Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Spitfire Mk I.
Loaded weight = 5,750 lbs.
RR Merlin II engine. 1,030 hp.
.18 lbs per hp.
Fw-187A0
Loaded weight = 5,000 kg. 11,023 lbs. Or perhaps a bit lighter without liquid cooling system.
BMW 132J engine. 947 hp. Two = 1,894 total hp.
.17 lbs per hp.
I wouldn't recommend this option but I believe the Fw-187 would be competitive during 1940 even with BMW132 engines. You can hardly go wrong with the Falke airframe as long as it has engines producing at least 900 hp.
View attachment 209373
Might cut max speed by 20 mph or so. Acceleration and climb should still be good as long as you've got a good power to weight ratio.radials would cut performance quite a bit, purely because of their much larger frontal area
Might cut max speed by 20 mph or so. Acceleration and climb should still be good as long as you've got a good power to weight ratio.
Not that I would recommend radial engines. The Falke was designed for DB601 engines and that's what it should have.
Feel that way about the FW190 as well?The Falke was designed for DB601 engines and that's what it should have.
3 August 1937.
Dornier files patent number 728044 for rear prop shaft design useful for tandem engine aircraft.
Eventually this led to the Do-335 fast bomber during 1945. However there were many starts, stops and specification changes along the way.
Give Dornier a clear directive for a tandem engine (2 x DB601) fighter aircraft during 1937 and they might have something operational during 1940. It would be considerably smaller and lighter in weight then the historical Do-335. No weapons bay as this would be a fighter aircraft.
An intriguing possibility. However Focke Wulf had a Fw-187 prototype flying during the spring of 1937 and performance was so good that it's difficult to justify any other choice.
How does Fw 187 replace Me 110 in night fighter role? The answer is simple - it can't.
FW 187 "D0" destroyer and nightfighter full calculated project from FW 1942 with plans to the RLM/ordered by RLM but canceled 1943
weight: 7000kg loaded; 2 x DB 605A (2 x 1475PS), wing span 30m², payload to 8200kg (bombs, external fuel tanks, external weapons), internal fuel capacity 1300 liter; fuselage 880 Liter (increased to the A0) wings 210liter each; armor 167 kg; 4 x MG151/20 with 250 bullets - rigidly to the front, 2 x MG131 with 450 bullets - rigidly to the back, range 1200 km to 1.330 km,
Calculated with 6650 kg:
max speed at 7100m 685km/h, max speed near ground 547km/h, climb rate near ground 18m/s, climb time 0,9 min/1,0 km, 1,7 min/2,0 km, 3,6 min/4,0 km, 5,7 min/6,0 km .
FW 187 "X" single seater clean fighter/long range fighter full calculated project from FW 1942 with plans to the RLM/ordered by RLM but canceled 1943
weight: 6350kg loaded, 2 x DB 605A( 2x 1475PS), wing span 30m², internal fuel 1300 liter, 4 x MG151/20
Calculated with 6050 kg:
max speed at 7100m 725km/h, climb rate near ground 21,2 m/s, climb time 10,6 min/10 km
Source: Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History/Dietmar Hermann/Peter Petrick
Given a fixed number of DB 601 engines, you either sacrifice a Me 110 for each Fw 187 built, which leaves with a huge gap in NF capability. Or you produce it alongside the 110, which brings up the same problem as the Germans had with the 110.. it was not performance, but the number available. There were too few 110s to compete with hordes of cheap, numerous single engine RAF fighters.
Third way is the sacrifice TWO 109s for each 187, which is downright silly IMHO. The 187 simply offers no advantage over the 109, the same dilemma as with P-38 vs P-51.. I am extremely doubtful that the 187 would have any greater range with the same engine.. 1100 liters total, thats 550 / engine, the 109 had 400 liters that is true, yet the 190 with 530 or so liter had exact the same range as 109, because of the increased drag from radial engine. A twin engine heavy has the same problem, simply it has more drag.
But let's say for second that the Fw 187 with 550 liter / engine had 10-20% better range than existing and half the cost 109 with 400 liter / engine... nothing that 10 Pfenning light alloy drop tank cannot solve on the 109, however (700 liter / engine)...
Whilst undeniably an interesting aircraft I have always thought the Fw 187 was probably rightly rejected on the grounds that it had little scope for further development.
I'm happy for the Fw 187 fans to correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it another case of shoehorning the smallest airframe around the then most powerful engines available?
(yes I know it didn't get the BD601 but even so....)
In contrast the Me 110 not only had room for the enormous quantities of electronic night-fighting kit - and a 3rd crew-man - that would be so useful to the LW later on but it made for (as best as I can tell) an excellent fast fighter-bomber.
Of course it was no nimble single-seat fighter....but then I suspect neither was the Fw 187 which, again as far as I can tell, had little room for a 2nd crew-man as it was nevermind hoping to fit radar kit etc etc.
In my opinion the Fw 187 with DB601s helps the LW survive the earlier years of the war - especially the BoB - with fewer losses, sees the RAF suffer heavier losses but is still not enough to decisively tip the scales......and in Russia and beyond I just don't see that it offers anything the LW need - the Me 110 being more useful in it's fighter-bomber role and of course capable of a very useful night-fighter role.