1/72 - Messerschmitt Bf.109H "Höhen Jäger" by AZmodel - released

Homebee · September 7, 2016

As logical development from its Bf.109G "Gustav" kit family ( http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234948834-172-messerschmitt-bf109g-gustav-family-by-azmodel-released-new-bf-109g-0-v48-boxing/ ), AZmodel is to release a 1/72nd Messerschmitt Bf.109H "Höhen Jäger" (high altitude fighter) kit - ref. AZ7540
Source: https://www.facebook.com/azmodelkits/photos/pcb.1258490817508858/1258490477508892/?type=3&theater

V.P.

Edited March 16, 2018 by Homebee

meisnerr · September 7, 2016

As logical development from its Bf.109F "Friedrich" kit family

Ouch

or maybe not... "Friedrich"

Quoting Marmet ("Bf109") p.168

[...]Bf 109 H V54

This prototype was a flying test-bench for the production

version. Its WNr was 15708 and its factory code DV+JB

or PV+JB (seen in a flight report). It was the pen-ultimate

Bf 109 G-5 of a batch entirely delivered in March 1943.

Modified, it retained its pressurized cockpit, while its span

was raised from 9.92 m (32 ft 6 ¥t in) to 13.26 m (42 ft

6 in) by the addition of parallel-chord sections inserted at

the wing roots and using the leading edge and ailerons of [...]

AZ is AZ in his way of...interpretation, but IMHO this should be BF109G sprues plus the one shown above. /or: this it the one and only new sprue for Bf109H.../

New fuselage for version with BD628? Unlikely.

just my 2 rivets

Edited September 7, 2016 by meisnerr

Homebee · September 7, 2016

I confess being definitely not interested in Awfulschmitts a/c whatever the type...
Thanks meisnerr. I modified my message in accordance with your informations.

My source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_109_variants#Bf_109H

Quote
The Bf 109H was intended to be a high-altitude fighter, developed from the F-series. The wingspan was increased through the addition of new, constant-chord inner wing panels to 11.92 m (39.11 ft), and the widened stabilizer again received a supporting strut leading from the fuselage, like the B through E models. Maximum speed was 750 km/h (470 mph) at 10,100 m (33,140 ft).^{[citation needed]}^{[clarification needed]} A small number of Bf 109 H-1s were built, flying several sorties over Britain and France. Bf 109 H-2 and H-5 developments were also planned, but the entire H-series was scrapped because of wing flutter problems.^%5B93%5D

H-0 (Pre-production aircraft, rebuilt from F-4/Z, powered by a DB 601E engine with GM-1 boost)

H-1 (Production version, based on G-5 airframes, powered by a DB 605A engine with GM-1 boost)

A record exists of one particular Bf 109H-1, Werknummer 110073, was recorded as having been converted to a photo-recon aircraft by a Luftwaffe long-range reconnaissance group, Fernaufklärungsgruppe 123, in May 1944, and flown on dates immediately following the Invasion of Normandy with one mission meant to scan the entire French coastline from Cherbourg to Ouistreham, from an altitude of some 15 km (49,200 ft), which proved to be just beyond the achievable ceiling of the selected aircraft.^%5B94%5D

V.P.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Homebee

Graham Boak · September 7, 2016

I wouldn't rely upon Wiki at all here. I certainly would sling out continued reference to the DB605A engine rather than the high-altitude DB605D, or any account of production airframes. There was, as said above, certainly one G-5 airframe that was powered by the DB628, but with a standard wing. This engine was cancelled, possibly because of the success of the DB605AS/D. IIRC there was another prototype based on the G-5 with the widened wing, which could have had the DB605A if it was only intended to study the general handling characteristics of the lengthened wing. However, it would seem rather odd to restrict its high-altitude performance in that way rather than putting in a DB605AS or DB605D. Then there was an example built around the airframe of the cancelled Me209HV-1 (also known as Me209V-6). It is always possible that this airframe might, just might, have had the intended DB603G, but there wee never a lot of those around. Just which one of these three (clearly not the first) was the example flown by F/123 does not appear to be known, at least for sure. Certainly not to me. I suspect the third. At least one (or two) of the development airframes were destroyed in an air raid.

There may well have been flutter problems, amongst others, and these may have been intractable, but the most convincing reasons for the cancellation of the Bf109H were the success of the Bf109G-10 as the interim high altitude interceptor, and the success of the Ta152H as the definitive one.

If you look in the references, you will find a wide range of different versions of the Bf109H story, but the one above seems to me to be the one that both matches more (most) of the more recent research, and makes engineering sense. This doesn't mean that it has to be the true historic story. It may well be a little too simplified and logical, given the stresses of the times, but it has eliminated some of the more extreme claims. We really could do with a little more hard evidence - or perhaps more than just a little.

Roll on the model: let's see what it looks like. But please let's have the refined cowl not the beule.