# Which double-engined aircraft of WWII, with piston engines was the fastest one?



## Krewetki (Dec 17, 2011)

Hello,

I think that title says it all, but to be perfectly clear, can You tell me one with documented top speed?


Thanks


----------



## krieghund (Dec 17, 2011)

Well
here's my list

Do335A-0 477 mph @ 21000ft
DH Hornet 472 @ 22000ft
F7F-3 435 @ 22200ft
Ki-83 435 @ 32000ft
F-15A 440 @ 33000ft


----------



## Krewetki (Dec 17, 2011)

Thanks krieghund.
I think it's all. 
Thread can be closed now.


----------



## cherry blossom (Dec 19, 2011)

This is a strange place for this thread and perhaps it should be moved. However, if we are sticking to aircraft that did not see combat in WW2, we should add the North American Twin Mustang which has a speed of 482 mph at 21000 ft. for a later version according to Wikipedia. I don't know a speed for 1945 but it must be close to the Hornet and the Do 335. The Lockheed P-38L Lightning was probably the fastest twin that saw combat.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 19, 2011)

Moved -_ "Which *double-engined *aircraft of WWII, with piston engines was the fastest one"_Correct term is "Twin Engine"


----------



## Siegfried (Dec 20, 2011)

krieghund said:


> Well
> here's my list
> 
> Do335A-0 477 mph @ 21000ft
> ...



Several things to note about the Do 335A tested speed of 477mph. This was with the 
DB603E engine. This was an 87 octane engine with a single stage variable speed 
supercharger. Equiped with the DB603LA engine the speed was 495mph, original
Dornier charts of alt versus speed are around. The DB603LA engine was in service
with the 4 x Ta 152C delivered to the Luftwaffe, so it existed. There are also
original Dornier charts out.

See link for chart
Do335 Flugleistungen of data.








See here (from Rudiger Kosins "The German Fighter", Kosin was the Ar 234 designer)

There was also the DB603N which was capable of around 2800hp using C3 fuel. 
This engine should have pushed the Do 335 over into the 500mph territory I'd say 515 or so.

This was going to be a potent aircraft able to mix it with the jets till mid 1946

The Do 335 had a bomb bay, so this was the kind of penetration speed achievable.

I expect bomb aiming would be by the TSA-2D toss bombing sight or via electronic
guidance: the Oboe like EG-ON-II which used a boosted a pair of Freya radar IFF (FuG 25a) 
or the new FuG 226 Neuling IFF which could function as a blind bombing system from the
begining and was begining to replace the FuG 25a IFF.

In noting the speeds of aircraft consider that the Do 335 with a single stage
supercharger may be just as fast at low and medium altitudes as one with a
single stage supercharger. GM1's runs were made as well. 

As far as the P-51H goes; The famous 487mph was an engineering estimate. Fastest it
flew was 475mph, this being with 100/150 octane and ADI (water injection).
The British fitted some Mustang III with Merlin 100 engines which had two stage
three speed superchargers the same as the P-51H and they achieved about 465-469 mph
essentially the improved aerodynmaics of the P-51H was worth about 10 mph.

Would a P-51H catch a Do 335? In general, no, though it could be possible with height advantage 
or in the case of being caught unawares essentially the the Do 335 was equally fast and in 
the planed for Do 335 (DB603L) and DB603N versions significantly faster.


----------



## davparlr (Dec 20, 2011)

Siegfried said:


> Would a P-51H catch a Do 335? In general, no, though it could be possible with height advantage
> or in the case of being caught unawares essentially the the Do 335 was equally fast and in
> the planed for Do 335 (DB603L) and DB603N versions significantly faster.


An obsolete dinosaur by the time it was flying. As heavy as a B-25, its performance had already been eclipsed a year before by the 4000 lb lighter XP-72, cancelled because the Allies had the war won and was moving on to jets.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 20, 2011)

Siegfried said:


> Would a P-51H catch a Do 335? In general, no, though it could be possible with height advantage
> or in the case of being caught unawares essentially the the Do 335 was equally fast and in
> the planed for Do 335 (DB603L) and DB603N versions significantly faster.



As long as the rear engine kept working since it tended to overheat.


----------



## Siegfried (Dec 21, 2011)

davparlr said:


> An obsolete dinosaur by the time it was flying. As heavy as a B-25, its performance had already been eclipsed a year before by the 4000 lb lighter XP-72, cancelled because the Allies had the war won and was moving on to jets.



So what was the fastest speed a XP-72 flew in actual flight: straight and level. I believe it never hit more than 480mph. The elaborate turbo-compound system was never developed. What bomb bay size did the XP-72 have?

XP-72 and P-51H are mainly 'brochure talk' though obviously fast. The 550mph claimed speed is unbelievable.

Jumo 222E/F a massive 2900 hp engine with a two stage supercharger was also slated for the Do 335, that engine was actually ready and ordered into production after protracted development.


----------



## Juha (Dec 21, 2011)

Hello Siegfried
the highest flown speed for Do 335 in the graph you posted is 750km/h (466mph), so if we are comparing flown speed that was the speed of Do 335 up to Dec 44, Hornet proto first flew Jul 44 and achieved 485mph (780km/h) in the end, cannot remember when.

Juha


----------



## jim (Dec 21, 2011)

Juha said:


> Hello Siegfried
> the highest flown speed for Do 335 in the graph you posted is 750km/h (466mph), so if we are comparing flown speed that was the speed of Do 335 up to Dec 44, Hornet proto first flew Jul 44 and achieved 485mph (780km/h) in the end, cannot remember when.
> 
> Juha


 
The (beautiful) Hornet was around 460mph in operational form. Additionaly had zero limits for added horspower as the Merlins 130 were at the limit of their development and specially designed for the aircraft. Do 335 had greater potential not only from engines point of view but from its shape as well.And the internal bomb bay is huge advantage. I like very very much both of these planes.
However my latest passion in WW2 aircrafts is KI83. It appears that in american tests approached 462mph. It was equally beautiful with the Hornet. It was much much simpler than Do 335 , of conventional structure unlike Hornet,yet it managed similar performance. And it did it on radial engines! Built in Germany and equiped with Jumo 222 E/F it would be a monster ! Even with Db 603EM or Jumo 213E-1 would be top in speed.Yet it had ,in standart version room ,for second crewman without additional drug. So NF and bad weather mission convertions very easy. And of excellent agility like most japan aircrafts. In short excellent performance by a relatively simple aircraft.


----------



## Juha (Dec 21, 2011)

Hello Jim
I agree with most. yes production Hornet was slower than the proto, but are we sure that fully combat ready Do 335 would have been as fast as the plane which achieved the highest speed in the test phase. IMHO probably not. And what was DB 603 A5? I must admit that I don't recall coming across it earlier. Even DB 603E engined plane was a bit slower, achieving something like 742-45km/h max speed. On development potential, now jet age was dawning, dH had Vampire on pipeline and one must remember that the captured 335s were problem children, plane was clearly not ready and full of system problems from landing gear onwards, so not near to effective combat use.
I also like Ki-83, also Hornet but I think that 335 was only very interesting construction, Ta 152C was more to my taste for a country which had limited fuel supplies. I tended to saw 335 as potentially effective night fighter.

Juha


----------



## tomo pauk (Dec 21, 2011)

Too bad for Germans they didn't produce it much earlier (but in a smaller shape, tailored for DB-601/605 and/or Jumo 211 - Davebender was posting something along these lines before), when another engine in a single-hull layout was still offering some benefits. Like for BoB or for jobs in MTO in Russia (possible pros: speed, armament - even if that's 8 LMGs initially, range probably).
A bomber destroyer of better performance armament than both Fw-190 and Me-410 for 1943-44?


----------



## Siegfried (Dec 21, 2011)

Juha said:


> Hello Siegfried
> the highest flown speed for Do 335 in the graph you posted is 750km/h (466mph), so if we are comparing flown speed that was the speed of Do 335 up to Dec 44, Hornet proto first flew Jul 44 and achieved 485mph (780km/h) in the end, cannot remember when.
> 
> Juha



The speed of 474 mph is assciated with the *production* Do 335A-1 (using MW50 boosted DB603E-1 engines) not shown in this early chart for A-0 aircraft. The speed was 474 mph at 21,325 ft with MW 50 boost. The do 335 consistantly exceded expectations.

As I pointed out, put in the Ta 152C DB603LA engine and speed is likely to be 495mph, perhaps more since boost levels went up after this chart was made.

Do 335B number 9-8604-B-1 did receive the DB605LA engine.

The Hornet prototype RR 915 first flew on 28 July 1944 with Geoffrey de Havilland Jr. at the controls. Powered by twin Merlin engines, it was the fastest piston-engined fighter in Royal Air Force service. The Hornet also has the distinction of being the fastest wooden aircraft ever built and the second fastest operational twin propeller-driven aircraft — being slightly slower than the unconventional German Dornier Do 335 of 1945.
The prototype achieved 485 mph (780 km/h) in level flight, which came down to 472 mph (760 km/h) in production aircraft.

The first 10 Do 335 A-0s were delivered for testing in May. By late 1944, the Do 335 A-1 was on the production line. This was similar to the A-0 but with the uprated DB 603 E-1 engines and two underwing hardpoints for additional bombs, drop tanks or guns. It was capable of a maximum speed of 763 km/h (474 mph) at 6,500 m (21,300 ft) with MW 50 boost, or 686 km/h (426 mph) without boost, and able to climb to 8,000 m (26,250 ft) in under 15 minutes. Even with one engine out, it could reach about 563 km/h (350 mph).


----------



## Crimea_River (Dec 22, 2011)

"The DB603LA engine was in service with the 4 x Ta 152C delivered to the Luftwaffe, so it existed."

There were 4? Thought there were 2.


----------



## Milosh (Dec 22, 2011)

The 1st pre-production machine, the Do335A-0, WNr 240101, VG+PG made its 1st flight on Sept 30 1944.


----------



## Juha (Dec 22, 2011)

Thanks Siegfried
But 335 definitely didn't "consistantly exceded expectations." E-Kdo 335 report clearly stated that their Do 335s were slower than what had been claimed by Dornier and predicted that fully service equipped production planes might well be up to 20km/h slower still.


Juha


----------



## Siegfried (Dec 27, 2011)

Juha said:


> Thanks Siegfried
> But 335 definitely didn't "consistantly exceded expectations." E-Kdo 335 report clearly stated that their Do 335s were slower than what had been claimed by Dornier and predicted that fully service equipped production planes might well be up to 20km/h slower still.
> Juha



Source? The use of two additional wing guns would've cost speed, but this is hardly neccessary given the high fire power of the 2 x MG 151 and 1 x MK 103 (30mm) gun.


----------



## GregP (Dec 27, 2011)

My database says the fastest piston twins were as follows:

1. Dornier Do.335 at 474 mph
2. de Havilland D.H. 103 Sea Hornet at 472 mph
3. Arado Ae.240 C at 454 mph
4. Mitsubishi Ki-83 at 438 mph
5. Grumman F7F Tigercat at 435 mph

The fastest piston twin was supposed to the Bugatti R-100 Speed Record plane at 500 mph, but its speed was never proven in actual flight ...


----------



## spicmart (Dec 30, 2011)

What do you guys think about a potential Fw 187 with Jumo 213E/J/S? I guess it would be in the same class as the DH Hornet. In its original Form it had as slim a fuselage and engine nacelles as the Hornet.


----------



## jim (Dec 31, 2011)

spicmart said:


> What do you guys think about a potential Fw 187 with Jumo 213E/J/S? I guess it would be in the same class as the DH Hornet. In its original Form it had as slim a fuselage and engine nacelles as the Hornet.


 
Fw 187 even with Db 605Db/Dcwould be in that class . Jumo 213 A&E would add much weight without big hp advantagr ( E of course would offer 2 stage supercharger) 213J would create a 5000hp monster but this engine was expected at summer 45 the earlierst
Fw 187 seemed to offer great performance with ordinaru methods (like Ki 83)


----------



## Timppa (Dec 31, 2011)

GregP said:


> My database says the fastest piston twins were as follows:
> 
> 1. Dornier Do.335 at 474 mph
> 2. de Havilland D.H. 103 Sea Hornet at 472 mph
> ...



All of these belong to prototype/did not see action -category.

The fastest twin engined plane that did see action in WW2  was probably the Mosquito PR Mk. 34.
With Merlin 77, 422 mph.
With Merlin 113, 432 mph.


----------



## Vincenzo (Dec 31, 2011)

Timppa said:


> All of these belong to prototype/did not see action -category.
> 
> The fastest twin engined plane that did see action in WW2  was probably the Mosquito PR Mk. 34.
> With Merlin 77, 422 mph.
> With Merlin 113, 432 mph.



i'm not sure that pr mk 34 did see action in WW2, EDIT i just found a detachment started recce mission from july '45
the engines were not 113 or 114?


----------



## GregP (Dec 31, 2011)

The thread originator did not mention production or action in the title to the thread. He asked which double-engined airplane of WWII was the fastest.

I like my answer and yes, the list would be different if asked for a mass-produced WWII aircraft, but prototypes were made and flowm and documented, so thety count in my book. They added no combat effectiveness, but are interesting in their own right.


----------



## Siegfried (Jan 1, 2012)

spicmart said:


> What do you guys think about a potential Fw 187 with Jumo 213E/J/S? I guess it would be in the same class as the DH Hornet. In its original Form it had as slim a fuselage and engine nacelles as the Hornet.



I think the FW 187 with DB605 or with Jumo 211J or P would have been good enough, especially as the DB605 soon reached 1700, 1850 and even 2000hp. It would have bypassed much of the effort dedicated too and ulimatly wasted on the Ta 154.
Up untill about October 1943 or so the Jumo 211J was more powerfull than the equally heavy DB605A at low altitude.

Ta 154, really just a slightly improved wooden version of the FW 187 could take the Jumo 213 and BMW 801 as well as Jumo 211.


----------



## Siegfried (Jan 1, 2012)

Timppa said:


> All of these belong to prototype/did not see action -category.
> 
> The fastest twin engined plane that did see action in WW2  was probably the Mosquito PR Mk. 34.
> With Merlin 77, 422 mph.
> With Merlin 113, 432 mph.



Ar 240 did fly a few reconaisance missions over the UK, Siegfried Kneymeyer was the pilot of some.


----------



## iron man (Jan 1, 2012)

Siegfried said:


> I* think the FW 187 with DB605 or with Jumo 211J or P would have been good enough, *especially as the DB605 soon reached 1700, 1850 and even 2000hp. It would have bypassed much of the effort dedicated too and ulimatly wasted on the Ta 154.
> Up untill about October 1943 or so the Jumo 211J was more powerfull than the equally heavy DB605A at low altitude.
> 
> Ta 154, really just a slightly improved wooden version of the FW 187 could take the Jumo 213 and BMW 801 as well as Jumo 211.


 
I would agree here. Power to spare and would have been fairly easy to put into production as a bomber-killer, even late in the game. 

Question about the _"Falke"_ though...How well did the proven (i.e. initial) design perform (_aerodynamically_) at altitude; i.e. 7-8km? This has always been something I wondered about and I've found little documentation on the matter (not that I've really searched _that _hard).

To carry a little further along the same train of thought...I can't understand why there was no effort put into a _severely_ "stripped-down" Me 410 (i.e single seater, bombing and defensive gear/gunner removed, battery of nose cannon [4 x Mk108 a la Me 262] and an "armoured bathtub", proof to .50 HMG) as a high speed/armoured bomber destroyer? Were there aerodynamic/performance issues (at altitude) in this case? One would think that this would be an even more expedient route to achieving the same ends, as opposed to reviving the Fw 187 design...perhaps some weight and balance issues (from removing the barbettes at the rear)? The moment arm is still not that far relative to the C of G so I don't see it presenting a huge problem. A few kilos of ballast (at a greatly increased moment arm) should surely address a minor issue like this this. 

Surely _someone _must have thought of/proposed this?

I realize that all bets are off once the P-51 is present in numbers, but performance (i.e. _survivability_) would certainly have been better than that of the modified 190A's, historically employed. I fully recognize the fact that such a platform (Me 410) imposes a much greater burden upon already strained resources. 

Comments? Anyone?

Ron


----------



## chris mcmillin (Jan 1, 2012)

GregP said:


> My database says the fastest piston twins were as follows:
> 
> 1. Dornier Do.335 at 474 mph
> 2. de Havilland D.H. 103 Sea Hornet at 472 mph
> ...




I think that this is a fantasy of misquoted figures through the years. I think the airplane was supposed to go about 310 to 330 mph. That's about 500 kph.
Chris...


----------



## wuzak (Jan 1, 2012)

Timppa said:


> All of these belong to prototype/did not see action -category.
> 
> The fastest twin engined plane that did see action in WW2  was probably the Mosquito PR Mk. 34.
> With Merlin 77, 422 mph.
> With Merlin 113, 432 mph.



To be fair, the Hornet prototype achieved 490mph+, the F1 472mph. But the Hornet did not see service in WW2. The Sea Hornet was definitely post war, and had lower performance than the land plan Hornet.

The fastest Mosquito was the prototype, W4050, when fitted with two stage Merlins (61s). It achieved 437mph in '42.


----------



## wuzak (Jan 1, 2012)

Vincenzo said:


> i'm not sure that pr mk 34 did see action in WW2, EDIT i just found a detachment started recce mission from july '45
> the engines were not 113 or 114?



It probably used both.

The B.XVI and PR.XVIs used both a Merlin 76 and a Merlin 77 - the difference being that one of them was equipped with a cabin presurisation blower. Can't recall which was what.

So I figure it would be the same deal with the 113/114 for the PR34.


----------



## wuzak (Jan 1, 2012)

Siegfried said:


> I think the FW 187 with DB605 or with Jumo 211J or P would have been good enough, especially as the DB605 soon reached 1700, 1850 and even 2000hp. It would have bypassed much of the effort dedicated too and ulimatly wasted on the Ta 154.
> Up untill about October 1943 or so the Jumo 211J was more powerfull than the equally heavy DB605A at low altitude.
> 
> Ta 154, really just a slightly improved wooden version of the FW 187 could take the Jumo 213 and BMW 801 as well as Jumo 211.



The Ta 154 was a night fighter, something that would have been difficult with the tiny fuselage on the Fw 187.


----------



## Siegfried (Jan 2, 2012)

Juha said:


> Thanks Siegfried
> But 335 definitely didn't "consistantly exceded expectations." E-Kdo 335 report clearly stated that their Do 335s were slower than what had been claimed by Dornier and predicted that fully service equipped production planes might well be up to 20km/h slower still.
> 
> 
> Juha



From what I've read service versions of the DH Hornet were also only good for around 460mph.


----------



## Siegfried (Jan 2, 2012)

wuzak said:


> The Ta 154 was a night fighter, something that would have been difficult with the tiny fuselage on the Fw 187.



The Germans did experiment with single engined FW 190 and Me 109 equiped with Neptune radars. They found that after staring into the osciliscope that the pilot lost his night vision. FW 187 was built as a two seater and thus could have provided for the all importan radar opperator and navigator. While it would have lost performance and perhaps and lacked the space for a full electronic fitout it was certainly better than a single engined aircraft. More important it might have been fast enought to catch a mosquito.


----------



## wuzak (Jan 2, 2012)

Siegfried said:


> The Germans did experiment with single engined FW 190 and Me 109 equiped with Neptune radars. They found that after staring into the osciliscope that the pilot lost his night vision. FW 187 was built as a two seater and thus could have provided for the all importan radar opperator and navigator. While it would have lost performance and perhaps and lacked the space for a full electronic fitout it was certainly better than a single engined aircraft. More important it might have been fast enought to catch a mosquito.



IIRC, there were two seat (trainer) versions of both the Fw 190 and the Bf 109.

The prototype V1 Fw 187 was a single seater, as was V2. V3-V6 were all 2 seaters, and formed the basis for the Fw 187A-0, the pre production prototype.

Yes, an Fw187A with DB605 engines may have been able to catch a Mosquito. The closing speed would be marginal for later two stage types, but better on the single stage Mossies. However, add the antenna array common with German nightfighters with their extra drag, weigh it down with extra equipment and the intercept becomes much more difficult. 

Of course if Fw187 interceptions of Mossie bombers do become a problem the RAF can use PN150 fuel and up the boost pressure from +18psi to +25ps, for an additional 20 or 30mph.


----------



## pinsog (Jan 2, 2012)

I'm a bit suprised that the P38 hasn't even been mentioned here. The official top speed I have always seen quoted is 414 mph, but many claim it was much faster than that. And of course, the P38K prototype which was stupidly never produced.


----------



## wmaxt (Aug 4, 2012)

The P-38 was mentioned earlier. Lockheed reportedly had P-38L versions in the 440 range however that was with 150 fuel and more that 60in MAP conditions the AAF didn't test for. In combat pilots often pushed the throttles "Through the Gate"( one pilot of a P-38H noted he hit 86"MAP it must have been scooting along!), but were to busy to note speed. Also at 30,000ft 440 is getting near the speed the P-38 gets into compressibility, and drag really climbs as an aircraft nears compressability, so it couldn't go that fast in that flight regime 
At 60" MAP the fastest P-38 was the P-38J-1 through J10 at 421mph.

Some of these other aircraft mentioned in this thread were faster than that - though they may not have been in as much combat or made as much of an impact.

Bill


----------



## drgondog (Aug 4, 2012)

wmaxt said:


> The P-38 was mentioned earlier. Lockheed reportedly had P-38L versions in the 440 range however that was with 150 fuel and more that 60in MAP conditions the AAF didn't test for. In combat pilots often pushed the throttles "Through the Gate"( one pilot of a P-38H noted he hit 86"MAP it must have been scooting along!), but were to busy to note speed. Also at 30,000ft 440 is getting near the speed the P-38 gets into compressibility, and drag really climbs as an aircraft nears compressability, so it couldn't go that fast in that flight regime
> At 60" MAP the fastest P-38 was the P-38J-1 through J10 at 421mph.
> 
> Some of these other aircraft mentioned in this thread were faster than that - though they may not have been in as much combat or made as much of an impact.
> ...



IF the P-38L made 440mph at 30,000 feet it would at .648M and be deep into Drag Divergence issues just before transonic shock wave inititiation. This is one of the reasons the P38 never won during the Bendix races Post WWII...the last time I dabbled with the drag numbers it looked like the 38 needed nearly 4000 hp to muscle through 430mph at .65


----------



## iron man (Aug 4, 2012)

iron man said:


> I would agree here. Power to spare and would have been fairly easy to put into production as a bomber-killer, even late in the game.
> 
> Question about the _"Falke"_ though...How well did the proven (i.e. initial) design perform (_aerodynamically_) at altitude; i.e. 7-8km? This has always been something I wondered about and I've found little documentation on the matter (not that I've really searched _that _hard).
> 
> ...


Quoted to bump.

Anyone?


----------



## R Pope (Aug 5, 2012)

Clostermann in "The Big Show" recounts an encounter with a Do335 while flying his Tempest. Diving at "almost 500 MPH" he could only watch as the Jerrie flew away untouched. I read a story by a Dornier test pilot about what is likely the same encounter where the pilot claimed similar speed in his escape. He was in an unarmed prototype, so the top speed may have been more than an operational fighter could have achieved.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 5, 2012)

iron man said:


> I would agree here. Power to spare and would have been fairly easy to put into production as a bomber-killer, even late in the game.
> 
> Question about the _"Falke"_ though...How well did the proven (i.e. initial) design perform (_aerodynamically_) at altitude; i.e. 7-8km? This has always been something I wondered about and I've found little documentation on the matter (not that I've really searched _that _hard).
> 
> ...





iron man said:


> Quoted to bump.
> 
> Anyone?



I'll bite - your concept is sound, I can only guess production and operational costs (a twin vs. a single engine aircraft) and possible C/G issues based on the C/G vs. MAC would prohibit this. Without computing the actual weight and balance it's hard to determine how this aircraft will perform during all flight regimes.


----------



## wmaxt (Aug 5, 2012)

Dragndog,

If you look at my post you will notice that I specifically said that drag would be to high for the P-38 to go that fast at 30,000ft.

The 440mph was realized between 20,000ft and 23,000 which would be possible for the P-38.

I have only Lockheed data on this speed and though this data was only revealed in the 1980's, never used as a sales tool and Lockheed data has proven reliable and accurate over the years I have never found corroborating data from a second source to confirm it.

The fact romaines that there were faster twin engine fighters in WW2 primarily the Hornet which I think was capable of speeds slightly over 450mph.

Bill


----------



## Vincenzo (Aug 5, 2012)

DH Hornet as WW II fighter... i think we can account it as prototype not as fighter


----------



## iron man (Aug 5, 2012)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I'll bite - your concept is sound, I can only guess production and operational costs (a twin vs. a single engine aircraft) and possible C/G issues based on the C/G vs. MAC would prohibit this. Without computing the actual weight and balance it's hard to determine how this aircraft will perform during all flight regimes.



It's an interesting idea (for the immediate needs of the Jagdwaffe) and I'd really like to find someone who has any evidence that such a proposal was considered...a missed opportunity on the part of the RLM if it wasn't studied. Even with a reduced battery of 4 x 151/20's (firing "M" shells) it's altitude performance might well have been a better option than the overloaded 190's historically employed. Sucks up a lot of the DB 605 production though. Hang two Jumo 213's on those wings in 1943, and it's a whole different matter.

But this won't happen until the "emergency fighter programme" makes productive effort at Jumo available to the needs of the Jagdwaffe.
And the beat goes on...La-de-dah-de-de...La-de-dah-de-dah.

Thanks for commenting!


----------



## drgondog (Aug 6, 2012)

R Pope said:


> Clostermann in "The Big Show" recounts an encounter with a Do335 while flying his Tempest. Diving at "almost 500 MPH" he could only watch as the Jerrie flew away untouched. I read a story by a Dornier test pilot about what is likely the same encounter where the pilot claimed similar speed in his escape. He was in an unarmed prototype, so the top speed may have been more than an operational fighter could have achieved.



357FS/355FG Randolph Cooper scored heavily on a Do 335 south of Magdeburg before it slipped into cloud cover 4-04-45.


----------



## drgondog (Aug 6, 2012)

wmaxt said:


> Dragndog,
> 
> If you look at my post you will notice that I specifically said that drag would be to high for the P-38 to go that fast at 30,000ft.
> 
> ...



Agreed, although I suspect the F7F was also faster..and the Do 335 was certainly faster.


----------



## krieghund (Aug 6, 2012)

Here's a better scan of the Do-335 speeds,


----------



## GregP (Aug 11, 2012)

It doesn't matter what 2 or 4 prototypes did in the speed department. It only matters if the prototypes went into production and had an impact on the war. The entire Ta-152 program was nothing. They only delivered less than 50, so who cares? They did NOTHING.

Though I am from the U.S.A., the P-51H doesn't matter either since, though it entered the war, it didn't see combat. If we allow protypes, I like the P-51J at 487 mph .... but it was PROTOTYPE, not a war machine. Again, it doesn't matter as it had no war impact.

From my perspective, admittedly probably not yours, confine you inquireies to types that had at least 300 - 500 produced and DEPLOYED, and you might have something to talk about. The rest were pipe dreams that never saw fruition. Nobody much cares about what the prototypes promised except maybe me (I love obscure aircraft), they care about what actually happened. Of the production AND non-production prototype fighters, I believe the fastest were, in order:

1. Suklhoi Su-5 at 503.4 mph
2. Republic XP-72 at 502.8 mph
3. North American P-51H at 487 mph
4. Supermarine Spiteful at 482.9 mph
5. Supermarine Seafang at 474.8 mph

The real Dornier Do-335 went 474.8 mph tops and was never delivered with souped-up engines, so it never went 490+ mph, even in prototype form, except in a dive. The Sea Hornet 472.3 mph in real life. The real Ta-152H-1 went 472 mph.

If we limit ourselves to PRODUCTION aircraft, the list gets much slower. I don't consider 43 aircraft production, so the Ta-152's are out. The Su-5 is out, the XP-72 is out; the Spiteful is out, and the Seafang is out. The P-51H is IN since they made 555, but NOT in WWII, so it's out, too. The F4U-5 was fast, but was not a WWII bird, so it doesn't count either.

That leaves the Republic P-47N at 466.7 mph as the fastest OPERATIONAL fighter of the war, if we ignore the hype of "what ifs" and "might have beens."

People claim all sorts of things, but the REAL fighters were NEVER faster than the P-47N when it was at it's best altitude.

Of course, if we look at the speed versus altitude charts, we can find SOME altitude where fighter "X" was faster than fighter "Y," but the top speed is what we are looking at in here .... I assume, and the speed versus altitude charts don't exist for most prototypes.

So, please get away from the prototypes and look at planes that were operational with regular units in numbers of more than a few hundred and you may find what you seek. Prototypes only flew fast with factory or military test pilots at the controls, and usually with special souped-up engines and special surface preparation. They were waxed and prepared, not operational fighters that sat out in the elements for several month or years. If you want fast REAL fighters, look to the P-47N and you HAVE it.

No operational Luftwaffe plane was faster, but they WERE very close. If we ignore anything less than, say, 5 mph, we have a group that was about equal.

1. P-47N at 466.7 mph
2. Hawkewr Sea Fury at 459.9 mph (not sure if it qualifies as a WWII aircraft)
3. Grumman F8F-2 Bearcat at 455 mph (not sure if it qualifies as a WWII aircraft)
4. Chance-Vought F4U-4 Corsair at 446.2 mph (definitely qualifies)
5. Messerschmitt Me 109K at 442 or 443 mph or so
6. Hawker Tempest V at 441.2 mph (definitely qualifies)
7. Fw 190D at 438 mph

The first German plane I find, excluding jets with more than 200+ made and also fast was the Me 109K at 442 or 443 mph or so. If you want to argue speeds, please have original sources, and show that more than 250 were made and DEPLOYED for WWII wartime operations.

No jets, we're talking pistons here.


----------



## cimmex (Aug 11, 2012)

Wasn’t the question “Which double-engined aircraft of WWII, with piston engines was the fastest one?” 
Cimmex


----------



## DonL (Aug 11, 2012)

To say the TA 152H was a prototype a/c is historical wrong!

It went in mass production and has left the prototype status. The course of war avoided a proper production but not the stage of development of the a/c. It is totaly unimportant how many were produced or the impact on the war, it is important which status of development was reached and the TA 152H was clearly a lot ahead of it's development status to be called prototype! It was a fully developed fighter a/c which went in mass production. That's the historical facts!


----------



## drgondog (Aug 11, 2012)

Greg - NAA stopped production of the P-51H in October, 1945. Approximately 300 were produced before end of WWII.


----------



## Vincenzo (Aug 11, 2012)

Su-5 was a mixed propulsion so if jet are not admit neither the Su-5 (and afaik the speed was 793 km/h)
for the XP-72 i've read somewhere that never go over 500 mph
for the P-51H 487 mph is a estimated speed, probably true speed is around 470 mph
Seafang first flew is in june '46
Sea fury were prototypes at WWII end
The variant deployed, but not combat, in WWII was F8F-1


----------



## wuzak (Aug 11, 2012)

Hey Greg, what's with the decimal point in speeds? Just a conversion legacy?



GregP said:


> Of the production AND non-production prototype fighters, I believe the fastest were, in order:
> 
> 1. Suklhoi Su-5 at 503.4 mph
> 2. Republic XP-72 at 502.8 mph
> ...



I assume that the Spiteful speed was meant to be 483mph. That was actually for the production version, though not many were made. I believe the prototype, which flew during the war, went 494mph.

The de Havilland Hornet prototype managed 491mph, also during the war. However, production versions were down to 472mph, and Sea Hornets less. And they were all very much post war.

One of the Hawker Fury prototypes was fitted with a Napier Sabre VII and annular radiator and managed 485mph. That may have been post war, though. As was the annular radiator conversion of a Tempest V, which did 465mph. The Tempest I flew in 1943 and managed 466mph.




GregP said:


> So, please get away from the prototypes and look at planes that were operational with regular units in numbers of more than a few hundred and you may find what you seek. Prototypes only flew fast with factory or military test pilots at the controls, and usually with special souped-up engines and special surface preparation. They were waxed and prepared, not operational fighters that sat out in the elements for several month or years. If you want fast REAL fighters, look to the P-47N and you HAVE it.
> 
> No operational Luftwaffe plane was faster, but they WERE very close. If we ignore anything less than, say, 5 mph, we have a group that was about equal.
> 
> ...



You may have missed a couple Greg.

The Spitfire XIV was rated at 448mph. The Spitfire 21, which entered service in early 1945, was good for 454mph.

The F8F-2 did not enter service until 1946 or 1947. Teh F8F-1 did enter service just before the end of WW2.


----------



## GregP (Aug 11, 2012)

Hi Wuzak,

Yeah, it is a conversion legacy and should be rounded down to the nearest whole number.

The Ta-152 never made production. They delivered between 43 and 47 aircraft to operational units depending on whom you believe, and there were never more than 25 operational at any one time. At the war's end in Europe, therre were exactly two Ta-152c's operational. That sort of defines a service prototype. Many people claim thay built 150 - 200, but only the 43 - 47 were ever delivered and flew in the war. I don't count non-flying partial airframes as aircraft. An aircraft must be able to fly, not look good on the ground.

I know the SU-5 was a prototype, and was mixed power, and that is why I went away from prototypes and went to production aircraft. The prototypes are interesting but contributed nothing to the war. I believe I said to go with production planes ...

Yup, typo on the Spiteful speed; 483 mph! You might have noticed I am a bit dislexic as a typist ...

I realize the P-51H was built mostly during the war, but never actually saw combat, so I tend to discount it as a "WWII" fighter. The war was years long and a fighter that never fought is hardly representative of a production, deployed fighter aircraft, even if my country made it. It is disingenuous to bring in planes, even production planes, that didn't fight in the war and compare them with the planes that actually fought and made a difference in the war.

As far a a twin goes, I'd nominate the Heinkel He-219 as one of the fastest, certainly faster than rank and file production Mosquitos. There may well have been variants of the reliable Mossie that were faster than the He-219, but the rank anf file Mosquitos were simply not faster. Of course, the He-219 is almost a footnote since it was primarily a night fighter and was never employed in missions similar to the Mosquito in any numbers, but about 283 were produced and that qualifies as production. It was also deployed and fought, though obviously not in any great numbers since there were so few made.

I'd mention the Grumman F7F Tigercat, but that would be disingenuous, too since it didn't see combat in WWII despite being delivered durning the war. It is the Navy twin analogy to the P-51H. Technically it could be said to count as a WWII fighter, but never really fought during the war.

I'm trying to be practical and fair here, and not count low-run planes that didn't really fight in the war. There is no disputing that planes like the Ta-152 were delivered, but they were delivered in numbers so low that they were simply not a factor. You must realize that the Ta-152's only flew until they broke ... tehre was NO pipeline of spare parts and no logistical center for repair. If they broke and could be fixed easily, they were. If not, they were rendered non-operational. That's why only two Ta-152c's were left operational at the war's conclusion in Europe ... no spare parts from which to draw.

There is NOTHING wrong with the Ta-152 other than normal prototype teething problems; I really like it. But it wasn't a production aircraft to me and didn't make much of a contribution to the war. In WWII, German pilots were awarded 62,218 victory claims. I believe the Ta-152 series accounted for two to seven of these, depending on whom you believe. Let's be fair and put the number right in the middle of the claims, and say it was about 4.5 victories. Like I said, it made no impact and almost no contribution relative to the rest of the German Luftwaffe. So I discount it as a factor even though I personally like the aircraft, especially the H model.


----------



## DonL (Aug 11, 2012)

This is no TA 152 Thread!

All of the TA 152 could be read at Eich's or from Mr. Hartmann's book.

I believe serious researched books more then your personal opinion, also I believe Rechlin tests more then your personal opinion.

Your facts about the TA 152 (speed, kill ratio and production) are wrong, proved from good researched books and original tests.

The TA 152H went in mass production, the TA 152 C never went in mass production. Please read a well researched book instead of posting opinions then facts.


----------



## riacrato (Aug 11, 2012)

GregP, what the hell are you talking about? The Ta 152 H reached frontline units in January 1945. It drew blood and was itself shot down a few times. That makes it an operational aircraft of WWII in any book anyone with a right mind has ever written. Period.



> That's why only two Ta-152c's were left operational at the war's conclusion in Europe ... no spare parts from which to draw.


The Ta 152 C breaking and not being used due to spare parts? There isn't even any conclusive evidence the type ever flew with operational units at all! Are you just making up stuff to support your agenda here?


----------



## DonL (Aug 11, 2012)

> As far a a twin goes, I'd nominate the Heinkel He-219 as one of the fastest, certainly faster than rank and file production Mosquitos. There may well have been variants of the reliable Mossie that were faster than the He-219, but the rank anf file Mosquitos were simply not faster. Of course, the He-219 is almost a footnote since it was primarily a night fighter and was never employed in missions similar to the Mosquito in any numbers, but about 283 were produced and that qualifies as production. It was also deployed and fought, though obviously not in any great numbers since there were so few made.



Here you have forgotten the P38 which was definitely faster especially the later modells.
Also I have my doubts that the He 219 was faster then the Ju 88 G6 or the Me 410, the fastest modells of the He 219 were the He 219 A6, which were a special mini extreme light series to hunt Mosquitos (with average success).This proved that the Moussie was as fast or faster.
The He 219 A6 was rated between 640-650km/h, Eric Brown clocked something about 640km/h with a Ju 88G6 (Jumo 213A with MW50).

Personally I'm not convinced that the He 219 played in the same league as the Ju 88 G and the Mosquitos, because at the end of the war the Ju 88 showed much more development potential. The Ju 88 G7 with the Jumo 213 E (same as in the Tank 152H) was at this time better and more reliable then the DB 603 L/LA. This was also shown by the latest He 219 A7/R5 modell, which were converted to Jumo 213.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2012)

1. Lets keep it civil! 

2. Lets get back on the topic of this thread.

Everyone understand? If not, please let me know so that we can clarify it.


----------



## Denniss (Aug 11, 2012)

DonL said:


> Also I have my doubts that the He 219 was faster then the Ju 88 G6 or the Me 410, the fastest modells of the He 219 were the He 219 A6, which were a special mini extreme light series to hunt Mosquitos (with average success).This proved that the Moussie was as fast or faster.
> The He 219 A6 was rated between 640-650km/h, Eric Brown clocked something about 640km/h with a Ju 88G6 (Jumo 213A with MW50).
> 
> Personally I'm not convinced that the He 219 played in the same league as the Ju 88 G and the Mosquitos, because at the end of the war the Ju 88 showed much more development potential. The Ju 88 G7 with the Jumo 213 E (same as in the Tank 152H) was at this time better and more reliable then the DB 603 L/LA. This was also shown by the latest He 219 A7/R5 modell, which were converted to Jumo 213.


There was no He 219 A-6 built but aircraft may have been stripped at the unit level for the same effect. The He 219 A-7 with DB 603E engine was the fastest He 219. There were five He 219D with Jumo 213 but they never gor their 213E to work properly. BTW there was no Ju 88 G-7 either, there were some Ju 88 G-6 fitted with 213E but this may have been more experimental.


----------



## GregP (Aug 11, 2012)

I thought I'd leave the P-38 to our friend Lightning ... I like it and enjoy it every time ours flies. We're working on a P-38 engine right now. It was fast, I think not generally faster than the He-219.

Sorry, 43 to 47 aircraft does NOT qualify as mass production in a reasnable person's book. I KNOW the Ta-152 history and don't need any more than my 5 - 6 books I already have, and I have already been reminded this is not a Ta-152 thread, so I'll just drop the Ta-152. Suffice to say I am a fan, but not a big fan. If you feel differently, then OK. Oh, the two Ta-152c's left operational at the end of the war in Europe is from William Green. He never said they flew operationally. He said they were operational at the end of the war. That means they could be started and flown, nothing more. I have never heard that these two aircraft were NOT operational except for you. That makes you an uncorroborated source for me.

Hey, if YOU feel 25 - 50 airplanes qualifies as production, then draw your own conlcusions. I simply don't think it qualifies as production, and you won't change my mind. To me, production has to result in a reasonable number of airplanes, and 50 just doesn't get it for me. If it does for you, then OK, enjoy it. For me, real war fighters equipped several units or more, not just an airfiled. I wouldn't even count the P-40 if just the AVG had operated it ... but it was operated widely and certainly qualifies as a real WWII combat aircraft. 

In fact, that's why I discount the Finish experiecnce with the Buffalo, it was too small a sample despite their atypical success and similar results were not seen by multiple users. That's why I insist on a large sample for any sort of a valid kill ratio. Unusual successes are a fact, but are atypical.

Ricrato, if you just go back and read my post, you'll see what I'm talking about. If you don't agree, and I'd count on that, then please discuss civilly and we can talk. Otherwise, methinks the moderators won't be happy with us, and I'd rather not give one any reason to slap me ... or you. Discussion is nice, insulting dialogue is unpleasant and probably against the rules of this forum. So, state your case nicely and we can have a discussion. Or I can simply refrain from talking with you; your choice. Personally, I'd rather discuss and exchange ideas. What do you say?

Doni, I'll pretty much write what I want to, just like YOU did, whether or not this a Ta-152 thread or not, but I'll drop it if you will. Nothing I said about the Ta-152 was incorrect except some people think 43 airplanes qualifies as production; I don't. The rest is true. There were 2 to 7 victories and four losses in combat. That's not as good as the Grumman F4F Wildcat, but I attribute that more to the tactical situation at the time more than the general qualities of the Ta-152. Still, it was a neat effort and COULD have been a great one, but never made the grade in the crucible of combat. Most other brand new aircraft would not have done any better out of the box with no testing. The very few were deployed with less than 40 hours of testing! I'm amazed they did as well as they did.

All this stuff is opinions, not a personal attack. Let's play nice like the moderators asked us to do, OK? If you disagree, just post your opinion. I accept that we may never agree. I hope you can too. All our opinions come from what we've read and experienced. Naturally, our experiences are different and our opinions will be, too. OK? Doesn't mean we can't agree at all, just on several points. That's OK. It was 65 to 70 years ago and I have talked with the pilots who flew in the war. That's where I get my opinions, plus some from books published at the time by people who were there. I distrust people who weren't there a LOT ... they published anywhere from the truth to idiotic ideas that were never actually a fact. It's tough to pick the truth out from stuff written by people who weren't there, isn't it? They write as if they know, but they don't.


----------



## wuzak (Aug 12, 2012)

GregP said:


> As far a a twin goes, I'd nominate the Heinkel He-219 as one of the fastest, certainly faster than rank and file production Mosquitos. There may well have been variants of the reliable Mossie that were faster than the He-219, but the rank anf file Mosquitos were simply not faster. Of course, the He-219 is almost a footnote since it was primarily a night fighter and was never employed in missions similar to the Mosquito in any numbers, but about 283 were produced and that qualifies as production. It was also deployed and fought, though obviously not in any great numbers since there were so few made.



What counts as a "rank and file" Mosquito? 

How about the Mosquito B.XVI? They made more of those than Heinkel made He 219s. And the B.XVI was faster than all but the specially prepared versions of the He 219, and probably still faster than those.

Of course, not quite as fast as a P-38, but not that far behind either:




> Details for Mosquito B.XVI
> 
> Length: 41ft 6in (12.64m)
> 
> ...



RAF - De Havilland Mosquito


----------



## NiceShotAustin (Aug 12, 2012)

Does anyone have some test data for the top speed of the HE-219 A7? I'm getting a mixed bag from articles on the Internet ranging from 385 mph to 415 mph (higher frequency in the 385 range)


----------



## Milosh (Aug 12, 2012)

NiceShotAustin said:


> Does anyone have some test data for the top speed of the HE-219 A7? I'm getting a mixed bag from articles on the Internet ranging from 385 mph to 415 mph (higher frequency in the 385 range)



I think you will find that the 415mph speed was for a striped He217. That is, the radar antlers and exhaust shrouds were removed.

Wuzak, the NF30 did 424 mph (682 km/h) at 26,500 ft (8,100 m). Some 526 were built.


----------



## wuzak (Aug 12, 2012)

Milosh said:


> the NF30 did 424 mph (682 km/h) at 26,500 ft (8,100 m). Some 526 were built.



I only mentioned the B.XVI as this was one that the He 219 would be needing to intercept. PR.XVIs were just as fast, PR.IXs and B.IXs only slightly slower. I think the PR.34 was the fastest of them all, but slightly post war.


----------



## GregP (Aug 12, 2012)

Hi Wuzak,

I was thinking of the fighter versions of the Mosquito. The PR versions were unarmed and not a threat to other aircraft. Ditto the Bombers … though they DID carry bombs. The F Mk II went 366 mph, Sure, there were some faster PR and Bomber versions, but I was thinking fighters. They were slower due to the addition of armament and the attendant drag.

As for the He 219, the A-6 went 400 mph and the He 219B went 440 mph. If they added the drag of radar, the speed dropped to about 385 mph, just as it would drop on a Mosquito with radar antennas installed. Antennas were pretty draggy.

I’m not Mosquito bashing here; I love the Mossie. I am also not a huge fan of the He 219. I simply put it out as a fast twin engine aircraft, and some versions were. A Mosquito PR Mk VIII went 436 mph, so they were fast, too … but unarmed. I am a fighter guy, and not a fan of unarmed aircraft in wartime.

So the armed He 219 could hit 440 mph with the Jumo 222 engines, assuming they were running well. Armed Mosquitoes were not that fast, though the unarmed ones could get close. If I had a choice, I’d take the Mosquito due to the reliable Merlin engines. The Jumo 222’s were quite powerful, but had a reputation for being very temperamental. If it’s MY life on the line, give me reliable any day.

In any case, the He 219 was a fast twin, as were the Mosquito and the P-38.

In point of fact, the Douglas A-26 could hit abouit 385 mph, too, and it had both fixed armement as well as a bomb bay. The Mitsubishi Ki-46 was also pretty fast and slick, and was armed, and they built 611 of them, so it qualifies. The Beechcraft A-38 Grizzly was pretty fast at 377 mph, but was only a prototype. The Caproni-Bergamaschi Ca.380 was fast at 400 mph, but was only a prototype, too. The Dormier Do.335 was fast, but they only built 26, so I don't count it either. The Focke-Wulf Ta-154 was fast at 404 mph, but only 50 were built and they weren't used operationally much in the war. The Kawasaki Ki-96 was fast, but they only built 3. The Kawasaki Ki-102c went 373 mph and they built about 238, so it qualifies as a fast WWII combat twin.

The McDonnell XP-67 was fast at 410 mph, but was only built in prototype form. The Messerschmitt Me-261 was fast at 385 mph, but they only built 3. The Me-410 was pretty fast at 388 mph and was produced and deployed, so it is a candidate. The MiG-5 might have been a good one if they has built more than 2. The Mitsubishi Ki-83 wasa great candidate at 438 mph, and was armed, but they only built 4 of them! What a shame. The Nakajima J5N was pretty fast and armed, but they only built 6.

The Northrop P-61 is a strong candidate and some versions could hit 424 mph. The Savioa-Marchetti SM.92 was interesting and fast, but only a protoype, as was the Savoia-Marchetti SM.91.

There are others, but most are very slightly post-WWII.


----------



## Milosh (Aug 12, 2012)

> As for the He 219, the A-6 went 400 mph and the He 219B went 440 mph. If they added the drag of radar, the speed dropped to about 385 mph, just as it would drop on a Mosquito with radar antennas installed. Antennas were pretty draggy.



What radar antennas on the Mossie? The radar was enclosed in the nose.

You mean the proposed A-6 that was suppose to do 400mph.

A 85 Squadron Mossie NF30 (FltLt Vaugham, FltSgt McKinnon) shot down a He219 on the night of 13/14 April 1945.It was the A-10TL with a turbojet mounted below the fuselage. Even with the jet it couldn't outrun the Mossie.


----------



## Vincenzo (Aug 12, 2012)

Ca 380 was only a project, the SM twins are not fast... or the 92 designed speed was fast (665 km/h) but the actual prototype speed was much lower.
so on hand i think 385 mph for A-26 it's too high, maybe some post war variant?
Thr P-61C was so fast but this is low production plane and very late (1st delivery july '45, last 41st jan '46)


----------



## GregP (Aug 12, 2012)

Milosh, I said that IF radar antennas were mounted on a Mosquito, it would have slowed down, too. I believe my sentences were clear. I never said they mounted antennas on Mosquitos like they did on, say, the Me-262 or He-219 ... I said IF. When they took the He-219 antennas off, it went pretty fast, and that is all I said ... and it DID. When equipped with running Jumo 222's, it was VERY fast.

Hi Vincenzo. When I was looking at combat twins of WWII, only a very few got to 400 mph or more. The balance were 250 385 mph aircraft, and I decided that anything over about 370 mph was a fast twin with regard to the rest of the twins or WWII. If you want to make the threshold different, please do so and propose a speed that any potential candidate must exceed. We can go from there. According to my data, the SM twins were decently fast; you might have other data. Even in Wikipedia, the SM.92 is listed as 382 mph and the SM.91 is olisted at 363 mph.

Relative to other 285 - 325 mph twins, that is decently fast, don't you think? If not, what is your threshold for a "fast" twin?


----------



## Milosh (Aug 12, 2012)

Well Greg that is not how it came across to me.

How ironic, Greg doesn't consider the Ta152H-1 a production a/c but includes the Ju222 powered He219 of which there was only one a/c built, the V16 and the mystical He219B.


----------



## wuzak (Aug 12, 2012)

GregP said:


> I was thinking of the fighter versions of the Mosquito. The PR versions were unarmed and not a threat to other aircraft. Ditto the Bombers … though they DID carry bombs. The F Mk II went 366 mph, Sure, there were some faster PR and Bomber versions, but I was thinking fighters. They were slower due to the addition of armament and the attendant drag.



366mph for a fighter Mosquito would be early versions with the saxophone exhaust. Not sure if any FIIs got ejector exhausts.

As related before, the NF.XXX went 424mph. FB.VIs could do 380mph by the end of the war, 370mph earlier.

The bomber versions of the Mosquito are what the likes of the He 219 were designed to destroy.




GregP said:


> As for the He 219, the A-6 went 400 mph and the He 219B went 440 mph. If they added the drag of radar, the speed dropped to about 385 mph, just as it would drop on a Mosquito with radar antennas installed. Antennas were pretty draggy.



Earlier you were told a stripped He 219 went 215mph - that is it was lightened, did not have all its armamemnt, nor radar.




GregP said:


> A Mosquito PR Mk VIII went 436 mph, so they were fast, too … but unarmed. I am a fighter guy, and not a fan of unarmed aircraft in wartime.



Unlikely that a PR.VIII went 436mph. The fastest Mosquito was the prototype, W4050, which had shorter span wings and tailplane. When fitted with 70-series Merlins it was able to do 439mph.




GregP said:


> So the armed He 219 could hit 440 mph with the Jumo 222 engines, assuming they were running well. Armed Mosquitoes were not that fast, though the unarmed ones could get close. If I had a choice, I’d take the Mosquito due to the reliable Merlin engines. The Jumo 222’s were quite powerful, but had a reputation for being very temperamental. If it’s MY life on the line, give me reliable any day.



How many He 219s were fitted with Jumo 222s? I think none. 440mph may be a projected speed with Jumo 222s, but I don't think any ever flew. Anybody confirm?




GregP said:


> The McDonnell XP-67 was fast at 410 mph, but was only built in prototype form.



Yes, and the engines were not giving the power they ought to. Teh IV-1430 were rated for 1600hp in the XP-67, but are said to have actually only making 1060hp.




GregP said:


> The Northrop P-61 is a strong candidate and some versions could hit 424 mph.



The P-61 that could do 400mph+ was the P-61C, and it was post war.

Interestingly, the He 219 was heavier empty equipped than a Mosquito fully loaded, and the P-61 nearly so.


----------



## GregP (Aug 12, 2012)

Actually, I knew there were over 280 He-219's built. I didn not know there was only one with the Jumo 222's. The He-219 has not been a subject of much interest to me, but came to mind when the question of a fast WWII fighter twin surfaced. Everyome shouts about the Mosquito and I thought I'd submit something else. Since 280+ built is enough for a limited "production," I threw out the He-219 as a type. It so happens that the He-219B was the only variant with performance quoted in the place I found the data, and there was no mention of only 1 being built. Now that you have brought that up, I'll check on He-219 production myself. Nothing at all ironioc about it; it's simply what I found, and the He-219 qualifies as a fast twin with more than 280 produced. At least it does in my book. 

Checked and there seems to have been one or two Jumo 222 planes made, they aren't sure. But the He-219A-7 WAS built with DB 603 engiens and it went 400 mph on combat trim, so I suppose it qualifies. Nobody seems to be sure how many were built, but 210 were ordered.

I am not the subject of this topic; it is about fast WWII twins as I recall. So, submit a fast WWII production twin of your own if you don't like the He-219 as a candidate, and you don't seem to. If you prefer, open the discussion to prototypes and low-run planes, and we can begin to look at the one-off fast twins. 

While I love them, they made no contribution to WWII and I simply think they are not really WWII combat aicraft since they didn't fight in the war. But, by all means, if you want to throw it open to any design started during the WWII timeframe, it opens the list considerably and admits some admittedly interesting prototypes. Almost anthing that flew before the end of 1949 was probably started during WWII, and that opens the door for the last of the piston military combat species. There were NO military piston twins slated as combat aircraft in the late 1940's that did not originate in WWII, but many didn't fly until after hostilities had ceased. Should we include them, too?


----------



## Denniss (Aug 12, 2012)

Some projected He 219 speeds from a 6/1944 Heinkel document, first value without antenna + flame damper, second with:

A-2: 605 km/h in 6.4 km; 560 km/h in 6.3 km (DB 603A engine, all a/c had the uprated 603AA engine, speed should be not that far away from A-5)
A-5: 615 km/h in 8.4km; 585 km/h in 8.3 km; DB 603E engine (not built)
A-6: 630 in 8.6, 600 in 8.5 (DB 603E)
A-6: 650 in 10.2, 615 in 10.0 (DB 603L)
B-1: 655 in 7.4, 620 in 7.2 (Jumo 222 A/B-3)
B-1: 705 in 11.7, 650 in 11.4 (Jumo 222E/F)


----------



## GregP (Aug 12, 2012)

While I had not intended to turn this into a thread about a specific aircraft, I do have reports that the cews loved the He-219 and clamored for more. According to William Green, they even managed to assemble one from spare parts, but witheld news of its existenace carefully from the RLM. 

It was probably the closest thing to a German Mosquito, though the RLM didn't quite seem to see it that way. That would be the same RLM that didn't think a strategic bomber was necessary, either.

Bad decisions seem to have come from the RLM regularly, and were based on a sort of popularity contest rather than cambat needs of the German armed services. Otherwise, they would have operated more high-performance Heinkel aircraft than they did. Just my two cents worth.


----------



## wuzak (Aug 12, 2012)

Denniss said:


> Some projected He 219 speeds from a 6/1944 Heinkel document, first value without antenna + flame damper, second with:
> 
> A-2: 605 km/h in 6.4 km; 560 km/h in 6.3 km (DB 603A engine, all a/c had the uprated 603AA engine, speed should be not that far away from A-5)
> A-5: 615 km/h in 8.4km; 585 km/h in 8.3 km; DB 603E engine (not built)
> ...



Projected? As in not measured?

As far as I am aware, the Jumo 222 never reached series production. Is this ocrrect?

If so, that delay B series production until the Jumo 222 was put into production.

Also, for those who work in mph:

Without radar antenna

A-2: 605km/h (376mph) @ 6.4km (20,997ft)
A-5: 615km/h (382mph) @ 8.4km (27,559ft)
A-6 (DB603E): 630km/h (391mph) @ 8.6km (28,215ft)
A-6 (DB603L): 650km/h (404mph) @ 10.2km (33,464ft)
B-1 (Jumo 222A/B): 655km/h (407mph) @ 7.4km (24,278ft)
B-1 (Jumo 222E/F): 705km/h (438mph) @ 11.7km (38,385ft)

With radar antenna

A-2: 560km/h (348mph) @ 6.4km (20,669ft)
A-5: 585km/h (364mph) @ 8.4km (27,230ft)
A-6 (DB603E): 600km/h (373mph) @ 8.6km (27,877ft)
A-6 (DB603L): 615km/h (382mph) @ 10.0km (32,808ft)
B-1 (Jumo 222A/B): 620km/h (385mph) @ 7.2km (23,622ft)
B-1 (Jumo 222E/F): 650km/h (404mph) @ 11.4km (37,401ft)


----------



## wuzak (Aug 12, 2012)

GregP said:


> It was probably the closest thing to a German Mosquito, though the RLM didn't quite seem to see it that way.



Maybe in performance, but not in original role. The Mosquito was designed as a bomber/PR aircraft and adapted to night fighting, whereas the He 219 was a hevy fighter adapted as a night fighter. The Ju 88 is probably Germany's Mosquito, but as the Ju 88 came first maybe teh Mosquito was Britain's Ju 88.


----------



## Milosh (Aug 12, 2012)

He219 performance graphs

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/5214/he219data.jpg


----------



## GregP (Aug 13, 2012)

So, are we all agreed that the He-219 was a decently fast real WWII combat twin engine aircraft? I can't see why it took several pages, but at least we SEEM to agree it was about as fast as required to qualify for this thread, huh?

The WWII combat twins that made 400+ mph (643 kph) and ALSO had production of over 200 units were very rare. So far, only I have proposed that "fast" is anything above 360 - 370 mph (579 - 595 kph). Anybody else have a threshold in mind?

Milosh, thanks for the graphs. I can't read them very well, but maybe in the future I can.


----------



## Vincenzo (Aug 13, 2012)

over 370 mph twin engined with combat in WWII and a relatively high production (200+)
Mosquito
Lightning
Army Type 4 two engined assault plane
Army Type 100 model 3 fighter (not sure on how many were converted in fighter)
Ju 88G-6
Ju 88S-3 (high altitude bomber)
Bf 110G
Me 210C
Me 410
He 219

i hope have not missed some


----------



## krieghund (Aug 13, 2012)

Here are some more He219 graphs


----------



## GregP (Aug 13, 2012)

Thanks, Kreighund!


----------



## johnbr (Aug 13, 2012)

I think the Arado 440 would have made a good night Fighter.


----------



## GregP (Aug 13, 2012)

The test crews liked the Arado 440, but it was not proceeded with and only 4 were bulit. Since the PILOTS liked it, you are probably correct. 

I dismissed it from my list as a prototype, and should have probably included it along with the Ar 240, which was also pretty fast, but only 15 were built.

I suppose we COULD include the Arsenal VB-10. It didn't fly until 1947 but was firmly a WWII design and only 6 were built. It went 435 mph. Cancelled due to the imminent arrival of jets.

Of course, if we allow this one, it opens the door for other post-war pistons, too. In that case, I like the Argentinian FMA I.Ae.30 Namcu. Altogether a beautiful, fast, single-seat piston. Alas, only 1 was built and it flew in 1950. It wasn't built, not becasue of jets, but because of lack of money by Argentina. But it certainly showed what they could do with aircraft design.


----------



## Denniss (Aug 14, 2012)

All these Heinkel graphs are projected/calculated speeds unless noted as "erflogen" (flown/tested). The mentioned DB 603G engine never reached series production.


----------



## Vincenzo (Aug 14, 2012)

ya, in december '42 was just flown the 219 prototype


----------



## J.A.W. (Mar 18, 2013)

What was the best speed recorded for the lightened PR Mitsubishi Dinahs?


----------



## GregP (Mar 18, 2013)

There is a lot of material on the Dinahs, but very little concrete data. We do know that two Ki-46 IV prototypes were built with turbocharged engines and one flew from Peking to Yokota in 3 hours 15 minutes covering 1,4330 miles for an average speed of 435 mph ... but we don't know the winds aloft at the time. At least, I don't ... so it's hard to say. They didn't repeat the flight both ways for an average. The oft-publishedspeed is 391 mph @ 32,810 feet.

I've always liked the lines of the Ki-46, but finding much data on it that gives technical details is not easy. Suffice to say it was swift for a twin at the time in the Pacific. I really don't think it is the hunt for fastest against the German, British, or American twins in use in Europe, but it was near the top in the PTO, where people "babied" their engines as much as possible since the landing area was very wet and aircraft carriers and islands were far between.


----------



## Readie (Mar 18, 2013)

WW2 Aircraft Ranked by Speed

This is interesting, scroll down till you find Arado E530 478 mph

Cheers
John


----------



## J.A.W. (Mar 19, 2013)

Which twin was fastest going downhill?
Or at least, going by the book - listed permissable V-max..


----------



## GregP (Mar 19, 2013)

Hi Readie,

Saw that one and dismissed it as fiction since most of the planes never flew. They included paper designs as flying aircraft. Pure fiction, but interesting from a fiction standpoint that never happened and was never going to happen.

They list all the fictional stuff and conveniently leave out the P-51H that DID see producrtion and was in WWII, though never saw action. Some other s are missing , too, but I still enjoyed the science fiction.


----------



## Readie (Mar 19, 2013)

Hi Greg,
Some fascinating designs in that link. Not all relevent to the thread I know but,they show the breath of imagination at the time.
Cheers
John

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Mar 19, 2013)

They do show that ... you are right. I like to think that many of the fictional planes might have flown had the war dragged on a bit, but I hate thinking of the war dragging on and the people who would have died had it done so. I love the planes, but wouldn't kill a single person to see another one fly.

Man's gretest achievements come in wartime. We went into WWII flying rag-wing biplanes and came out flying jets. Too bad we can't seem to make progress like that in peactime ... usually.


----------



## Readie (Mar 19, 2013)

GregP said:


> They do show that ... you are right. I like to think that many of the fictional planes might have flown had the war dragged on a bit, but I hate thinking of the war dragging on and the people who would have died had it done so. I love the planes, but wouldn't kill a single person to see another one fly.
> 
> Man's gretest achievements come in wartime. We went into WWII flying rag-wing biplanes and came out flying jets. Too bad we can't seem to make progress like that in peactime ... usually.



Quite right Greg. Total agreement with you. War is the spur to many things, good and bad.
There were some designs that survived throughout WW2 flying from day 1 to VE day. Does that fact make the Spitfire ME109 ,for example, really advanced in 1939 or, just so good there wasn't any need to replace them in front line service?
I think it was a bit of that plus expediency.
Cheers
John


----------



## GregP (Mar 19, 2013)

Well, both the Spitfire and the Me 109 were definitely "long in the tooth," and I doubt there was much more to get out of them without a major redesign. Both designs could have been revised and I believe the Germans made a virtual air force of Me 109 variants for one reason or another, including one with inward-retracting, conventional landing gear and another with tricycle gear.

The 109 needed elevator, aileron and rudder trim, inward-retracting landing gear, better aileron design, a bubble canoy, and more fuel. It COULD have had all. The Spitfire could have used wider gear, a less draggy radiator setup, a more swept windscreen, and more fuel. If could have had all that, too.

In the end, neither "improvement" would likely have changed the war's outcome, so how badly were they needed? Apparently not that badly. I know it is a simplistic view but, in the end, both were good enough to finish the war. Had the Germans won, the Me 109 would have been there at the end, too, as it was in defeat. Ditto the Spitifre the other way.

Back to the subject of the thread, I believe the real life fastest piston twin that was a production model wasn't likely faster than about 435 mph or so ... the rest being either paper designs or prototypes that weren't ever serially produced. The Hughes XF-11 and Twin Mustang were both post-war, though firmly rooted in WWII. They built fewer Do 335's than they did Ta 152's, so I discount both of those as non-events. Depending on who you believe, they only flew between 16 and 22 examples of the Do 335 before the war ended.

So, if we discount the fabulous prototypes, we are left with very few real production fast twins from which to choose. left to my own devices, I'd take a Tigercat since it actually made fleet service entry prior to the end of WWII, but obviously never made it to Europe an didn't contribute to the outcome. If I discount the Tigercat (I won't fight too hard since it was a non-factor in the war), then I'm pretty much left with the Mosquito and the P-38 as meaingful twins. For a fighter, I'd take the P-38 any day of the week. If range and bomb carrying capacity were important, I'd take a Mosquito except in the South Pacific due to the deleterious effect of tropical weather on wood airframes.

I think all the rest were not as fast as either the P-38 or the Mosquito and were not produced in large enough numbers to warrant consideration as a WWII service twin. 

I'm sure there are those who believe paper airplanes that were deisgned but never flew are valid for consideration along with the one-offs. If you are one those, choose in peace ... no argument from me at all going forward. Went back and read some of my earlier posts in this thread and I must say they sounded a bit pompous. Didn't intend to come across that way at the time but apparently did. So, as I said above, no more arguments from me. I'll express my own opinion and not argue about anyone else's ... 

Fantasy airplanes that made no real contribution to the outcome of the war aren't my cup of tea, but they are interesting nonetheless in themselves. Enough said.

As for fastest twin regarless of engine type, I could not choose other than the Me 262. Though not a big fan of the type, it was impressive and showed the way forward for better jet fighters to come only a short time later.


----------



## Vincenzo (Mar 19, 2013)

i think the only "fast" twins produced in number comparable (but less, around 3 thousand each) are the Bf 110G and the Ju 88G/S/T


----------



## GregP (Mar 19, 2013)

I think you are right, Vicenzo. The Japanese made a few "fast twins," but in nowhere near the numbers.


----------



## Conslaw (Mar 23, 2013)

What about the P-51 with Ramjets on the wingtips? Could that plane catch the DO 335?


----------



## Readie (Mar 24, 2013)

Conslaw said:


> What about the P-51 with Ramjets on the wingtips? Could that plane catch the DO 335?



Wouldn't that be triple 'engines' though?
Cheers
John


----------



## GregP (Mar 25, 2013)

Yes, triple, and the pulsejets vibrate a LOT. I know since we have restored and run one. Google "Chino Pulsejet" and see it run. We pushed my pickup down the runway in 2009 at the Planes of Fame airshow with it and it was NOT sonething you'd want to have on your P-51 wingtips.

The P-51 with the ramjets on the wing was lucky to get down in one piece. Nobody would want to fly it under power for very long.

At cruise, it burned 3.3 US gallons of gasoline per minute. Two would be 6.6 gpm or 396 gallons per hour typical fuel consumption ... that without the Merlin running! Add the Merlin at CRUISE and you are at about 460 gallon per hour. I'd think that the plane wouldn't really be able to go anywhere at still get back ... heck, that's close to an F-86 fuel burn! They use 600 gph when we fly them.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## wuzak (Mar 25, 2013)

GregP said:


> Yes, triple, and the ramkets vibrate a LOT. I know since we have restored and run one. Google "Chino Pulsejet" and see it run. We pushed my pickup down the runway in 2009 at the Planes of Fame airshow with it and it was NOT sonething you'd want to have on your P-51 wingtips.
> 
> The P-51 with the ramjets on the wing was lucky to get down in one piece. Nobody would want to fly it under power for very long.
> 
> At cruise, it bruned 3.3 US gallons of gasoline per minute. Two would be 6.6 gpm or 396 gallons per hour typical fuel consumption ... that without the Merlin running! Add the Merlin at CRUISE and you are at about 460 gallon per hour. I'd think that the plane wouldn't really be able to go anywhere at still get back ... heck, that's close to an F-86 fuel burn! They use 600 gph when we fly them.



_Ram_ jet, not _pulse_ jet Greg.

The ram jet needs forward momentum to work.

Here are a couple of German Ramjets being tested.
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/ListOfJets/img2/Do-17.jpg
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Do17/Do-217.jpg

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## swampyankee (Mar 11, 2017)

Did they ever get the Do335 to stop snaking?


----------

