MW50 -Secondary effects were cooling of the engine .

[OberstDanjeje]

I think this table is a bit wrong, if you read this page,at the table's end you will find this line (for the DB605ASM):

Das Triebwerk Daimler Benz DB 605 ASM entsprach dem Ausgangmuster
DB 605 AS, wurde jedoch im Gegensatz zu diesem Verbesserung der Start-
und Notleistung mit dem Sonderkraftstoff C 3 und zusätzlicher Wasser
Methanol-Einspritzung geflogen (MW 50).


Roughly it say:

The ASM is the sameas the AS but with improved Special Emergency power designed to run with C3 fuel and MW50

The same is for AM engine

Only the DB/DC engine colud use B4 or C3 fuel

DB/DC engine are the same with just a different setting, you can change this setting with simple screwdriver

[Mustang]

OberstDanjeje

Thanks !

[OberstDanjeje]

If you PM me I will send you an usefull original DB605 datasheet that cover all the engines.
As I already said all the MW50 equipped (except DB/DC and ASB/ASC) need C3 fuel,them can't run max boost without C3 and MW50.
There is a switch that enable the MW50 when the throttle is 110% open.

Probable SM/ASM could run with B4 and without MW50 but with B4 them are the same as A/AS, less boost, less power.

Clearly is quite strange that an DB605A engine could run it's max boost for 5 minutes when an DB605AM could run it's max boost (it mean with MW50) for 10 minutes.
Probable it mean that with MW50 an engine could endure more time at his max boost

[OberstDanjeje]

I found an interesting article aboutBf109K-4, C3 and MW50:

http://kurfurst.atw.hu/articles/MW_KvsXIV.htm

[NZtyphoon]

Originally Posted by OberstDanjeje

I found an interesting article aboutBf109K-4, C3 and MW50:

http://kurfurst.atw.hu/articles/MW_KvsXIV.htm

Compare what Kurfürst, a well known obsessive about the "inferiority" of the Spitfire (eg:http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...e-Mk-Vc-Forums ) says, with the actual article http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html before you go believing everything that's written by Kurfurst.

[Shardur]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Compare what Kurfürst, a well known obsessive about the "inferiority" of the Spitfire (eg:http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...e-Mk-Vc-Forums ) says, with the actual article http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html before you go believing everything that's written by Kurfurst.

After reading both articles I have to say that the Kurfürst article seems to be way better researched. As a German native I can definitely say that the Kurfürst translations are way more accurate.

[Whacker]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Compare what Kurfürst, a well known obsessive about the "inferiority" of the Spitfire (eg:http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...e-Mk-Vc-Forums ) says, with the actual article http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html before you go believing everything that's written by Kurfurst.

Err... I was under the impression from multiple, varied sources that the early Spits generally *were* inferior to their chronological counterpart 109's in a number of ways.

As I understand it, Spits always had better turn rates across the board and the 109's were never able to take the lead. The early Merlins were inferior and had fuel starvation problems in negative G situations, there was a band-aid solution that partially worked until several years later it was fixed. All but the earliest 109's had the Kommandogerat device which automated pitch and mixture, most also had automated radiator controls. Later Spits had more automation that worked, and as the war went on they had better armament, the later Merlins and Griffons were on par with or superior to their German counterparts, and the performance gap was finally closed.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Whacker

Err... I was under the impression from multiple, varied sources that the early Spits generally *were* inferior to their chronological counterpart 109's in a number of ways.

As I understand it, Spits always had better turn rates across the board and the 109's were never able to take the lead. The early Merlins were inferior and had fuel starvation problems in negative G situations, there was a band-aid solution that partially worked until several years later it was fixed. All but the earliest 109's had the Kommandogerat device which automated pitch and mixture, most also had automated radiator controls. Later Spits had more automation that worked, and as the war went on they had better armament, the later Merlins and Griffons were on par with or superior to their German counterparts, and the performance gap was finally closed.

IMHO the corresponding Marks of the Spitfire were more or less on par with the 109s, ie. Mark I vs 109E, Mark IX vs 109G, Mark XIV vs 109K - the only exception of the Mark V that was a bit inferior to the 109F from the start, and later Mark IX (1943 with the Merlin 66) that took a lead on the contemporary 109G-6.

The problem with not so much with development, but deployment. Even though there were as good Marks of the Spitfire at the same time, they were never entering service as quickly as the newest 109s. Mark Is may have been as good as 109Es, the difference was that all 109s were Emils in 1939/40, while most of the RAF still had Hurricanes and only a handful of Spitfires in comparisons. The Mark IX may have been about as good as the 109F/G in 1942/43, but again the difference was that while all 109 units had 109Gs, most of the RAF Spitfire Squadrons were still flying Mark Vs - even at the start of 1944 the Mark V was the most common Spitfire, just about to be replaced by the Mark Niners but the LW was moving to the next phase of MW boosted 109s and/or AS engines; the Mark XIV may have been as good as the 109K, but it mattered little given that 90% of the RAF Spitfire Squadrons were still flying Mark IXs, which were a bit overhwhelmed in performance by late 1944.

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by NZtyphoon

Compare what Kurfürst, a well known obsessive about the "inferiority" of the Spitfire

Well its not so much inferior, its more that its effete and girly. The Spitfire is far too pretty and only flown by nancy boys and big girls blouses. The Hurri on the other hand, like the 109, is a mans airplane

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by OberstDanjeje

I found an interesting article aboutBf109K-4, C3 and MW50:

http://kurfurst.atw.hu/articles/MW_KvsXIV.htm

Many Thanks

This explains many things .