1940: Luftwaffe's ideal heavy fighter? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davebender
1st Lieutenant
The Luftwaffe was created from scratch. For the first several years everyone was working beyond their ability. It cannot be avoided.
Why so? Just because something is new doesn't mean that it's managers are stretched beyond their ability. It should be a challenge or opportunity that competent managers/officers embrace.
Whilst I agree that inter departmental competition seems to have been a feature of nazi government I disagree that the cream rose to the top.Simplistically loyalty was prized above ability.
Take a look at the remnants of the nazi leadership at Nuremberg. With the exception of very few (Speer,Goering) most were revealed as rather average men and some were no better than loyal thugs. "The banality of evil" is a phrase coined by Hannah Arendt to describe Eichmann at his trial but could just as well be applied to the whole sorry bunch.
Steve
The Luftwaffe wasn't created from scratch, most of it's Generals had WW1 combat experience, and the clandestine Luftwaffe had been carring on training and experiments all thru the 20's and early 30's .
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Look in a toilet after you've done your business. That isn't cream rising to the top. Government often works the same way.
No it didn't. In my opinion, it was a mistake not to develop and produce the Fw-187 as the relatively light twin-engined high-performance single seat fighter it was originally designed to be, but production of the Bf-110 was definitely not a mistake. The Bf-110, while no better than any other heavy two-seat fighter of the era, was very amenable to adaptation and was a fine fighter-bomber, long range intruder, and night fighter for the early 1940's. There is no way without almost complete redesign the Falke could have fulfilled all the roles that the Bf-110 fullfilled. The bastardized two-seater Tank was forced to develop added a second, largely useless, crewmember and didn't even provide the plane with rear defense. Since it was basically still the same small airframe, the Fw-187 could not have matched the 110 in armament suites, offensive stores, and probably even radar adaptability without a major loss of performance. True, with DB 601s and above the Falke might have been better, but we really have no idea how well the basic airframe could absorb the additional power and maintain the types original good handling.
DonL
Banned
@ zoomar
I disagree
The FW 187 was constracted and developed from the scratch to the DB 601 and Jumo 211. It was developed to the RLM advertisement of a 35Liter 1000PS engine. Only of the shortcomings of this engines the V1-V4 and the three A0 a/c's were built with Jumo 210.
Source: Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History from Dietmar Hermann
All this roles could be filled from the FW 187 (two seater). Till mid 1942 (introduction of the Lichtenstein radar) no LW nightfighter was flown with onboard radar. Also even the Bf 109 had a bomb hook, so where is the argument that it isn't possible for the FW 187.
The airframe of the FW 187 is near the same size as the P38, only the concepts are different, because of the small aerodynamik fuselage of the FW 187 and it was much lighter then the P38, but all this has nothing to do with the payload:
FW 187: Length: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in); Wingspan: 15.30 m (50 ft 2 ⅓ in); Height: 3.85 m (12 ft 7 ⅔ in); Wing area: 30.40 m² (327.22 ft²)
P38: Length: 37 ft 10 in (11.53 m); Wingspan: 52 ft 0 in (15.85 m); Height: 12 ft 10 in (3.91 m); Wing area: 327.5 ft² (30.43 m²)
Where are here the big differences ?
To all what Mr. Hermann wrote from primary sources this statement is wrong! Only the nightfighter role is debatable, all other roles could be filled from the FW 187 without redesign but with much better performance.
Rear defense for an a/c which has a speed fromn 615km/h till 725 km/h is totaly absurd.
Only with the the radar adaptability I agree all other arguments are wrong from primary sources. The FW 187 had absolute the same armament as the Bf 110, perhaps it could carry less shells through the smaller fuselage but for a heavy destroyer and nightfighter the german LW had enough alternatives through the Ju 88 or Do 215.
The payload of the FW 187 with DB 601 E or DB 605A is at 1000-1500kg (full loaded and can be carried under the fuselage) depending which armament and what armour.
I disagree
The FW 187 was constracted and developed from the scratch to the DB 601 and Jumo 211. It was developed to the RLM advertisement of a 35Liter 1000PS engine. Only of the shortcomings of this engines the V1-V4 and the three A0 a/c's were built with Jumo 210.
Source: Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History from Dietmar Hermann
All this roles could be filled from the FW 187 (two seater). Till mid 1942 (introduction of the Lichtenstein radar) no LW nightfighter was flown with onboard radar. Also even the Bf 109 had a bomb hook, so where is the argument that it isn't possible for the FW 187.
The airframe of the FW 187 is near the same size as the P38, only the concepts are different, because of the small aerodynamik fuselage of the FW 187 and it was much lighter then the P38, but all this has nothing to do with the payload:
FW 187: Length: 11.12 m (36 ft 6 in); Wingspan: 15.30 m (50 ft 2 ⅓ in); Height: 3.85 m (12 ft 7 ⅔ in); Wing area: 30.40 m² (327.22 ft²)
P38: Length: 37 ft 10 in (11.53 m); Wingspan: 52 ft 0 in (15.85 m); Height: 12 ft 10 in (3.91 m); Wing area: 327.5 ft² (30.43 m²)
Where are here the big differences ?
To all what Mr. Hermann wrote from primary sources this statement is wrong! Only the nightfighter role is debatable, all other roles could be filled from the FW 187 without redesign but with much better performance.
Rear defense for an a/c which has a speed fromn 615km/h till 725 km/h is totaly absurd.
Only with the the radar adaptability I agree all other arguments are wrong from primary sources. The FW 187 had absolute the same armament as the Bf 110, perhaps it could carry less shells through the smaller fuselage but for a heavy destroyer and nightfighter the german LW had enough alternatives through the Ju 88 or Do 215.
The payload of the FW 187 with DB 601 E or DB 605A is at 1000-1500kg (full loaded and can be carried under the fuselage) depending which armament and what armour.
Last edited:
Is that so, how do you know? There were some planes that were competitive right until the end due to them being developable. The Spitfire and Fw 190 most notably come to mind which capable of adapting to heavier armament and equipment. Actually there are quite a few planes that were still competitive at the end of the war and they mostly derived from older designs (obsolete?).
One might think that the FW guys who did the engine installations for the 190 series right were foresighted enough to build a plane with enough development potential. This of course is just mere speculation.
But you cannot say if they are just superficially similar or not unless you have the respective blueprints and know how to interpret them for guessing its capability for development.
The Fw 187 should have been more upgradeable than the Whirlwind though that really was made as the tiniest possible airframe for a certain engine. If Tank really just wanted to design a racer to beat the speed records of the day (I read it before somewhere) he would have chosen a design with the Whirlwind's dimensions.
As for the four 20mm cannons, the DH 103 had them installed in the lower fuselage, having there muzzles in the position where the 187 had a window to look down. So close the window and install the guns.
If this is hampered by the wing spars so a change to a midwing configuration might work out which shouldn't have been too big a deal. A layout which can be found on the competitors in the twin engined fighter section: F8F Tigercat, DH 103 Hornet and Mitsubishi Ki-83.
Because it was not built to an Air Ministry specification,the specification was written around the design. The fact that it first flew in 1944 and was designed with the benefit of lessons learned from other de Havilland products,most obviously the Mosquito,makes it more "modern" than an aircraft conceived in the mid 1930s. De Havilland were not making retro designs.
What has the development potential of other types got to do with it? Some designs could be developed some could not,at least to any extent. We'll never know how "upgradeable" the Fw 187 would have been because it was never produced. Everything relating to this aircraft's development is conjecture. Saying "close the window and install the guns" is just far too simplistic. "...a change to a mid wing configuration....which shouldn't have been too big a deal",you're kidding,right?
Steve
I was thinking about the Kawanishi N1K1 Kyofu's conversion from mid-wing plane to the low- wing Shiden-Kai . Why shouldn't the reverse be possible? I guess there are planes whose original designs were altered a lot more in order to become useful craft.
Yes, it may be simplistic but does it my make my argument less valid (than your assumptions) in estimating the Fw 187's potential to become the equal of any twin the allies had? The facts are provided by other members.
Last edited:
True because we're both guessing.Everything about the potential development of an aircraft that never entered service (in a meaningful way) and of which only a very few were built has to be conjecture.
I am well aware of the problems which confronted the development of many other aircraft and the hoops that people jumped through and compromises that were made to make them work. There is no reason that the Fw 187 would be different.
There is a tendency generally (not just here!) for people to want to "just" bolt this engine on this aircraft or "just" stick these cannons in the wing of that aircraft,but history tells us that it is rarely as simple as that.
If it was the A+AAE at Martlesham Heath or the various Luftwaffe operations at places like Rechlin wouldn't be needed.
Steve
DonL
Banned
You should read the book about the FW 187 stona!
And the FW 187 V5 was flying from mid 1939 till 1942 with DB 601 engines without problems.
This a/c reached the famous 635 km/h at sea level (september 1939 from primary sources) with the Dampfheißkühlung, what was an experimental water pressure cooling with very small conventional coolers.
I had told this a hundred times, that the FW 187 was developed from the scratch to the 35Liter 1000 PS engines (DB 601 andd Jumo 211) and had shown from real testflights, that it was no problem to absorb the bigger engines.
I'm not convinced, first the FW 187 wasn't first hand developed to an special advertisement. Wimmer and von Richthofen gave their agreement to built it as a single seat twin engine fighter, Udet was convinced from this a/c but wanted a second seat.
From all testflights we know, the FW 187 didn't lost it's characteristics with the second seat, neither the aerodynamic nor the agility were affected. And it is accepted from the Allies that the german a/c's had in general the better aerodynamik through the reasearch of the University of Göttingen. And with all respect how do you wish to know that the FW 187 was an outdated design at 1944 or retro?
Simply said!
All german designs that were developed to the 35 Liter 1000PS engine advertisement of the RLM (also the FW 187) were very much "upgradeable"! Bf 109, Ju 88, Ju 87, He 111, Do 17, Bf 110. Please name only one german a/c what wasn't "upgradeable" except the He 100 with it's small fuselage. (What was the main reason why the He 100 was rejected next to the water evaporation cooling).
I can't see that the Hornet was the better design compare to a developed Fw 187 from 1939 to 1944!
And the FW 187 V5 was flying from mid 1939 till 1942 with DB 601 engines without problems.
This a/c reached the famous 635 km/h at sea level (september 1939 from primary sources) with the Dampfheißkühlung, what was an experimental water pressure cooling with very small conventional coolers.
I had told this a hundred times, that the FW 187 was developed from the scratch to the 35Liter 1000 PS engines (DB 601 andd Jumo 211) and had shown from real testflights, that it was no problem to absorb the bigger engines.
I'm not convinced, first the FW 187 wasn't first hand developed to an special advertisement. Wimmer and von Richthofen gave their agreement to built it as a single seat twin engine fighter, Udet was convinced from this a/c but wanted a second seat.
From all testflights we know, the FW 187 didn't lost it's characteristics with the second seat, neither the aerodynamic nor the agility were affected. And it is accepted from the Allies that the german a/c's had in general the better aerodynamik through the reasearch of the University of Göttingen. And with all respect how do you wish to know that the FW 187 was an outdated design at 1944 or retro?
Simply said!
All german designs that were developed to the 35 Liter 1000PS engine advertisement of the RLM (also the FW 187) were very much "upgradeable"! Bf 109, Ju 88, Ju 87, He 111, Do 17, Bf 110. Please name only one german a/c what wasn't "upgradeable" except the He 100 with it's small fuselage. (What was the main reason why the He 100 was rejected next to the water evaporation cooling).
I can't see that the Hornet was the better design compare to a developed Fw 187 from 1939 to 1944!
Last edited:
DonL
Banned
That's incorrect.
After Mr. Hermann Book:
http://www.amazon.de/dp/392769746X/?tag=dcglabs-20
many experiences from the FW 187 were integrated to the Ta 154. Without the FW 187 the Ta 154 couldn't be developed this fast.
In his book he makes it very clear how much the Ta 154 benefits from the FW 187.
The fuselage of the Ta 154 is very simular to the FW 187 but larger, because it was developed from the scratch as nightfighter with a much more powerfull armament. (4 x 30mm)
1. The Ta 154 was develpoped as nightfighter with onboard radar
2. It was built from wood not metall, after Mr. Hermann this needs an other design, especially where wood and metall were linked together.
3. The Ta 154 was developed from the scratch to bigger engines with a dry weight of +900kg
After Mr. Hermann Book:
http://www.amazon.de/dp/392769746X/?tag=dcglabs-20
many experiences from the FW 187 were integrated to the Ta 154. Without the FW 187 the Ta 154 couldn't be developed this fast.
In his book he makes it very clear how much the Ta 154 benefits from the FW 187.
The fuselage of the Ta 154 is very simular to the FW 187 but larger, because it was developed from the scratch as nightfighter with a much more powerfull armament. (4 x 30mm)
1. The Ta 154 was develpoped as nightfighter with onboard radar
2. It was built from wood not metall, after Mr. Hermann this needs an other design, especially where wood and metall were linked together.
3. The Ta 154 was developed from the scratch to bigger engines with a dry weight of +900kg
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Really,where is that from? they added another seat,extra armament and weight and got exactly the same performance?
Ask yourself why Udet or whoever wanted a second seat? I'd suggest it's because Tank had ignored the current RLM requirements and a second seat might be a way of at least having the aircraft considered.
By 1944 when the Hornet was built everything had moved on.Material sciences,aerodynamics,everything. It was a different world. We'd gone from biplanes to jets. There was no aircraft designed in the 1930s that wasn't on the verge of obsolescence. The best carried on for a few years.
All aircraft are upgradeable to some extent. Even the Hurricane accepted a more powerful engine and better armament. It is a futile argument because it is a question of degree. How many aircraft designed in the 1930s could remain competitive towards the end of the war? Take a look at the German aircraft the allies were interested in after the war,the ones they bothered to take away with them to investigate. Not one on your list of the most successful German designs. Times had changed,what possible use could a twin seat,two engined,propeller driven,lightly armed and small fighter have been in 1945?
Good to see the Bf 110 on there
Cheers
Steve
Last edited:
@ stona,
did you read Dietmar Hermann's Fw 187 book as DonL suggests? It's a nice read.
Hawker's Typhoon evolved into something we call the Sea Fury and the LaGG-3 into the La-9/11 and there are other examples.
What I want to say is that arguably all aerial designs could be developed into something that can match similarly dimensioned planes of foreign nations. Of course if given that they receive the engines that fit their potential, so force of development might succeed.
If one take a look it's more the norm than not that a truly great aircraft had its roots in a previously mediocre design that has been constantly improved just because it had the right genes.
The other possibility is to construct a completely new aircraft which is normally based on existing designs.
What would likely make an evolved Fw 187 a match for the Hornet?
As far as I know the FW guys always seem to put special emphasis on the torsional stiffness of their combat aircraft's wings (mostly two massive spars in contrast to Messerschmitt's preferred one-spar designs) and thus enabling them to a high roll rate and agility, both being vital to ACM as we know. Stiffness should not allow the wing to bend too much.
And Tank always struck me as a foresighted guy if you take e.g. his horse comparisons concerning airplanes.
According to aforementioned Mr. Hermann who happens to have written a recommendable book about the Ta 154 also the 154's wings were of 20% sturdier built than its stable mate Fw 190 (ergo high torsional stiffness and roll rate).
A pilot who had flown the Ta 154 stated that it flew like a single engined plane rather than a twin, that it matched or even surpassed the 190 and 152 (!) in turning and because of this it was in a different league than its competitors, among them the Bf 110 that lost out to the larger Ju 88 in terms of manoueverability.
This is an amazing statement, speaking of ACM of TE vs. SE fighters.
Even if there is a possibility that this statements might perhaps be a little bit exaggerated the truth should not be too far off either. And it does show the soundness of the Ta 154 design which had many features of the 187.
But even the Ta 154 could not hope to equal the projected performance of the smaller Fw 187 as this one is a cleaner design aerodynamically. Ergo this makes the 187 even better and one can assume that it had very good flight characteristics and performance matching or surpassing those of SEs.
As far as improved aerodynamics in the later years of war are concerned it should almost match the Hornet's which had a low drag laminar flow wing however.
But it should be possible for Focke Wulf to incorporate such an airfoil in the Fw 187. The projected Ta 152 with Jumo 222 was to have a laminar wing design.
So if we take all this into account and apply it to the Fw 187 then this leads to the conclusion that there is a great plausibilty that it could be developed to become at least a worthy opponent to the Hornet (1944 and later) with similar versatility.
One question:
Have the Germans fielded a similar kind of radar so that it could be installed internally in the Fw 187 airframe at that time?
Anyway the night fighter Hornet had a second crewman in the rear fuselage operating the radar I guess. This also should be doable with the 187 airframe I guess.
did you read Dietmar Hermann's Fw 187 book as DonL suggests? It's a nice read.
Hawker's Typhoon evolved into something we call the Sea Fury and the LaGG-3 into the La-9/11 and there are other examples.
What I want to say is that arguably all aerial designs could be developed into something that can match similarly dimensioned planes of foreign nations. Of course if given that they receive the engines that fit their potential, so force of development might succeed.
If one take a look it's more the norm than not that a truly great aircraft had its roots in a previously mediocre design that has been constantly improved just because it had the right genes
.The other possibility is to construct a completely new aircraft which is normally based on existing designs.
What would likely make an evolved Fw 187 a match for the Hornet?
As far as I know the FW guys always seem to put special emphasis on the torsional stiffness of their combat aircraft's wings (mostly two massive spars in contrast to Messerschmitt's preferred one-spar designs) and thus enabling them to a high roll rate and agility, both being vital to ACM as we know. Stiffness should not allow the wing to bend too much.
And Tank always struck me as a foresighted guy if you take e.g. his horse comparisons concerning airplanes.
According to aforementioned Mr. Hermann who happens to have written a recommendable book about the Ta 154 also the 154's wings were of 20% sturdier built than its stable mate Fw 190 (ergo high torsional stiffness and roll rate).
A pilot who had flown the Ta 154 stated that it flew like a single engined plane rather than a twin, that it matched or even surpassed the 190 and 152 (!) in turning and because of this it was in a different league than its competitors, among them the Bf 110 that lost out to the larger Ju 88 in terms of manoueverability.
This is an amazing statement, speaking of ACM of TE vs. SE fighters.
Even if there is a possibility that this statements might perhaps be a little bit exaggerated the truth should not be too far off either. And it does show the soundness of the Ta 154 design which had many features of the 187.
But even the Ta 154 could not hope to equal the projected performance of the smaller Fw 187 as this one is a cleaner design aerodynamically. Ergo this makes the 187 even better and one can assume that it had very good flight characteristics and performance matching or surpassing those of SEs.
As far as improved aerodynamics in the later years of war are concerned it should almost match the Hornet's which had a low drag laminar flow wing however.
But it should be possible for Focke Wulf to incorporate such an airfoil in the Fw 187. The projected Ta 152 with Jumo 222 was to have a laminar wing design.
So if we take all this into account and apply it to the Fw 187 then this leads to the conclusion that there is a great plausibilty that it could be developed to become at least a worthy opponent to the Hornet (1944 and later) with similar versatility.
One question:
Have the Germans fielded a similar kind of radar so that it could be installed internally in the Fw 187 airframe at that time?
Anyway the night fighter Hornet had a second crewman in the rear fuselage operating the radar I guess. This also should be doable with the 187 airframe I guess.
Last edited:
The Fw 187 died right here.
Minutes of a meating with Milch 8/18/42.
"The He 219 production model has been discussed in a development meeting. It is worth considereing at this point which combat zerstorer will eventually be dropped. To this end performance data of the Bf 110,Ar 240,Fw 187,Me 210 and Me 210 with DB 603 G will be compared.
The Fw 187 offers no advantages whatsoever as a zerstorer
The Fw 197 and Ar 240 would have to be rebuilt from the ground up. Bf 110 production has ceased. Due to their performance,consideration of these three types can be set aside."
Zerstorer,in the context of discussions in late 1942 has nothing to do with the original concept. It almost invariably refers to a bomber destroyer. Meetings over the next months bemoan the lack of armament on the Bf 110s (and other aircraft) in service. A lot of effort was going into up-arming all Luftwaffe aircraft.
In the end it matters not one jot what any of us think today about the potential or otherwise of these various aircraft. What matters is what Milch and the RLM thought of them at the time.
Steve
Minutes of a meating with Milch 8/18/42.
"The He 219 production model has been discussed in a development meeting. It is worth considereing at this point which combat zerstorer will eventually be dropped. To this end performance data of the Bf 110,Ar 240,Fw 187,Me 210 and Me 210 with DB 603 G will be compared.
The Fw 187 offers no advantages whatsoever as a zerstorer
The Fw 197 and Ar 240 would have to be rebuilt from the ground up. Bf 110 production has ceased. Due to their performance,consideration of these three types can be set aside."
Zerstorer,in the context of discussions in late 1942 has nothing to do with the original concept. It almost invariably refers to a bomber destroyer. Meetings over the next months bemoan the lack of armament on the Bf 110s (and other aircraft) in service. A lot of effort was going into up-arming all Luftwaffe aircraft.
In the end it matters not one jot what any of us think today about the potential or otherwise of these various aircraft. What matters is what Milch and the RLM thought of them at the time.
Steve
Last edited:
Simplicity is a matter of view. One side's reflections and viewpoints can be considered as simplistic by the other side and vice versa.
The question here is which would have been the ideal heavy fighter (not Zerstörer) of the Luftwaffe in 1940, and there it is where the Fw 187 stands out.
As a heavy fighter I consider a plane that could take on enemy fighters (SE and TE) on equal terms while having good enough range.
According to the data provided by fellow members, namely davebender and DonL, and reading my own books about the matter the Fw 187 very well could do that.
Last edited:
