Bf 109 H in service with 5.(F)/123

[Ruy Horta]

Nick,

Do I understand correctly that the "H" can almost be regarded as a Rustsatz, or Umbausatz?

[Graham Boak]

I don't think a greatly extended inner wing can be regarded as either. It may be that the prototype had only a "bodged" extension between standard wings and standard fuselage pick-ups: this would perhaps explain some of the severe limitations on manoeuvre described. A production version would have required strengthened root attachments, at least.

I think this aircraft also had an Me 209 tail?

[Harold Lake]

Mermet,

Something doesn't seem quite right with your engine designation information. If, as you say, there was a "GS" engine which, as you also report, was really the "ASM" engine, then how do you explain this particular G-5/U2 (with GM 1) having an ASM (M - MW 50) engine? From what I have read, the G-5 wasn't normally equipped with both powerboosting systems at the same time. Perhaps, the "GS" engine was really something else? Of course we now know that the H-0 was to have BOTH systems, but only after conversion. I am confused.

[George Hopp]

Modifying the G-5 to carry both a camera and an MW-50 tank would have been fun since, of course, first the main fuel tank would need to have been removed (since it provided the only access to the rear fuselage). Then the MW-50 tank was installed, followed by the recce camera, and then finally the fuselage tank would be reinstalled. After the provision of those two boosting systems, it seems strange that the aircraft would not also have been provided for the plumbing to carry underwing drop tanks to give it a decent range, or to place fuel tanks in the wing root sections as was planned in the report of 15.12.43, but not planned for the aircraft to be converted at Guyancourt.

For the report of 24.01.44 that details the changes to be completed at Guyancourt to create a 109H, see http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showth...t=13823&page=2. The report indicates that the vertical tail would be the 109G tall tail unit, while the horizontal tail was to be that of the Me 209. Did this happen? I don't know, but to have a larger horizontal tail to match the larger wing would seem to be a logical action.

As for the engine of this aircraft, the January 1944 document clearly states a DB 605 BS (a DB 605 A with modified gearing, as used on the Bf 110), together with the 3.4m propeller as used on the Me 210. But, the report mentions only a GM 1 unit, and not a MW-50 unit to be applied to the aircraft during conversion, although Nick's narrative declares that both were installed.

[Nick Beale]

Well, if it helps you all to "rebuild" the Bf 109 H, here's the original decrypt about the equipment fit.

[George Hopp]

Thanks for that report, Nick. It's always interesting to see what was supposed to be done and compare it to what was actually done.

Thanks again,
George

[Nick Beale]

Newly posted to ghostbombers.com is update to the article on the Bf 109 H in service with 5.(F)/123 establishing (I'm fairly confident in saying) who shot the machine down, the date and what happened to the aircraft afterward.

[Chris Going]

Just a few observations around the margins on this one, as it were: Oblt Kaiser of 5/123 flew a photographic sortie on June 7th 1944 (F30/44) during which standoff imagery was taken of the Allied shipping off Pagham harbour. Frames 872 and 873 of this sortie -obliques with a mid range scale of 1:12000 approx- were roughly mosaiced together to accompany an Intelligence Report (No 3478, Lfl 3 - Interpreter, Kallenberger). Clearly a single engined a/c involved. But not likely to be the H -or might it be?

Other covers of the bridge-head include Utah beach on June 12th (by I Nag 13; F66 and F67/44); and on the same day, an east-west strip including Pegasus bridge (F13/66) - pilot Oblt Geiger. All three sorties generated Intel reps. The numbers on June 12th (rising from F13 to F66) suggest Nag 13 at least was very busy that day, and doubtless other too. Some night stuff was also taken within a week or two south of Sword and Juno. Buried in this F sequence might be something taken by the 'H'.

Cheers


ChrisG

[George Hopp]

Thanks for that info, Chris.

[RT]

Some night stuff was also taken within a week or two south of Sword and Juno. Buried in this F sequence might be something taken by the 'H'.

Night picture is pretty complicated job, need Ju88 experiment over Alexandria in 1943, seems results deluded people

Bf109G-5 of 4.F123 had DB605AS with GM-1+MW50, 110073 too

Remi