Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
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?
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)
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.
Just one jet engine on the not-163, not two.Jet engine make the 163 far larger, the Me 262 was about done as best as they could.
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.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.
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
Full production didn't begin until 1941, so they could just scrap it: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
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.Production began in Spring 1941 in both the Augsburg and Regensburg factories.
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 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.
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.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.
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.
Well, for 109s you can have gun boats escorted by 3 gun fighters which doesn't sound all that efficient.
The MG FFM was a needless distraction.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.
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.