Crumpp your calculation of 492 km/h is spot on, nice one!

Regarding the French test - it seems they had a sub-performing 109 and / or some problems with the components and fuel, olil, etc. Although the top speed figures are within limits, what do you think about the radiator drag and overall climb performance (see my previous post?) Hard to explain...

Some time ago i made speed comparison between RL Spit MK1 +6/+12lbs (blue/red line), Hurricane MK1 +12lbs (green line) and 109 E-3 Db601Aa (black line, data from german manual 0-500 km/h , 5 - 570 km/h).

http://i56.tinypic.com/9qcrvb.jpg

Nice job Kwiatek, just to remind you that the V15a was identical to series E-1 and it has had some problems to reach the guaranteed power output and the difference in PS had to be calculated, hence the staggered line. In this case the prototype certainly performed worse... As for the supercharger, that's just as you wrote, the V15a had the same supercharger also, but the test was commited without it on purpose (as per the test description).

The French test was very accurate as for the top speed, also in the same ballpark. That's for the E-3 with 601A and 9-11081A, at 1.3 ata, 0m. What was the rad setting? Also 1/4 open?

it was not "variable" compressor. It was a step frwrd in that direction. For what I know Germans never reached tht stat of the art for multiple raisons.

As it was alrdy discussed, the French test used a damaged aircraft with cooling problem. I hve in memory that oil compatibility was also an issue (remind that those engine at the time used a lot of oil per flight hour).

The Swiss 109 were also slightly modified 109E.

It would be better guys to source the E perfs from German doc and actual flying warbird.

I remember reading the flight test of the first E3 flying in US with a 450 sea level speed at 1.2 (or was it 1.3 ?)

What ever is the right case my opinion is that you guys are wrong to try to build a super E to match the hollystic (a contracted word made out of Hollywood and mysticism ? :rolleyes:) Spit we hve in game.

I know that most of you prefer late war super banger. But BoB is all abt early war plane. So pls be patient ;)

By the way I still hve no prob to dash at 500 deck in my 109. SO I don't see what is all abt in this chating.

@Kwia : As I alrdy said those last curves you posted are complete phantasmagoria. Just look at the poor Hurri reaching it's VNE btw 7.5 to 19kft. May I suggest you to throw that one away ?

Dennis the Menace
 

Robo, change your name to Dennis the Menace and stop picking on Crumpp.
Crumpp, give up, mate, obstinance trumps knowledge every time!;);)

Quite OT dude :o I happen to agree with Crumpp in almost all of the things he wrote, I dared to comment his attitude and pointed out that everybody is making mistakes. Nothing to do with you, Sir. ;)

TomcatViP - no, we're not trying to build an Emil that was better than the real thing. I see that many opinions and fact inetrpretations here are on the optimistic side, but as whole, we discuss this matter because we find it interesting. We don't even know it that affects anything regarding the FM. Most likely not.

French test - completely agree, but Swiss top speed was prior to the modification and seems to be legit (and interesting).

I wonder how supercharger control - variable hydraulic speed or 2 postion could affect on performacne. Surly speed curve for hydraulic is smooth without power lost between gears but other hand it could casue some lost.

In V15a chart black thick line speed was made at 1.31 Ata power output - it reached 485 km/h with radiator 1/4 open. Still we need to remember that these is prototype NOT A SERIAL PLANE with different supercharger control.

Later German test show that standart 109 E-3 with Db601A at 1.3 Ata 2400 RPM reached 467 km/h at deck with also 1/4 radiator open.

http://kurfurst.org/Performance_test...MP16feb39.html

So i think speed for 109 E-3 with 1-minute emergency power depend of radiator settings ( 1/4 open or close) and type of engine Db601 A or DB601Aa was in range 485-500 km/h.

TomcatVIP for Hurricane MK1 i found 2 charts:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...ne-I-level.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...peed-HRuch.png

The second at 12 lbs line looks more reliable to me also.

That's not what I wrote ;). I said the V15a's engine was lacking 45PS (nothing to do with the supercharger) and the actual curve had to be calculated for guaranteed engine output. A different supercharger control would only make a difference between 2200 and 4800m, not down on the deck. The only problems mentioned (except major issue with the engine performance) was lack of manifold exhaust covers and rough finish of the engine cover.

And I agree. The Aa should behave slightly different down low and the EN rating was different, too. That's why I am asking if we really have (or suppose to have) a Aa 601 or A version.

Can you guys put a chart together with exact information (all rated ata settings, rpm, rad setting...) for both DB 601A and DB 601Aa with aproximate guestimated max TAS at the sea level?

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/datasheets/601a1.jpg

http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/datasheets/601Aa.jpg