Me 109, Spitfire, Zero or Mustang

Jabberwocky · 11-28-2005, 06:16 PM

A bit off topic, but isn't that 452 mph figure for the 109K4 with a special high altitude prop and 1.98 ata rating? I think the more usual top speed was around 440-448 mph, but this is all off the top of my head. Does anyone have a 109K kenblatt on their H/D?

I have one German document with engine ratings and speed for the 109G-14/ASM, 109G-14/U-4 and 109K-4.

Speed ratings are 680, 665 and 710 kph respectively at 1.8 ata. 710 kph is about 441 mph.

Does anyone have anything more comprehensive, like a engine and speed curve chart from RLM?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 11-29-2005, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky

A bit off topic, but isn't that 452 mph figure for the 109K4 with a special high altitude prop and 1.98 ata rating? I think the more usual top speed was around 440-448 mph, but this is all off the top of my head. Does anyone have a 109K kenblatt on their H/D?

I have one German document with engine ratings and speed for the 109G-14/ASM, 109G-14/U-4 and 109K-4.

Speed ratings are 680, 665 and 710 kph respectively at 1.8 ata. 710 kph is about 441 mph.

Does anyone have anything more comprehensive, like a engine and speed curve chart from RLM?

Not sure on that, you might be right. All the figures I have seen for the K-4 are 452mph hour.

falcon39 · 11-30-2005, 02:07 AM

A fighter pilot in the guns/cannon fight must get his guns to bear on his target by pulling 'lead', which basically is aiming ahead of the target so that when he fires, his ammo reaches the critical point in space just as the target gets there. If he is well practiced a good fighter pilot keeps his E up with airspeed much greater than his target, manipulates the 3 dimensional image of the fight in his head, projects the target movement, to get ample 'lead' on the target, tracks it for a period long enough to make sure the target's flight path is going through his aim point, and goes for a 'flythrough shot', disengage away at full power and preferably climbing to convert kinetic energy into potential energy. That is where excess power and accelleration is advantageous. If the target explodes then the jock swaps to another target or rejoins his flight element to engage more targets or go home. If the target flies on, then the attacker has the option of using his greater energy to advantage for another flythrough shot, or, he can slow down to his 'cornering speed' when in close contact with the target for a steady tracking shot, by sitting behind the target a/c . Cornering speed is considerably slower than maximum speed, and is where the you get the best performance in terms of maximum 'g', max turn rate, and minimum turn radius - and maintain it long enough to get a firing solution. Mind you none of this is easy. The other guy is not just sitting there letting you get a nice sight picture. Most WW2 fighters had a 'corner speed' in the range 160 to 220 knots. The combination of power and high max speed allowed the pilot to keep high E. A high powered engine allowed the pilot to maintain his 'corner speed' in close, because at corner speed the angle of attack is high, the 'g' load high, and therefore drag very high, requiring lots of power. Some folk say that horse racing is the sport of kings, but fighter pilots know what really is the sports of kings!

falcon39 · 12-02-2005, 06:44 PM

You can see from my last post that fighter pilots really got to earn their pay when they fought against someone in a figfhter with perhaps a slower cornering speed and with higher power/acceleration. That is where experience, guts, motivation, cunning, tactics, numbers of aircraft, formation types and numbers, mathematics, training and luck played their part. And it is also another factor that makes it so difficult to say which 'machine' was the best.

pbfoot · 12-02-2005, 07:50 PM

excellent posts falcon 39

lesofprimus · 12-02-2005, 08:23 PM

Quote:

That is where experience, guts, motivation, cunning, tactics, numbers of aircraft, formation types and numbers, mathematics, training and luck played their part. And it is also another factor that makes it so difficult to say which 'machine' was the best.

You're speaking to the already converted brother.... If u read around in some of the older stuff, u'll see almost ur exact words being repeated by several different members...

Plain and simple fact, certain Aces flew their aircraft as an extension of themselves, and did things that an average pilot couldnt even grasp...

Most pilots were just that, pilots...

SeaFury · 12-03-2005, 04:01 AM

Hi people! I see you guys have met my best friend Falcon. He sure is an impressive guy...we have been friends for over 20 years.

He was a good friend of Major Jim Evans who was here as an exchange pilot in the 70s and went on to become USAF Chief of Staff!

I think he might have forgotten to mention his time as an F4 instructor in the USA. I believe he used the Call Sign Flying Kangaroo and had a lot of of fun on Truckie CB channels while he was airborne!!! ("Your 10.20 is Chino??? You just told me it was San Diego! What sorta rig you driving son???")

We share a pashion for aircraft and have done some mad aerobatic stuff together...

Keep up the passion...

Cheers!

SeaFury

SeaFury · 12-03-2005, 04:23 AM

Hi people!

Can anyone tell me if Rear Admiral 'Jumping Joe' Clifton is still alive....my favourite Carrier Pilot! Love to know how he he is.

SeaFury

falcon39 · 12-03-2005, 06:01 PM

That MIKE RYAN Sea Fury. You Navy wackers can never remember details! Comes from all that total concentration on that little red ball I guess.

FLYBOYJ · 12-03-2005, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falcon39

A fighter pilot in the guns/cannon fight must get his guns to bear on his target by pulling 'lead', which basically is aiming ahead of the target so that when he fires, his ammo reaches the critical point in space just as the target gets there. If he is well practiced a good fighter pilot keeps his E up with airspeed much greater than his target, manipulates the 3 dimensional image of the fight in his head, projects the target movement, to get ample 'lead' on the target, tracks it for a period long enough to make sure the target's flight path is going through his aim point, and goes for a 'flythrough shot', disengage away at full power and preferably climbing to convert kinetic energy into potential energy. That is where excess power and accelleration is advantageous. If the target explodes then the jock swaps to another target or rejoins his flight element to engage more targets or go home. If the target flies on, then the attacker has the option of using his greater energy to advantage for another flythrough shot, or, he can slow down to his 'cornering speed' when in close contact with the target for a steady tracking shot, by sitting behind the target a/c . Cornering speed is considerably slower than maximum speed, and is where the you get the best performance in terms of maximum 'g', max turn rate, and minimum turn radius - and maintain it long enough to get a firing solution. Mind you none of this is easy. The other guy is not just sitting there letting you get a nice sight picture. Most WW2 fighters had a 'corner speed' in the range 160 to 220 knots. The combination of power and high max speed allowed the pilot to keep high E. A high powered engine allowed the pilot to maintain his 'corner speed' in close, because at corner speed the angle of attack is high, the 'g' load high, and therefore drag very high, requiring lots of power. Some folk say that horse racing is the sport of kings, but fighter pilots know what really is the sports of kings!

Great info Falcon. I got to fight in mock dogfights with L-29s, 39s and T-33s. My father in law flew fighters and bombers in the USAF and I got to tutored as a civilian. He emphasized what he called "the energy egg,' and keeping every thing in the vertical until a firing solution is gained. It was quite an experience and about once a year I get to play with these guys who own these aircraft....

the lancaster kicks ass · 12-04-2005, 03:04 AM

great stuff guys, we've had a lot of great experienced people join the site recently, i hope you all enjoy the site and love the lancaster

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 12-04-2005, 12:39 PM

Yeap I agree. Great stuff being put out here.

CurzonDax · 12-07-2005, 01:33 PM

Simple fact is this, all these aircraft are the best that thier respective country's industrial war-making power could produce. They all were exellent aircraft in all thier own ways for all four are some of my fav aircraft too. But the point is, who in the long run had the biggest war-making industrial power and in the case of WWII it was the allies. Yes, depending on the situation all these aircraft can get the upper hand on all these aircraft. But like it has been expertly said what chance do 20 109s have against a whole group of 'Stangs. I think its not who has the better plane, and that is very important, but who had the capability to build more of them.

:{)

falcon39 · 12-08-2005, 01:45 AM

FLYBOYJ I am pleased that you have had a taste of the energy egg, and in an a/c of some pewrformance as well.
I have enjoyed perusing the posts all the way through from page 1. Things seem to have slowed down a bit lately as there seems to be a good general understanding of the balance of a/c types/designs/engines, available numbers to fly and to replace those shot down/damaged etc, pilots, training, and design and manufacturing capability.
What else is lurking in the fertile minds out there that can be thrown in the ring to tussle over? Maybe some 'what ifs'. What if Hitler had not exercised his personal ideas on the use of the Me 262? That is an a/c that would have been a great 'energy egg' user to get in quickly for a high deflection fly-through shot, zip off out of range, and uphill out-accelerating and outclimbing the prop a/c, and then reposition for another squirt. Those great technical minds of the German fighter pilots would have come up with some interesting multiple attack tactics to keep the Spits/Mustangs/P47/P38 etc turning. For instance a pair of 262s could bounce a formation and get them turning in defence, then as they pull off to go high and reposition the next pair of jets is right on the spot to keep the attack going. A third lot of jets could do the same, and as they puill off the first pair are back in the fight etc etc. I have been in such fights in 3 x2 Mirages versus 2 x 4 Hawker Hunters over the South China Sea. We kept our Mirages high sub-sonic to M1.2 and kept the mostly subsonic Hunters turning defensively. Mind you if we made the mistake of slowing down to their speed they would have a great chance to get some kills. That performance disparity would have been similar with the 262s v the big piston a/c. From both a strategic and tactical point of view he was a silly boy eh?

falcon39 · 12-08-2005, 01:46 AM

How did that happen?