IRL how difficult was it to install/remove the 109's gunpods?

[percydanvers]

Just a thought I had and couldn't find any info on. Was it something that could be done flexibly in the field or was it a major overhaul to have gunpods put on a 109?

[VA_Kamicosmos]

I've wondered about that as well.  Here's something I found on a website, not sure what their source is yet.  I have recently acquired several detailed books on the BF109 series, and if I see something about the gun gondola installation, I'll try to remember to post!

 

"The  conformal  gun  pods,  exclusive  of  ammunition, weighed 135 kg (298 lb);  and 135 to 145 rounds were  provided per gun. The  total weight,  including  ammunition, was  215 kg. Installation  of the  under-wing  gun  pods was  a simple  task  that  could  be  quickly performed  by  the  unit's  armourers,  and  the  gun  pods imposed  a reduction of speed  of only 8 km/h (5 mph). "

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

As stated above, could be removed and installed in the field by armament crews. The added firepower was worth the small reduction in speed and slightly worse climb/initiation of roll. Finnish Air Force had a few of these "cannon birds", but they were stripped of the guns for better fighter vs fighter performance. The bomb rack was also removed from FiAF 109G-2/6´s as bombs and drop tanks were not used. Saved weight and gave speed/climb.

 

The effect of the added guns was very well demonstrated by Kyösti Karhila, one of few pilots that flew a G-6/R6 variant. He shot down 3 x IL-2´s in a short succession in one sortie. In his own words "..the Strurmoviks disintegrated midair and fell down a burning wreck as a result of a short burst..". But he also preferred the normal version for fighter combat.

[the_emperor]

5 hours ago, percydanvers said:

Was it something that could be done flexibly in the field or was it a major overhaul to have gunpods put on a 109?

The gunpods were were indeed quite flexible as they were a so called "Rüstsatz" that could be installed depending on the task it had to perfom.

IIRC the wing was continually strengthened from the F-4 to the G-6 series to accomadate the heavier plane/loading and Rüstsätze and rougher airfields. But Iam not quite sure about that, but I am sure here are some expert with detailed 109 knowledge, that can elaborate that further.

[percydanvers]

Thank you all - quite interesting! 
 

7 hours ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

The effect of the added guns was very well demonstrated by Kyösti Karhila, one of few pilots that flew a G-6/R6 variant. He shot down 3 x IL-2´s in a short succession in one sortie. In his own words "..the Strurmoviks disintegrated midair and fell down a burning wreck as a result of a short burst..". But he also preferred the normal version for fighter combat.

It's really cool to me that this experience rings so true to the sim. I generally prefer not to use the gun pods but their usefulness against sturmoviks is really something to behold!

[PatrickAWlson]

I use them for intercepts.  I don't for anything where the primary opposition might be fighters.  Just like real life though, sometimes you find yourself facing fighters with the gun pods strapped on.  Fortunately the 109 is not a complete dog with the pods.

[firdimigdi]

Quite hard for a while, until a young Swede called Ingvar Kamprad apparently came up with a system that only needed a 5mm Allen wrench.

[percydanvers]

21 hours ago, PatrickAWlson said:

I use them for intercepts.  I don't for anything where the primary opposition might be fighters.  Just like real life though, sometimes you find yourself facing fighters with the gun pods strapped on.  Fortunately the 109 is not a complete dog with the pods.

I've been surprised by how well they work sometimes. Obviously the handling isn't as nice as without them, but a gunboat 109 isn't as helpless as one might be inclined to think.
 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S! 

 

Lot of the "helplessness" of Bf109 is from accounts by seasoned Allied pilots facing worse trained Luftwaffe pilots later in the war. Die Experten were either wounded or dead by then or withdrawn from active duty.

 

Also Eric Brown has his part of picturing the 109 as something clumsy etc. Messerschmitt main test pilot Beauvais, who flew them all and had a lot more hours in them than Brown, wanted to discuss about Brown's views on 109, but Brown refused to do so. Cocky attitude if you ask me, without taking away any of his merits in aviation. 

 

How this relates to 109 cannon birds? They did suffer a bit with the guns installed, but as it seems not as much as has been touted everywhere. Minimal loss of speed at about 8km/h is tolerable, badly trimmed plane can lose more. The climb did drop a bit, but still very good. Roll rate itself was more or less unaffected, but initiating it was slowed down a bit. 

 

The Rüstsatze were usable by ground crew in the field. Germans could over engineer things, but field kits did not require depot level or even field depot level facilities for installation and removal. I bet same applied to Allied items for planes. 

 

Personally I would use the gun pods only for busting bombers or ground attackers. If bounced one would have to rely on wingmen without gun pods to assist. At least with the modelling of 109 in many sims up to date. 

 

TL;DR Ease of use was there, but had an impact on performance. 

[the_emperor]

One can say, that those "Rüstsätze" and further (bomb) loadouts made the 109 a very versatile plane, that could be adapted to various mission profiles.

1 hour ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

Lot of the "helplessness" of Bf109 is from accounts by seasoned Allied pilots facing worse trained Luftwaffe pilots later in the war.

Yes, in early ´44 when the allies renewed their air offensive with the help of the new Pony (Mustang) in the stable, the 109 was outclassed by Pilot training of allied pilots, reduced perfomance due to often attached Rüstsätze, and probably the DB605A engine still wasnt cleared for more than 1.3ata/2600rpm (still a hot topic in this forum).

 

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, LLv34_Flanker said:

If bounced one would have to rely on wingmen without gun pods to assist. At least with the modelling of 109 in many sims up to date. 

I wonder, if the second fighter flight, you usually encounter in intercept missions in the career mode, is equipped with gunpods. I never looked for it. It would make sense to only have the player flight being equipped with the gunpods and the second flight, which usually is attacking the enemy first, being in default loadout, as it should keep the enemy's fighter escort busy, so your flight can do its task.

[69th_chuter]

The 109 suffered from increasingly poor aileron effectiveness as speed increased and the nearly ~475 lbs of weight on each wing added considerable polar inertia further degrading roll performance.  In reality sometimes destructive power is worth more than maneuverability so the tradeoff was worthwhile at times.  Unfortunately, polar inertia itself isn't yet modeled in the game so that part of the equation isn't relevant yet.

[Kurfurst]

On 12/22/2021 at 4:24 AM, percydanvers said:

Just a thought I had and couldn't find any info on. Was it something that could be done flexibly in the field or was it a major overhaul to have gunpods put on a 109?

(Almost) all 109s from the G series onwards (and a few late F4s) had the wiring etc. installed so I reckon it wasn’t much of a job then unscrewing the bottom panel on the mid wing section, installing the guns and ammo and then connecting some wires and then zeroing them in. The last part probably was the most time consuming, the rest could be probably done in half an hour.

[percydanvers]

On 12/24/2021 at 1:24 AM, LLv34_Flanker said:

S! 

 

Lot of the "helplessness" of Bf109 is from accounts by seasoned Allied pilots facing worse trained Luftwaffe pilots later in the war. Die Experten were either wounded or dead by then or withdrawn from active duty.

 

Also Eric Brown has his part of picturing the 109 as something clumsy etc. Messerschmitt main test pilot Beauvais, who flew them all and had a lot more hours in them than Brown, wanted to discuss about Brown's views on 109, but Brown refused to do so. Cocky attitude if you ask me, without taking away any of his merits in aviation. 

 

Yes definitely - I think a lot of american perception of the 109 is colored by the fact the pilots were 1) horrendously badly trained and 2) told not to engage fighters but instead focus almost exclusively on bombers. 

I do also think the 109 is an unusual flier (part of why I like it so much). It's sort of an acquired taste as an airplane. If you only fly it for like five hours it would seem really clumsy and awkward, but if you spend a lot of time with the 109 its strengths become more apparent.