BF 109 G-6 ASM vs. G-10

[MattS]

Hello!

 

Sorry if this question has been answered, I searched but no clear answer was found…

 

Is the G-6 ASM with MW50 effectively the same thing performance-wise as a G-10?

Would the G-10 be a little faster down low with the MW50 flowing? If so, does anybody know by how much?

Thanks for any input you have.

[CUJO_1970]

G10 is faster on the deck (improved engine block, increased manifold pressure/supercharger/oil centrifuge etc) to top speed on deck to about 373 mph, but with similar performance all the way up to the G6/AS rated altitude.

 

"In the sorties we flew short before the end of the war in low-level flight in the Cham area and east of Regensburg, we often met US fighters, and although they were superior to us in numerical terms, we were able to get away from them. The fastest Bf 109 I ever flew in, I handed over to the Americans on 8 May 1945 in Neubiberg” -Peter Duttman JG52

 

So, G10 has best of both worlds - was many Luftwaffe pilot's favorite as it saved them at a time when they were terribly outnumbered in late-war low altitude situations they were able to outrun/outclimb Allied fighters with it and 'get away'.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2024 by CUJO_1970

[MattS]

2 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

G10 is faster on the deck (improved engine block, increased manifold pressure/supercharger/oil centrifuge etc) to top speed on deck to about 373 mph, but with similar performance all the way up to the G6/AS rated altitude.

 

"In the sorties we flew short before the end of the war in low-level flight in the Cham area and east of Regensburg, we often met US fighters, and although they were superior to us in numerical terms, we were able to get away from them. The fastest Bf 109 I ever flew in, I handed over to the Americans on 8 May 1945 in Neubiberg” -Peter Duttman JG52

 

So, G10 has best of both worlds - was many Luftwaffe pilot's favorite as it saved them at a time when they were terribly outnumbered in late-war low altitude situations they were able to outrun/outclimb Allied fighters with it and 'get away'.

 

 

 

 

Thanks - that’s pretty significant!

[CUJO_1970]

18 minutes ago, MattS said:

Thanks - that’s pretty significant!

 

By the time the G-10 rolled around they have developed workarounds for the economy metals issues for the most part - but that 605 engine block had pretty much reached it's design maturity, time to move on to further develop DB603/Jumo 213 (best V engine design of the war) and jet engines.

 

Still, what they were able to do with that engine with charge cooling, etc. (pushed it over 2,000 hp) is pretty astonishing considering.

[CUJO_1970]

Forgot to mention G-10 also had better spark plugs by late 1944 - the Luftwaffe also having to deal with spark plug problems so with G6 ata was made 1.42 and then eventually with charge cooling AND better Bosch DW250ET 7/1 spark plugs 1.7 ata were possible. So they had these plugs beginning in summer 1943.

 

G-10 engine block like K4 what I find was:

1.80 to 1.9ata = Bosch DW250ET 7/1A and 10/1 - on this spark plug Luftwaffe mechanics over boosted to 1.98ata but then was restricted back to 1.9ata due to engine failures.

1.98ata = Beru F280 E43 spark-plugs are required.

 

So with G-10 and then K4 you got planes faster on the deck as G6/AS and then equal at high altitude.

[CUJO_1970]

[sevenless]

15 hours ago, MattS said:

Hello!

 

Sorry if this question has been answered, I searched but no clear answer was found…

 

Is the G-6 ASM with MW50 effectively the same thing performance-wise as a G-10?

Would the G-10 be a little faster down low with the MW50 flowing? If so, does anybody know by how much?

Thanks for any input you have.

 

Hi,

 

The plane we got is the G6/AS (without MW50) and G14/ASM (with G50). What we did not get is the G14 with ASC engine which is from a performance point of view essentially the same as the G10 with DC engine. See here for some further details:

 

 

[MattS]

10 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

Hi,

 

The plane we got is the G6/AS (without MW50) and G14/ASM (with G50). What we did not get is the G14 with ASC engine which is from a performance point of view essentially the same as the G10 with DC engine. See here for some further details:

 

 

Yikes, I really searched poorly to have missed that thread - sorry.

 

Are you saying that the G-6 collector plane that I bought is a G-6/AS as base, and then it changes to a G-14/ASM if we enable the MW50 modification? I thought it was a G-6/ASM when the MW50 mod is installed 🤔

 

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

Yikes, I really searched poorly to have missed that thread - sorry.

 

Are you saying that the G-6 collector plane that I bought is a G-6/AS as base, and then it changes to a G-14/ASM if we enable the MW50 modification? I thought it was a G-6/ASM when the MW50 mod is installed 🤔

 

No. The standalone G-6 is a 1943 plane with no special high-altitude equipment or boost systems. The G-6/AS is the high-altitude model with a streamlined engine canopy that can be flown with or without MW50 and hence essentially turn into an early-model G-14/AS.

[sevenless]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

I thought it was a G-6/ASM when the MW50 mod is installed 🤔

 

Well, depends what kind of definition of a G14 you are following 😉. Without knowing the WNr. you never can be sure. I am following the school which says: If it is a G6 with AM or ASM engine and MW50, it is a G14 🙃

 

Some quotes:

 

 

 

 

Wołowski, Krzysztof. BF 109 Late Versions (White Series) (S.39). MMPBooks. Kindle-Version. 

 

BF 109 Late Versions: Camouflage and Markings (White Series) (English Edition) eBook : Wołowski, Krzysztof: Amazon.de: Kindle-Shop

 

 

Edited May 2, 2024 by sevenless

[MattS]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

No. The standalone G-6 is a 1943 plane with no special high-altitude equipment or boost systems. The G-6/AS is the high-altitude model with a streamlined engine canopy that can be flown with or without MW50 and hence essentially turn into an early-model G-14/AS.

 

 

2 hours ago, sevenless said:

 

Well, depends what kind of definition of a G14 you are following 😉. Without knowing the WNr. you never can be sure. I am following the school which says: If it is a G6 with AM or ASM engine and MW50, it is a G14 🙃

 

Some quotes:

 

 

 

 

Wołowski, Krzysztof. BF 109 Late Versions (White Series) (S.39). MMPBooks. Kindle-Version. 

 

BF 109 Late Versions: Camouflage and Markings (White Series) (English Edition) eBook : Wołowski, Krzysztof: Amazon.de: Kindle-Shop

 

 

 

Thanks gentlemen, I believe I am 100% tracking now. 😅

 

 

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, MattS said:

Thanks gentlemen, I believe I am 100% tracking now. 😅

 

No worries - late-war Bf 109 variants and subvariants are an extremely complex topic. 

[FeuerFliegen]

Would love a G-10... it sounds like it's that perfect sweet spot, kinda like how the 109 F-4 is viewed.

[Kurfurst]

On 5/1/2024 at 5:27 PM, MattS said:

Hello!

 

Is the G-6 ASM with MW50 effectively the same thing performance-wise as a G-10?

 

Basically yes, but it depends on the time period. The D and AS engines had for all practical purposes the same ratings.

 

HOWEVER, the ratings were increased later in late 1944, so if our G-6/ASM is correctly modelled with its Normandy era rating of 1,7 ata / 1800 PS output obviously it will not match the performance of late 44/45 ratings of either the G-6/AS or G-10, which were increased to 1,8* (1850 PS, later reduced to around 1800 PS due to poor B-4 quality, so not that much of a difference), 1,9 ata (cc. 1925PS, tested only with JG 11 AFAIK) and 1,98 ata  (2000 PS) ratings, which were validated for both AS and D series engines.

 

On 5/1/2024 at 5:27 PM, MattS said:

Would the G-10 be a little faster down low with the MW50 flowing? If so, does anybody know by how much?

Thanks for any input you have.

 

They were pretty much the same +/- 1-2 km/h. Which is unsurprising, as its basically the same airframe, powered by the same power output.

 

The boon of the G-10 was that it used many internal components from the K series, without having to change airframe production and jigs. 

[the_emperor]

My January 45 manual for the G-10 says, that it uses a K-4 airframe with fully covered landing gear and preparation for the retractable tailwheel which is to be installed later e.g. when in for repairs.

so on paper you could justify a late late G-10 with the K-4 airframe 😄

though the reality at this time of the war it would probably closer to the G-6/ASM as in this time of the year it was common to fix the tailwheel and revome landing gear covers to minimize failures for the landing gear due to mud/water/snow/dirt clogging it.

and not to forget the whole 109 mess in general