ME 109 Rheims September 1944

[the_ivan]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Unlike some people (Hi, Ferdinando!) I'm no good on the details of Bf 109 anatomy but isn't that a deeper than usual intake for a G-6 series, more like a G-10? Or would you expect this on an aircraft with the AS engine?

If by intake you mean the oil cooler, it looks like indeed a Fo 987. These were designed for AS engines.

What is also interesting is, if it's equipped with a DB 605AS, that it seems to have a VDM 12087 propeller instead of a 12159. But that could be the angle of the blades, too

[ouidjat]

As for deeper cooler (FO987) we can find it on the following machines, both with VDM12159
http://www.flickr.com/photos/2809206...-jNuRsg-jNvCr2
and the one in attachment.

[ouidjat]

Originally Posted by the_ivan

If by intake you mean the oil cooler, it looks like indeed a Fo 987. These were designed for AS engines.

What is also interesting is, if it's equipped with a DB 605AS, that it seems to have a VDM 12087 propeller instead of a 12159. But that could be the angle of the blades, too

As for VDM 12087 instead of 12159 on that machine ... This is not surprising since a reco machine is not supposed to make interception at high altitude but to be able to do it fast at low. medium altitude. And the VDM12159 wasn't suited for that.
By the contrary Dahl machine here under wasn't an AS but for sure got MW50 and VDM12159 for high interception ....

[the_ivan]

Originally Posted by ouidjat

As for VDM 12087 instead of 12159 on that machine ... This is not surprising since a reco machine is not supposed to make interception at high altitude but to be able to do it fast at low. medium altitude. And the VDM12159 wasn't suited for that.

Well, it's (relatively) surprising because DB 605AS were to be fitted with 12159A, irrespectively of the airplane's task, but for sure it's not the first photo of such type of engine-propeller combination.

Theoretically ,12087A vs. 12149A will give just 3-4 km/h of advantage for the former at low altitude, and ~10 km/h for the latter at high altitude. In flight tests both gave equal speed down low.

By the contrary Dahl machine here under wasn't an AS but for sure got MW50 and VDM12159 for high interception ....

Why MW50 "for sure"??

[ouidjat]

Originally Posted by the_ivan

Well, it's (relatively) surprising because DB 605AS were to be fitted with 12159A, irrespectively of the airplane's task, but for sure it's not the first photo of such type of engine-propeller combination.

Theoretically ,12087A vs. 12149A will give just 3-4 km/h of advantage for the former at low altitude, and ~10 km/h for the latter at high altitude. In flight tests both gave equal speed down low.



Why MW50 "for sure"??

JC Mermet mail when the photo was in auction ... In October 2010. And correction, I'm sorry, GM-1 not MW50 ...

[the_ivan]

Originally Posted by ouidjat

JC Mermet mail when the photo was in auction ... In October 2010. And correction, I'm sorry, GM-1 not MW50 ...

Ah, I see. We agree then