Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
-[HRAF]Roland_HUNter

Erla Hood/Longer Tail/As Engine for G-6/G-14

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Really interesting discussion, chaps. I had no idea how complicated was the subject.

 

Out of interest, why was there so much variation? It seems strange to have different cowlings for what was essentially the same aircraft, with all the logistical complications that this might bring.

According to Jean-Claude Mermet Erla redesigned the engine cowlings of their G-10s to improve the aerodynamics*:

the most obvious change was to port, where the area between the supercharger intake and windscreen was more streamlined, eliminating the bulged, curved fairings used by other factories. In addition, the lower cowling forward of the oil cooler inlet was wider and squarer to cover the cooling pipes, whereas small bulges were needed to clear the pipes on WNF/Diana & Regensburg built G-10s, while the fairing for the Fo 587 oil cooler was slightly wider and shallower. Finally, the gun troughs on Erla cowlings were different to those of the other factories.

 

*IMO, it's also likely that Erla's cowlings were redesigned to simplify the stamping processes.

 

Just for interest,  Erla built 1,458 G-10s and G-10/R6s, cf WNF/Diana 356 G-10/U4s and Regensburg 121 G-10s (see Schmoll, below)

109g-012.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Widely dispersed manufacturing centers, ever-increasing pressures to push more planes out of the factory, and a reliance on slave labor will do that. The Soviets had similar problems themselves with their factories. 

 

Or simply, life happened. 

 

You got an order for 1000 G14s. You made the stamped parts for it. They are all in storage and cost a bucketload of money to make.

 

You produced 674 G14s, when they changed their minds and said they need just 700 G14s but also need 300 G10s.

 

Soo, you produce the remaining 26 G14s to complete the order, and had 300 already stamped G14 parts lying around. They fit the G10, sooo….. after all, its still a Gustav airframe with slightly different engines and stuff fitted.

On 11/3/2019 at 6:17 PM, JtD said:

 

Prien/Rodeike allocate this serial number to G-6 built by Erla and 8./JG1 had no G-14's on roster in July 1944.

 

Why would it be a G-14?

 

Because its a G14, says so on the manufacturer's label. I guess the Brits could read what was written there.It's no big mystery, they probably finished a G-6 as a G-14, which received a new manufacturer plate accordingly but kept the serial. It happened all the time, you have E-7s that started out as E-1s but were converted later - the serial was restamped in these cases. In both cases it was the same airframe, only equipment changed.

 

The serial btw is also very close to the G-6/U2 batch, so its probably a case of a plane ordered as a G-6/U2 (which had the GM 1 tank, easy to convert to MW, so it was beneficial for the manufacturer to finish those planes first as G14), and finished as a G-14. After all at the time G6s were already fitted with MW, and in the type descriptions the G14 is described as 'as G-6, however MW injection via supercharger pressure' (this was the difference - early MW G6s had used pressurized bottles to force the MW tank contents into the supercharger, the G-14 had lines tapping pressure from the supercharger instead).

 

The unit strength reports for this period are rather unreliable. The nomenclature was changing all the time. The 605AM engine was first called 605G, then 605A/m, then AM. JG 11s G-5/AS which are well documented on photos, are still listed as 'G-5' in the spring... but they are visible AS cowling with red legs on photos.

On 11/9/2019 at 12:17 AM, sevenless said:

 

Ahhh, I see. That makes it easy then. Low filler = G14 with AS-engine and high filler = G10 with 605 D-engine. As always it is a question of definition.

 

Then those Erla blocks 49xxxx and 15xxxx with rectangular fairing in front of the cockpit are G-10s if they have a high oil filler and 605 D and are G14/AS if they have a low oil filler and AS engine ?

 

Life gets complicated as the late G-14/AS were fitted with DB 605 ASB/ASC, which was probably a hybrid of 605A blocks and 605D parts (reuse / upgrade of older blocks lying around) as it had similar ratings to the 605D (1.8/1.9/1.98 ata).

 

High filler point just denotes the bigger oil tank that was used on the later G14 as it was found that the early versions the original smaller oil tank of the earlier Gs were just insufficient. Bumps on the lower cowling indicate a 605ASB/ASC IMO, since if you fit it with a 605D you have to call it G-10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Because its a G14, says so on the manufacturer's label

You have seen the label?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... On a practical level: with many G-6 still present in the timeframe of our campaign wouldn't be nice to have it updated for the west front scenario?

 

Bare minimum would be having the Erla canopy, the newer pilot model and a default skin. With those cosmetics part dealt with, what would be needed to represent the model used? GM/MW systems?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alexmarine28 said:

So... On a practical level: with many G-6 still present in the timeframe of our campaign wouldn't be nice to have it updated for the west front scenario?

 

Bare minimum would be having the Erla canopy, the newer pilot model and a default skin. With those cosmetics part dealt with, what would be needed to represent the model used? GM/MW systems?

And how would you tell the difference whether you are in a g6 late or a g14?

 

I think the devs ressources should be spent better...

 

the last two late 109 versions that could be added with a little benefit would be a g10 and g6as - but neither would be necessary. 

 

Demanding a late g6 would be like demanding f1 and e4 for bom. Yes they existed but they would not add anything to the game we don't have already...

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

And how would you tell the difference whether you are in a g6 late or a g14?

 

I think the devs ressources should be spent better...

 

the last two late 109 versions that could be added with a little benefit would be a g10 and g6as - but neither would be necessary. 

 

Demanding a late g6 would be like demanding f1 and e4 for bom. Yes they existed but they would not add anything to the game we don't have already...

Because a G14 is not a G6Late for a number of relevant reasons. You would understand that if you read what people wrote in this very thread.

 

Particulary for BoBP G6 w/ GM and AS(M) is not necessary but adequate for high alt performing USAF planes. It served then and there and some hosts might want not to enable the 109K4 (it`s a lot better).

 

Besides that, G6 Late would be mandatory for `44 Western Front scenarios.

Edited by Mac_Messer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A G14 IS a G6 late - that was exactly the whole idea behind the model and that is exactly what is written in this threat as well...

 

There is not one G6 late model but there are a myriad of different details in g6's later in the war - and combining all improvements in one model resulted in the G14...

 

And as Kurfürst mentioned g6's that had to be overhauled would be upgraded to g14 standard - and frontline fighters had to be overhauled all the time. They were even rebrandished as g14...

 

btw the intent of standardising even in the form of the g14 failed due to dispersed production as already stated in this threat...

 

And I already agreed that AS variants differ enough to justify an addition - but a g6as is not the same as a vague g6 "late"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

A G14 IS a G6 late - that was exactly the whole idea behind the model and that is exactly what is written in this threat as well...

 

No, it was not exactly the same thing. A "late" G-6 could or not have a tall tail and the MW 50 system - things that would differentiate it from being a true G-14. At the least, it would have the Erla canopy. I think the original IL2 got it right by having its G-6 Late feature both the tall tail and Erla canopy but no MW 50. That was enough to differentiate it from the 1943 G-6 and the G-14. 

Edited by LukeFF
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

13 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

No, it was not exactly the same thing. A "late" G-6 could or not have a tall tail and the MW 50 system - things that would differentiate it from being a true G-14. At the least, it would have the Erla canopy. I think the original IL2 got it right by having its G-6 Late feature both the tall tail and Erla canopy but no MW 50. That was enough to differentiate it from the 1943 G-6 and the G-14. 

Ok so in box a Late g6 would have to have the mw50 as optional mod - with which installed it would gameplay wise be identical to the g14...

 

if that was a core plane for a new module I'd feel cheated...

 

if a collector plane - well sure :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need these aircraft added because no mission designer is going to substitute a G-14 for a G-6 late. They are just going to stick a G-6 in there and say ‘sorry no G-14’ built during these month so enjoy your G-6’.

 

etc etc

 

This isn’t hard to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

You have seen the label?

The report is quoted in full here *; note that there's no mention of "G-14" being stamped on the manufacturer's plate. Also note that  there was no FuG 25 fitted, meaning that W. Nr. 413601 was a hybrid (quoting Jean-Claude Mermet...)

Quote

Apart from MW50 and DB 605 AM, if one of these options was not factory installed, the aeroplane was not a G-14....the denomination, according to Mtt-AG instructions, was Bf 109G-6/MW50. But, for the factory, the simplified MW 50 system meant above all the Bf 109G-14. We should notice, incidentally, (on Erla-Leipzig documents for example) that at delivery of such "uncompleted" planes they are shown as G-6/MW50, although taken in charge by the Luftwaffe as G-14s, which does not facilitate research in units' records...

 

109g-028.thumb.jpg.2b864a4606583c27aeb1da23931c9e44.jpg

The British also had an intact, flyable Bf 109G-6/U2, W. Nr 412951 'White 16' of 1./JG 301 that had landed at Manston in the early hours of 21 July 1944, so they were able to note the differences between the two.

 

* Interestingly, the report stated that, apart from the bullet resistant windscreen, " No other armour is fitted to this aircraft" and there was nothing protecting the fuel tank, apart from a plywood box.

Edited by NZTyphoon
Removing unintended emoji

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking in game terms here: All the devs have to do to satisfy the late G6 demanding crowd is to take away the MW-50 boost from the G14 and replace the 605AM with the 605A and hey presto, you have a late G6. Or give the present G6 an Erla-hood and you have a not so very late but also not very early G6.

Edited by sevenless
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NZTyphoon said:

The report is quoted in full here *; note that there's no mention of "G-14" being stamped on the manufacturer's plate. Also note that  there was no FuG 25 fitted, meaning that W. Nr. 413601 was a hybrid (quoting Jean-Claude Mermet...)

Of interest in the report:

 

(1) On deliver flights or test flights after an engine change, after take-off do not exceed 2,100 r.p.m. and 1.05 ata of boost. If possible duration of flight should not exceed one hour. Watch oil pressure.

(2) For the first five hours, if possible do not exceed 2.300 r.p.m. and 1.15 ata boost.

(3) For the second five hours, if possible do not exceed 2.600 r.p.m. and 1.30 ata boost

(4) After ten hours, the aircraft may be flown if necessary without limitations other than those laid down in current instructions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... Just an option for the Erla canopy and a new default skin to be used on Bodenplatte career? :ph34r:

Edited by Alexmarine28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alexmarine28 said:

So... Just an option for the Erla canopy and a new default skin to be used on Bodenplatte career? :ph34r:

 

Yes, that's one way it could possibly be done - assuming the Bf 109 3D model allows for easy swapping of canopies, like the Fw 190 D-9.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, that's one way it could possibly be done - assuming the Bf 109 3D model allows for easy swapping of canopies, like the Fw 190 D-9.

 

The later step would be to have the newer pilot and also a default skin for the career (just like the script that switch the il-2 skins in the Kuban career)... But the canopy as a start would be nice... 

 

@Han would be possible to have an Erla canopy as an available mod for the Bf 109 G-6? It would make it more correct for the Bodenplatte timeframe as @BlackSix also included them in several LW units...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Ideally they could do something akin to the British Nieuport 17 in Rise of Flight. For those who don't remember, the British version of the 17 was added a good bit later into development, and once it was added, it was sold at a lower price than the original. So what the devs could (ideally in my mind) do is produce a late version Bf-109G-6 as a collector plane, which would have the Erla canopy by default, and mods for the tail and perhaps the MW50, and maybe sell it for half price to people who have the early G-6, and bundle it for maybe a 50% markup with the early G6 for all buyers who don't already have the G6.  Having the basic G6 version would make producing the late (I imagine) not quite as much work as a full new aircraft. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thenorm said:

I think Ideally they could do something akin to the British Nieuport 17 in Rise of Flight. For those who don't remember, the British version of the 17 was added a good bit later into development, and once it was added, it was sold at a lower price than the original. So what the devs could (ideally in my mind) do is produce a late version Bf-109G-6 as a collector plane, which would have the Erla canopy by default, and mods for the tail and perhaps the MW50, and maybe sell it for half price to people who have the early G-6, and bundle it for maybe a 50% markup with the early G6 for all buyers who don't already have the G6.  Having the basic G6 version would make producing the late (I imagine) not quite as much work as a full new aircraft. 

Honestly, I don`t care much for the new canopy since glass headrest is very close to it visibility wise. Rather have the more aerodynamic Beule and AS engine with GM equipped.

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

Honestly, I don`t care much for the new canopy since glass headrest is very close to it visibility wise. Rather have the more aerodynamic Beule and AS engine with GM equipped.

I agree, personally speaking I'd like to see a G-14/AS

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mac_Messer said:

Honestly, I don`t care much for the new canopy since glass headrest is very close to it visibility wise. Rather have the more aerodynamic Beule and AS engine with GM equipped.

I disagree, I'd love to have the improved visibility, and since the G6 appears in the career for Bodenplatte, I'd like to have the right version in for it. And since doing those couple of upgrades would (again, I assume) not require the same level of work as an entirely new variant, hopefully they could produce it in parallel with some other 109 version like the G10 or G6/G14AS.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to revive this thread again, but I’ve noticed that the G-6 and later 109s have a port on the right hand side of the fuselage with a C3 fuel triangle. What was this for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AndytotheD said:

I hate to revive this thread again, but I’ve noticed that the G-6 and later 109s have a port on the right hand side of the fuselage with a C3 fuel triangle. What was this for?

Indicating the port for the C3 fuel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

Indicating the port for the C3 fuel.

Yeah but why have two separate fueling ports? Could both fuels be used interchangeably depending on what was available?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The access to the main fuel tank was on the left side of the plane.

 

On the right side you have the access to the filling port of the starter tank, this why you can see the C3 fuel triangle. (red circle, here on a G14 but this access appeared during G6 production)

109g14_1.png.42879765393f653c837fae7d97ebec8c.png

 

 

Some DB605 can use the both fuel B4 and C3. 

AM, ASB and DB can use B4 with MW50 or just C3;

ASM can use C3 and B4, both with MW50

D-2 can use C3 and B4, but without MW50

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, AndytotheD said:

Yeah but why have two separate fueling ports? Could both fuels be used interchangeably depending on what was available?

 

Its the same fuel port, just different stencils for the crew. Default fuel to use was C-3 for all methanol boosted variants, B4 could be used in an emergency, according to manuals.

 

The reason was that C-3 had high enough ratings to keep going without knocking even if the MW50 system fails, while with B4 if you did not have MW injecting properly you were risking rapid and massive engine failures. Although in around February 1945 the lead content of B4 was raised and it was said that with the revised formulae it now had 'near  equal C3 quality'.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 11:27 PM, sevenless said:

 

They could sell the G14 model with an G6 engine and call it a G6 late to fill the timeframe 9/43 - 8/44 but I doubt they will do that. ......................

done with BoN :lol:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, III/JG53Frankyboy said:

done with BoN :lol:

Wait for it. I haven´t lost hope for them to include the G6/AS instead. We will learn in a few months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my bet is a 109G6 with Erla canopy, Galland headarmour, large wooden tail. 1,42 ATA DB605A as default.

MW50 as modification. And yes, than ist an G-14......but, missiondesigners can forbidd the MW50.

 

NO DB605AS because it need a 3D Modell overwork - EVEN they could use the K4 nose in parts-

 

But true, we will see !

 

Edited by III/JG53Frankyboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will intentionally withold the AS model. 

 

This is a cunning plan to actually help the blue MP players... after careful study of the past, it was expected majority of blue fighters would be up in the stratosphere in AS version and not contributing to mission objectives 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

  • Haha 2

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  

×
×
  • Create New...