Warbird Information Exchange

Hey bluedharma
Where was that picture taken? My dad had a friend named bill dilts, ex navy pilot and model builder, lived in the atlanta area. He died recently. He gave me his WW2 backpack when I was a little kid.

_________________
All I did was press this red button here...

Pretty right. Should have an accent over the 'o': Buchón. Strictly the name (the colloquial, local name for a kind of Spanish deep chested pigeon*) is a nickname, rather than the type's official name - Hispano HA-1112-M1L. Mostly you'll see Buchon without the accent though.

This is the man who rang up the Spanish embassy to try and settle an argument over how Buchón was pronounced...

*Not a pelican, despite some refs that confuse a unit insignia, also based on the Buchón's deep nose profile, with the name.

Sounds about right! I can excuse the OCD as, being an editor, it's part of the job.

However, it depends on the source. Wartime Allied accounts didn't differentiate too much and they were often known as 'Em Ees' or 'Messers' etc, so if you are reporting a veteran's account, that's what they may've said. Sometimes they were even He 113's, although it's funny how those combat claims seem to have been 'corrected' since!

OK, Equivalent, yes, the but all Messerscmitt 109 variants had variable flaps on the rear of the radiators, from the first models to the last. However, up to the E model there was only a lower flap, with the radiator and it's smaller fairing set further (in effect) forward and the inner section of the wing was just the inner end of a long, standard flap.

Think of the exit-air flap door on the P-51 for an equivalent, except two, moved to the wing. The Spitfire and Hurricane also has a similar set up.

(The shapes of the radiator intake and exhaust were quite a new understanding of an aspect of the venturi and Meredith effect in the 1930s, so the shaping of the intake and exit were carefully worked out, and the way of varying the radiator's efficiency on aircraft's speed and engine heat was a simple flap at the rear, changing the size of that exit vent.

Some discussion of how to get thrust, rather than drag, using hot air from your shaped rad ducting, here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=33360&p=333399 )

From the F onwards, the radiators were wider and the radiator housing extended to the trailing edge. The wing upper surface gained a separate part of the flap, which could be 'raised' as well as lowered with the rest of the flap, rather than being part of the whole flap. So then the lower flap could be lowered to increase the air exit area and the upper flap could be raised to also increase the air exit area. I'm sure Lynn's account of their actuation difference is correct - I don't know that bit. What's interesting is when they put the Merlin into the 109G airframe, they kept the G type radiators and added another rad under the nose, as well as the nose oil cooler that'd been there all along. When a certain Buchon was converted for a certain collection into a 109E by hanging the 109E-type engine on it, it still had the G style rads giving Buchon-nuts like me a moment of nit-pickery delight.

Um, I hope that helps? That's about the 12th re-write with corrections. Much easier to describe on a walk around...

Cheers,

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

cof... cof...

so...

Is it...

McDonnell Douglas F 15 or Boeing F 15 ?

seems the same kind of question... no?

_________________
rreis

If you want pictures, see rreis@flickr

JDK, thanks a million for taking the time; your explanation is the next best thing, and the walkaround, whenever it finally comes, will be that much more informative for me. I've got to make point of examining one of these things firsthand, somewhere, somehow.

But the most important thing I learned from your post is this: if you don't quite get the answer you were looking for to a question about some arcane piece of vintage aviation trivia, then simply re-write whatever you think you understand (or make something up and state it) as fact, and the information you seek shall come pouring generously forth as "corrections".

Ahem, that was said at dire risk of being found guilty of poking at you a little bit, James. But seriously, I'll bet the technique works wonders here on WIX. If you wear enough layers of Nomex, that is.

(Oh boy, and the link given was the P-40 thread -- one of my favorites!)

_________________
Cheers,
Kurt Maurer
League City, Texas

PIC, Ford 6600 pulling Rhino batwing up and down the runway

Yup!

Actually, a corr...


(Only kidding. Heh.)

_________________
James K

"Switch on the underwater landing lights"
Emilio Largo, Thunderball.

www.VintageAeroWriter.com

Enemy Ace...
Sorry, I didn't ever respond to this question.

The photo was taken at the Spirit of Flight Center in Erie, CO
Lots of great things there!

Messerschmitt Bf 109F-4 (WNr.10144)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bluedharma ... 728762177/

_________________
Live the Good Life
Bluedharma
http://flickr.com/photos/bluedharma/
http://www.airport-data.com/photographe ... arma;1045/
bluedharmawix@gmail.com

Yes, with or without italics

_________________
Disclaimer: Photo discription, original photographer and/or original web source credit unknown unless otherwise noted.

As for pilot reports on the Me 109, one of the best was by Charlie Brown a few years ago, in I think Flypast. For those who don't know, Charlie is ex RAF and has lot's of time flying the warbirds at Duxford, etc.
He wrote some about comparing the Spitfire with the 109.
John Romaine is another British pilot who has some time in the 109 as well as Spit, Hurri, etc.
I use Me 109 which as for as I know is the modern version of what may have started as BF 109.
Anyone studying or contemplating flying a 109, should know that as for as I have been told there is a big difference between the handling of the original 109 and the Spanish version; with the original being a lot better for landing and takeoff. I watched Skip Holm fly the original 109, and he seemed to handle it without much trouble, except for landing on a muddy grass strip one day when it began to rain. By the way, the prop turns the same way on a Merlin 109 as on a DB 109, so what some folks say about handling problems cannot be attributed to any difference. Denny and Scott Sherman flew the Spanish 109, and seemed to do ok, but not without some effort. One day I was coming to Leeward Air Ranch in Florida, and there was a pretty good direct crosswind, about 15 mph. I could have gone to nearby Ocala airport with 2 runways, but Dirk Leeward came on the unicom and said Denny landed the 109 in the same conditions, and urged me to try it. Since the runway is wide, long, and grass, I came on in; actually landed without too much problem. When I saw Denny he said, yes he had landed in the wind and he probably would not do it again. I don't know who owns that 109 now.

As for as the flaps that deploy out of the front of the wing. They come out into the low pressure area when the wing gets slow, they are not controlled by the pilot with any switch or lever. It is my very uneducated guess that they do not degrade from handling of the plane, rather they help, since they only deploy when the airflow calls for them. Some American pilots have criticized these slats, and say they make a bang when deploying ,but I have read and talked to some of the top German aces, and never had them make any such complaint.

I am not very familiar with the 109 radiator flaps. However the Spitfire has rad flaps that are set up to open automatically when the engine coolant temp reaches about 110 or so degrees. When open they provide some drag, noticeable in climb or cruise, but the plane does not fall out of the sky when open on approach, and there is no caution against this in the Pilot Notes. Many modern civilian Spitfires have been modified so the rad doors can be fully opened without having to be 110 * and this helps add a little drag for landing and keeps the engine cool longer on startup and taxi.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

I've got a ton of 109 pics particularly the Radiator flaps. Without being an expert, it appears the earlier models do not have the split flap with the upper surface extending above the wing. The inlets are not nearly as wide with a single flap at the rear. The He-111 had cooling system that allowed the cooling flap to be in one of three positions. Automatic, Manual and Trail which kept the flap open all the time. It was pneumatically controlled. The later 109 had a much wider radiator opening with the split flap at the rear. I'll post a bunch of pics after I get back from Midland on Sunday or Monday.

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.

OK, I lied, I'll post them now.
First, the older 109s







Now the newer ones










And a Buchon







Hope all this helps a bit.

_________________
The more I learn about aircraft, the more I realize I still have to learn.

Way back when we were doing the commute to Midland I got to visit with a couple of former Luftwaffe fighter pilots. One gentleman walked with me to the Hispano (prior to its sale) and mentioned that he never could get the most performance out of the Bf109 as he was an "average" pilot. He explained that part of the reason the top scorers were successful with the '109 was because they felt comfortable being very agressive with the airplane during combat. He said the slats really banged out pretty hard when they deployed and it tended to unnerve him a bit, enough so that he said he had developed a bad habit of relieving a little backpressure on the stick when they popped out. He said a senior pilot explained that the slats gave him an advantage during a turning fight if only he would use them, but he never really mastered the technique. He told me he was relieved when he was posted to an Fw190 unit and preferred the Focke Wulf. As we were finishing our conversation about the '109 he mentioned (with some pride) that he never wiped one out landing or taxiing--a fair accomplishment for a relative neophyte pilot!

Scott

One comment that's stuck with me from Al Williams' 1940 book "Airpower" was his comment about flying the Bf 109- he said it was as though he were flying a finely balanced rifle. The 109 tended to reward those who were willing to push it right up to the edge, but you had better know where that edge is- because if you go over it, you would be absolutely screwed. The most successful pilots in the Luftwaffe were those 109 pilots who were able to find that edge either through natural talent or training, and fly right to the edge of it without exceeding it. Hartmann's aggressively skilled handling of his 109 in close quarter combat served him as well as Marseille's incredible aircraft control skill and shooting eye. The comments you posted from that Luftwaffe pilot ring absolutely true- the 190 was a far more docile aircraft, nowhere near as demanding to fly and a much better choice for your "average" pilot, and I hope you congratulated him heartily on not wrecking a 109... in my mind, that may be a more significant accomplishment than a 20-kill ace!

Lynn

Lynn,

The gentleman I met got that little glint in his eye when he told me his "claim to fame" was not tearing up a '109 in the pattern!

He was eventually posted to a Fw190-equipped Sturmbock unit where he explained that his relatively poor training and ability wasn't as much of a factor as it would have been in a normal fighter Gruppe. He loved flying the '190 and said it would have been a great general aviation sport plane.

It was quite a moment for me when he asked if he could visit the cockpit of the B-24. He sat in the pilot's seat and quietly looked out over the nose for a long time. He finally turned back to me and told me that this was pretty emotional for him. The last time he'd seen a B-24 close-up he was crouching behind his windscreen armor shooting at them as they were shooting at him. His thought was that it was a "bunch of young boys on both sides, scared to death, thinking of getting home to their families in one piece someday."

Scott

Wasn't going to comment on this thread but it is Friday night so just one point! There is a difference between the Buchon and the 109 that causes an issue due to prop rotation. Buchon was designed for Hispano-Suiza motor with opposite prop rotation to the DB, the Buchons vertical stab was designed with the aerofoil to combat the prop wash from that rotation, when the Buchon was fitted with the merlin and the direction of rotation changed the vert stab was left the same and so the aerofoil actually adds to the yaw rather than counteracts it and makes the aircraft much more of a handful on the ground! I spoke to Dave southwood about the handling of the 109 on the ground and what came across to me was that it seems the 109 really is as big a handful to handle on the ground as people make out, I was not expecting him to say that, I expected him to say that it was just like any other high powered warbird but I was wrong!

Augsburg, as for as prop rotation, one of us is confused, (maybe both of us!)
I think you are mistaken, if you believe that there is a difference in the direction of prop rotation of a Me 109 with the original D B type engine, and the Spanish version with the Merlin.
I have read and heard of this a number of times, but think it is a myth.
I have looked at several Hispano 109s with a Merlin, as well as stood beside, sat in ,flown beside, and watched the start up, taxi and flight of the Me 109 in Canada with the original type D B engine. Unless I am blind they all turn the same direction as to prop rotation.
If you were in the cockpit, and the blade was pointing straight up, it would move down to the pilots right, thus turn clockwise as the pilot sees it.
This is the same for a Merlin or a DB, whether the engine is in a Me 109 or a Spanish Merlin109, or Spitfire or Hurricane or P-51 , or P-40. As a matter of fact the same as most planes with a few exceptions like Centaurus, Griffon, Gypsy engined planes.
To be sure, I got out some photos of DB engined 109s and you can see be the prop blade angle what the direction of rotation is. I have looked in several different books, I can quote the titles and pages if you need.
I only know Dave Southwood by good reputation, but I doubt if he told you that the props turn opposite directions. If he did perhaps it was after a trip to the pub and from years of driving on the wrong side of the road.

I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

PS, oops now I have to add a footnote. I phoned Larry at Vintage at Ft. Collins, who rebuilt two real Me 109s with the DB 605s. He confirmed that I am correct, that the DB and the Merlin turn the same way. BUT there's more to the story. Apparently when the Spanish first built the Buchon ,they used an Hispano engine that did turn the opposite way, before converting to the Merlin. Does anyone have a good photo of one of these early Buchons that shows the prop? And should have read your post more clearly the first time.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK