Me/109, Bf109 used what engines?
Ralph Jones
Bill Finch wrote:
> As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>
> Spain. What were they? Also, a friend who flew P-51's in WWII had a
> chance to fly a wartime Me109 in 1944. He said it was difficult to fly
>
> compared to the P-51. Have any of you flown a real Me109? What's it
> like?
The WW2 Bf109's used various versions of the 600-series Daimler Benz
12-cylinder inverted V. I believe the postwar Spanish "Buchon" version
used an Allison V-1710; it can be recognized by the potbellied cowling.
The 109 was a much more basic airplane than the Mustang, having been
designed in the Thirties. It may have been the last major WW2 combat
type to have a strut-braced tail.
The narrow-track, outward-retracting landing gear had poor ground
handling and some 1500 109's were written off in groundloops. The
purpose of this was to mount the landing gear struts to the fuselage
instead of the wing. This meant that the wing contained no hydraulics. A
wing could be replaced in an hour by a mechanic and two helpers, one of
them big and strong; all the tools he needed were a wrench, a
screwdriver and a crate to put under the other wing. Not a bad bit of
engineering for an air force that had to be built from nothing to a
world-wide force in a couple of years.
The most advanced system on the aircraft was the fuel injection system,
which kept the engine running under negative G loads. A 109 could shake
a Spitfire off its tail by pushing over hard, which would cause the
carbureted engine on the Spit to cut out.
The crudest system was probably the landing gear hydraulics. After
putting it down, the pilot would yaw the airplane both ways to see if it
stayed there. If the gear-down lights flickered, he had to pump up some
more pressure with a hand pump.
The airplane was simple and easy to make, and so remained in production
right through the war.
rj
Ken Duffey
Bill Finch wrote:
>
> As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
> Spain. What were they? Also, a friend who flew P-51's in WWII had a
> chance to fly a wartime Me109 in 1944. He said it was difficult to fly
> compared to the P-51. Have any of you flown a real Me109? What's it
> like?
At my local model club, when we had a quiz evening, I posed the question
'Which a/c made its FIRST flight powered by a Rolls-Royce Kestrel and
its LAST flight powered by a Rolls-Royce Merlin engine ??'
The answer ??
The Messerschmitt 109 !!!
The prototype Bf-109V1 was powered by the Kestrel, pending the
availability of the then new Daimler-Benz 601 (?).
The Spanish CASA Ha-112 Buchon had a Rolls Royce Merlin - hence the
different nose contours and totally changed noise !
Also - don't forget the Czech S-199 'Mule' was powered by the Junkers
Jumo - the same engine that powered the Fw-190D.
Ken Duffey
Tuomo Lukkari
Ken Duffey <"K.(Flanker)Duffey"@ncs.nerc.ac.uk> writes:
>Also - don't forget the Czech S-199 'Mule' was powered by the Junkers
>Jumo - the same engine that powered the Fw-190D.
>Ken Duffey
No, the correct Jumo engine model for S-199 was the Jumo 211
originally used in He111.
Fw190D series was powered by the Jumo 213 engines.
Tuomo Lukkari
Emmanuel Gustin
Bill Finch wrote in message <343C3C32...@ix.netcom.com>...
>As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>Spain. What were they?
It's a rather complicated story.
The prototype made its first flight with a Rolls-Royce Kestrel V-12. (This
engine had been sent to Germany to be installed in a Heinkel He 70, which
had been acquired by Rolls-Royce as an engine testbed. When the He 70
arrived, the engineers of Rolls were surprised to see that the engine
was completely worn-out...)
The first production aircraft, the Bf 109B, C and D, had versions of the
Junkers Jumo 210 engine. This was an inverted V-12. (The claim that
the Bf 109D was powered by the DB600 is now dead and buried.) These
versions served in the Spanish civil war and in Poland, but were retired
to non-combat duties before the spring of 1940.
The Bf 109E switched to the Daimler-Benz DB601, another inverted V-12,
but appreciably more advanced and powerful. The Bf 109F was powered
by a further development of the DB601. The Bf 109F is often considered
the best from the series, at least from the pilot's viewpoint -- later
models
were too heavy and had undesirable flying characteristics.
The Bf 109G introduced the DB605, which was based on the DB601, but
with an increased swept volume. The same engine, again further developed,
was retained by the Bf 109K.
The post-war Spanish production used two engines: First a series with
Hispano-Suiza 12Y V-12s, but these were not very satisfactory. Later
production switched to the Rolls-Royce Merlin. The latter are the familiar
"Buchon" aircraft often seen on airshows. It is said that handling
characteristics are worse than that of the DB605 engined Bf 109G.
In Czechoslovakia, Avia produced the S.199, which was a version of the
Bf 109G powered by the Junkers Jumo 211. This was probably the most
unpleasant version of the Bf 109 ever built.
There were also some wartime high-altitude projects, of which only
prototypes appeared, that were essentially highly modified Bf 109s with
either the Daimler-Benz DB603 or the Junkers Jumo 213 installed. These
did not proceed, because the Luftwaffe preferred the Ta 152.
Another wartime project was a version of the Bf 109 with a BMW 801
radial engine, the same engine as the Fw 190. I can't remember whether
this one has flown or not. The large diameter of the radial required
an almost completely different fuselage.
Finally, Messerschmitt had on the drawing board a version of the Bf 109
with two jet engines, the Bf 109TL.
Emmanuel Gustin
Charles K. Scott
In article <343C3C32...@ix.netcom.com>
Bill Finch <ali...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
> Spain. What were they? Also, a friend who flew P-51's in WWII had a
> chance to fly a wartime Me109 in 1944. He said it was difficult to fly
> compared to the P-51. Have any of you flown a real Me109? What's it
> like?
Read the book:
- 16 -
Author: Carson, Leonard C.; Hodges, Ken Illustrator
Title: Pursue & Destroy
Subjects: WORLD WAR, 1939-1945-AERIAL OPERATIONS, AMERICAN
WORLD WAR,
1939-1945-PERSONAL NARRATIVES, AMERICAN
New to BIP: 1980/01
Pub. Date: 071978
Price: Cloth Text $19.95 (Retail Price)
ISBN: 0-913194-05-0
Publisher: Sentry
Status: Active Record
Notes: Illustrated
In it Carson describes what flying the Me 109 is like, as well as what
it was like flying other German aircraft, he flew a number of them.
He said that the 109 was a mostly manually operated aircraft with the
prop needing to be reset for proper rpm every time you adjusted the
throttle. This makes for a high cockpit workload for the pilot. Also,
the rudder did not have a trim tab and the airplane flew at an ever
increasing yaw, the faster it went, which naturally needed to be
corrected by pushing on the rudder bar. After a flight of an hour or
so, the pilot's leg would get pretty tired pushing on that rudder bar
all the time. Carson felt that this was why the Me 109 appeared to
break faster to one side than the other when attacked. He thought that
they could turn quicker to the non tired leg side because that leg
could push harder and faster on the rudder.
He also noted that the canopy included some 30 lbs of head armor which
had to be lifted when you raised the canopy. This, he surmised, was
why most pilot bailing out of the 109, flipped it inverted and allowed
gravity to pop the hood open.
He didn't like how cramped the cockpit was nor did he like how little
could actually be seen out of the tiny canopy.
All in all he thought the 109 a terrible tool to be fighting in and had
nothing but great admiration for those who not only fought in it but
managed to be so effective.
Corky Scott
MariTerm/Barken/AS
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
---------------------------------210273092820222
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
An interesting point is that the RR Merlin had the opposite
rotation to the German engines. The fin and rudder on the Me
109 had a lifting profile to compensate and this was
reversed on the Buchon.
Eje Flodstr=F6m
---------------------------------210273092820222
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
From: "Emmanuel Gustin" <gus...@uia.ua.ac.be>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military
Subject: Re: Me/109, Bf109 used what engines?
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 1997 14:30:01 +0100
Organization: BELNET (DWTC/SSTC)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <61iio2$cnf$1...@dalet.belnet.be>
References: <343C3C32...@ix.netcom.com>
Bill Finch wrote in message <343C3C32...@ix.netcom.com>...
>As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>Spain. What were they?
It's a rather complicated story.
Emmanuel Gustin
---------------------------------210273092820222--
Bela P. Havasreti
On Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:06:43 -0500, Bill Finch <ali...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:
>As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>Spain. What were they? Also, a friend who flew P-51's in WWII had a
>chance to fly a wartime Me109 in 1944. He said it was difficult to fly
>compared to the P-51. Have any of you flown a real Me109? What's it
>like?
Hi Bill,
The WW-II ME-109 (or Bf-109 or whatever we're calling it today) used a
Daimler Benz DB-600 series fuel-injected inverted V-12 powerplant.
The Spanish license built "ME-109" was called the Buchon (forget
the model name... HA-1??? something). The Buchon used
a Rolls Royce Merlin (upright carbureted V-12) powerplant.
I haven't had the pleasure of flying either type.... 8^(
But....
I've read some pilot reports (current warbird driver-type
reports) that say the 109/Buchon is a nice flier until the speed
builds up. Then control forces become increasingly
heavy, roll rate suffers, etc. Also, there were some problems
with the automatic leading edge slats not deploying exactly
at the same moment which could get your attention...
The visibility out of the 109 is horrible as compared to
say a Spitfire or Malcom canopied B/C model Mustang.
Then there's the well known negative G maneuver 109
drivers used to like to pull on older marks of Spitfires.
Because the DB-605 was fuel injected, 109 pilots could
pop the stick forward into a dive without the engine
cutting out where-as if early marks of Spitfires would
do this, the engine would cut out momentarily as negative
G's would cut off the supply of fuel inside the carburetor.
The 109 has a bad reputation of being hard to land. The
landing gear is relatively narrowly spaced and splayed
out in at a rather odd angle. These days, as long as you
fly them off of grass and don't try to fly them when birds
are walking (stiff winds), there shouldn't be any problem.
I'd bet that most of the Buchons / 109's that have been
ground looped post-war were landing on pavement
and/or were operating in winds that were perhaps
a bit high....
Bela P. Havasreti CP-ASEL-I
SNJ-5 BuNo 91077 Basket case
NATA member #1742
EAA Warbirds of America (Cascade Warbirds Squadron #2)
Warbirds Worldwide member
Puyallup, Washington USA
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/2951
Jenna Beegle
Bill,
The BF109B and C used the Junkers Jumo 210D engine.
The BF 109D used the DB 600A engine.
The BF 109E used the DB 601A, 601N, or the dB 601E engine
The BF 109F used the DB 601E
The BF 109G used the DB 605 A, B, or D
The BF 109K used the DB 605ASCM/DCS engine.
I can give more information on the engines if you give me more specifics
(i.e. BF109E-3 and time frame).
Another good source of info is the Luftwaffe home page by Scott Rose. He
may even be able to put you in contact with someone who flew them.
Earl>
Mark Rerecich
>As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>Spain. What were they? Also, a friend who flew P-51's in WWII had a
>chance to fly a wartime Me109 in 1944. He said it was difficult to fly
>compared to the P-51. Have any of you flown a real Me109? What's it
>like?
>
According to "Wings of Fame", Vol. 4 by Aerospace Publishing Ltd., The
Bf109 initially came out with the Jumo 210 engine. This configuration
was used in Spain up to 1939 when the Daimler-Benz DB 600 replaced the
Jumo engine. The DB 600 Aa was, however, retrofitted to an early
pre-production airframe as early as 1937. Then came the DB 601, a
boosted version of the DB 600 in a specially made Bf 109 to attain the
world speed record for landplanes in 1937. The production version of
the Bf 109 with the DB 601 came out in 1939 and they never looked
back. The Bf 109 stayed with the DB 600 variants to the end of the
war through its 'F', 'G' and 'K' models.
Mark Rerecich
Ruy Horta
Ken Duffey <"K.(Flanker)Duffey"@ncs.nerc.ac.uk> wrote:
>Also - don't forget the Czech S-199 'Mule' was powered by the Junkers
>Jumo - the same engine that powered the Fw-190D.
Wrong, it may look like a D-9 nose, and it is a Jumo engine...but a
different one.
Fw190D-9 -> Jumo213A-1
S-199 -> Jumo211F
The Jumo211 was inferior compared to the Jumo213...
Ruy Horta
Luftwaffe and JG53 webpage
http://www.xs4all.nl/~rhorta
"How good bad reasons and bad music sound
when we march against an enemy."
(Due to the ever increasing activity of SPAMMERS,
I've been forced to include an anti-SPAM, sorry.
If you want to e-mail me, just remove NOSPAM.)
Yama
Charles K. Scott wrote:
> He didn't like how cramped the cockpit was nor did he like how little
> could actually be seen out of the tiny canopy.
Cockpit, cramped was it, was said to have it's good sides. All
instruments were within normal handreach. Visibility was bad, OTOH pilot
protection was quite good.
>
> All in all he thought the 109 a terrible tool to be fighting in and had
> nothing but great admiration for those who not only fought in it but
> managed to be so effective.
He might have changed his opinion had he flew longer the plane. It was
common that pilots didn't like 109 at first. Kyosti Karhila, Finnish
ace, wrote to his diary after first flight with Me-109: "In the air
plane was usual, though rudder very stiff, even much stiffer than in CU
[Curtiss 75 Hawk]...By the way, I did expect more from MT ship. Well,
when we get used to it, let's say further comments then"
And next day: "Take-off went well. Then I made few turns and ship felt
much nicer than yesterday, it felt like real airplane, actually I began
already like it!"
Abdullah al Jabir
Bela P. Havasreti <bph...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> escribió en artículo
<34441959...@130.42.135.117>...
> On Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:06:43 -0500, Bill Finch <ali...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> >As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
> >Spain. What were they? (...)
> >like?
>
> Hi Bill,
>
> The WW-II ME-109 (or Bf-109 or whatever we're calling it today) used a
> Daimler Benz DB-600 series fuel-injected inverted V-12 powerplant.
>
> The Spanish license built "ME-109" was called the Buchon (forget
> the model name... HA-1??? something). The Buchon used
> a Rolls Royce Merlin (upright carbureted V-12) powerplant.
>
>(...)
Yes, that sounds weird, but it is true. The cowling had to be modified in
order to house the Rolls Royce engine
I am writing from memory, but I think that the "Buchon" was built till the
mid-fifties (I believe it was license-built by CASA and not by Hispano
Aviacion, but I'm not sure now). I remember (that was in the early 70s. I
even climbed to the cockpit) having seen one of them, with a four-bladed
propeller, very well preserved in a hangar of a Spanish Air Force Base at
Leon, together with a He-111 bomber and other assorted antiques.
Abdullah al Jabir
...
>
> Bela P. Havasreti CP-ASEL-I
> http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/2951
>
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci
In article <01bcd71b$c1508620$f6c77ac3@javier>,
Abdullah al Jabir <abdu...@mx2.redestb.es> wrote:
>
>Bela P. Havasreti <bph...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> escribió en artículo
><34441959...@130.42.135.117>...
>> On Wed, 08 Oct 1997 21:06:43 -0500, Bill Finch <ali...@ix.netcom.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >As I recall the Me109 used one engine during WWII and another later in
>> >Spain. What were they? (...)
>> >like?
>>
>> Hi Bill,
>>
>> The WW-II ME-109 (or Bf-109 or whatever we're calling it today) used a
>> Daimler Benz DB-600 series fuel-injected inverted V-12 powerplant.
The Bf-109 started off in prototype with a Rolls Royce "Kestrel" upright
v12, then inital production versions flew with Jumo 211 and DB 600
inverted V12s. The more common Bf-109E and F flew with DB601 versions and
the 'G and 'K versions flew with DB605s.
>>
>> The Spanish license built "ME-109" was called the Buchon (forget
>> the model name... HA-1??? something). The Buchon used
>> a Rolls Royce Merlin (upright carbureted V-12) powerplant.
The Spanish machines were orginally Bf-109Gs(?) and were re-engined with
several Spanish up-right V12s until Rolls Royce Merlins became available.
Each re-engine had a different cowling and intake and cooling configuration.
The second Spanish version was the least ugly of the series, but none
were perfect.
Mike Tighe
On 12 Oct 1997 14:32:25 GMT, "Abdullah al Jabir"
<abdu...@mx2.redestb.es> wrote some stuff on Spanish-built/assembled
Bf109s in follow up to this thread:
>
> I am writing from memory, but I think that the "Buchon" was built till the
>mid-fifties (I believe it was license-built by CASA and not by Hispano
>Aviacion, but I'm not sure now). I remember (that was in the early 70s. I
>even climbed to the cockpit) having seen one of them, with a four-bladed
>propeller, very well preserved in a hangar of a Spanish Air Force Base at
>Leon, together with a He-111 bomber and other assorted antiques.
>
>Abdullah al Jabir
>
HA-1112 Buchon', but this is a mistake that is not repeated in the
text. So your memory *is* pretty good, it's just picked up something
that was wrong in the first place <g>.
Production did keep going right up to 1958, and some of the planes
stayed in service until '67, when stardom beckoned...
One thing that may not have been mentioned elsewhere on the thread
(sorry if it has) is that the Merlin rotated the prop in a different
direction to the Daimler Benz engines. The Bf109 tailfin was
originally built with a bias to counteract the engine torque effects,
but this was never changed by the Spanish, so their HA-1112s always
flew with the rudder trimmed way over to keep the plane going in a
straight line.
Mike Tighe
Speaking from the bottom left
hand corner of the big picture.
Jason Long
Bev Clark/Steve Gallacci wrote:
>
> The Bf-109 started off in prototype with a Rolls Royce "Kestrel" upright
> v12, then inital production versions flew with Jumo 211 and DB 600
> inverted V12s. The more common Bf-109E and F flew with DB601 versions and
> the 'G and 'K versions flew with DB605s.
>
to modern myths only a couple of prototypes flew with the DB600
engines since the DB601 quickly entered production in late 1938.
Jason