Messerschmitt Bf109 Ideas

[Maverick]

Looks a bit better than the Doppelreiter the Fw-190 used.  Maybe a turboprop & some zero-length launchers for a post war Buchon or Mezek?

Regards,

Mav

[rickshaw]

Looks a bit better than the Doppelreiter the Fw-190 used. 

You mean the one which was never used?

[GTX]

Though trialed:



Regards,

Greg

[Maverick]

Obviously, when I said 'used', I meant they existed for that aircraft, not necessarily 'operationally used'.

Regards,

Mav

[Arc3371]

Interesting, I wonder if it would make the me-109 more appealing to Japan

[rickshaw]

Though trialed:

Yes and found to have some really adverse effects on handling, which is of course why they were never used operationally. 

[denodon]

I just got a new 109-E model and I'm thinking of using my balsa skills to give her a triple tail unit and fit a large underbelly drop tank so that she'd be a more stable gun platform that can fight longer over London (the idea being that this was a quick-rig developed by ground crews to increase range and the endplate fins needed to keep her stable with a drop tank).

[Maverick]

An interesting idea, but of course, it'd have similar problems to the 110.  Poor maneuvrability against the Spits & Hurris.  That is of course, unless the tank was jettisoned before encountering fighters, but that might result in it's intended benefit of range not occurring.  Of course, you could drain the tank first, like the -51s and -47s did over Germany, but how would the new rear end affect the performance of the 'bare' aircraft?

Regards,

Mav

[denodon]

I was thinking that they would use the fuel in the tank on the flight over to England and then jettison them (and the tail fins) as well and then fly as a normal Me-109. The fins could be made of wood anyway and I wasn't thinking of them having any Rudder mechanism.

[icchan]

With the overwing design, I'd be a lot more worried about the tank coming straight back and nailing the elevator after disconnect.  Solvable by putting it under the wing, of course, but you've got to add a fuel connection point and make the whole thing work around the landing gear.  Would it work, if you just used it for extended patrol range and ditched it for combat?

[Maverick]

I suspect the complexities involved with being able to jettison the tail structure would lead to issues.  The 'slip wing' Hurricane was a case in point.  Workable, but ultimately not operationally sound.  Still, it's a whif so one can say everything worked right every time!

Regarding the Doppelreiter tanks, I suspect they were more a fixture as I agree the problems with jettisoning them would be 'interesting' to say the least.  I've only really heard of them used in concert with the Mistels rather than as a 'normal' fitting, which might give weight to the idea that they were not designed with intense dogfight type combat in mind.

Regards,

Mav

[sequoiaranger]

>Interesting, I wonder if it [wingtip tanks] would make the me-109 more appealing to Japan<

Japan bought and tried out at least one Bf-109E, and the thought that they might use them operationally made our Allied intelligence unit give them a code-name of "Mike", but they were never built in Japan or used. I suspect because of the short range, and that they had their somewhat-similar Ki. 60/61 series (more like the He-100 than a Bf-109) being tested. Both the He-100 and Bf-109 were designed around the idea of making THE SMALLEST fighter that could take the DB engine. Small meant limited range--an anathema to the Japanese. I guess fortunately for us, their license-built Diamler-Benz inline engines had some SERIOUS problems and were never very satisfactory (those that powered the Ki.61 Hein fighter and the D4Y Suisei dive bomber).

[GTX]

Yes, I know it's not even a 109, but it's close enough (and I couldn't be bothered opening a Me309 thread:  Messerschmitt Mustang:



Regards,

Greg

[gofy]

The Nazis captured a Spitfire and mounted a DB-605 to it.  Maybe a British 109 with a Griffon?

[pyro-manic]

Like an advanced Buchon then?