Bf109 test data

[klem]

GUYS! PLEASE don't turn this thread into an ego/red/blue argument fest. I just want links to historical data.

I have been unable to decide which data to use for Bf109 testing (speed at altitudes, climb, turn).

There seem to be factory specs, French Tests, British Tests, Swiss Tests but there does not appear to be a definitive data set for any "BoB" 109.

Would you please post a link to historical data that you believe best represents (one of?) the 109s we have so that I can test ours. Please confirm Manifold Pressure, RPM, Radiator setting and anything else you believe is relevant so that I do not rely on my interpretation alone.

Again, I don't want 'opinions' just data and any qualifying information.


MODERATORS. Please leave this on the open forum for a week or so, so that it is seen by as many as possible. We can move it to FM/DM forum later. Also please moderate the thread heavily to leave only constructive posts.

Many thanks.

[Kwiatek]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...09/me109e.html

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...109E1-1791.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...109e3-1792.jpg

Dont think you find any better

[[URU]AkeR]

whatever source you choose there will be another saying different, so if you have the time take as many believable sources as you can find and use the average values

[klem]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...09/me109e.html

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...109E1-1791.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...109e3-1792.jpg

Dont think you find any better

Thanks, I don't know how I missed the first one. It seems to collect everyone's opinions

Still not sure which to choose so I think I'll start with the Me109E-3 and see how that looks against a selection of them.

[JtD]

I'd also recommend Kurfürsts site, which provides some more in depth information on some of the data found.

[41Sqn_Banks]

http://www.rolfwolf.de/daten/E4/Emil.html

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute

Nothing is ever simple, there are no easy ways to arrive at 109 performance figures which are 'exact'.

The German figures are qualified with a note that different engines of the same type, (DB601A, N, etc.) can vary from +2.5/-2.5 percentage difference in engine horsepower output. That can easily add up to 20 kilometers per hour difference between different aircraft when we are talking about top speed at altitude.

The British, American and Swiss figures are done with aircraft which are either captured or export variants, which might or might not perform up to German standards.

In addition, often tests are done at different boost levels, or with radiators either open or shut.

Some of the German documents may or may not have figures which are inflated, as they are intended to provide information for potential foreign buyers, and obviously a higher performance aircraft is more likely to sell.

All of the above means that one has to be VERY careful in the study of the various tests/figures, and not jump to hasty conclusions.

What we do know is that the 109E was a very competitive and dangerous aircraft, capable of taking on the Hurricane and Spitfire in the aerial combat arena. And vice versa.

[IvanK]

A good selection on the WWII aircraft performance site. Interesting comment on items 13 and 14 ... the ones with 500Kmh IAS at sea level.

[klem]

Originally Posted by IvanK

A good selection on the WWII aircraft performance site. Interesting comment on items 13 and 14 ... the ones with 500Kmh IAS at sea level.

Thanks for your inputs guys.

IvanK I am disregarding items 13 and 14 as they have no 'provenance', i.e. no acknowledged testing organisation although the speed test is close to the V15a tests so they are possibly based on a prototype perhaps simplified for publication.

For interim information: I am testing the 109E-3 at 1.3ata and 2400rpm, radiator 1/4 open which aligns with the Swiss tests which are very close to the handbokk figures until 5,000m where they fall away more than the handbook. The French tests at 1.3ata 2400rpm produced better results to 4,000m but it was probably an E-1 and curiously the radiator was open to 4,000m due to cooling problems. The average of all the six data sets I have is quite close to the handbook, 2%-3% above handbook at low altitude and matching the handbook in the 4,000m to 7,000m region. In any case, the CoD 109E-3 is below all those figures and is looking like 93-95% of handbook figures at altitudes to 1,500m and around 98% at 5,000m. I still have more tests to do at other altitudes.

Of course I don't know if the various figures are supposed to be max speeds or just representave performance at those power settings so I don't know of we can compare them with Spitfire Max Speeds. We can at least see if CoD 109s are perfoming near to those historical tests - or not.

I'll post results here when I finish.

[Ze-Jamz]

Interesting Klem..thanks for yer hard work