Work In Progress Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 (edited) While looking unsuccessfully for 109H pics just now I stumbled across this. Never seen a 109 with this totally revised wing structure before - wide-track gear hinged from, and supported by, the wing itself rather than being connected directly to the fuselage as on the normal 109. Any ideas what it is? Some comments elsewhere suggest this airframe may have a non-retracting UC, and be a test bed for the non-standard radiator seen under the fuselage, which I imagine occupies space which the standard undercarriage mechanism would take up. Edited March 12, 2017 by Work In Progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackG Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 Bf 109V-31, apparently testbed for the Me309. See page 5 of pdf below: http://www.letletlet-warplanes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Bf109G.pdf regards, Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 The Me209 fighter was intended to have (and eventually did have) an inward retracting undercarriage. This kind of radiator was seen on the Me309, also with an inward retracting undercarriage (but a nosewheel). The Me209 fighter, as built, had the later annular radiator on the nose. I suggest that this was a Messerschmitt test mule, being used to test different ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted March 12, 2017 Author Share Posted March 12, 2017 Thanks, gents. I like it, it looks a lot more reassuring for the pilot than a standard 109. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody37 Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 That looks rather nice in that configuration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Work In Progress Posted March 12, 2017 Author Share Posted March 12, 2017 It certainly strengthens the resemblance to the Allison Mustang, the wide gear and the radiator both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
593jones Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 That configuration would have been suitable for the Tragerjaeger if the Graf Zeppelin carrier had been completed. Much better for deck landings than the standard 109 undercarriage. An interesting 'What if'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duncan B Posted March 12, 2017 Share Posted March 12, 2017 There is a kit of it in 1/72 scale, AModel 72219. Duncan B 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now