Me 109 G vs Macchi 205 N Orione

[DIOGENIS]

The Daimler engined fighters debate:

Both fighters were powered by the DB 601 A-1 engine rated 1475 hp. (Italian version Fiat RA 1050 was built under license, and was identical with the original Daimler Benz powerplant)

The legendary Messerschmitt was among the top fighters of WW2.A closer look in the Macchi fighter though, may convince us that the Italian design was superior.

What is your opinion?



Ps
Kawasaki ki 61 I Hien was another axis fighter powered by the same powerplant (DB 601 A 1100 hp)which fought ''very well'' against a Me 109 E..

[Glider]

The Ki61 fought 'very well' against most planes the USA could throw at it let alone a 109E

[DIOGENIS]

Both aircraft weigh 2600 to 2800 kgs, with major differences in span (me 109 :9.04m, macchi 205:11.25 m).Possibly the me 109 could roll better , but the macchi fighter should be more manoeurable and perform better in higher altittudes due to it's lower wing loading.The slats in me 109's wings played a part in dogfighting, but on the other hand during the big war most succesfull fighters operated without them (in fact i don't recall any of them having slats) .

[DIOGENIS]

The same with Macchi 205 N applies for the ki 61 also, but it was even lighter than the 205N, and with a bigger wing!

[Parmigiano]

Who knows? The MC205 N 'Orione' was completed only in a couple of prototypes, words are that it was better than the contemporary Bf109G and it makes sense, since the 'Macchi 200 Mk III' (or MC205V) was at least on par with the best of the bunch, having finally closed the gap on armament.

But production of the 205N never started because of the armistice and because the Germans decided to standardize production on their models that were also easier to build (and this makes sense too)

Btw the engine was the DB605, not 601.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Well I let history speak for itself on this one and in that case the 109G wins for me.

[DIOGENIS]

My mistake parmigiano, DB605 indeed.

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

109 for me too. After all, the impact it had on the war was much greater than the Macchi. Italy wasn't involved in as many fronts as Germany was and their fighters weren't as numerous. But the Me was still up there right with it's biggest envy the Spitfire. I don't know what plane the allied pilots were more afraid of.

I bet often what they met more in greater numbers. And that would be the Me 109.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Agreed, nice siggy there too.

[Parmigiano]

I think there is no doubt for '205N' vs '109G'.

Maybe a correct comparison could be 205V vs 109G-6: they were contemporary and the production (about 250) of 205V was enough to have some opinion on performances.

Of course we should limit the pool to pure performances evaluation (like when we talk about the Ta152), if we consider effective deployement, numbers produced, impact on the war etc. there is no comparison.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Has there ever been a comparison of the two in areas such as maneuverability, speed and so forth?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

We can make a comparison off of performance:

Max Speed
Bf-109G-6: 398 mph
M.C. 205: 399 mph

Cieling
Bf-109G-6: 38,550 ft
M.C. 205: 37,950 ft

Rate of Climb
Bf-109G-6: 3,345 ft/min
M.C. 205: ????

Range
Bf-109G-6: 447 Miles
M.C. 205: 530 Miles

Armament
Bf-109G-6: One 30mm MG 108 cannon firing through hub.
Ammunition: 60 Rounds
Or
One 20mm MG 151 cannon
Ammunition: 150 Rounds
And
Two 13mm MG 131 machine guns above engine.
Ammunition: 300 rpg

M.C. 205: 2x 12.7 mm MG with each 400 rounds on cowling
and
2x 20 mm cannons with each 250 rounds in wings

Basically based off of performance they were pretty much equal. The only thing to go off of is maneuverability now.

[Parmigiano]

I have found this for the 205,

Tipo
Macchi Mc.205
"Veltro"

Motori
DB.605/A o RC.58

Potenza
hp 1.475

Apertura alare (wing span)
m 10,50 (34,45 ft)

Lungh. tot.. (lenght)
m 8,85 (29 ft)

Alt. tot. (height)
m 3,05 (10 ft)

Superf. alare (wing area)
m2. 16,80 (181 sq ft)

Peso a vuoto (empty weight)
kg 2.524 (5.609 pounds)

Peso max (max weight)
kg 3.224 (7.164 pounds)

Velocità max (max speed)
km/h 650 a 7.400 m (403 mph @ 24.280 ft)

Autonomia (range)
km 1.040 (645 miles)

Quota di tangenza (ceiling)
m 11.350 (37.200ft)

The weight for Bf 109 G6 I have found is 2.700 kg (5.900 lb) empty and 3.400 kg (7.500 lbs) max.

Wing area is (should be? I've started to trust the sources like pre-owned car dealers...) 16,36 sqm or 179 sq feet

If so, wing load for the MC205 is 150 (empty) and 192 (max), for the 109G respectively 173 and 218 kg/sqm

The only rate of climb data I've found is for the MC202, 1.086 mt/min (3.563 ft/min): being the 205 about 100 to 300 kg heavier but with a lot more power (about 300 hp) the 205 should be equal or a bit better. (airframe was almost identical)

If the data are correct, the 205 should be a bit more maneuvrable, mainly because of a lower wing load, but the 109's slats were probably an advantage in low speed flight and we have no data about comparison of controls effectiveness.

Also to remark that several sources reports that the AR built DB605 was performing a bit worse than the original. Again a mess, because it seems that several MC205 were fitted with the German built DB605.

.. so, it looks pretty close to a tie, it looks that all the top fighters were in a narrow range and that the pilot could always make the difference. Hmmm... I believe to have already read this!

[Chocks away!]

Bf-109 G is a rather general term. I went with the Gustav, because as far as performance is concerned, it's later versions were rather superior to the Macchi.

[Soundbreaker Welch?]

Thanks, DerAdlerIstGelandet. And yours shows what a great plane the Bf was.