Quote:
Originally Posted by bongodriver
Oh, have I misunderstood something?...
|
Some are drawing wrong conclusions from the chart, but that doesn't change the chart. Kurfürst said the 262 can sustain a better turn time than the Spitfire at 400 mph, which is true. This will not win it a sustained turn fight though, as the Spitfire doesn't need to match the 262's speed. It can't do it in straight and level flight, so why bother in turns. Like I said, there's the chart and there's what you make of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst
My best guess is that there was a major difference between the Emil and Friedrich propellers...
|
OK, I can see that at altitude the F is at least faster than the E, even if still at more power. Do you have the propeller efficiencies somewhere so I could take a look at them? Regarding the Spits, the IX was quite a bit more dirty than the I, just like a G-6 was more dirty than an F. So I would expect it to need more power for the same speed. But the E-F issue is different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Schlageter
Doesn't the V in a designation mean a prototype/test a/c?
|
Yes, 109E prototype.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bounder!
Just a stab, Kurfürst is probably the man for this question but looking up the weight of the 109e and 109f and it appears the later is heavier when loaded which might help account for the lack of speed increase over the emil?
|
Weight certainly is a factor, but for top speed of high speed fighter aircraft the effect is rather small. It matters much more for climb and turn.