting an /AS, G-10, or K. I hope to offer choice of canopies for the Gustav hoping not to destroy the model while doing cutting and fitting. I should have been a brain surgeon!

I'll have the camera out this evening, some pics tomorrow of some late 109s from my collection for Thursday viewing.

 

[Ratsel]

Well there where various rudder for the woodtail G-6/G-14. Depending whether it was and AS equipt engine or not.

 

[vanir]

I think you'll find rudder variations by regional production and local AS interceptor assembly coincidental. Just saying I've spent time talking with German vets in person and Dietmar Hermann online and the impressions of any orgnisational infrastructure in deployment or equipment from late 44 is largely illusory record keeping as they tell it, and the atmosphere I was trying to create of a very ad hoc and stressed effort governed almost entirely by local circumstances I feel is something important.

It would be more correct to say that: "Regensburg was being supplied with tail units made in nearby Munich, which were this type. Erla however were fitting tail units from this other supplier, who made them a little differently."
Than it is to say, "The G-10 had this tail unit and the G-14 had that one."

That would be incorrect to say, and it is the impression I feel is being translated Ratsel. I mean no offence saying so and certainly wouldn't challenge you in any contest here, I'm making a sincere observation about something that's been nagging at me here.

I'm weighing up my way of looking at it and yours and finding mine more likely.


if I might add and again honestly I mean no offence, I had a drawn out issue some years ago over the special boost in bmw engines on focke wulfs because the documentation at the time didn't mesh with mechanical likelihoods (I'm a hobby race builder), so I distinctly challenged them on the basis that if documentation and likelihood go head to head, likelihoods will generally win. Things like aircraft and war industry are finite measures, they're mechanical in nature and ruled absolutely by convenience and likelihood.

it took years before a small document appeared on a host website, a declassified US Wright-Patterson 1945 evaluation of an Fw-190F-8 with the overboost system, the document specifically describes mechanical details of the system. These perfectly matched my contentions and falsified the popular misconception, which incidentally derived from the combination of translated documents and an ambiguous understanding of mechanical workings by the documentarians, nomenclature is sometimes misleading.

point is likelihoods do trump documented inferrences.

 

[kettbo]

OMG!
3 rudders, swell! Glad that I am working in 1/144 scale here, leave a bit for the imigination! Which rudder(s) for those with AS/ vs without?
Will be ordering the Prien book and any others suggested in the next few days. The more I find out, the more there is to find out. I suppose 109 sleuthing could become a serious pursuit!
The drawing in Beaman p 40 shows G-14 with rudder hinge bracket T shaped while G-14/AS has the spear point (>) that you show above.
Drawing in Weal's Bf 109F/G/K Aces of the Western Front for tall-tail Gustavs only show a G-10 without tabs and a G-10/R-2 with multiple tabs

edit
after reading VANIR's comment #25 and Ratsel's #24 again
Way too much info on 109 rudders!
Great that there is this much information out there! Thanks for posting all this guys.
In 1/144 scale the tall tail is difficult to identify much less which shop made it. By necessity it will be somewhat vague in detail.

now I saw that there are larger trim tabs on some of the stabilizers...

 

[Ratsel]

Mtt-Reg G-10's came w/o tabs. Rudders were IIRC manufactured by a single plant. Hence so many with the same paint schemes, either stenciled or freehand mottled depending what Mtt-Reg/Erla/WNF wanted (we are talking the wooden rudders). Pg.66 of Augsburgs Last Eagles has a good example. A good read would be Late war Bf 109 pictures source - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum or if one chooses the can take a look at my foto-album Messerschmitt Bf 109G-10 pictures by ASYLUM_thirteen - Photobucket. One should find many questions answered if one knows what they are looking for.

 

[Siegfried]

There really is little consistancy.

The Me 109G6 could come with
a/ clear view Erla hood.
b/ extended tail yoke for better takeoff and landing
c/ tall tail
d/ it could come in AM (water methanol), AS (enlarged supercharger) and ASM (both)

The Me 109G-14A and Me 109G-14AS standardised water-methanol (MW50)

However the G14 had a larger oil cooler to handle the extra power
but it could either come with or without the tall tail or extended yoke.

The Me 109G10, which came in after the Me 109G14 is really an Me 109G14AS
with a few extra Me 109K4 parts (bigger wheels and wing bulges)

Late model Me 109G10 and Me 109G14AS are virtually indistinguishable.

One thing is for sure, a Me 109K4 had a retractable tail yoke.

 

[vanir]

On a lot of K-4 in the field the tail wheel was locked down and the panels closed over, they're visually identical to some G-10 examples.
Some G-14 got G-6 wheels/wing bulges, others got K-4 ones. Same with the G-10. There are plenty of photos of both with interchangeable spec and parts and only engines/plates tell the difference.


When Ratsel says Mtt Regensburg fitted specific tails to their G-10s that's pretty convincing and highly likely, G-10 assembled elsewhere maybe different.


Hey what if we laid out model/subtype fit by regional deployment, and tried to infer regional suppliers, then worked back from there and compared different regions with the most common tail assemblies in service aircraft stationed in that region? Do you think we'd see a correlation in region variation, or an even spread throughout the Reich? Agreed this gets awkward because staffeln were being redeployed regularly and in general retreat to start with, but still some significant variation ought to show at the battlefront if it exists in logistics.

 

[Ratsel]

The Me 109G10, which came in after the Me 109G14 is really an Me 109G14AS
with a few extra Me 109K4 parts (bigger wheels and wing bulges)

What I found out so far:

130000 – 130500 ~ Mtt-Regensburg G-10 - small main/long fixed tailwheel
150700 – 151000 ~ Erla G-10
151500 – 152000 ~ Erla G-10
490000 – 490800 ~ Erla G-10 - many were fitted with DB 605/AS - small main/long fixed tailwheel
491000 – 491600 ~ Erla G-10 - small main/long fixed tailwheel
610300 – 610600 ~ WNF G-10
610900 – 611000 ~ WNF G-10
611900 – 612000 ~ WNF G-10
612700 – 613000 ~ WNF G-10
613000 – 613300 ~ WNF G-10
770000 – 770400 ~ WNF G-10 - majority equipped with Rb50/30 camera
770900 – 771000 ~ WNF G-10 - majority equipped with Rb50/30 camera
771000 – 771200 ~ WNF G-10

 

[kettbo]

Wow fellas! Such interesting information!
I think I'm becoming absorbed here. The information should make my 1/144 plane a more authentic replica.

But there is more to this...
1/144 scale is actually LARGE for me to build in! For many years I have build aircraft master for RAIDEN MINIATURES in the UK in tiny 1/285 scale!
And if you are thinking there are more GUSTAVS around you are correct.


3x 109s, left to right
we have my Raiden GUSTAV with tall tail and smooth canopy able to be painted as regular or Erla Haube
The G-6/R-6 in JG300 band is a GHQ brand Gustav
the Grau beast is a CinC Bf 109F altered a bit to look like a Gustav in the HohenJager role

Side views
GHQ has a funny side view
CinC is nice but too thick in the fuselage at the front of the tail
Though a crappy paintjob is in progress, the profile is correct

The JG300 unit and my Gustav(far from done with painting by the way) shown with my Kurfurst (bare metal) and a CinC F made to look a lot like a G-10 in the Gray and Green. I modified this aircraft, fitted a tall tail and made the canopy look Erla Haube.

Lots and lots of Hundert Neuns and 190s

'some' of the American fighters.

I have LOTS of painting to do this winter! Cobbler's children without shoes and a master figure sculptor with unpainted miniatures!

and finally a somewhat out of focus solo shot of the Kurfurst

 

[stona]

FWIW my notes have five different rudder types fitted from early 1944 (retrofitted to earlier airframes) onwards. Taking into account sub-types with,for example,different width tabs,I've got a minimum of nine different rudder configurations.
So much for standardisation.
Cheers
Steve

 

[kettbo]

Am enjoying Falcon's 109 site. Thanks Ratsel.
I have concluded that with 2 canopy types, 3-4 cowl shapes, short tail and 5 tall rudder configurations, a 'standard' late 109 really isn't standard!

 

[Milosh]

Example: Your first link showed 177 built Mtt-Reg G-10's, the number is closer to double that ( around 350 NEW units W.Nr. allotted 130 000 - 130 600 source: Prien others). Rasmussen on 12o'clock high has unique insight and information about this subject that us mere mortals cannot access.

If you have primary reference material Ratsel on this ~350 number why don't you post it in the thread so the spreadsheet can be updated.

 

[vanir]

Me too, I kind of got awed a bit as this thread got going. You guys have left me in the dust.

 

[Ratsel]

Milosh, its still a work in progress. Time consuming to track all the Mtt-Reg W.Nr.'s with a lack of factory records. But it will get done. Even fotos of the elusive Mtt-Reg built G-10s are very hard to come by. You can see the fotos I have collected here.

In terms of standardizing parts that was almost accomplished with the G-10/K-4's. G-10's came with the DB 605D (save for a few very rare Elra built G-10/AS), and rudders either with or without trim tabs. But again, different plants had different ideas, and with these being produced in late 44', you get what you get.

 

[kettbo]

I am considering completion of the GUSTAV in G/AS or G-10 with refined bulges vs earlier unit with MG131 boils.

Ratsel, interesting pics in your gallery. Thanks you for posting the link.
Noted a few of the 109s in Allied 'attire'
Reminded me of the other thread here of planes in Captured Markings...
Are there German comparative flight tests, Eric Brown type, of say P-51B/C or D vs Gustavs?
Not trying to derail my thread here, just on my mind at the moment.

 

[Milosh]

So why not post in the thread what you have Ratsel.

 

[Ratsel]

I am considering completion of the GUSTAV in G/AS or G-10 with refined bulges vs earlier unit with MG131 boils.

Ratsel, interesting pics in your gallery. Thanks you for posting the link.
Noted a few of the 109s in Allied 'attire'
Reminded me of the other thread here of planes in Captured Markings...
Are there German comparative flight tests, Eric Brown type, of say P-51B/C or D vs Gustavs?
Not trying to derail my thread here, just on my mind at the moment.

the Me 109G-5/AS, G-6/AS, G-10, K-4's streamlined cowls are refered to as 'Type 100' or 'Type 110' cowls. The 110 being asymetrical. Dunno if Eric Brown said anything specific about the 109 vs the P-51, but Eric Brown, once said the Bf-109's lines always brought the adjective "sinister" to mind. A lot of pilots, both Allied and Axis, have an opinion of the 109. Several Luftwaffe aces (Eric Hartmann included) preferred the 109 over Focke-Wulf's design. One Allied P-47 pilot once commented that "In all the dogfights I was in, I never saw the pilot of a 109 lose control. I saw a lot of Fw-190's spin out, hit trees, or suddenly stall. Never the Messerschmitt." The Luftwaffe pilots I've personally spoken with, Herr Theo Nau (3 kills) Herr Horst Petzschler (26 kills) told me the Me 109 was a "very forgiving airplane to fly". Herr Nau who dogfighted with P-47s said that could not "manuver" with the 109, and Herr Petzschler said the P-51 could not "Dive" with the 109. He also told me that the one time he looked at the Air speed indicator in a dive, it was pinned at 800kph (end of gage).

 

[kettbo]

just wondering of the Luftwaffe evals of the captured Allied fighters have survived. Some 'test flight' data German style vs same tests on German planes like on Kurfurst's site.
Then again, would the German pilots and ground crew get the most out of the Allied aircraft?

Interesting info from the German pilots Ratsel. Curious if these combats were low, medium, or high altitude.

I have tried a few times to make miniatures rules for WW2 air combat. Who climbed faster, turned tighter....just too much conflicting info. Too much "it depends"
Saddened that even in a 2004 book, saw G-6 speed listed as 389mph