Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

Bf109G-4 vs. G-2 Top Speed

Recommended Posts

With the Announcement of the G-4 coming with the Kuban Expansion one question has popped up in my head about the G-4s Level Performance. 

The G-4 we will get most likely has the late style landing gear with Non-Retractable Tailwheel and Bulges on the Wings. 

According to later comparisons this meant a Speed Reduction of 12kph. 

 

From the most commonly available Sources

 

Ingame our 109G-2 has 

S.L.: 525-528

2000m: 572-575

4000m: 610-613

6000m: 648-651

7000m: 650-653

With Automatic Radiators (103°C) and Trim between neutral and fully nose down.

 

Datenblatt for G-1 May 1942 (virtually identical with our early G-2)

S.L.: 535 (or 537)

2000m: 583

4000m: 624

6000m: 647

7000m: 660

With variable settings for 103°C and unknown trim.

 

Soviet Test of a Captured G-2 with retractable Landing Gear:

S.L.: 524

2000m: 582

4000m: 608

6000m: 640

7000m: 666

Same as above.

Soviet tests tended to for some reason give the Ground Speed Results 10-15kph low. 

 

German Test of late type G-1 in March 1943 (same as our G-4 would be)

S.L.: 525

2000m: 563

4000m: 602

6000m: 642

7000m: 649

With Non-Retractable Tailwheel and Bulges for larger main wheels. 

 

A G-6 with Gondola, MG131 bulges and Non-retractable gear would be calculated with: 

-9kph for MG131

-12kph for Non-Retractable Tailwheel

-8kph for MG151 Gondolas

Top Speed in this Config was 502

 

Clean G-6 Top Speed at 7k was apparently 635-640. 

 

By adding these up we get a Top Speed of 531 at S.L. if it was clean, these tests were run at slightly more open radiator settings, so it seems the default would have been closer to 535. 

 

After Crossreferencing all this data I come to the conclusion that the G-4 should have the same Performance as our ingame G-2 right now, and that the G-2 should be faster by at least 10kph. 

 

Sources were mostly 

wwiiaircraftperformance.org

kurfurst.org

and a couple discussions on other forums with mixed sources. 

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little bit an offtopic, but this question is buzzing in my head when I read this thread - "Why a Zerstorer pilot is asking about flight characters of single-engine Bf109G-4, instead asking about flight characters of zerstorer aircraft Bf110G-2?" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little bit an offtopic, but this question is buzzing in my head when I read this thread - "Why a Zerstorer pilot is asking about flight characters of single-engine Bf109G-4, instead asking about flight characters of zerstorer aircraft Bf110G-2?" :)

I want my Escort to perform realistically. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty much the same aircraft, the only difference was that the G-4 was more likely to have a non retractable tail wheel and thus slower.

 

Basically this difference is not so visible probably since our G-2 is a bit slower at altitude and worse in turns than it should be. Its akin to a late G-4 already.

 

Frankly, the only sensible way I can see the G-4 being different from the G-2 is to have it as a somewhat right 1,42 ata version with 1550 PS.

Edited by VO101Kurfurst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its pretty much the same aircraft, the only difference was that the G-4 was more likely to have a non retractable tail wheel and thus slower.

 

Basically this difference is not so visible probably since our G-2 is a bit slower at altitude and worse in turns than it should be. Its akin to a late G-4 already.

 

Frankly, the only sensible way I can see the G-4 being different from the G-2 is to have it as a somewhat right 1,42 ata version with 1550 PS.

I think you mentioned the Condition of the 1942 Datenblatt was quite poor. It would be nice to see it anyways if it's possible. Many of the links on your site are broken, maybe you could restore them. 

I think the Kuban will be set before the release of Start- und Notleistung. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Start und Notleistung 1.42 ata was released for DB 605 in october 43... so since the Kuban bridgehead stood until october, it's a close call..

I can only hope that I'm not "blacklisted" like 'ZeHairy' or 'Crump' by the Devs and wether my Threads will be ignored. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Start und Notleistung 1.42 ata was released for DB 605 in october 43... so since the Kuban bridgehead stood until october, it's a close call..

 

DB technical note cleared it 8th June 1943 so if we keep to the date fetish of Soviet periodicals for the Battle of Kuban (same day) it just catched the train. Now of course Rechlin did the state acceptance test in the summer, which indeed meant that the Technical office clearance of 1,42 ata indeed sometime in October, given its appearance in the October plane manuals.

 

So basically you have too levels of clearance, one internal one by the manufacturer (DB) in June 1943 and one by the state testing center, in October 1943.

 

Klaus Mann, I will send you the Datenblatt copy, when possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only hope that I'm not "blacklisted" like 'ZeHairy' or 'Crump' by the Devs and wether my Threads will be ignored. 

nah come on, you're definitely on the constructive side of things.

 

 

DB technical note cleared it 8th June 1943 so if we keep to the date fetish of Soviet periodicals for the Battle of Kuban (same day) it just catched the train. Now of course Rechlin did the state acceptance test in the summer, which indeed meant that the Technical office clearance of 1,42 ata indeed sometime in October, given its appearance in the October plane manuals.

 

So basically you have too levels of clearance, one internal one by the manufacturer (DB) in June 1943 and one by the state testing center, in October 1943.

 

Klaus Mann, I will send you the Datenblatt copy, when possible.

 

I see... the question is then when the updated DB 605s reached the front and when the old ones were replaced. That was the requirement to release 1.42 ata or did I get something wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is good and I fear nobody can answer it. Not unless someone digs DEEP into individual engine histories... if those exist anymore, that is.

 

Anyway, just to make it clear, 1,42ata G-4 rather just an idea to make the G-4.. work. As something different from the G-2. For the sake of variety, for the sake having a G-4 making more sense than a reskinned G-2 that otherwise is EXACTLY the same in all regards. Especially with this - IMO rather silly - cutoff date that has very little to do with reality of air war...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll check Mankau/Petrick's book, but by my memory, Bf110G-2 had large problems with DB605 engines up to late 1943.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll check Mankau/Petrick's book, but by my memory, Bf110G-2 had large problems with DB605 engines up to late 1943.

I think I read in some document that the 110s had less trouble due to the larger amount of Oil carried and a couple more factors favouring installation in the 110. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

can only hope that I'm not "blacklisted" like 'ZeHairy' or 'Crump' by the Devs and wether my Threads will be ignored. 

 

I am not aware of any "blacklisting".  Are you aware of something I am not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×