The 'E' series 109... the purists choice?

[Trooper117]

There is something about the E series 109 that strikes a chord with me... I wouldn't say it is 'beautiful', not perhaps like the smoother lined and more 'elegant' looking F and later series.

 

No, it has a more 'thuggish' and simplistic, pugilistic aura that appeals to my senses than any of the other later variants.

 

Your thoughts gentlemen, and ladies of course if any are viewing...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2017 by Trooper117

[Gambit21]

The E is far and away my favorite - always has been. As I said in another thread, it's "early war" ness lends a more honest, visceral feeling of flight that I enjoy. I16 ang MiG 3 lend a similar feeling.

 

The E is likely the only one I'd care to fly or build missions around.

[DD_Arthur]

Its the most interesting and rewarding to fly by far and its got a great 'pit. 

 

Its got character.

[Willy__]

The most beautiful series of the 109, but it is so damn slow.... 

Edited May 17, 2017 by JAGER_Staiger

[TAAC_Blue]

I've always thought the E series was the best looking of the bunch.

[Finkeren]

I personally think the design reached maturity and its greatest look with the early F series. The Emil has its own unique charm (I particularly like the E-1 with the rounded early cockpit and 4 lmg armament)

 

In this sim, the E-7 is by far my favourite 109. It has character and poses an actual challenge in combat against the VVS.

[Gambit21]

The F was no doubt the pinnacle - but the E is still my favorite.

[Guest deleted@30725]

I like them all really.

 

Generally whenever I think of this body style I think of battle of Britain (E-3s) and it has this connection and relevance to me so I know its looks the best.

 

When we got one in Il2 even though we had one in Il2 clod I was just really happy to have this variant with this team making the planes and to have it is really good. I find myself flying it most when I pick out a 109. I like that I'm a little more hands on, I feel like I have a little more to do and it does look pretty flying in virtual skies.

 

When I started playing Il2 bos I forgot about it till we got it in Bom. I got used to the sleeker lines of the F and Gs, would play Il2 clod for the Es. Looking back after a time on the E it looked like an old warrior, but take it out to fight was rewarding. The wing mounted guns feel punchy, but the ammo is gone too fast. The pit familiar, but simpler.

 

It's a hard choice between an E and an F though. Both designs look good. The F series just looks faster while on the ground. The E looks dangerous, just in a different way, for the period. But in some ways the style of the F that would last till the end of the war makes me sad. Pray to the machine god to fly forever in peace and joy.

 

There are better choices it could be said, but the E can still give blows.

[Chief_Mouser]

'E' for me. Always liked the look of the nose more than the other variants, and it has tail struts - a last link with much earlier aircraft.

[Jade_Monkey]

Love the E as well.

 

The only things I dont love are the cannons, because they shoot allover the place and have relatively low ammo capacity (or it feels like it).

[BMW801]

I liked the E series first and I thought it was a more menacing look than the F, G and K.

It was my favorite aesthetically for many years.

When  I began flying the original IL-2 series, I flew mainly 109's and read about them more than any other aircraft.

The F's really grew on me and now my favorite is the F both functionally and aesthetically.

[Gambit21]

Looks like we got the makings of a club!

I'll design the patch, first meeting is next Wednesday.

Trooper you're the president, we need a treasurer and someone to head up the first bake sale.

[pilotpierre]

I also think this is the best 109 in the game.

[von-Luck]

Nope . . . 109 F all the way.  E is too much the hunchback to earn my love . . . that nose profile, those tail struts, squared wings and 60 rounds of MG FF per cannon.  Admittedly early F's only used MG 151 (as opposed to MG 151/20) but still.  Quasimodo can live on in eternity over England where it belongs.  

 

von Luck

Edited May 18, 2017 by von-Luck

[Danziger]

I really like the E-4 with curved canopy and prop cannon in CloD. That is probably my favourite. I like all the 109s though. The early ones to the late ones.

[LLv24_Zami]

I like all 109s, they look like war machines. E models are the most legendary but visually the F models are the finest. But G6 is my favorite, basicly because it served Finnish air force in numbers and our pilots did pretty good with it.

[Jade_Monkey]

There is something appealing about the boxy look and the straight wing tips.

[=EXPEND=Dendro]

It is great to turn and dogfight in.... I LOVE IT!

[Guest deleted@50488]

In IL.2 it is also, probably, the Axis aircraft that more closely matches what I look forward to see in the announced update to the flight dynamics, regarding the yaw-roll coupling and wobbling problems the sim still has...

 

Yes, I really like the feel of the E-7 :-)

[Trooper117]

Looks like we got the makings of a club!

I'll design the patch, first meeting is next Wednesday.

Trooper you're the president, we need a treasurer and someone to head up the first bake sale.

 

Hahaha... we also need a provost marshal to keep order!

You know how demanding flight simmers can be 

 

Thanks for the replies lads!

[Ypsan]

I don't fly 109s often but E is my favourite too. Having to be conservative with cannon is what appeals to me the most besides nimble flight characteristics. With relatively slow speed you need to pick your engagements carefully and I always like to play as underdog hence my unconditional love for Folgore and P40.

[Y29.Layin_Scunion]

It's the only 109 I genuinely enjoy flying.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I'm a big fan of the F-2. The MG151/15 (technically just an MG151) is a lot of fun (different characteristics than the MG151/20) and the engine power is somewhere between a late Emil and later Friedrich variants. 

Looks like we got the makings of a club!

I'll design the patch, first meeting is next Wednesday.

Trooper you're the president, we need a treasurer and someone to head up the first bake sale.

 

I sell propane and propane accessories... 41-time employee of the month here at Strickland.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Space_Ghost

[Cpt_Cool]

I am with Gambit about the early war appeal. I think it has to do with the variety. the 1930s were a pretty wild time for aviation. The variety of designs were really astounding as the lessons learned from WW1 were becoming obsolete. I think that variety is more appealing than the relative parity of the later war.

 

I think my favorite 109s are the early Es with the curved canopy. Anyway sign me up for that club.

[Retnek]

Style and performance came to a peak with the latest and greatest 109 model, the G-10. The E-series with it's cubism appearance (that tiny little snub nose, baah!) was graciously followed by the large nose of the F-series. It is worth a long discussion if one prefers the slim lines of F-series or that still slender, but stronger elegance of the G-10 with the "Erla" cabin-hood. But the E-series? Even the bulb of the G-6 is just a wart on the cheek of a beautiful person, but the E-series is hopeless -> "Quasimodo", thx, von-Luck, you nailed it! 

[Luger1969]

Am an e series fan 2. Funny when I bought BOM it was just to support but now I really appreciate the earlier generation aircraft (e7, f2, m3, il2, 110e etc). Like you say it has a particular appeal and it also presents a challenge when you pit it against the later aircraft. I must also say that pilots like Invictus etc inspires you to use it. For me this realisation has also sparked a great interest in the wildcat/zero coming up. Early Pacific, not the same timeframe but as with BOM the early times.

[Finkeren]

Style and performance came to a peak with the latest and greatest 109 model, the G-10.

I would argue, that the 109 reached its peak both design- and performance-wise with the F4 in the autumn of 1941. At no point was the design cleaner and the lines more pleasing and at no point was the advantage in performance over its adversaries greater (which is what really matters)

[Gambit21]

Style and performance came to a peak with the latest and greatest 109 model, the G-10.

 

 

F4 if you're talking about dogfighting.

[Tomsk]

Yeah I've always thought of the F4 as being a peak for the 109. Early G models weren't particularly improvements in terms of power, and later models started gaining a lot of weight. To answer the original question, I always liked the F series 109s more than the E's. Although the E's were also very capable planes for their time. Although I never particularly enjoyed the manual prop-pitch of the early E models. I think one of the greatest assets of the German planes was the automation, sadly it's not an aspect that is all that well represented in BoX for various reasons.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

I think one of the greatest assets of the German planes was the automation, sadly it's not an aspect that is all that well represented in BoX for various reasons.

 

Uhh... Am I missing something here?

 

All of the 109s have the appropriate input-based automations and automations for the radiators where appropriate.

 

All of the 190s have a Kommandogerät to automate the engine.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Space_Ghost

[Tomsk]

Uhh... Am I missing something here?

 

I just meant that IMO the automation doesn't bring quite the advantages that it should because stuff like the technochat means that the Russian planes do not suffer greatly from the lack of automation.

Edited May 18, 2017 by Tomsk

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I just meant that IMO the automation doesn't bring quite the advantages that it should because stuff like the technochat means that the Russian planes do not suffer greatly from the lack of automation.

 

Fair enough, although I don't think technochat fully mitigates the advantage of German automation.

[Retnek]

I would argue, that the 109 reached its peak both design- and performance-wise with the F4 in the autumn of 1941. At no point was the design cleaner and the lines more pleasing and at no point was the advantage in performance over its adversaries greater (which is what really matters)

Hm, I doubt it. In a G-10 (of we don't care for the quality problems the Germans had in 1944) with the upgraded DB-605 a good pilot was able to fight the escorts on equal terms. There are several reports by experienced Luftwaffe pilots: in late 109-models they only feared the overwhelming numbers, but no longer the height performance of the escort fighters.

  It's just the personal view of some veterans, I don't see a way to come to a final result in this kind of what-if-debates. But I think this aspect usually is hidden by the horrible losses of the insufficiently trained Luftwaffe-pilots in 1944. Some biographic reports touch this topic because this knowledge enhanced the frustration / depression of some veteran pilots acting as leaders. Sending up hopelessly green pilots in capable planes it's just to your order victimising the greenhorns. An outgunned plane like the G-6 was no excuse for losses no longer. Some leaders felt guilty because it was a kind of war crime to order the unable pilots to fly.

Edited May 18, 2017 by 216th_Retnek

[Finkeren]

Hm, I doubt it. In a G-10 (of we don't care for the quality problems the Germans had in 1944) with the upgraded DB-605 a good pilot was able to fight the escorts on equal terms. There are several reports by experienced Luftwaffe pilots: in late 109-models they only feared the overwhelming numbers, but no longer the height performance of the escort fighters.

It's just the personal view of some veterans, I don't see a way to come to a final result in this kind of what-if-debates. But I think this aspect usually is hidden by the horrible losses of the insufficiently trained Luftwaffe-pilots in 1944. Some biographic reports touch this topic because this knowledge enhanced the frustration / depression of some veteran pilots acting as leaders. Sending up hopelessly green pilots in capable planes it's just to your order victimising the greenhorns. An outgunned plane like the G-6 was no excuse for losses no longer. Some leaders felt guilty because it was a kind of war crime to order the unable pilots to fly.

Sure, but in 1941 the Bf 109F4 was not not just able to fight "on equal terms" it was arguably the best performing fighter in the World and had a substantial advantage over the far majority of fighters it faced.

[Gambit21]

...and was not an ounce over-engineered.

[Luger1969]

Chaps some great news from the mission sharing corner thanks SYN Haashashin https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/25066-alberts-life-now-scripted-campaign/page-4?do=findComment&comment=472926

[Retnek]

Sure, but in 1941 the Bf 109F4 was not not just able to fight "on equal terms" it was arguably the best performing fighter in the World and had a substantial advantage over the far majority of fighters it faced.

That's a question where you like to find your criteria - I don't care that much for comparison with other fighters, depended on the pilot much too much. Without the bulbs the late 109s to me made it back into the group of elegant planes, beginning with the G-6/U2. Elegant, but with a powerful engine giving it a touch of brute force, that's my preference.

  Compare it with the Spit Mk. XVI or XIV where the slim tail and the tear-drop canopy balanced the large engine section nicely. (btw: the British with these models just copied Yak 1b-127 design - but never-ever would admit it ) With the P-51 it's just the other way, here I slightly prefer the P-51 Mk III with the larger fuselage and the Malcom hood looking more balanced to me. The D-models were elegant, too, but especially the late ones with the additional tail fin can't compete with the Mk III.

  "Over-engineered"? Oh yes, absolutely, if we care for this, it's back to the 109 F-4 or the Spit Mk II. But looking at this kind of criteria the narrow gear excluded both series from being well engineered at all ...

[BurroHablando]

Messerschmidt decided to fix the gear to the body of the plane, in order to make it easier to change the wings on airfields close to the front. From that point of view i dont see it as an actual design flaw. They traded start/landing stability for easier service.

[Livai]

Fair enough, although I don't think technochat fully mitigates the advantage of German automation.

 

advantage for who old pilot that reached his 80th anniversary or the greenhorn. Automation and the pilot still needs to use brakes manually is this not something what the engine can do automatic? Automation and still no Auto pilot? BTW what you do if automation fails, bail out? Dogfight with automation where everything counts to change the outcome is holding back!  Disable automation means full control and push everything to their limits. What is better to fly Stock or with Overclock?

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Emil is my favorite as well. It just looks like a war machine. And JG 5 used it up to 1942, even 43 up in the Arctic front. They got the F and G later than other squadrons and still did well. Emil has appeal. Grrrroowwwl ye sexy beast :D