• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Messerschmitt Bf/Me 109 - Blohm & Voss Bv 155 Projects & Prototypes

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
118
hesham said:
From Aero Journal No.5,

some Bf.109 Projects.
Which Aero Journal was this from? There seems to be one that was published in the late 90s early 2000s and another thats been around for the past few years, or maybe it is just the same magazine relaunched?
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,311
Reaction score
1,078
Aero Journal 8-9 2008.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,311
Reaction score
1,078
I sent them here;

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,29902.msg316782.html#msg316782
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/VB-109-01-L-44.pdf ???
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
4 propeller karl? http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Aspera_VDM_4427.pdf
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,280
Reaction score
111
sgeorges4 said:
4 propeller karl? http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Aspera_VDM_4427.pdf
no no no

This paper is Results of Test with four different propellors on Me109 with DB 605 D engine
and wich one give best performance
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,280
Reaction score
111
sgeorges4 said:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/VB-109-01-L-44.pdf ???
That's test with simulator for a aerodynamic fuel tank with 109 liter under Me109
 

Sherman Tank

I don't want to change my personal text
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
88
Reaction score
6
Is there very much information about the original Me 155 carrier fighter project? As a naval historian I'm interested in carrier aviation projects but it's not my specialty so I don't know quite where to look and Google doesn't help much.
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
Sherman Tank said:
Is there very much information about the original Me 155 carrier fighter project? As a naval historian I'm interested in carrier aviation projects but it's not my specialty so I don't know quite where to look and Google doesn't help much.
Check out the 'Me 409 - looking for info about it' thread.
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6761.0.html
:)
 

Sherman Tank

I don't want to change my personal text
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
88
Reaction score
6
Thanks. I knew that I had seen some good information on this forum but when I checked this thread it wasn't there. Now I know why!
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
Sherman Tank said:
Thanks. I knew that I had seen some good information on this forum but when I checked this thread it wasn't there. Now I know why!
But anyway, the Me 409/Me 155 A project stalled out early. Surely the more interesting Messerschmitt carrier fighter project is the Me 109 S (the 'S' standing for Soufflé), work on which continued at Caudron-Renault right up to the point at which the factory was liberated in August 1944. Messerschmitt itself in Augsburg was still working on it up to that time too.
 

Attachments

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
Do you have some other drawing or not?
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
sgeorges4 said:
Do you have some other drawing or not?
I have two reports on it, a French one and a German one. The drawings are all French. Maybe someone else can post them up. However, the 'Souffle' as designed was only a test vehicle. The large ventral intake required for the blown-air system meant its undercarriage wouldn't have been able to fully retract. Presumably, once the technology was tried and tested it would have been applied to some future model - perhaps a development of the Me 109 K series. Caudron-Renault estimated that it was three months away from completing the work at the point of liberation.
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
why you're not posting the two report?
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
sgeorges4 said:
why you're not posting the two report?
Presumably there's already a full account of the Me 109 S out there somewhere..
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
118
newsdeskdan said:
sgeorges4 said:
why you're not posting the two report?
Presumably there's already a full account of the Me 109 S out there somewhere..
Is this a hint or a tease?
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
sienar said:
newsdeskdan said:
sgeorges4 said:
why you're not posting the two report?
Presumably there's already a full account of the Me 109 S out there somewhere..
Is this a hint or a tease?
I don't know of any decent article anywhere on the Me 109 S (or indeed any non-decent ones), but also I surely can't be the only person who has anything on it. If nothing else turns up, I'll write it up and get it published somewhere - but I just figured every conceivable aspect of the Me 109 had already been covered in exhaustive detail already and someone else was bound to post something up.
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
There was not drawing of the fuselage,and no description about wich version was concerned by that wing.
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
Justo Miranda said:
S=Souflé ?
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?
Nope. The ST is the ST. The S is the S. The S has a big circular intake on its underside, as viewed from the front.
 

Justo Miranda

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
3,524
Reaction score
209
newsdeskdan said:
Justo Miranda said:
S=Souflé ?
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?
Nope. The ST is the ST. The S is the S. The S has a big circular intake on its underside, as viewed from the front.

Cooling fan?
 

Attachments

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
Justo Miranda said:
newsdeskdan said:
Justo Miranda said:
S=Souflé ?
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?
Nope. The ST is the ST. The S is the S. The S has a big circular intake on its underside, as viewed from the front.



Cooling fan?
No an air scoop for the blown air system. The radiator was repositioned under the port wing, forward of the air scoop.
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
483
Reaction score
50
I discover a tail for the 109(for me it seem a little bit "different"):
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Me_109_Dive_Test.pdf
(page 3)
 

Justo Miranda

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
3,524
Reaction score
209
newsdeskdan said:
Justo Miranda said:
newsdeskdan said:
Justo Miranda said:
S=Souflé ?
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?


Thanks
Nope. The ST is the ST. The S is the S. The S has a big circular intake on its underside, as viewed from the front.



Cooling fan?
No an air scoop for the blown air system. The radiator was repositioned under the port wing, forward of the air scoop.
 

perttime

I really did change my personal text
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
105
Reaction score
0
sgeorges4 said:
I discover a tail for the 109(for me it seem a little bit "different"):
...
There were some different fin and rudder designs. Especially late models used a taller one. Some were built out of wood. I've seen photos of G6 models with either small and tall fins. I recall Finland got some with the taller fin, but replaced it with the small one.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
118
sgeorges4 said:
I discover a tail for the 109(for me it seem a little bit "different"):
This is just one of the later tall tails, of which there were many variations. The tail of the 109 remained practically unchanged until the G-6, sans a redesign which may have been present on a v series aircraft.
 

Attachments

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
118
hesham said:
From Aero Journal No.5,

some Bf.109 Projects.
I contacted JC Mermet and asked him about the first drawing.

He states that the drawing is a reconstruction based on a report from Messerschmitts design office at the end of 1938. It was intended to be an improvement of the 109e, featuring a canopy like that fitted to the V21 with a cut down rear fuselage, removal of the horizontal stabilizers struts and retractable tail wheel, a reworked cowling with a circular intake like that later adopted on the F, and boundary layer splitters for the oil cooler and radiators. Since this proposed variant required a major retooling of production lines it was dropped in favor of the more conservative F and more advanced 309.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
590
Reaction score
118
Drawing traced from photographs of the effects of a wing fence tested on the 109V6. It was mounted 30cm inboard of the outer edge of the flap, with many different shapes and sizes of fences tested.

Unfortunately I have no idea why they decided against this. Seems like a cheaper and more reliable solution to the stall issue than the slats. Wolfgang Liebe also tested a self actuating flap on the 109 to some success.
 

Attachments

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
222
The fences on the Hispano version we due to the muzzle blast from the 20mm cannon.
There was some correspondence on this in Aeroplane Monthly was elaborated on by Col Pope of the Aircraft Restoration Company.
His letter read, "My understanding is that when the Hispano 20mm cannon were installed into the HA-1112-M1L there was an immediate handling problem when they were fired. The cannon is just inboard of the outer wing slats and, on firing, a shockwave would be produced that then made the slat deploy, causing a violent and uncommanded aerodynamic wing stall at the speed the aircraft would be at this point of the flight envelope, this being because the wing slats were automatic and rely on a lack of forward air pressure to deploy. This was obviously a major problem, and yet the fix was simple. By fitting the large wing fence it prevented the shockwave from progressing down the leading edge and essentially flicked it away, so preventing the flap deployment. The problem was not apparent on the earlier 'Emil' model Bf 109 as the calibre of the machine guns didn't produce anything like the shockwave of the 20mm. In addition, later G-models that had additional wing armament had it mounted in underwing gondolas and the shockwave went underneath the wing, in essence. The Hispano armament does alter the internal structure significantly compared to a 109..."

This account obviously ignores that some 'Emils' did receive 20mm MG FF cannon in the wings. But I wonder if this was the reason why the F-models dispensed with the wing cannon? It seems odd that if the same shockwave issue occurred with the MG FF that the fences were not looked into again.
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
560
Reaction score
252
Website
galgot.com
Maybe that shockwave problem was specific to the Hispano cannon ? I understand the MG FF muzzle velocity is much lower so maybe that is why they didn't had the problem before ?
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,371
Reaction score
222
Justo,
My quote is from the following issue when Aeroplane published the full letter from Col Pope as their editing had made the first version, which you have posted, slightly misleading.
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,280
Reaction score
111
Justo Miranda said:
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?
According the german Text in Pictures

Spezial Träger Jagereinsitzer = Special Carrier Hunter one seater (what a Word)
is the destination for Aircraft had operating on Graf Zeppelin Aircraft carrier
until Göring "everything what fly belog to me" crap

Messerschmitt worked on Me 109G in three variations
A - with DB 605 engine
B - with DB 628 engine for high altitude
C - With Jumo 213 engines

they change Designation to Me 155A /B /C
with new wing design for B version to reaching altitude of 14 km
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
823
Reaction score
168
Michel Van said:
Justo Miranda said:
ST= Spezial Trägerflugzeug?
S=ST ?
S= Bf 109 ST Ausführung A?
According the german Text in Pictures

Spezial Träger Jagereinsitzer = Special Carrier Hunter one seater (what a Word)
is the destination for Aircraft had operating on Graf Zeppelin Aircraft carrier
until Göring "everything what fly belog to me" crap

Messerschmitt worked on Me 109G in three variations
A - with DB 605 engine
B - with DB 628 engine for high altitude
C - With Jumo 213 engines

they change Designation to Me 155A /B /C
with new wing design for B version to reaching altitude of 14 km
I refer you back to this (see below). The redesignation from Me 409 to Me 155 was some time between June 26, 1942, and July 22, 1942, and the Me 155 A, B and C split seems to have continued for most of 1942, although I can't say exactly when the 'A' and 'C' were dropped. Willy Messerschmitt ordered his agents at SNCAN and Avions Caudron to cease work on the Me 155 on February 19, 1943, and received a letter back from them shortly thereafter making excuses for why the work had not progressed as hoped. The project then seems to have been in limbo until the handover to Blohm & Voss, overseen by the RLM, on September 7, 1943 (although what B&V received had very little to do with the original Me 155!).

Meanwhile, work on the Me 109 S continued at Caudron until the liberation in 1944.
 

Attachments

Top