Question For Those Who Know Alot About WW2 Fighters

Specifically the Messerschmitt Bf 109. I know nothing about WW2 Fighters or any aircraft for that matter, but im pretty sure the Messerschmitt was the best German fighter.

My question is:

How could you make it BETTER

Better meaning faster, more agile, more climb speed, more guns on it....

Im basically asking if there were a fighter that could take down the Messershmitt in a dog fight, what features would it have?

 

Firstly, it's difficult to generalise because the 109 underwent a hell of a lot of modification over its lifetime and I'd imagine the designers had pretty much done as much as could be done (i.e got as much performance out of it as possible - even at a cost in handling) by the time they got to the -K series.

That said, two improvements I could think of would be:

1) Bigger fuel tank = more range. Would have had a big impact in 1940.
2) Better canopy design would have improved pilots' situational awareness.

 

It depends on alot of things such as what part of the war you are talking about. At the start of the war the Me-109 was one of the best and the pilots were some of the best. As the war progressed other fighters came along that were better and Germany's best pilots were lost and the new ones were not trained as well.
The item that cost the Me-109 the most losses in general was the narrow landing gear. It did not do well in the rough conditions of the eastern front and huge losses were due to ground loops and other landing gear problems from mud and ice and snow.
Anouther problem was it had short range compared to later fighters but even with that said an Me-109 with an experienced pilot would be dangerous to an allied pilot in 1945.

 

Yes, very good point about the canopy Greenjacket !

 

IMO I would make the wings sturdier and put more guns on it. This was its achillis heel which is why the landing gear was mounted on the fuselage and not the wings.

 

gents this depends on the Bf 109 model.

as to arms what then ? plenty to take out a US/RAF fighter let alone a US heavy bomber especially with underwing 20mm gun pods.

some of the pilots did go so far as to attach mirrors on either side and even on top of the Erla-Haube canopy, it wa sufficient enough with out to be able to see.

my sig took out the 109 in all forms, the 109 was getting quite outdated by mid-44, but it was all the LW had for high escort duties. during that time period extra fuel tank would not have helped the reason for the silly oversized drop tank that had to be used but of course limited the speed of the craft. remember it was on it's home turf so an enlarged internal gas tank was really not needed as the war progressed

 

As mentioned by TA152, the landing gear was a problem due to it being so close together.

I once worked with a German chap who was a 109 pilot during WW2.

He was shot down and wounded over southern England, after the war he married a British nurse who had cared for him during his time in hospital.

He would often tell of his times in the Luftwaffe, including his recollection of when he was actually shot down, a round from the attacking aircraft hit him in the a*se !!!

 

I don't know that you really can. The biggest single problem with the Me 109 is that it was designed as an interceptor not as an offensive fighter. I'm sure I'll get some argument on this but it is really hard to deny. In a later period it would be the same as say, an F-104 or MiG 21. That is, a good fighter on its home turf but unable to effectively carry the war to the enemy.
The Me 109 was built on a very small airframe. The cockpit is tight. The landing gear is done the way it was to make it light weight while strong and to avoid having to make a heavy thick wing to take the landing gear further outboard. This made the wing thin and light. While this enhanced maneuverability it left no room for fuel or weapons. The small fuselage limits the size of the fuel tank you can install.
At the same time there is very limited ability to hang bombs or fuel tanks on such a plane without major redesign. You see the same problem with the MiG 21 for the same reasons. With the F-104 Lockheed literally built virtually an entirely new aircraft in the F-104G.
Such a massive redesign might have been possible with the 109 but at what cost in a wartime setting? Some possibilities for this would be:

Increase the strength of the wing spar substancially to allow wing weapons to be installed. Install integral fuel tanks into the wings and fuselage that increase the range substancially. Make it possible to hang more drop tanks and bombs on the aircraft for greater mission flexibility. Hydraulic ailerons and a powered rudder would help substancially. Redesigning the landing gear is probably not possible and will remain a problem.

Obviously, it is in the early war period where the 109 is literally out of its element and when the Germans need it the most. Later in the war the 109 is sufficent, if underarmed, to deal with bombers as it is now in its element as an interceptor.
It was largely a lack of strategic insight within the RLM and Luftwaffe in general that put the wrong kind of fighter in service as their primary system.

 

In short, bring the Bf109 back to thr drawing board and reissue it as a Tempest or a Mustang. Then it would be a serious fighter

 

it was also quite difficult to fly because aerodynamism was a great example of what it should not be. It was therfore difficult to control as it had unexpected reactions at certain points. The speed issue was somewhat improved with the Turbo . There was a little device in the cockpit that had four positons that could be activated with a key attached to a small chain. (0 m1 m2 and M1+M2 , the later being the highest speed) . This allowed temporary acceleration but was damagable for the engine. Therefore it had to be a deliberate action and the handle could only be activated when the key was in the device. I you have a picture of a cockpit , it's on the left side. The version I am thinking about is for example a G6 with a D605 Daimler Benz engine. Note that early versions had British Rolls Royce engines! Hope this helps.

 

The ME109 was the German aviation equivalent of the British MG roadster. It did a lot of things because of its small size, but it could bite you hard if let your guard down. And it was worthless on long hauls or for carrying a load.

There were much better designs, but it was too cheap and easy to build the ME 109. Also, certain non-flying leadership was locked into its glory day past exploits.

 

considering that most thumb their nose at the bird, look at the craft with the MW 50 injected AS engine in the G-6/AS. quite competent for engaging the Mossies of the LSNF in fall-winter of 44. the G-6/AS, G-14/AS and G-10 were still thrown at the US Mustang/P-47 escorts in all to small numbers as this is all the LW had for high altitude work, the Fw 190Dora 9 was just few and not all present in late 44-45 to equip many gruppen.

one most also look at the experience this a/c had on the Ost front where it led all LW single engines till wars end...........flying with JG's 51, 52 and 54 as examples

 

As mentioned, incorporating a wider stance in the landing gear like the 190 and increasing the fire power would have been a good start. Extensive modifications for aircraft carrier use may have been fruitful. Might have warranted using the KMS Graf Zeppelin storage facility to carry planes rather than store U-boat parts.

 

That's right!Throw the Me 109s overboard and buy the producing rights for Hellcats, now that's a serious plane! :aa_usa:

 

you guys are still stuck on more firepower............why ? a center nose 2cm or 3cm heavy. two cowling .50's. underwing 2cm jobs if needed. sounds like enough to me.

of course for the .50 afficiendo's that like in wing arms.......... ~

 

Adolf Galland had the right idea in 1940
[SIZE=-1]Adolf Galland rated the Spitfire so highly he told Goering 'Give me a squadron of Spitfires'[/SIZE]

 

Talking about Adi. Did you know he got his Me-109 specially adapted with a cigar holder, so that he could smoke and put it down in case he needed his two hands during a combat?

 

My favourite "what if" mod for the Bf 109 would have been the addition of a couple of wing root inserts, adding in total about 1 metre to the wingspan, made strong enough to take the undercarriage loads. This might have come into effect for the G model, and would have had four advantages:

1. Mounting the undercarriage legs on the end of the inserts would have increased their track by one metre.

2. The space created by the inserts would have allowed wing-root cannon to have been fitted, like the Fw 190.

3. The extra wing area would have compensated for increased weight as the plane developed.

4. Everything else could have remained the same - wings and fuselage - so a minimal effect on production lines.

An armament of three 20mm cannon clustered around the nose would have been enough for most purposes, so the cowling-mounted MGs could have been omitted and the nose cleaned up.

 

Interesting . What about the additionnal weight? Would it be an important change and need a more powerfull engine? The wingspan would only compensate part of it.

 

Something along these lines was tried first with the Me 109H which had stability problems and then on the Me 209 II. The later would have fixed most of the problems listed here but, like many other mid war designs it was not better "enough" to warrant switching production to it from existing designs.