ME 109g-6 u4 arnaments?

[Andreas Brekken]

Hi, guys

Is this a way to end this with a consensus?

The full technical description of a Bf 109G-6 with Mk 108 engine mounted cannon and two 151/20 guns in wing pods would be:

Bf 109G6/U4 mit rustsatz IV or simply written Bf 109G6/U4/R6

but that it is highly unlikely that this designation will turn up EXCEPT in documentation at unit level (technical/administrative documents), and we will see these birds in most records as:

Bf 109G6/U4

What then an aircraft with the above configuration and drop tank?

Bf 109G6/U4/R3/R6?

Regards,
Andreas B

[George Hopp]

In RL2 III/882 (Aug-Dec 1944) NAG 11 records BF 109 G-6 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/R-2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-5/R2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-8/R5 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/U3 MW 50 and Bf 109 G-6/U2/R2.

Those designations are really interesting, Nick. No wonder the Luftwaffe lost the air war, it was spending all its time trying to figure out what type of 109 was on strength with what unit. So, one might ask: what was the difference between the Bf 109 G-6 MW 50, the Bf 109 G-6/R2 MW 50, and the Bf 109 G-14, since they all had the MW 50 system and carried the DB 605 AM engine.

And, to refresh my memory, was the U2 the GM-1 designation? And, the U3 was the MW50 installation for recce aircraft? Aaaaarrrrggggghhhhh!!!!

I seem to recall that the various Rüstsatze numbers referred only to the wiring/plumbing that was built into the a/c during production. And, whether or not the a/c carried the fuel tank, or the gun pods, or whatever, depended on the tactical situation.

For what it's worth, the manual for the 109 G-6/U4 with MK 108s in the underwing pods, gives no subtype for it, the sub-title for it being only "2 MK 108 in wing pods."

[bearoutwest]

Would it be reasonable to assume - that from a documentation point of view - a maintenance depot or aircraft assembly works would dispatch aircraft to the front line listed as (e.g.) Bf109G-6/U4?

Any description involving the add on rustsatz items, perhaps only appearing in unit combat reports; e.g. 14 aircraft sorties today - interception mission - 8x Bf109G-6/R6 and 6x Bf109G-6/U4, etc (as an example)?

...geoff

[George Hopp]

Would it be reasonable to assume - that from a documentation point of view - a maintenance depot or aircraft assembly works would dispatch aircraft to the front line listed as (e.g.) Bf109G-6/U4?

Any description involving the add-on rustsatz items, perhaps only appearing in unit combat reports; e.g. 14 aircraft sorties today - interception mission - 8x Bf109G-6/R6 and 6x Bf109G-6/U4, etc (as an example)?

My feeling on this would be that the maintenance depot or a/c assembly works would want to give the receiving unit as much data as possible on the a/c. So, if it had Rustsatz 1, it had the wiring for the ETC 500, but it didn't have the plumbing for the 300l drop tank. If it didn't have Rustsatz 7, it could only use the FuG 16 ZE radio, since the others had the homing facility. Etc.

And, in sortie reports, I would guess that the basic description, 109G-6, 109 G-6/U4, and even just 109G would be considered sufficient.

But, don't despair, geoff, I have been wrong before.
All the best,
Felix

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by George Hopp

Those designations are really interesting, Nick. No wonder the Luftwaffe lost the air war, it was spending all its time trying to figure out what type of 109 was on strength with what unit.

I put it down to an over-zealous Technischer Offizier in NAG 11, or a very bored one!

[yogybär]

I think it makes sense to give these designations in the stocklist, because you need specific supply for the MW50 as well as for the MK108's. Maybe the lists were used for planing of logistics (among other applicaitons), who knows...

[George Hopp]

I think it makes sense to give these designations in the stocklist, because you need specific supply for the MW50 as well as for the MK108's. Maybe the lists were used for planing of logistics (among other applicaitons), who knows...

You make a good point as far as you take it. But, then why is the MW 50 and the far more difficult to use GM-1 not mentioned for the G-6/U2/R2. Anyway, as you say, who knows ...

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Your memories of our 1989 Freiburg trip have faded a little! My notes from RL2 III/881 on the strength of NAG 11 in June, July & August 1944 include Bf 109 G-8/R5, G-6/U2/R3 and Bf 109 G-5/U2/R2. However, all the unit's other aircraft are recorded more conventionally as G-6, G-6/U3, G-8/U3, G-5/U2.

In RL2 III/882 (Aug-Dec 1944) NAG 11 records BF 109 G-6 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/R-2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-5/R2 MW 50, Bf 109 G-8/R5 MW 50, Bf 109 G-6/U3 MW 50 and Bf 109 G-6/U2/R2.

None of the other units we were looking at gave that much detail. JG 77 recorded a lot of Bf 109 G-6 and Bf 109 G-6/U4 but no Rüstsatz numbers.

These are not showing kits, but permanent factory conversions...

Take for example, G-6/U2/R3 in the records. It's probably 'custom' G-6, converted into a long range photo recce (with GM-1 none the less..?) the /R3 is actually showing a rarer variant of the 109 which carried a 300 liter droptank under each wing (2 DTs in total). However that was a special version with fuel lines in the wings for the droptanks, which standard fighters did not have.. the /R3 suffix meant it had these two droptanks, a camera in the fuselage, and an extra oil tank in place of the cowl MGs. I am not 100% sure about if the /U2 means the same as on fighters (GM-1 tank and boost present), but probably so. Such plane makes sense in Nähaufklärungsgruppe, ja?

R5 and R2 I believe showed different cameras. G-6/R2 (camera + MW50 boost) was later re-designated as G-8 if I am not wrong and mixing the desinations up.

Field kits - bombracks for 50kg/250 kg, 300 liter underfuselage droptank, gondolas etc - NEVER !!!! show up in the type designation... there of course exceptions. For example the 109F could not mount gondolas, there was a late 109F serie that could and it had the /R1(?) suffix as a result (regardless it actually carries them or not. It just shows it's been modified to be able to). However, all the subsequent 109G airframes were factory prepeared for gondolas, so there's no special

The confusion probably arises from the fact that authors used the designations wrong for so many time, and it's easy to mix up R-factory conversions (with arab numbers) with R-field kits (with roman numbers).. the latter again do not show up in the designation.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Andreas Brekken

Hi, guys

Is this a way to end this with a consensus?

The full technical description of a Bf 109G-6 with Mk 108 engine mounted cannon and two 151/20 guns in wing pods would be:

Bf 109G6/U4 mit rustsatz IV or simply written Bf 109G6/U4/R6

It's a Bf 109G-6/U4.
It's a G-6, that was subject to the No. 4 factory modification, namely, fitting of a MK 108 in place of the MG 151/20.

It also carries the Rüstsatz VI (gunpods. These are Rüstsatz IV in case of the 109K).

but that it is highly unlikely that this designation will turn up EXCEPT in documentation at unit level (technical/administrative documents), and we will see these birds in most records as:

Bf 109G6/U4

Yes, because it's still a Bf 109G-6/U4.
All Bf 109Gs could take the R-kits, each and every one of them had the wiring, piping etc.

Was a Spitfire IX with droptanks ever a Spitfire IX/Droptank...?

What then an aircraft with the above configuration and drop tank?

Bf 109G6/U4/R3/R6?

It's still Bf 109G-6/U4.

(with a Rüstsatz VI (gondies) and Rüstsatz III (rack for droptank).)


I think we need a sticky for German designations.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by George Hopp

So, one might ask: what was the difference between the Bf 109 G-6 MW 50, the Bf 109 G-6/R2 MW 50, and the Bf 109 G-14, since they all had the MW 50 system and carried the DB 605 AM engine.

The G-6 / MW 50 is iirc an early designation for those G-6s carrying MW-50 boost, too. The /R2 bird is a fighter-recce version with cameras and MW-50.

And the G-14, since it had MW-50 as factory production standard, as some ancient paper tells us, is 'wie G-6', but the MW-50 system is using compressed air 'auf Ladeluftbasis'.

the early MW-50 G-6s were usually simple-to-do conversions (only a valve was changed and MW-50 was filled instead of GM-1 afaik) from GM-1 tank carrying high-alt fighters, which used compressed air carried onboard in oxygene bottles, to force GM-1 into the eye of the supercharger. Since GM-1 was a spring fuel used in emergency, it was a simple enough solution, since most fighters didn't carry GM-1.

When the first GM-1 birds were converted to MW-50, they kept that system to force the MW-50 tanks content into the supercharger -
a leftover from the GM-1 system..

The G-14, and later 'proper' MW-50 aircraft were built from the start with MW50 boost in mind, and thus they simply tapped the supercharger's surplus compressed air into the MW-50 tank to do the same - same metod was used for a long time with the droptanks, no need for extra pumps that can go wrong...