1940: Luftwaffe's ideal heavy fighter?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

davebender said:
Not a fair comparison as the P-38 wasn't yet in mass production. You are paying for a hand built P-38 prototype that probably lacks most military equipment such as weapons, protective armor, self sealing fuel tanks, radio equipment etc.
Click to expand...

Makes no difference as the P-38 was still approx twice the cost of an American s/e a/c even in 1942.

from Army Air Forces in World War II
Average cost per airplane is the weighted average on all programs approved during a designated fiscal year and represents the estimated cost of a complete airplane ready for flyaway, including factory installed ordnance and radio equipment. Costs exclude equipment installed at modification centers and airplane spare parts. Unit costs reflect renegotiation of contracts only to the extent of reductions in contract prices for future deliveries but do no reflect reductions in price effected by cash refunds.

You still can't compare American prices of an a/c to German prices of an a/c.
 
That only holds true if both aircraft are powered by V12 engines. American single engine fighter aircraft powered by R2800 engine cost almost as much as a twin engine P-38. Just as the single engine Fw-190 costs almost as much as a twin engine Fw-187. Large radial engines and airframes big enough to use them must be expensive.
 
davebender said:
That only holds true if both aircraft are powered by V12 engines. American single engine fighter aircraft powered by R2800 engine cost almost as much as a twin engine P-38.
Click to expand...

That may be almost true of the P-47. But what about the F6F? F4U?

Wiki lists the unit cost of the P-38 as $97k.
P-47 $85k
F6F $35k

No listing of F4U price.
 
Last edited:

Really??? what a gift to the allies. Stop a 1580-1600hp for take off engine ( and more importantly max cruise at sea level of 1280hp and 1170hp at 15,000ft) for more DB 601s

What are you going to do with the 300 Do 217 bombers built in 1941, put a third DB 601 in the nose?

even the DB605 was only good for 1075 PS max continuous at sea level and 1080 PS at 5500 meters.

And if you want to compare the DB605A to the BMW 801D (using 96 octane) the take-off goes to 1700hp, climb rating is 1440 (vs 1310 for the 605A) and max cruise at sea level is 1300 at 2300rpm at 1.2ata. Max cruise at 18000ft is 1215 at 2300rpm and 1.2ata.

Good as a FW 187 with DB engines may have been I doubt it could replace Do 217s.
 
Last edited:

Try looking at the cost per pound of aircraft. Those big american airplanes were actually kind of cheap. P-47 in 1943 went for about $10.00 a pound. It could carry 562KG worth of guns and ammo ( and the ammo boxes wouldn't even be full), how many of the "cheap" planes does it take to carry the same load? The later P-47s could carry 3 500lb bombs with ease. How many cheap 109s do you need? THREE not looking so cheap for results or mission capability is it?

TANSTAAFL

You want mission capability in terms of armament, speed, range and ceiling you pay for it. If you are satisfied with short range, light armament and medium instead of high altitude you can still get speed cheap. GEE, is one out four good or bad?
 
There is no single reason to abandon the FW 190! I totaly agree with shortround6, I totaly support his arguments about the BMW 801. Also the the FW 187 and FW 190 would have other missions, the FW 187 would be at it's introduction heavy fighter, long range escort fighter and destroyer.

There are plenty enough a/c's to produce without the Bf 110, Me 210 and Me 410 (without all the production changes and problems with the Me 210). To my opinion there are no reasons to change significant any production lines to the FW 187 till the beginning of 1943 and the introduction of the Bf 109G. Here is discussion potential because of the bad performance of the Bf 109G and the need of a good fighter for high altitude at the defending of the Reich.
 
Last edited:
davebender said:
3,500 man hours to build Me-109 airframe.
5,400 man hours to build Fw-190 airframe.
…..Fw-190 airframe requires 54% more man hours to build.
Click to expand...

And a Spitfire took many more man hours than either and yet the British aircraft industry easily out produced the German industry.
Again you have to broaden your view and look at the way the industry was organised. At almost every level the British were more efficient,not least of all in the hours they worked.

Don you see excess capacity in the German aircraft industry in the late pre war and early war years that simply coudn't be exploited. I agree that the potential to increase capacity to some extent was already there but the managment systems from top to botton which might have unleashed some of this potential were not.
Production plans in 1939-1942 were as fanciful as those of 1944-1945.

Steve
 
Last edited:
Not during peacetime but German production priorities must change when Britain and France declare war during September 1939.

Ju-87.
Produced at moderate rate as standard light dive bomber.

Ju-88.
Produced on a large scale as standard heavy dive bomber and light level bomber.
.....Supplemented by He-111 in level bomber role.

Me-109.
Produced on a large scale as standard light fighter aircraft.

Fw-187.
Produced on a large scale as standard high endurance fighter and recon aircraft.



If built the Fw-190A would replace the Me-109 but is that smart in this scenerio?

By 1941 Fw-187s will have the entire high altitude air superiority mission. Me-109s will provide local airfield defense and escort for CAS aircraft. In practical terms that means most Me-109s will be on the Russian front. Elsewhere most Jagdgeschwader will operate the Fw-187.

Russian front Me-109s have an outstanding combat record. VVS rated Me-109 more dangerous then the Fw-190A. So where is the incentive to replace proven and well liked Me-109s with more expensive Fw-190As?


Do-217 bomber is a side issue with several possible solutions.
DB603 was the preferred engine for Do-217 so that's the program RLM should fund if this aircraft is to enter production. Better yet, put the Jumo 222 engine into mass production and build the Do-317 (i.e. Do-217 powered by Jumo 222 engines). Alternately He-177B (4 Jumo 211 engines) could enter production during 1941, eliminating Do-217 and He-111 level bombers.
 
Ju 87 was never produced in what we could call large numbers in terms of wartime production.

The Fw 190 was the result of an RLM request for proposals for a new single engined fighter specifically to counter the Spitfire (if we are to believe Kurt Tank).

It succeeded well in this.

So serious was the threat of the Fw 190 following its introduction that on 13th November 1941 the Air Staff issued a directive halting all but "essential" RAF operations over Northern Europe. Operations began again at the beginning of February but were again suspended after the "Channel Dash" (Operation Cerberus) of 11 February 1942. Operations began again the next month,concentrated against ground targets. At the end of this period the RAF had lost 335 aircraft,a majority being Spitfire Vs. This was unsustainable and on 13th June 1942 Air Marshall Sholto-Douglas was ordered to curtail all operations. Only operations against coastal targets continued.

It doesn't matter how we spin the statistics,the RAF had suffered a serious rebuttal.

The balance of Air Power had turned decisively against the RAF,due to a very large extent to the arrival of the Fw 190 in September 1941 and yet you wouldn't have produced the best and most versatile German single engined fighter of the war at all!

Cheers

Steve
 
5 March 1936.
Spitfire prototype first flight.

27 June 1936.
Spitfire prototype revealed to public at RAF Hendon air display.
.....As one would expect, the new aircraft had numerous technical problems which had to be solved before mass production could begin during mid 1938.

Autumn 1937.
RLM specification for a new fighter to operate alongside Me-109. He-100 and Fw-190 competed for this contract.

4 August 1938.
Spitfire enters operational service with 19 Squadron at RAF Duxford.


Fw 190 was the result of an RLM request for proposals for a new single engined fighter specifically to counter the Spitfire
Click to expand...
How is that possible? The Spitfire wasn't even operational during 1937 when RLM requested a new fighter aircraft.
 
1937 fighter aircraft will be powered by the new DB603 engine. (Prototype was running during 1937.)
.....Naturally this means DB603 engine program will be pushed to completion rather then cancelled.

1937 fighter aircraft will carry 600 liters of internal fuel. 50% more then existing Me-109.

With these changes 1937 fighter aircraft becomes significantly more capable then the existing Me-109. So there should not be a lot of discussion about the 1937 aircraft replacing the February 1934 specification Me-109.

Fw-190C has a good chance to win but it's not a sure bet. He-100 will be designed larger to meet the specification. A Heinkel version of Ki-61 powered by a DB603 engine might give Fw-190 some stiff competition.
 
davebender said:
Ju-88.
Produced on a large scale as standard heavy dive bomber and light level bomber.
.....Supplemented by He-111 in level bomber role.
Click to expand...

You have it backwards, the Ju 88 supplemented the He 111 in the "level" bomber role. The He 111 was the Luftwaffe "strategic" bomber even it if doesn't get much credit.

davebender said:
Me-109.
Produced on a large scale as standard light fighter aircraft.
Click to expand...

already being done.

davebender said:
Fw-187.
Produced on a large scale as standard high endurance fighter and recon aircraft.
Click to expand...

Great except it will never be as cheap to make as the Fw 190. Unless things are very strange building a 9000lb twin is going to be more expensive than a 7000lb single engine plane. Contract prices, especially proposed contract prices can be all over the map.

And if you think you can build a pair of 1200-1300 hp V-12s ( 24 cylinders) cheaper than a single 14cylinder engine in similar quantities you might be interested in a bridge I have for sale spanning the East River in New York.


The Jumo 222 is only a solution if you believe in the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny. It didn't work, end of story. The He 177B might have worked, you just get half as many as the number of DO 217s and He 111 actually built. Not a real advantage.
A DB 603 in 1940-41 probably wouldn't be the "UBER" engine you think would be. How much of what DB learned on the 601N and E was used on the later 603? Or even how much of what was used on the 605A?
An early 603 may very well run at 2500rpm instead of 2700rpm and use 1.3ata instead of 1.4 ata. It could very well be a 1500-1600hp engine instead of 1750hp which means no advantage over the BMW 801 at the time.

edit> as for even earlier?? IF the 603 is held to the same piston speed as the 601Aa (2500rpm, 2625fpm piston speed) the long stroke 603 would have an rpm limit of 2222rpm. a 603 running at 2500rpm has a piston speed of 2954fpm.
Didn't the DB605 have problems overheating the piston crowns? only going to be worse in a bigger cylinder.
 
Last edited:
davebender said:
1937 fighter aircraft will carry 600 liters of internal fuel. 50% more then existing Me-109.
Click to expand...

Won't the 50% more powerful engine consume 50% more fuel, therefore leaving your new, larger aircraft with the same range, give or take a small amount, with only a slight performance advantage.

Good to know you have enough excess fuel to burn.
 
At cruise (at the same speed) the bigger engine should only burn enough more fuel to overcome the additional drag of the bigger air-frame + a bit more due to the larger amount of friction in the bigger engine. Using the the extra power ( take-off, climb and combat) will burn the the extra 50%. Range will NOT go up 50% unless the air-frame is cleaner than the 109E. Not hard to do but then a cleaner air-frame with the existing DB 601 and 500 liters might go as far or farther than the the big engine plane.
 
Historical Version of Do-335A1.
2 x DB603G engines. 1,900 hp each.
7,400 kg empty.
11,700 kg loaded
477 mph max speed. 413 mph sustained speed.
350 mph max speed with one engine.
2,330 range with drop tanks.
4,600 ft/min climb.
1 x M103 3cm cannon firing through prop hub. 2 x cowl mounted 151/15 or 151/20 cannon.
Optional. 2 x wing mounted 3cm Mk 103 cannon.
1,000kg bomb bay

Do-335 was a bomber complete with 1,000 kg bomb bay. Airframe was reinforced to the extent that it could carry very powerful cannon armament. That's fine for ground attack but not what you want for a fighter.

A tandem engine fighter aircraft powered by DB601 engines should be about 3,000 kg lighter. Three 20mm cannon and no bomb bay. Might still look something like the historical Do-335 but it will be smaller and more nimble.
 

According to Tank (not always a man with a reliable memory)

"After receiving the requirement for the new fighter...... in 1938 the project office submitted several alternatives,all based around the idea of a fighter somewhat more rugged than the Messerschmitt 109 [sic]."

Later.

"The Messerschmitt 109 [sic] and British Spitfire,the two fastest fighters in the world at the time,could be summed up as a very large engine on the front of the smallest possible airframe..... I felt that a quite different breed of fighter would also have a place..."

After which good old Kurt goes on to explain the background thinking behind the Fw 190,describing it as a "Dienstpferd" or cavalry horse rather than a racehorse like the Spitfire and Bf 109.
It is clear that he at least thought he was designing an aircraft to compete commercially with the Bf 109 and militarily with the Spitfire.

Shacklady's "Butcher Bird" supports Tank's memory. Whilst saying that the RLM directive was given in September 1937 he also states,

"The experimental design effort was led by Oberingenieur Blaser and commenced during the summer of 1938."

By mid 1938 rumours were rife in German circles about the performance of Supermarines new fighter.

It is also worth considering that without the development of the Fw 190 A series there would have been no Fw190 D series either. Too little,too late but the Dora was the best single piston engined fighter the Germans produced and also one of the best produced by anybody during the war.

Cheers

Steve
 
Last edited:
A-0 was equipped with DB 603A engines, the A-1 was planned with 603E but may have received the 603Aa as well. DB 603G was never built except prototypes. Cowl guns were 2cm ones, they may have used 15mm ones in prototypes. The wing-mounted MK 103 were planned for the B-version, I haven't heard or seen something about gunpods.
 
According to Smith and Creek the only engine type ever fitted in the Do 335 was indeed the DB 603 A with the single exception of one prototype,V3 (CP+UC).

The performance figures are way lower than the ones in "davebender's" table

The first prototype to be fitted with armament was V9 (CP+UI). It had two 20mm MG 151/20 cowl guns and one 30mm MK 103 firing through the spinner. V5 (CP+UE) was the designated armaments test aircraft but due to delays with the MK 103 it followed V9.

V9 first fired the MK 103,a grand total of five rounds,the results being described rather cryptically as "nicht einwandfrei".

V5 fired 1400 rounds from MK 103s but there were constant problems and the weapon was not perfected before the end of the war. Unsurprisingly the proven MG 151/20s worked fine.

Cheers

Steve
 
Last edited:
without the development of the Fw 190 A series there would have been no Fw190 D series either
Click to expand...
Not necessarily true. Initial Fw-190 design proposals were powered by Daimler Benz engines. The Fw-190 could have been powered by the DB601 or, better yet, DB603 from the beginning.

However this is somewhat beside the point. Late war Fw-187s powered by 1,800 hp DB605AS engines or 2,000 hp DB605D engines would probably fly rings around a Fw-190D and the Falke has a lot more endurance. So if Germany builds 20,000 Fw-187s ILO 20,000 Fw-190s the Luftwaffe comes out ahead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Engineman
E
S
Day fighter Ta 154
Replies
0
Views
508
spicmart
S
Axis Strategic Heavy Bombers?
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Shortround6
S
A
Empire fighter program?
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
MiTasol
German heavy bombers
2 3
Replies
50
Views
4K
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
Menu
Log in
Register