PDA

View Full Version : What wing profile did the Me 109 have?



Holtzauge
08-05-2006, 10:06 AM
Does anyone know which wing profile the Me 109 had? Was it changed in some variant or did it remain the same? The info I have is rather cryptic: the profile is given as 2R1 14.2 and 2R1 11.35 on the F4 variant. I think this means that the wing is 14.2% thick at the wing root and 11.35% thick at the tip but what does the 2R1 stand for?

During the design phase I think there was a bit of a flap on this issue between Messerschmitt and Lusser in the 109 design team. Messerschmitt at some stage wanted a profile named as M29 and Lusser proposed a different "American" profile which he though was better and I believe would be the excellent NACA 230XX-series used on the FW 190 amonst others. What was the outcome of this and who knows what the M29 is? Is it a NACA Munck profile or an indigenous Me profile or something altogether different?

I tried posting this on the LEMB forum as well but the going has been slow so far so I'm hoping that someone here knows...

Holtzauge
08-05-2006, 10:06 AM
Does anyone know which wing profile the Me 109 had? Was it changed in some variant or did it remain the same? The info I have is rather cryptic: the profile is given as 2R1 14.2 and 2R1 11.35 on the F4 variant. I think this means that the wing is 14.2% thick at the wing root and 11.35% thick at the tip but what does the 2R1 stand for?

During the design phase I think there was a bit of a flap on this issue between Messerschmitt and Lusser in the 109 design team. Messerschmitt at some stage wanted a profile named as M29 and Lusser proposed a different "American" profile which he though was better and I believe would be the excellent NACA 230XX-series used on the FW 190 amonst others. What was the outcome of this and who knows what the M29 is? Is it a NACA Munck profile or an indigenous Me profile or something altogether different?

I tried posting this on the LEMB forum as well but the going has been slow so far so I'm hoping that someone here knows...

Divine-Wind
08-05-2006, 10:22 AM
I'm thinking (BEWARE! Here be Divine-Wind's logic!) that the 2R1 would be the designation of sorts for the type of wing.

Also, what do you mean by profile? Like from the bottom/top, or the thickness and all that technical mumbo jumbo?

VW-IceFire
08-05-2006, 10:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Divine-Wind:
I'm thinking (BEWARE! Here be Divine-Wind's logic!) that the 2R1 would be the designation of sorts for the type of wing.

Also, what do you mean by profile? Like from the bottom/top, or the thickness and all that technical mumbo jumbo? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Wings have different profiles in terms of thickness and where it is and by how much. I don't know the specifics of how this works but the Spitfires wing profile is drastically different than the FW190s profile.

You actually start to understand both the compromises and the genius of the German designs when you compare their profiles to the Allied fighters. The Germans get alot of performance out of their aircraft by design of the wings. Much like how the Mustang gets 439mph out of the same engine that powers the Spitfire IX which can only eek out abour 408mph.

Holtzauge
08-05-2006, 11:24 AM
Yep, I mean that humbo jumbo! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The Mustang did get a lot out of the Merlin because it incorporated the new NACA laminar profile technology which cuts profile drag drastically (especially in laboratory conditions!) However, the NACA 230-series was used by a lot of manufacturers on both sides because it had a high Clmax and the pitching moment did not change that much with speed changes compared to other profiles which cut down the trim drag.

But what about Willy and his profile problem? What did he finally go for for the 109?

reverendkrv1972
08-05-2006, 09:44 PM
he should have used an RG15 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
08-05-2006, 10:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Much like how the Mustang gets 439mph out of the same engine that powers the Spitfire IX which can only eek out abour 408mph. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Almost 10% slower.

FritzGryphon
08-06-2006, 01:12 AM
The answer.

http://members.shaw.ca/evilgryphon3/win.jpg

I hear the curvy part makes it go up. Sometimes back.