Was wondering how many Reichmarks a Bf109 cost? Per unit from Regensburg? I suppose the Emil was a different price to a Gustav? And how much that would cost in today's currency, say in Euros. Anyone know or have a good idea?

Don't know the cost, but here is a little piece ofinformation:

interview of Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighterpilot, found on http://www.virtualpilots.fi

--------------------

"The 109 had the lowest production cost. Least labour and materials and so on. That is why we got the Messerschmitts. We were hoping to get Focke-Wulfs, because there was the undercarriage problem (of the 109). The F-W undercarriage had been constructed by the designer to be able to take 250 per cent strain. I have seen in Malmi how one (F-W) landed, veering to the left. It was wintertime, the runway was ploughed and the snow piled in banks on both sides of the runway which was clear from snow. The snow bank had become more than a meter high, the F-W went through the snow. She went right through the snow on the other side. The pilot just applied some power, turned and came right back through the snow. "

Yup. Cheap. Very cheap. And easier to produce than the He 112. (Less complex surfaces). And it was kept to stay so. I read an interwiew with Willy Messerschmitt who stated, that trim on ALL axis could have been fit from D or E-1 on, but it was cancelled due to costs...

Not to forget that Galland had a F-2 with (!) the MG FFMs in the wings, and another one with MG 131 over the motor without the big bubbles/Beulen...

But as the russians prooved over the first year of Barbarossa: Quantity can, at least, stop quality until the day when quality meets quantity, and so a war is won.

Much could have done, but in an ongoing blitzkrieg, expected to end soon, circumstances are always a bit different
Imagine selection of FW-187 instead of Me 110 in long-range fighter role...
Imagine He 280 serial production in late 1943...
Imagine Me163 with sufficiant fuel supply and working Jagdfaust over the Ploesti oilfields...

And so on.

Speculating over costs is always fascinating. Wasn't the Mustang favoured over the P-38 (to a certain degree) because of lower costs &produciton time per airframe? And guess what: It worked! The Mustang won the war

Yours, Marc-David

Did someone win Lotto? ...i will take a Tempest please..or a Seafury.

cheers

Imagine the Finns having 190s... They ran up high enough scores with their 109s.

Prices for un-motorized 109E.
1938
Bf 109E : 101600 RM
1939
Bf 109E : 73900 RM
1941
Bf 109E : 58000 RM

Economies of scale. Another good reason for sticking with a proven design.

They used to reckon on a round £5000 for a Spitfire when they were running the Spitfire Fund. That would get a presentation one with an inscription like that Mark II "Borough of Lambeth".

1941, Bf 109E : 58000 RM - is it possible to convert that into today's Euros I wonder?

It may not be possible to adjust to todays prices. Remember in war materials, prices, labour were all controlled, rationed. Much like the old Soviet Union, where often the true cost of production was understated. As opposed to the nominal cost.