Jump to content

Bf 109 and Spitfire Mk IXc range


Krupi

Recommended Posts

Do we have any comparison on the range of these aircraft, I am sure I came across an article posted on the forums however I cannot find it?

 

I thought the range of these two were always very similar however at present the 109 seems to have a significantly greater range?

 

Thanks,

Krupi

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we have any comparison on the range of these aircraft, I am sure I came across an article posted on the forums however I cannot find it?

 

I thought the range of these two were always very similar however at present the 109 seems to have a significantly greater range?

 

Thanks,

Krupi

 

As i remember, the p51 had far greater range first of all because of laminar flow wings which decresed drag and only second because of the ability to carry more fuel.

The spitfire's bigger wings create more drag than the 109's. It's possible it also has more horsepower compared to a 109 not using mw50.

Also what type of 109 was described in the article ? Because the 109k has dramatically improved aerodynamics ,was designed to be slippery through the air compared to the G model.So i would presume that the engine has to work less to push it through the air just like in the p51's case.

 

This is just my basic understanding of facts.


Edited by otto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't forget that the 109 can use a drop tank

 

So can the Spitfire, I have yet to see a 109 use a fuel tank online so I am after the on-board fuel range.

 

As i remember, the p51 had far greater range first of all because of laminar flow wings which decresed drag and only second because of the ability to carry more fuel.

The spitfire's bigger wings create more drag than the 109's. It's possible it also has more horsepower compared to a 109 not using mw50.

Also what type of 109 was described in the article ? Because the 109k has dramatically improved aerodynamics ,was designed to be slippery through the air compared to the G model.So i would presume that the engine has to work less to push it through the air just like in the p51's case.

 

This is just my basic understanding of facts.

 

Of course the p51 does , that is why I didn't mention it ;)

 

Interestingly I read a report from a pilot bemoaning the state of aircraft coming out of the factory late in the war, obviously these kind of things will never be modelled in a sim so it is a moot point.

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not yet unfortunately, however the 109 can fly for a lot longer on full power compared to the spitfire. I was just wondering if this was because of the beta or something that the spitfire pilots have to manage with lower power for cruise :)

 

I am hoping that the slipper tanks will become available soon, 30, 45, 60 and 90lb version


Edited by Krupi

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note that 90 gallon drop tank was not practical on the Spit IX LF though.

 

I suppose the 109K is somewhat of an improvement over the 109G in range, given its cleaner lines and higher engine compression.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=158128&stc=1&d=1488193332

AFDS147_109G_rangecomparison_via_wwwkurfurstorg.thumb.png.cad9f3530df6dde1897a9fc04813e2ee.png

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

Yes, I have the impression that DCS Spit burns fuel quite rapidly. Specially when you get the bottom tank with its last 37 gallons they seems to go away at a surprising fast pace.

According to Spitfire IX pilot notes at 2650rpm/+7boost (good cruising speed) the plane will use 80gal/h. That is about slightly below half an hour before running out of fuel. At 3000rpm/+15 boost (combat settings) fuel would last about 17minutes. Obviously that figures can vary depending on circumstances with height and use of supercharger.

The think is that everytime I see the fuel getting in to the last 37gls I have to seriously think about coming back to base in the next 10minutes. I haven't done any test so I could be wrong but the feeling is clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whats interesting in game is, that all ww2 aircraft seem to burn fuel faster the less they have....the first 200liters in the 109 take quite a long time to burn, but the second half goes empty really rapid...

 

its the same with the p51....where you can literally watch how quickly the last 5 to 10gallons in each tank vaporise....

 

and this effect is definitely most pronounced in the spit...at least it was with the previous patch where the last 20gallons vanish within like 5min

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if its actually so, or its just a very detailed model of the fuel gauge.. some car fuel gauges I drove tended to do the same thing, i.e. When the tank was full the needle barely moved, then it seemed to consume fuel increasingly fast.

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

whats interesting in game is, that all ww2 aircraft seem to burn fuel faster the less they have....the first 200liters in the 109 take quite a long time to burn, but the second half goes empty really rapid...

 

its the same with the p51....where you can literally watch how quickly the last 5 to 10gallons in each tank vaporise....

 

and this effect is definitely most pronounced in the spit...at least it was with the previous patch where the last 20gallons vanish within like 5min

 

That is exactly the feeling. The first "half" of the tank lasts more or less as you would expect (depending on circumstances) but it the second half that really vaporizes in front of your eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
That is exactly the feeling. The first "half" of the tank lasts more or less as you would expect (depending on circumstances) but it the second half that really vaporizes in front of your eyes.

 

Did you carefully read the note on the Spifire fuel gauge? :)

 

To be serious... I just checked the fast cruising. I do not know exactly what flight settings were used for the table data, but the common sense tells that the plane must fly not more than at 2400 rpm and near zero boost because these settings give optimal mixture and minimal power losses. The plane as well must be flown at FTH for this setting.

Flying at 5300-5500 m the plane with full throttle maintains +2 at 2400 that seemed good to me. It flew 66 minuts with 515-520 kph (I tested at x4 time, so the level flight was not perfect) starting from the takeoff the cruise time multiplied to this TAS gives good accordance with the table.

 

Anybody can perform more fuel friendly run, using the same considerations. You need to fly at 1600-1800 rpm to find FTH where IAS /TAS is about (190...200)/260 .

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a full power 3000rpm/18lbs at 3000m and ran dry after ~23 minutes for a little comparison.

 

It certainly is more of handle compared to the 109 which requires pretty much zero management... Just turn on MW50 and job done!

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes @18/3000 would defienetely point to the consumption being too high... or there is too little fuel. If its true, its like 221 gallon/h, its even higher than historical +25, which was 197 imperial gallon per hour. And we have 18, which was iirc 150 gallon hour.

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

  • ED Team
23 minutes @18/3000 would defienetely point to the consumption being too high... or there is too little fuel. If its true, its like 221 gallon/h, its even higher than historical +25, which was 197 imperial gallon per hour. And we have 18, which was iirc 150 gallon hour.

 

Yes, the Bendix-Stromberg enrichment for high power was a bit high... :) the spring screw turned back.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent, thanks for finding and fixing this so fast Yoyo! Just don't forget to spray some nail polish on that naughty screw :)

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

Excellent, thanks Yo-yo.

Yesterday I did a couple of quick tests and got similar results as Krupi.

The interesting part is that even if the consumption was too high the fact I was measuring it put my previous impressions in perspective. It lasts more than I was thinking. Still you have to judiciously set your engine to get the miles you need. Again, DCS modelling is superb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
23 minutes @18/3000 would defienetely point to the consumption being too high... or there is too little fuel. If its true, its like 221 gallon/h, its even higher than historical +25, which was 197 imperial gallon per hour. And we have 18, which was iirc 150 gallon hour.

 

Returning to the roots of this consumption figures I found very interesting thing: the same carburettor for V1650-7 metered 15-20% more fuel than for Merlin... so I can suggest that mixture was readjusted for Spitfires regarding the lack of fuel onboard...

  • Like 1

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting and I think you are right - I just checked the P-51D FO Instructions chart and indeed it gives 211/215 US gallons per hour for 67"/3000 in low/high gear... I had some suspicion at first that this might be due conversion between US/Imperial Gallons, but the 150 Imperial gallons/h for the M66 reported on the Spit would be still just 180 US gallons/h, so definietely there was something different between the Merlin 66 and V-1650-7 fuel flow setup.

 

Could be on account of smaller fuel capacity as you say, or perhaps difference in charge cooling (intercooling) capacity of the Mustang systems, I do not know.

 

In any case, :thumbup: for finding that detail! :pilotfly:

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

Interesting, makes me wonder if this difference also impacted the Spitfire Mk XVI Merlin 266?

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Returning to the roots of this consumption figures I found very interesting thing: the same carburettor for V1650-7 metered 15-20% more fuel than for Merlin... so I can suggest that mixture was readjusted for Spitfires regarding the lack of fuel onboard...

 

Another interesting detail is that the P-51D-5 Pilot's Notes, dated April 1944, shows a consumption rate of 194/187 U.S Gall p/h @ 67 Hg @ 3,000 rpm (162/156 Imp Gal p/h)

 

1-North%20American%20P-51D-5%20Pilots%20Instructions76_zpsvqp6ipwa.jpg

 

Whereas the P-51D/K Training Manual, printed August 1945, shows the 211/215 U.S Gal p/h @ 67 Hg @ 3,000 rpm mentioned by Kurfurst (176/179 Imp Gal p/h)

 

1-North%20American%20P-51D-K%20Pilot%20Training%20Manual101_zpskn5wt7pm.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

I think that it was a permanent compromise with mixture enrichment and consumption at high power rates.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...