gavagai Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Are you saying we know the 109K-4 will have that MP? P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mprhead Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 No we don't know that. It just seems that someone has decided that 109 will be overmodelled and spitfire undermodelled. Or something. I have usually been flying USAAF and RAF, but now I am starting to hope that we get spitfire mkIX as it was in late 1942 and Bf 109 K-4 with 1.98 ata... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DD_Crash Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 No we don't know that. It just seems that someone has decided that 109 will be overmodelled and spitfire undermodelled. Or something. I have usually been flying USAAF and RAF, but now I am starting to hope that we get spitfire mkIX as it was in late 1942 and Bf 109 K-4 with 1.98 ata... Or the other way round ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavagai Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 (edited) Ok, just to whip up a frenzy: Finally got the youtube tags to work! :doh: Edited November 9, 2013 by gavagai P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mprhead Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Or the other way round ;) Oh yes, it seems that there have always been and always will be that... But I think that in here all the posters so far have stated that k-4 should be modelled to late 1944 specs as should the spit mkIX. And that is the reason I fail to see the point, if there is one, in Milo's posts about this. I am sure he knows what he is talking about, only there is no-one arguing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 Oh yes, it seems that there have always been and always will be that... But I think that in here all the posters so far have stated that k-4 should be modelled to late 1944 specs as should the spit mkIX. And that is the reason I fail to see the point, if there is one, in Milo's posts about this. I am sure he knows what he is talking about, only there is no-one arguing about it. A 1.98ata K-4 is a 1945 a/c which only saw service ?? in the last few weeks of the war in Europe. A late 1944 K-4 would have 1.8ata. As of Dec 31 1044 II./JG11 had: 1 Bf109G-6/U4 38 Bf109G-14 11 Bf109K-4 or a staffel which were quickly withdrawn from their operational test status I can find no claims by II./JG11 for Dec 1944, so how much if any combat did these very few 1.98ata K-4s see? Just to be clear, I have no problem with a 1.8ata K-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mprhead Posted November 9, 2013 Share Posted November 9, 2013 A 1.98ata K-4 is a 1945 a/c which only saw service ?? in the last few weeks of the war in Europe. A late 1944 K-4 would have 1.8ata. As of Dec 31 1044 II./JG11 had: 1 Bf109G-6/U4 38 Bf109G-14 11 Bf109K-4 or a staffel which were quickly withdrawn from their operational test status I can find no claims by II./JG11 for Dec 1944, so how much if any combat did these very few 1.98ata K-4s see? Just to be clear, I have no problem with a 1.8ata K-4. And I am sure you are right about this. What I am not sure is why you keep on with this "1.98 was not used in 1944", because I have not seen any posts that suggest it should be modelled to 1.98 ata? There is nobody arguing about the issue, so why? :) On the other hand, these statistics make an interesting reading, so there is that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messermeister Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Any sources for that? Dropped from series in October From what i have read, mainwheel cover removal and fixed (long) tailwheel were field mods. There's also few ones fitted with G-type short tailwheel but they should be very rare. That might be about right for late series, to prevent malfunctions due to weather (snow, mud) or due to lower production quality. But the first series didn't have it from factory because the OK to systems reliability came later than the type's service introduction, after modifications proved successful in flight tests Testing continued up to December 44. Really? That is the book I'm relying on. I bought it about 20 years ago when I was very interested in parsing through 109 myths and facts. Why did Daimler-Benz request that the radiator shutoff be dropped from production? With the presence of the valves, the cooling system felt off at temperatures about 10-20º below the evaporation temperature. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messermeister Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 A couple of interesting points for modelling from 109K-4 operating instructions (Bedienungsvorschrift) of October 1944 (published January 1945). Both the elevator trim and the elevator gear ratios were changed compared to 109G to make them lighter. The relevant parts have been marked with red rectangles. Translation: 3. Stabilisers and control surfaces Rudder without horn balance, with Flettner tabs. Rudder with reduced trailing edge" "Cantilever horizontal and adjustable tailplane; increased gearing compared to Bf 109 G." Mechanical indicator of the horizontal tailplane setting in the left wall of the cocpit" "To reduce stick forces, modified elevator control kinematics" There is some doubts about the introduction of this feature, as the combination of standard ailerons and reduced elevator movement was forbidden by H. Beauvais : And the series introduction of new aileron (standard with Flettner or symmetrical nose without Flettner, were the two choices finally selected) hasn't been decided as of February 1945... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messermeister Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 No 1.98ata K-4s in 1944. Then I guess no fuss arose with E'Stelle Rechlin about problems in service machines... :rolleyes: There were machines converted in 1944, even if DB's directive apparently was not sanctioned by RLM via a TAGTT or Rechlin directive. The instructions to identification of modified engines were clear: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Then I guess no fuss arose with E'Stelle Rechlin about problems in service machines... :rolleyes: There were machines converted in 1944, even if DB's directive apparently was not sanctioned by RLM via a TAGTT or Rechlin directive. When did E'Stelle Rechlin become a combat unit? If you want to quibble over a few days > 22.12.44 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB 605 Posted November 10, 2013 Author Share Posted November 10, 2013 Dropped from series in October That might be about right for late series, to prevent malfunctions due to weather (snow, mud) or due to lower production quality. But the first series didn't have it from factory because the OK to systems reliability came later than the type's service introduction, after modifications proved successful in flight tests Thanks for posting these up. :thumbup: CPU: Intel Core i7-2600k @3.40GHz | Motherboard: Asus P8P67-M | Memory: Kingston 8GB DDR3 | OS W10 | GPU: Sapphire R9 290x 8GBDDR5 | Monitor: Samsung Syncmaster 24" | Devices: Oculus Rift, MS FFB 2 joystick, Saitek X 52 Pro throttle, Saitek Pro pedals, Gametrix Jetseat [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurfürst Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 (edited) Dropped from series in October That might be about right for late series, to prevent malfunctions due to weather (snow, mud) or due to lower production quality. But the first series didn't have it from factory because the OK to systems reliability came later than the type's service introduction, after modifications proved successful in flight tests Testing continued up to December 44. There might be some overlook here - the paper from 13.10.44 you have kindly provided discusses the testing hydraulically actuated main/tail wheel on 109K. testing showed that the mainwheel could be operated up to 310 kph IAS w/o problem (if my German is correct, that is...) However another paper from 18.10.44 makes it clear that the idea of hydraulic operation of the mainwheel was dropped in favor of the much more simple and reliable mechanical actuation of the main wheel and tail wheel covers. IMHO there is little relation of the doc you posted on the main/tail wheel covers since the paper discusses essentially testing related to a different subject (the general deployment of the wheels which were hydraulically actuated) but has nothing to do with the wheel well covers (Restabdeckung) which were mechanically operated by the wheel itself. There is some doubts about the introduction of this feature, as the combination of standard ailerons and reduced elevator movement was forbidden by H. Beauvais : Hmm, interesting. The paper is unfortunately not entirely clearly worded, however its clear they preferred the "normal" elevator design as "better". I am puzzled however how and why the aileron / elevator combination is better or worse... And the series introduction of new aileron (standard with Flettner or symmetrical nose without Flettner, were the two choices finally selected) hasn't been decided as of February 1945... Again very odd in view that WNF G-6s and indeed many G-10s are seen flying happily with aileron Flettner.. identification of 109K with aileron Flettner has been most difficult because of poor angles, rarity and quality of photographs, though one picture of a very late 109K suggest (too poor quality to make out detail 100%) the Flettner was eventually introduced sometime later. It is clear from documentation (see above) intitial ailerons were that of G-6. I am not sure if reason was aerodynamic or production related (existing stocks to be used first). Edited November 10, 2013 by Kurfürst http://www.kurfurst.org - The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site Vezérünk a bátorság, Kísérőnk a szerencse! -Motto of the RHAF 101st 'Puma' Home Air Defense Fighter Regiment The Answer to the Ultimate Question of the K-4, the Universe, and Everything: Powerloading 550 HP / ton, 1593 having been made up to 31th March 1945, 314 K-4s were being operated in frontline service on 31 January 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobek Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 (edited) There seems to be a misunderstanding going on. If you are looking for the bananaforums, you took a wrong turn. Now you guys keep it civil and familiarize yourselves with the house rules or your stay here will be short. Edited November 11, 2013 by sobek Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leafer Posted November 11, 2013 Share Posted November 11, 2013 Is there such thing as a wrong turn on the internet? :D ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurfürst Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Bf 109K-4 and K-6 performance at 1,98ata (2000PS) boost, DB 605DC powerplant. For relevant powers of DC powerplant at 1.98ata, see: http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/datasheets/DB605DC_limits_dec44Motorenkarte.jpg Level speeds (note: thick lines depict level speed with improved VDM 12 199 propellor. For perfromance with serial production VDM 12 159 propellor - or "Serienschrb", see thin lines). Climb rates Bf 109K-4 and K-6 performance at 1,88ata (1800/1850 PS) boost, DB 605DB powerplant. Level speeds (note: thick lines depict level speed with improved VDM 12 199 propellor. For perfromance with serial production VDM 12 159 propellor - or "Serienschrb", see thin lines). Climb rates : For relevant powers of DB powerplant at 1.80 ata boost, see: http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/datasheets/DB605DB_limits_dec44Motorenkarte.jpg Full report with English translation: http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109K_PBLeistungen/Leist_109K_EN.html http://www.kurfurst.org - The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site Vezérünk a bátorság, Kísérőnk a szerencse! -Motto of the RHAF 101st 'Puma' Home Air Defense Fighter Regiment The Answer to the Ultimate Question of the K-4, the Universe, and Everything: Powerloading 550 HP / ton, 1593 having been made up to 31th March 1945, 314 K-4s were being operated in frontline service on 31 January 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted November 12, 2013 ED Team Share Posted November 12, 2013 (unless the Germans printed their material in white on black paper) Just as a random useless fact, the documents are most likely a straight scan from a negative microfilm. When I scan microfilm like this I change it to positive reading where I can. But some dont. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friedrich-4B Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Just as a random useless fact, the documents are most likely a straight scan from a negative microfilm. When I scan microfilm like this I change it to positive reading where I can. But some dont. Thanks for that- I'd forgotten that many of the German documents are on microfilm. :thumbup: My main point is that it just seems that whenever the 109K-4 is mentioned exactly the same stuff turns up time and time again. I like the K-4 and would like more information on the subject, because at present there are too many loose ends. I don't live in Europe and don't have the same access to archival material that those who live on the continent do. Is there any new documentation that can be contributed that will help clear up the use of 1.98 ata? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]************************************* Fortunately, Mk IX is slightly stable, anyway, the required stick travel is not high... but nothing extraordinary. Very pleasant to fly, very controllable, predictable and steady. We never refuse to correct something that was found outside ED if it is really proven...But we never will follow some "experts" who think that only they are the greatest aerodynamic guru with a secret knowledge. :smartass: WWII AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurfürst Posted November 12, 2013 Share Posted November 12, 2013 Just as a random useless fact, the documents are most likely a straight scan from a negative microfilm. When I scan microfilm like this I change it to positive reading where I can. But some dont. The original DB/DC manual of Dec 44 which the db/dc ratings are posted from was on white background - I simply turned it into inverse colour to fit into the site's design of black background. I am sure everyone is relieved now that we have cleared that important bit up. :D http://www.kurfurst.org - The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site Vezérünk a bátorság, Kísérőnk a szerencse! -Motto of the RHAF 101st 'Puma' Home Air Defense Fighter Regiment The Answer to the Ultimate Question of the K-4, the Universe, and Everything: Powerloading 550 HP / ton, 1593 having been made up to 31th March 1945, 314 K-4s were being operated in frontline service on 31 January 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted November 13, 2013 ED Team Share Posted November 13, 2013 What kind of loose ends are you worried about? Thanks for that- I'd forgotten that many of the German documents are on microfilm. :thumbup: My main point is that it just seems that whenever the 109K-4 is mentioned exactly the same stuff turns up time and time again. I like the K-4 and would like more information on the subject, because at present there are too many loose ends. I don't live in Europe and don't have the same access to archival material that those who live on the continent do. Is there any new documentation that can be contributed that will help clear up the use of 1.98 ata? Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted November 13, 2013 ED Team Share Posted November 13, 2013 The original DB/DC manual of Dec 44 which the db/dc ratings are posted from was on white background - I simply turned it into inverse colour to fit into the site's design of black background. I am sure everyone is relieved now that we have cleared that important bit up. :D Ha, well there is that too... most film I have handled we negative so I just assumed :) Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friedrich-4B Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 What kind of loose ends are you worried about? Not worried, just interested - there doesn't seem to be much documentation relating to the K-4, and the same issues and debates with respect to the use of 1.98 ata crop up time and time again in various forums. IMO it is more than likely it is something which will never be satisfactorily resolved, because the relevant information is either long gone, or there isn't, as yet, enough information available to be absolutely certain about what happened in the last few weeks of the European theatre. Hopefully the relevant information will be found, and all credit given to the researcher who finds it. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]************************************* Fortunately, Mk IX is slightly stable, anyway, the required stick travel is not high... but nothing extraordinary. Very pleasant to fly, very controllable, predictable and steady. We never refuse to correct something that was found outside ED if it is really proven...But we never will follow some "experts" who think that only they are the greatest aerodynamic guru with a secret knowledge. :smartass: WWII AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
messermeister Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 There might be some overlook here - the paper from 13.10.44 you have kindly provided discusses the testing hydraulically actuated main/tail wheel on 109K. testing showed that the mainwheel could be operated up to 310 kph IAS w/o problem (if my German is correct, that is...) However another paper from 18.10.44 makes it clear that the idea of hydraulic operation of the mainwheel was dropped in favor of the much more simple and reliable mechanical actuation of the main wheel and tail wheel covers. IMHO there is little relation of the doc you posted on the main/tail wheel covers since the paper discusses essentially testing related to a different subject (the general deployment of the wheels which were hydraulically actuated) but has nothing to do with the wheel well covers (Restabdeckung) which were mechanically operated by the wheel itself. Incomplete image upload. Missing parts: Status as of 5.10.44: Status as of 19.10.44: Status as of 21.12.44: Reliable (more or less) cover mechanism with improvements must have been thus introduced in series in late November or early December. There is also a point (no. 26) dedicated to follow the testing of corrections introduced to solve the problems on the tail wheel retraction mechanism, but I'm tired of scanning. Hmm, interesting. The paper is unfortunately not entirely clearly worded, however its clear they preferred the "normal" elevator design as "better". I am puzzled however how and why the aileron / elevator combination is better or worse... Control harmony. Light elevator/moderate-to-heavy ailerons as undesirable (more in fact, according to Beauvais) as heavy elevator/light ailerons. Again very odd in view that WNF G-6s and indeed many G-10s are seen flying happily with aileron Flettner.. identification of 109K with aileron Flettner has been most difficult because of poor angles, rarity and quality of photographs, though one picture of a very late 109K suggest (too poor quality to make out detail 100%) the Flettner was eventually introduced sometime later. It is clear from documentation (see above) intitial ailerons were that of G-6. I am not sure if reason was aerodynamic or production related (existing stocks to be used first). What is clear from documents, is that no final decision on universally adopting ailerons with Flettner had been made as of February 1945. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted November 13, 2013 ED Team Share Posted November 13, 2013 That I am not 100% sure about, I know that the numerous different variants and field updates, etc etc could be maddening to try and sort out. I know there are a lot of things out there that are not on the internet. I know that ED is getting their hands on a lot of it... I dont want to speak for the dev team, I only have a small understanding of what it takes to make a DCS level aircraft, maybe Yo-Yo will come correct me. I dont know how you pick any one variant or if what we will end up in a bit of a hybrid of available data on the K-4, after all, even under the variant K-4 there are numerous other changes and such that may or may not have been made that might not be documented at all. Its also a matter of sorting through 70 years of facts, fiction, misinformation etc... I think its also fair to assume that some data from other variants might fill the gaps as well. I am glad to see people sharing the info they have, it all can be looked at and compared, most of the stuff I have collected for Yo-Yo doesnt make a lot of sense to me, even if it wasnt in German :) but I get the gist of how they develop an aircraft and it makes me pretty excited to fly any of the aircraft they are working on, I may not be able to fly them well... but I will enjoy every second :) If any of this sounds bad, its more likely I didnt explain it well, but trust me when I say this, Yo-Yo is very diligent in getting all the data he needs to make a complete FM, if they had to make short cuts or skip important details they probably wouldnt model it... Not worried, just interested - there doesn't seem to be much documentation relating to the K-4, and the same issues and debates with respect to the use of 1.98 ata crop up time and time again in various forums. IMO it is more than likely it is something which will never be satisfactorily resolved, because the relevant information is either long gone, or there isn't, as yet, enough information available to be absolutely certain about what happened in the last few weeks of the European theatre. Hopefully the relevant information will be found, and all credit given to the researcher who finds it. 1 Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kodoss Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 The control column has to be redone.:music_whistling: Instead of a straight column it must be bend like a mirrored question mark. This was done to have better access to the MK 108 for installation/deinstallation. From the Bf 109 K spare parts list: From the book: "Messerschmitt Bf 109 - Einsatzmaschinen"; Harald Helmut Vogt; VDM-Verlag; ISBN-13: 978-3-86619-068-9 Also the switch for the GM-tank is missing (left cockpit side, below the tail wheel arrest). But the rest looks awsome:thumbup: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts