Bf109T-1 folding wing

Good points Ray Jade – for those who can’t access the link I posted above (#12) the very next para states …

[quote] Stripped of naval equipment and fitted with a rack for a 66 Imp gal drop tank, 4 110-lb bombs, or a single 551-lb bomb, the planes were redesignated Bf 109T-2. It was concluded that the Bf 109T-2 would be ideal for operation from small, exposed airstrips such as those from which the Jagdflieger were forced to operate in Norway. Several units operated with the Bf 109T-2 in Norway. However, it never operated in its intended shipboard role. The short-field performance of the Bf 109T lead to surviving Norwegian-based Bf 109T-2s to be based on the tiny fortified island of Heligoland in 1943. The last of the Bf 109T-2s disappeared from the inventory at the end of 1944. [unquote]

So as you say, we have the “prototype” T-0’s, and the partly constructed/converted T-1’s redesignated as T-2’s. Arguably the naval equipment removed would have been the catapult points and arrester hook. The question about whether there ever were any folding wings remains open. Had they been built and then locked or bolted or …? Or were they never completed in the first instance?

All that said – I think we’re flogging a dead horse!

Actually I think it’s probable both arguments are correct. It seems the 109T was DESIGNED as a naval aircraft with folding wings but BUILT as a de-navalised landplane. Here’s an excerpt from the link I posted above, which is in fact an extract from “Warplanes of the Third Reich, William Green, Doubleday, 1970”…

I was also prompted to dig out the old bible last night – but gnome has a time zone advantage!

It is clear, if Green is correct, that the T was intended to have manually folding outer wings. It struck me that he didn’t state (in the paragraphs after gnome’s quotation) which naval features the T-0 and T-2 actually had except for additional spoilers on the wings which were present on the operational T-2’s. He also says that, by implication, the aircraft intended to be T-1’s were modifed to T-2’s on the production line and that, therefore, no T-1’s were ever actually produced.

My suggestion, largely unsupported by evidence, is that T-0 didn’t ever have folding wings, only strengthening, hooks spoilers etc. The T-1 didn’t exist and the T-2 had its potential folding wings locked / bolted.

Are they any photos other than the two of a “T-0” in Green’s book?

I think that’s that then! 😉

Actually I think it’s probable both arguments are correct. It seems the 109T was DESIGNED as a naval aircraft with folding wings but BUILT as a de-navalised landplane. Here’s an excerpt from the link I posted above, which is in fact an extract from “Warplanes of the Third Reich, William Green, Doubleday, 1970”

[quote] Messerschmitt’s proposal for a shipboard fighter was designated Bf 109T (T for “Trager”). It was basically a Bf 109E-1 with a larger wing, an attachment point for catapult points underneath the fuselage, and an arrester hook underneath the aft fuselage. A breakpoint was incorporated in the wing spar outboard of the gun bays to permit manual folding of the wings. However, the wing folding process was complicated by the need to detach the flaps prior to folding. The landing gear still retracted outwards, but the undercarriage legs were made stronger in order to accommodate the faster sink rates involved in carrier landings …

When the war in Europe began, the Graf Zeppelin was about 85 percent complete, and most of her machinery had been installed. However, work on the Graf Zeppelin was suspended in October 1939 due to a change in German naval thinking. It was deemed that the operation of a single aircraft carrier within range of enemy land bases was impractical, and all work on the Graf Zeppelin was halted in May of 1940. Assembly of the 60 Bf 109T-1 fighters was also halted at the same time.

However …, the successes of British carrier-based aircraft against the Italian Navy late in 1940 [another interesting story ~ is there a thread?] rekindled German interest in ships of this type, and the Fieseler Werke was instructed to complete the 60 Bf 109T-1s then under construction but to remove the naval equipment and deliver them as land-based fighter bombers suitable for operation from short strips. [unquote]

😮 So I was right after all?

Good thing I didn’t burn those books then! 😉

The Bf109T that were built had NO folding wings.

Source: Die Deutsche Luftfahrt, Band 17, Willy Messerschmidt, Bernd & Graefe Verlag (That series is the definitive guide about the German Aerospace History.)

Hello Friends…

I have the book “Messerschmitt Bf 109T – Die Jäger der >Graf Zeppelin<” from Francis L. Marshall. Its the german book, so far i know there is also an english version that was published before the german version.

OK, Francis wrote that the Bf 109 T got NO FOLDING WINGS! The place (lifts & hangars) on the carrier was constructed for the long wings of the Bf 109 T.

So please tell us original sources, when you write the Bf 109 T has got folding wings.

Greetings from Germany/Berlin
Falcon

Perhaps you can make a posting at the luftwaffe bullet board, www.luftarchiv.de

Mathieu

google

http://www.fact-index.com/g/ge/german_aircraft_carrier_graf_zeppelin.html

Anyone know why the first carrier was to be called Graf Zeppelin? Was it an historical thing, since the contemporary Zeppelin was a known anti-Nazi… – Nermal

Anyone know why the first carrier was to be called Graf Zeppelin? Was it an historical thing, since the contemporary Zeppelin was a known anti-Nazi… – Nermal

Anyone know why the first carrier was to be called Graf Zeppelin? Was it an historical thing, since the contemporary Zeppelin was a known anti-Nazi… – Nermal

The Midland Counties publications advert in the current FlyPast (P34/35) in the second column of ‘new titles’ lists ‘Messerschmitt Bf109T – profiles in Norway 3’ at £11.95.

Geoff.

Found this googling around

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/

click on “German Carrier-Based Aircraft”

Fills in details around what’s been said above.

Damn and buggeration!

http://www.battleofbritain.net/0013.html

Bottom of the page.

Dammit, my information was complete and utter sh!te! 😡

What I could find on the Bf109T didn’t say anything about wing-folding at all! 😡

I’m going home to burn my books! 😉

With Geoff’s information it seems likely that the wings folded just outside the landing gear, probably folded backwards to lay flush with the fuselage. Just a guess though :p

I agree – there had to be wing folding otherwise the Bf109Ts would be left on deck!
The Graf Zeppelin had three centre-line aircraft lifts on its near full length flight deck. All aircraft had to be hangered so that the carrier could operate in the Atlantic, so folding wings for all the aircraft was required.
Apparently the Fi167 was not required by 1939, the proposed Ju87C taking over the torpedo attack role, with the carrier supposedly being modified to carry 30 fighters and 12 torpedo/dive bombers.
The Graf Zeppelin, the Peter Strasser, and the Seydlitz were (respectively) scuttled, scrapped on the slip, and scuttled before completion.

Flood.™

Dont know if this helps at all?

T-1 – wing span: 36,35 ft (11,08 m) with unfolded wings 6,96 ft (2,12 m) broad with folded wings

Geoff.

[QUOTE=DazDaMan]The Bf109T’s wing didn’t fold, although the wings were lengthened in order to shorten take-offs and landings.

I don’t know where you get the information that the Me109T’s wing didn’t fold, but all the information I have says it had lengthened wings and that the “outer wing panels” were folding. The information does not specify exactly where the wings folded or how.

Among the users of the 109T were the original Wilde Sau, Hajo Herrman and his staff. In 1943 when they were experimenting with the Wilde Sau tactics they received quite a number of them as they had inferior performance to the G and were there for not wanted by others.