![]() |
Bf 109E-4
Any Bf109 aficionados out there?
I'd like to know of there are any exterior differences between the E-4 variant as apposed to a E-1, E-4, etc..... I'm only interested in external differences though. Cheers |
Re: Bf 109E-4
E-1 and E-3 produced at same time. E-1 had four MG 17's, two in upper cowl, two in wing. E-3 had two MG 17's in upper cowl and two MG FF 20mm in wings.
E-4 looks the same as E-3, but with improved MG FF "M" cannon and armour plate for fuel tank and pilots head. E-4N had improved DB 601N engine. Quite a few E-1 & E-3's where converted to E-4 keeping thier original Werknummers. Regards, Mike |
Re: Bf 109E-4
E-4 differred from the E-3 by having 'different' armament. 'Different' because it had MG FF/Ms capable of firing Mine shells, but the gun itself only differed in it`s recoil elements adjusted to the lighter shell.
Externally, I believe the E-4 also had a new type of canopy, a more boxy one, much like as on the 109Fs, whereas the E-3 had more rounded shaped canopy with some curved plexi surfaces. I am others will turn up here and give a more satisfying answer on the matter. ;) |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Well you really can't tell 100% of the time between the E-1,-3, and -4. E-1s differ in that they do not have the MF/FF cannon in the wings. E-3s did have the nose 20mm but no external difference from the E-4.
Now the new "squared" off canopy was introduced on the E-4 but many E-1s and E-3s received the new canopies as well. So... |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Not to mention that from autumn 1940 A LOT of earlier marks E- series Bf 109's were converted to E-7 standard an received both new armament and new canopies + + +
Regards, Andreas B |
Re: Bf 109E-4
No Emil ever had a MG FF in the nose. Butch2k posted a nice drawing a while back (either at the UbiZoo or SimHQ, can't remember) showing how the installation of the oil tank blocked the space the gun would need. That "E-3 and 20mm nose gun" is a myth repeated over and over again.
|
Re: Bf 109E-4
Loss records seem to imply that a number of E-1 were still being lost in BoB. Were they still only armed with 4 mgs? Or were the E-1 rearmed without change of number.
Birgir Thorisson. |
Re: Bf 109E-4
It seems that some E-4 wore the old canopy, concerning the armament, not sure that before the introduction of the M-geschoss the 2+2 was better than 4 MG17..
Remi |
Re: Bf 109E-4
The squared canopy and armour were added as they became available, and were not confined to specific subtypes during 1940.
|
Re: Bf 109E-4
Hi again
I've just emailed you some 'emil' plans showing the comparative external differences. Cheers Chris |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Quote:
I suspect those 'E-4' with the old canopy are in many cases E-3s... the August 1940 strenght reports show large number of E-1s and E-4s and few E-3s around - the only logical conclusion is that many E-3s after getting the MG-FF/M were also 'officially' restamped/designated as E-4s. Out of curiousity, which version of the DB 601A did the E-4s gets? A-1 or Aa? I believe the E-7s had the Aa as standard. |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Quote:
Junker |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Just a thought, but didn't the E-4 have the nose-cannon removed? I have a reference book here that says so..................I have also read that on the models that did have the nose cannon, they were not successful?
|
Re: Bf 109E-4
Quote:
Junker |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Thanks, Junkers ;)
|
Re: Bf 109E-4
Hi to all!:)
How some specimens of Bf 109 E will be equipped with (sub)variants of engines, armament, canopies... etc. not only depend what proposed by designer than also what available in the moment of production. It is also the same story when wrecked aircraft repaired. That repeated with later variants of Bf 109 even more than previous. So the features pointed out in documents understand only as guidelines but not as absolute truth. Kind regards Newcomer |
Re: Bf 109E-4
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 23:13. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net