Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Messerschmitt Bf-109G-6/R6

Discussion in 'Axis Fighter Planes' started by Jim, Aug 26, 2010.

  1. Jim

    Jim New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,324
    Likes Received:
    11
    via War44
    [​IMG]

    Entering production in the autumn of 1942: the Beule (Bump) Bf-109G-6 remained one of the Luftwaffe's work-horses for the remainder of the war. The Bf-109G-6/R6 variant shown here was a 'destroyer' [Zerstӧrer} designed to attack heavy bomber aircraft such as the B-17 and B-24. To fit it for such a role, the aircraft carried an additional pair of MG 151/20 cannon under its wings.

    [​IMG]

    Messerschmitt Bf-109G-6/R6 [​IMG]

    • TYPE: Single-seat heavy fighter aircraft
    • ENGINE: One 1,475 hp Daimler-Benz DB605AM liquid-cooled inverted-vee engine
    • WEIGHT: Empty 5,893lb (2,673 kg) Maximum 7,491 lb (3,398 kg)
    • DIMENSIONS: Wingspan 32 ft 6½ in (9.91 m) Length 29 ft ½in (8.84 m) Height 8 ft 2½in (2.50 m)
    • ARMAMENT: One 30 mm MK 108 cannon, two 20 mm MG 151/20 cannon and two 13 mm MG 131 machine guns
    • PERFORMANCE: Maximum speed 372 mph (599 km/h) at 9,840 ft (2,999m) Maximum range 620 miles (998 km) Service ceiling 37,890 ft (11,549 m)
     
  2. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    22,301
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Location:
    Kotka,Finland
    If Hitler had not decided me 262 would be a fighter bonbet perhaps me w62 would have been available by 1943. Also Hitler still put production on bomers and v1-v3 avenge weapons...
     
  3. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    The Me-262 wasn't ready in 45. It wasn't due so much to the role it would perform as the engines.
     
  4. gtblackwell

    gtblackwell Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,266
    Likes Received:
    656
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama, US
    Various accounts say a few ME 262's tried to bomb the bridge at Remagen but their main effort was to shoot down Allied daylight bombers over Germany. If I remember correctly they were somewhat successful, being armed with 23 and 30mm cannon effective against bombers but some loses in the air to air combat with P-51's but more when they were trying to land or take off. As lwd has pointed out their Jumo engines were notably problematic. As Kai-Petri pointed out the redesign work to develop them as bombers rather than fighters may have eaten into time that should have been spent on the engines. I have only seen one, in Prague, maybe a post-war model, but it was notably small . Bombs would have to have been external and the engines more powerful and durable it would seem. Range might have also been an issue.

    The Me-109 was a remarkable aircraft. It was constantly improved and produced in many marks. All weapons have their pluses and minuses but it held up well from the initial model to the high-altitude versions, one of the fastest propeller planes of the war. One tough airframe and the inverted V-12 with fuel injection was ahead of its time.. Not as graceful as the Spitfire but just as formidable... Not sure how we got off the Me 109?. Aesthetically it was a warplane..
    Speaking of the ME 109, I was always curious about its canopy.. Two rivals, the 51 and 47 both went to bubble canopies for visibility. The 109 flat-topped strong looking box did not. It must have been hard to see out of it or even get out. Was it somehow part of the airframe? Seems they would have changed it.

    Gaines
     
  5. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm pretty sure the airframe work and the engine work were independent. I've seen a number of discussions of the Me-262 development on the web and Hitler slowing down the development by wanting it to be a bomber looks to me like an urban legend. The big problem they had is the lack of metals needed to make temperature resistant parts to the engine. The Me-262 never reached the stage where the Western Allies would have considered deploying it,
     
  6. gtblackwell

    gtblackwell Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,266
    Likes Received:
    656
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama, US
    I agree, though it was in "operational status" in probably should not have been .. No doubt a desperate attempt. I have read where metallurgy was not up the engines demands. Beautiful design far ahead of its time but not its development.

    Gaines
     
  7. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,240
    Likes Received:
    987
    The metals were available just in short supply...so standard metal had to be used which meant regular refitting...the 262 was deployed as a psychological weapon as much as an anti bomber measure...with rockets attached to this aircraft it was super deadly to bombers and almost untouchable in the air. (Well worth deploying in my and A Galland's opinion.) The only reason the allies wouldn't have sported this was because they weren't getting the crap bombed out of them...!
    You may have noticed that all German aircraft have straight glass panels, this was because the Germans didn't know how to create "bubble" plexi glass that was transparent...just translucent.
    An Australian actually takes the claim to "inventing" or first using bubble windows...(Sidney Cotton) he fitted them pre-war into his twin engine aircraft that he used to tour Germany in...He was a business man who was trusted by the German government and allowed to fly all over...He took intelligence photographs of airfields and installations for the Poms...He or a friend used to open the side door and stick their heads out to see if they were being followed by aircraft...this sucked all the heat out of the aircraft and sticking your head out of a plane was an uncomfortable experience...so he put in a bubble window so he could see behind whilst keeping the door shut!
    More on this in "Last plane out of Berlin" - a good book.
     
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
  8. gtblackwell

    gtblackwell Well-Known Member Patron  

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2006
    Messages:
    2,266
    Likes Received:
    656
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama, US
    Thanks, I always wondered why the Germans did not have bubble canopies. They were extremely good with glass and plastic but just did not have that bit I guess.
     
  9. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    8,275
    Likes Received:
    1,751
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    I take it that you have not seen the FW-190...The He-112 also.
     
  10. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2013
    Messages:
    1,546
    Likes Received:
    418
    Location:
    London UK
    The Me109G6R6 was far from ideal as a bomber interceptor. It's in line engine was much more vulnerable to return fire than the radial that powered the Fw190 and it could not be armoured as heavily as the sturmbock 190. I am not sure the 30mm NK 108 was a standard fit. I thought a 20mm MG 151 was more common in the nose. Not sure how the gun convergence worked with on x 30mm and two wing mounted 20,mm.
     
  11. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,240
    Likes Received:
    987
    I have seen them for sure...the He112 was pre-war, using a RollsRoyce Kestral engine...and using...British canopies made for them..not surprisingly the Spitfire was just coming out with a, you guessed it, bubble canopy...obviously once war broke out the supply ended.
    And as for the 190...mate that’s not a bubble canopy, just a (bad try)...it’s made in two,pieces and joined...the so called bubble is a peice of glass ‘bent’ like a piece of metal...where the glass is curved it’s also blurry...but you should know that.
     
  12. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    They didn't have the metals in the quantity needed to develop and produce the engines in quantity. The short hand way of saying that is that they didn't have them.
    It did have some psych effect but there never were and never could have been the numbers necessary to have any significant impact on the war and the allies had counters available some they implemented and some they didn't. A fair number were shot down by allied fighters so they were hardly untouchable.
    They weren't going to have a serious impact one way or another. Fielding them may have taken resources that could have been better used elsewhere but the end was not going to change either way. They clearly weren't ready for prime time yet but then they were never going to be.
    The allies tended to have a better grasp of the impact of logistics and mass than the Germans. Better to have several P-51s or Spitfires than a jet. The allied jets were actually further along as far as being ready for operations than the Me-262 (although they may not have equaled it's performance). They'd also been put on the back burner as the allies started scaling back production and development in 44.
     
  13. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,240
    Likes Received:
    987
    The heat resistant alloys were being taken up by the V1 and V2...and in short supply anyway...the statement was made in reference to some of its ‘problems’ as though it was a design fault.
    That the numbers weren’t there, again is not a mark against the aircraft itself, and I said ‘almost’ untouchable...
    Number three...their country was being smashed, put yourself in the Germans boots...wouldn’t you throw everything at the bombers, especially something as lethal to bombers as rocket 262s? You’d be a fool not too...the only alternative is capitulation...

    And in 4 you are suggesting that if the allies had something like or could produce something like the 262, and their country was being daily bombed to buggery that they would just use their piston engines?
    The US and allies aircraft production and tactics was geared to bomb not stop being bombed...surely you can see that...to compare the two is false.
     
  14. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    Designing something you can't build is a design fault. Even without the V weapons though Germany was short on a number of critical alloys, indeed even before the war she was short on them. The engine as designed didn't last long enough for an "operational" plane in my book that's a design fault.

    That the numbers weren't there is something of an indicator that there were still issues with the plane. I.e. it wasn't ready for operational deployment. As for "almost untouchable" I guess that depends on just how you define "almost". The allies determined some in air vulnerabilities fairly quickly and of course the "almost" only applies as long as both engines were working something that was far from guaranteed.

    The use of extreme measures in a situation like that is reasonable although it's smart to make the best use of your resources in such a situation as well. The Me-262 was probably a better use than the V weapons. Whether it was a better use than conventional fighters is an open question.

    The US in particular but Britain as well tended not to field weapons they couldn't support and penny packets of such weapons are notoriously labor and material intensive to support. Look how Britain fielded the Meteor and in roughly the same time frame.
     
  15. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    6,240
    Likes Received:
    987
    The Meteor was a piece of crap...a bit harsh, but not suitable.
    Just ask the Australians who had to fly it...
    [​IMG]
     
  16. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,641
    Likes Received:
    265
    As noted the FW 190 had a bubble canopy from early on. I don't think it's been mentioned that in the later marks the 109 did have a, more or less, bubble canopy. It was called the "Galland hood" but Galland didn't have anything to do with it.

    The G-6 version of the ME 109 was the most produced version of the whole line but really, it was kind of a dog. It was slower than almost all of its competition. The later G series and K versions were quite a bit faster. Once you put those extra cannon on it was easy meat for opposing fighters-especially when flown by semi-trained youngsters.

    The interesting thing about the Me's engine was that it had comparable horsepower to its British and American competition but in a noticeably smaller package.

    The German engineers working on the jet engines got around some of the heat issues by designing the compressor blades so that they had a hole lengthways through them that ducted the heat away. This gave them a much lengthened service life, all of 24 hours. Service life was also extended by teaching the pilots to leave the throttles alone after takeoff. Jaming the throttles all over the place, such as you'd do with a piston-engine fighter shortened engine life considerably.

    Which leads to the fact that transitioning from 350-400 mph aircraft to one that flew 500+ mph was more difficult than it seemed. I get the impression that it was harder for the "old hares" than for the newer pilots.
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2018
  17. Mark3

    Mark3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2018
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    13
    I agree,one of the great warplanes.Two American pilots (their names escape me) who fly ww2 fighter aircraft at shows suggest that flown with skill,the 109 can out turn any other ww2 fighter aircraft.This could be explained by the auto slats on the wings which gave it great manouverability.
     
  18. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm very leery of statements like that. Do you assume that the pilot of the other fighters has a similar skill? My first thought was could it out turn a Zero my next was could it out turn a Gladiator or similar aircraft such as a CR32 or CR42?
     
  19. Mark3

    Mark3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2018
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    13
    Both the pilots fly all types of ww2 fighters including spitfires,p51's etc,etc.Their assessment after many hours on all types of ww2 fighter aircraft was that they could make tighter turns in the 109 than they could in all the other types they flew.Not my view but the view of two very experienced pilots.
     
  20. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    It is highly unlikely that they flew "all types of WW2 fighters". For instance:
    List of aircraft of World War II - Wikipedia
    list around 144 different WW2 fighters. I doubt most them had many flyable craft left by even the mid 50's and those that did wouldn't necessarily be available to those on the air show circuit. Biplanes in particular had a reputation for being very maneuverable and there were quite a few biplane fighters that saw action early in the war.
     

Share This Page