A massive rationalization at Messerschmitt post Battle of Britain?

[tomo pauk]

MTT was making, between the BoB and VE day, quite a number of aircraft designs. Bf 109, 110, Me 210, 410, 163, 262, plus a number of prototypes that were eventually abandoned for this or that reason (Me 155, 209, 264 309, P.1101). So let's have RLM find a sane note in it's collective brain, and dictate a rationalization in the number of types the MTT will be making.
And fast, especially once the late 1941 arrives and Germany finds itself in the war against almost the whole world.

 

[Shortround6]

Well, the 109 and 110 were already developed and flying so we can argue over how much time they spent refining the designs.
The 210 first flew in Sept 1939 and was a dog's breakfast but you already had tens of thousands of man hours in the thing well before the BoB.
Do you scrap it or salvage it?

 

[tomo pauk]

Well, the 109 and 110 were already developed and flying so we can argue over how much time they spent refining the designs.

Both should remain in production IMO. Some refinement is in order, and the 109F is already in production anyway.

The 210 first flew in Sept 1939 and was a dog's breakfast but you already had tens of thousands of man hours in the thing well before the BoB.
Do you scrap it or salvage it?

Scrap it.

 

[Denniss]

post-BoB they already started to produce the 210 only to be stopped in early 41 for redesign. They eventually worked it out with the 210C and 410. It could and should have been used to replace the 110 in the recon and bomber destroyer role.
163 was crap and more dangerous for pilots and mechanics then the enemy. But it was probably backed by politics
Mtt spent far too much time/resourced into Bf 109 successor that were barely improvements (209, 309)
No idea why Mtt deperately wanted to construct heavy bombers - another wastage of resources

 

[tomo pauk]

163 was crap and more dangerous for pilots and mechanics then the enemy. But it was probably backed by politics

My pet idea is that Me 163 is designed around a jet engine. Removes almost 100% or engine-related self-inflicted wounds, does not tax the engine production as much as a 2-engined jet fighter, ditto for fuel allowance.

Mtt spent far too much time/resourced into Bf 109 successor that were barely improvements (209, 309)

Having the wheel well covers on Bf 109 already in 1941 is no rocket science - no point to wait until the 109K-4 for that feature. Keep the tail wheel retracted now that we're at Bf 109.
A single 20mm cannon is not enough by 1941, the pop guns are also well behind the curve.

post-BoB they already started to produce the 210 only to be stopped in early 41 for redesign. They eventually worked it out with the 210C and 410. It could and should have been used to replace the 110 in the recon and bomber destroyer role.

Fw 190 is probably very good in the bomber-destroyer role, and will cost 1/2 of what Me 210/410 will.

 

[Denniss]

Jet engine make the 163 far larger, the Me 262 was about done as best as they could. Should have adopted the Heinkel as co-variant.
Airframe changes were kept to a minimum after the 109F. Mtt failed miserably to anticipate necessary weight increases so to leave headroom for bigger wheels while designing new wing and rear fuselage for the 109F.
Fw 190 desperately needed more engine power up high in the bomber stream, BMW did not have a fix until late autum 1944 while DB had some improved engines by spring 44.

 

[tomo pauk]

Jet engine make the 163 far larger, the Me 262 was about done as best as they could.

Just one jet engine on the not-163, not two.

 

[Shortround6]

Problem is that the Walter HWK 509 was supposed to give 3300lbs of thrust (or more with auxiliary cruise chamber) for around a 365lb weight.

The Jumo 004 was supposed to give 1980lbs of thrust for 1630lbs of engine weight
The BMW 003 was supposed to give 1760lbs of thrust for 1375lbs of engine weight.

Yes the Me 163 carried an awful lot of the fuel and you can trade some fuel for the engine weight but I an not sure how far down that road you can go.
The BMW 003 has about 1/2 the power.
Are you going to get the performance of the He 162 or are you going be giving Bell P-59s a run for their money

 

[Jabberwocky]

My pet idea is that Me 163 is designed around a jet engine. Removes almost 100% or engine-related self-inflicted wounds, does not tax the engine production as much as a 2-engined jet fighter, ditto for fuel allowance.

Lippisch's developed the P.20 proposal for a Jumo 004 powered Me 163 derivative. There was a later refinement, the P.15, which was to have the nose of the He 162, wings/tail of the proposed Me 163C, landing gear from the Bf 109 and a HeS 011 engine. Neat looking thing too. I get a lot of British/Canadian 1950s jet fighter vibes from it.

 

[MIflyer]

The Me-262 was designed as a multi-role aircraft and was inspired by the Mossie, which was doing just fine as a bomber, night fighter, recon. The Germans were saying "Why Can't We Build Something Like That?" and Willy stepped up with the 262.

 

[tomo pauk]

Problem is that the Walter HWK 509 was supposed to give 3300lbs of thrust (or more with auxiliary cruise chamber) for around a 365lb weight.

The Jumo 004 was supposed to give 1980lbs of thrust for 1630lbs of engine weight
The BMW 003 was supposed to give 1760lbs of thrust for 1375lbs of engine weight.

Yes the Me 163 carried an awful lot of the fuel and you can trade some fuel for the engine weight but I an not sure how far down that road you can go.
The BMW 003 has about 1/2 the power.
Are you going to get the performance of the He 162 or are you going be giving Bell P-59s a run for their money

I'm trying to give a run for their money to the the best Allied piston-engined fighters, by using something less taxing on the German jet engine production and their fuel supply.

 

[ThomasP]

Obviously this is with hindsight, but I would suggest dropping/not starting everything except the 109, 110, and 262.

The 109 as an intercepter was kept competitive throughout the war.
The 110 served a useful purpose as a LR fighter in the early war, and could serve as light strike and recon.
The 262 being continued is a no brainer.

Use the resources freed up by dropping/not starting the other airframes and you could probably increase the rate at which improvements were made to the 109 and 110, plus build more airframes.

The 109 - small and not really a fuel hog - was probably about the most efficient aircraft the Germans could produce in terms of structural material and fuel.

The 110 was maybe not necessary after 1942, except in the maritime patrol and recon rolls?

The 262, if it could have been introduced and improved more quickly, would have had a significant effect in the anti-bomber campaign.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Same as with Heinkel.

Heinkel 'roadmap' after the He 111 and 112?

After the important and very useful He 111 and decent, if uninspired He 112, Heinkel IMO had a lot of problems to come out with a remarkable design worthy to mass produce. Some promise was held with He 100, 280, 219 and He 162, but neither took the RLM by storm, so to speak, bar the 162 that was...

ww2aircraft.net

Messerschmidt needs to focus on Barbarossa. So it's tactical strike, air superiority and transports like the Me 323. Forget the long distant and heavy bombers, you'll never build enough of them to stop any transplanted armaments factories in the Caucuses.

Start with making the Me 210 into a better aircraft. This thing should have been a tank killer.

 

[wiking85]

post-BoB they already started to produce the 210 only to be stopped in early 41 for redesign. They eventually worked it out with the 210C and 410. It could and should have been used to replace the 110 in the recon and bomber destroyer role.
163 was crap and more dangerous for pilots and mechanics then the enemy. But it was probably backed by politics
Mtt spent far too much time/resourced into Bf 109 successor that were barely improvements (209, 309)
No idea why Mtt deperately wanted to construct heavy bombers - another wastage of resources

Full production didn't begin until 1941, so they could just scrap it:

Messerschmitt Me 210

the specifications and history of the Messerschmitt Me 210 aircraft of World War 2

www.pilotfriend.com

Production began in Spring 1941 in both the Augsburg and Regensburg factories.​

They'd lose some resources due to it being ordered before the prototype flew, but they'd lose FAR less if they killed it in late 1940 rather than take the BF110 out of production and then put it back in later after the Me210 production line was scrapped.

That way at most they'd lose resources production the jigs and machine tools, but not lose out on Me109 and Bf110 production when they tried to make the Me210 in 1941. Should net the Luftwaffe and additional 2000 aircraft even with the resources lots on the tooling. They'd save several test pilots as well, as they died in the Erprobungsgruppen for the Me210 in 1941.

The 110 was maybe not necessary after 1942, except in the maritime patrol and recon rolls?

The 262, if it could have been introduced and improved more quickly, would have had a significant effect in the anti-bomber campaign.

The 110 was vital from 1940-43 as a night fighter. In the east it did excellent work as a fighter-bomber/recon until 1943 as well. IIRC it wasn't really used for naval patrols.

The Me262 was held up due to the engines, not the airframe.

My pet idea is that Me 163 is designed around a jet engine. Removes almost 100% or engine-related self-inflicted wounds, does not tax the engine production as much as a 2-engined jet fighter, ditto for fuel allowance.

Not worth it. Just get rid of the design entirely and focus on the Me262 and upgrading the Me109 to the best of its ability.

Maximize output of improved Me110s and Me109s with production resources until the 262 is ready.

 

[tomo pauk]

The Me262 was held up due to the engines, not the airframe.


Not worth it. Just get rid of the design entirely and focus on the Me262 and upgrading the Me109 to the best of its ability.

Maximize output of improved Me110s and Me109s with production resources until the 262 is ready.

The 1st quoted sentence clashes with 3rd sentence wrt. Me 262. Me 262 was ready, engine production was not.
Please note that 1-engined fighter needs 1/2 of engines vs. what will a 2-engined fighter need.

As about the 109 and 110 - they more or less did what you suggest, it was not working. Allies were both making more fighters and a lot of their fighter were much better types than it was a Bf 109 or 110. Even if we allow for some nip & tuck that can gain 10-15 mph in 1943-44.

 

[Shortround6]

Well, for 109s you can have gun boats escorted by 3 gun fighters which doesn't sound all that efficient.
If you have to use a bomber intercepter that is escorted anyway use enough guns in the bomber destroyer.

 

[tomo pauk]

Well, for 109s you can have gun boats escorted by 3 gun fighters which doesn't sound all that efficient.

At lest 3 problems can be identified there for the Luftwaffe's Bf 109s in 1943-44, west from Berlin:
- lack of engine power is showing up already with Bf 109s with one cannon and 2 LMGs, let alone with 3 and draggy HMG installation
- Bf 109 not being very conductive to carrying powerful guns without a notable drag penalty, since it was a small A/C,
- 20mm being too weak as a bomber-buster, the MK 103 being ... problematic to install as a motor-cannon before the redesign, the MK 108 being with very low MV

1st problem requires ironing out the bugs from the DB 605A at least 6 months than it was the case, as well as coming out with the DB 605AS-equivalent by winter of 1943/44.
2nd problem might be solved by introduction of the auxiliary spar so the main spar can have a big hole drilled in, lest the wing does not fold mid-air (Spanish did that post-war) - should've allowed for the internal MG 151/20 installation. Or, fiddle a bit with belt-fed MG FFM installation (it was smaller and lighter cannon than the MG 151, with shorter and a bit lighter ammo, lower MV, the shells were the same types as on the 151/20). Deleting the cowl MGs altogether is my suggestion, too.
3rd problem probably requires coming out with a cannon that is mid-way betwen the MK 103 and 108 wrt. muzzle velocity. A ~100 kg cannon (vs. 140 kg MK 103 and 60 kg MK 108), call it 'big MK 108' for all I care, obviously installed as a motor-cannon. Should also mix well with the MG FFM in the wings, ballistically-wise.

Keeping the retractable tailwheel, early introduction of wheel well overs, as well as less draggy weapon set-up will keep the drag low and speed up.

Going with jet-engined fighters solves these problems, too, and some others (also introduces a few).

 

[Shortround6]

Or, fiddle a bit with belt-fed MG FFM installation (it was smaller and lighter cannon than the MG 151, with shorter and a bit lighter ammo, lower MV, the shells were the same types as on the 151/20). Deleting the cowl MGs altogether is my suggestion, too.

The MG FFM was a needless distraction.
The Germans were masters at assembling collections of weapons/ammunition in one aircraft that would not use the same trajectory or time of flight just about guaranteeing that only part of the armament would be on target at any point in time unless firing from short range.

20mm round...........................................MV
MG FFM mine.....................................700m/s
MG 151/20 mine................................800m/s
MG FFM HET.......................................585m/s
MG 151/20 HET..................................720m/s

The mine shell slowed down faster than the HET so when fired out of the same gun they did hit somewhat the same?
The MG 131 was actually not a bad match to the MG 151/20
The MK 108 was not quite as bad as many accounts claim.

round....................................MV................................V at 300 meters..............time to 300..........................V at 600.............time to 600
MG FFM Mine...................695......................................432....................................0.551......................................281.......................1.428
MK 108 Ausf A..................500......................................370....................................0.696.....................................264........................1.660

The MK 108 Ausf A shell was a pretty poor specimen of shell. The Germans very late in the war came up with the Ausf C projectile that would cut 0.26 sec off the time to 600 meters.

The upper cutaway shell is the Ausf A and the lower shell is a Ausf C

There was nothing revolutionary about the shape of the Ausf C shell.
It may have been more difficult to make with the drawn walls of the mine shell.

 

[tomo pauk]

The MG FFM was a needless distraction.
The Germans were masters at assembling collections of weapons/ammunition in one aircraft that would not use the same trajectory or time of flight just about guaranteeing that only part of the armament would be on target at any point in time unless firing from short range.

The FFM was just fine, it's main problem was that the belt-fed version was never used on day fighters.
You can see that I'm trying to get just to 3 guns for the LW, with not that dissimilar ballistics: FFM (often can fit where the MG 151 cannot, it is very light, still good punch), MG 151/20 (can be synchronised, high RoF), and an in-between 3cm wepon ( requirement is that is an easy fit in the Vee, where MK 103 was not; 700 m/s fits far better with 800 m/s for the MG 151 than it was the case with 500 m/s for the MK 108).

The MG 131 was actually not a bad match to the MG 151/20
The MK 108 was not quite as bad as many accounts claim.

round....................................MV................................V at 300 meters..............time to 300..........................V at 600.............time to 600
MG FFM Mine...................695......................................432....................................0.551......................................281.......................1.428
MK 108 Ausf A..................500......................................370....................................0.696.....................................264........................1.660

The MK 108 Ausf A shell was a pretty poor specimen of shell. The Germans very late in the war came up with the Ausf C projectile that would cut 0.26 sec off the time to 600 meters.

MG 131 is all but useless to fight B-17s and P-47s, and the installations took easy 10 km/h from the fighters, right when they were already hard pressed due to being under-performing.
Trying to hit something beyond 300 m without computerized sight and with low MV wepon is wasting of ammo. A 30mm 330g shell launched at 700+- m/s will be far less depending on aerodynamic finesse than the one launched at 500 m/s.

 

[Shortround6]

A better job of fairing the cowl MG 131s, then put a MG 131 inside each wing.
Not great but about twice the firepower of a Ki 43 or about equal to a Ki 44 or many Ki 61s.

AND THEN you get factor in the MG 151/20.

Or if you want, hang a single MG 151/20 under the fuselage

Granted you need the electric primed ammo.