1943 FW190D?

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


focke wulf 190 fw190c

So the FW190C with the DB603 was able to have a service ceiling of 40,000 feet, but after highly successful testing the RLM decided they needed to operate at 45,000 feet instead. Why not use the FW190C as a stopgap until the TA152 was ready? As it was the FW190D was that, but only after it was too late.

Edit:
I'm looking at my copy of Green's "War planes of the third reich" and it looks like the RLM was playing favorite with the Jumo 213, so wanted that to work, but once the FW190D came into service they changes their tune and ordered the DB603E installed in some FW190Ds for testing again. The DB603 had better performance than the Jumo, so the plan was that the D14 and D15 FW190s would be re-engined with the DB603 from now on. The bombing got in the way of production plans, but it seems that the Jumo was the inferior engine.

Even the FW team developing the FW190C and D thought that the DB603 was the superior altitude engine with greater development potential, but were overruled by the RLM that wanted to favor Jumo, which at this point was a state-owned institution.
 
Last edited:
Didn't they try to turbo charge the DB 603 of the Fw 190 C? Didn't several prototypes have a turbo pack slung underneath?I know V18 did.
I can't check now but I vaguely remember that the failiure to make the system work,and problems with the cockpit pressurisation,were factors that led to the dropping of the project.
Sorry to be so vague,there's a Christmas tree between me and most of my books
Cheers
Steve
 


Yes, for altitudes above 40,000 feet, which wasn't necessary in 1943 or really most of 1944.
Pressurized cockpits were necessary in the 40k feet range, but that research would take time to perfect for fighters and shouldn't have been a reason to cancel the project. Anyway it seems that there was some politics going on, as the DB603 had better performance than the Jumo 213, but the state-owned Jumo was picked despite protests and advice from the development teams working on the high altitude project.
At that point very high altitude research was ongoing, but wouldn't be ready until later with the TA152. The FW190D was not any better with a turbo charger, so even the Dora was a stopgap until the TA152 would be ready.
As it was the Focke-Wulf development team favored the DB603 as a better performing engine at altitude and had better development potential than the Jumo 213, but they were overruled by the RLM.
 
Okay, no problemo, wiking
Interestingly enough, Wikipedia lists the supercharger as a something extra to the engine, blurring the fact that the very two stage supercharger was a key for the engine's ability to perform well in altitude. In other words, reading the excerpt, one could arrive to conclusion that Jumo213E was a performer at high altitudes even without the crucial 2-stage supercharger
The excerpt does not state another important thing, namely the presence of inter-cooler, another important ingredient for engine's capabilities at hi alt.
 
A Great and interesting thread.
would anyone have any photos they could post, of the Jumo 213 engine.externally and internally, as quite hard to source.the reason being i have a relic section of this engine that includes the camshaft section piston and would like to confirm the same.

Cheers.
 
wiking85 said:
It turns out I was thinking about the Mk103 not 108, and it was with the Do335
Click to expand...

The MK 103 installation intended,as you say,for the Do 335 was never perfected before the end of the war. It was initially tested on V9 (later also on V5) with constant stoppages and other problems.A report described the results of tests undertaken in July 1944 with the with the MK 103 as "nicht einwandfrei". A loose translation might be "less than perfect".

There were plans to install the 55mm MK 112 in the Do 335 but nothing came of it before the end of the war.

Cheers

Steve
 
The B-17 cruised (inbound) at 150-155 IAS at 25-26000 -----> closer to 205mph TAS, B-24 cruised at 165+ which is about 215mph TAS at 22-23000 feet.

The 110 still has significant speed advantage but not as great as presented above. Outbound, unloaded, the speed will increase about 5mph.
 
Mk 103 and Mk108 cannons fired similiar mine shell projectiles. Difference was projectile velocity.

Until gyro stabilized gun sights were introduced you don't need a weapon accurate @ 1,000 meters for use against aerial targets. 3cm Mk108 cannon will work just fine for killing B-17s.
 

And yet the RLM specifically specified the MK 103 for the Do 335. Maybe they did see an advantage,firing mine shells,of an increased muzzle veloctity (860m/s as opposed to 520m/s).
They were prepared to accept the reduction in rate of fire (600/440 rpm) and large increase in size and weight (58Kg/146Kg).
The MK 103 could fire armour piecing ammunition (slightly higher velocity,slightly lower r.o.f.)

If they had considered the old MK 108 adequate why not go with it? As I said above,they never got the MK 103 to work properly in the Do 335.

The Do 335 was to have the EZ 42 "Adler" gun sight which was a gyroscopic sight.

Cheers

Steve
 

We have reached the same conclusion. Do-335 had a stabilized gun sight so it made sense to have long range weapons.

It's also worth noting the Do-335 was a light bomber complete with bomb bay. The Mk103 cannon would be used against both ground and aerial targets.
 
The MK 108 was a rather short ranged gun, or at least no longer ranged than the majority of Luftwaffe weapons, which were all a bit shorter ranged than the american .50 and the Hispano. The Germans themselves in one study figured the effective range against bombers for the MK 108 was 400 meters. But that is also the effective range for the MG 131, the MG-FF and the MG 151/20. The Mg 151/15 was figured at 600 meters and the MK 103 at 800 meters.

MAXIMUM ranges were considerably longer. Better sights can only do so much.

Time of flight to 600 meters at sea level for the MG 131, MG-FFM, Mg 151/15, MG 151/20 (regular HET shell) and MK 108 are 1.22, 1.428, 0.816, 1.101, and 1.66 seconds respectively. Times of flight at 6-8,000 meters will be less but will be somewhat proportional. Please note that the MG 151/15 while lacking hitting power, has a time of flight to 600 meters about 1/2 that of the MK 108 and will be much easier to hit with regardless of the sight. The MK 103 would have enjoyed a similar advantage. It may not be a 1000 meter gun it might be a 600-700 meter gun instead of a 400 meter gun without the gyro sight.
 
Yes,range,effective range,limiting range and the efficiency of sighting systems was something that guunery schools struggled to explain at the time!



Cheers

Steve
 
Just to go one (big) step beyond, what kind of performance could be expected from a Dora (D-14?) with the four additional wing tanks as planned and a DB 603N?

I'm curious about both max speed and climb rate, with and without MW-50.

I'm guessing about 800km/h and 23m/s.

(Did all 603 sub-types weight approximately the same?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

D
Professor Messerschmitt 1943 Lecture
Replies
4
Views
1K
Barrett
B
FW190D-9 vs Allied fighters
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
10K
Demopan78
Vultee Vengeance operational procedures used by 82 Squadron RAF in British India 1943
Replies
2
Views
863
MorrisOxford
Fw190D engines
Replies
6
Views
1K
Engineman
E
Advanced French Fighters vs 1942/1943 contemporaries
17 18 19
Replies
366
Views
25K
Elan Vital
E
Menu
Log in
Register