Better German Aircraft in 1943 Inflict Crucial Losses of Allied Air Power in Britain? (1 Viewer)

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

The multiplying effect of smart munitions is strategic. Far less raw material needed.

Germany had all of the pieces for smart munition lying on the table in 1940 in labs like Agfa, etc. But I believe the thinking of the time was that of air battle as a form of jousting. Bigger guns, faster planes.

I believe Goring was of that sort, that air war was just an extension of WW1 battle. Once the war outcome begins to depend on large quantities of nitrates, fuel, metals, Germany could not have prevailed with mere incremental improvements of weapons. And once in it, sacrificing present production to develop a game changer a year or two in the future would be a very difficult decision.

Another crucial element was the magnetron. Although the magnetron was well known in Germany, its use was limited and the much weaker klystron prevailed as a radar transmitter. This hobbled Germany defensively. Instead of megawatts, they got kilowatts, much less effective radar than otherwise.

Smart munitions in the 1940's is not unreasonable. I had a USAF tech order for the operational Sidewinder in front of me in the 1950's. And Germany of the 1930's era was more advanced in areas important to the developement of these munitions. Optics, color film, rocketry, etc.

Ron
I believe you are right about Goring. He came of age when air power was an extension of knights fighting one on one. A gentleman's war, fought by dashing young men, quite often of good breeding where you fought fair, acknowledged each other's greatness, and returned to base in time for dinner followed by brandy and cigars. As he grew older, fatter, and more powerful he never outgrew his need for flamboyance which was shown by his custom uniforms, clear polished nails, and make-up. Tempered with morphine and speed, his ideas as to what the Luftwaffe was and needed quite often collided with reality and his obsolete ideas of Aryan knights in the sky allowed him to overestimate it's capabilities. This might sound funny but in many ways he reminds of Jerry Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, who cannot stand to get out of the way of everyday operations of his team and let the pros do their thing. Goring was so scared of losing his exalted position of luxury that he did not dare put one of the brilliant young minds of the Luftwaffe in a position that may show him up.
 
Thank you for so many answers, and, sorry to say, I was off for some time and did not respond. Special thanks to MikeMeech for his numbers in posting #15. Well, I complained about my friend already, who is very stubborn. Our figure is, to attack Britain in the North. The main supply route to Britain has to pass the North Channel. My friend made a calculation that, taking two 600 l additional auxiliary fuel tanks, going airborne from Southwest Norway, the Fw 190 (not the 187!) could even reach the Irish-Northern Irish border. For this time, I have to say, he proved right. Escorted German bomber attacks on all Scotland could have been possible, thus probably causing incise dangers to shipping traffic moving through and off the North Channel to give Britan vital supplies.

But - and here, I think, my friend is wrong: He says, there never would be any more Allied fighters than about 200 ones in the North (so any German attack using 300 Fw 190 would always push through). I told him, look at the production numbers. If necessary, the Allies could have deployed (spoken for 1943 as a whole) 20.000 fighters in Britain, and a good portion of them in Scotland!

Well, I could not convince my friend, and so the discussion came to a temporary end. So my questions to you:

1) How many fighters do you say the Allies could have deployed in Britain rsp. in Scotland, where the most of the additional ground organization would still be needed to create?
2) If you look at that squadron multitude MikeMeech gave in his first two pictures: how many aircraft does this make?

Thanks again for every answer, and best regards,
RT
 
The main supply route to Britain has to pass the North Channel. My friend made a calculation that, taking two 600 l additional auxiliary fuel tanks, going airborne from Southwest Norway..............................
The problem with calculations like that is that don't take the return trip into account.

Google maps says it is about 540 miles from Stavanger to Northern Border of Ireland and North Ireland on the coast above Londonderry.
Trouble is that the route flies a bit south of Aberdeen on the east coast and a bit north of Glasgow on the west coast.

If the British manage to intercept the Germans about 15 miles ESE of Aberdeen the Germans are about 300 miles from Norway.
If the German 190's are forced to drop their 600 liter fuel tanks they will be lucky to make it back to Norway. Trying to continue on over Scotland is an complete fantasy.
With tanks gone and trying to fight or run from British fighters for 15-20 minutes will the 190s have enough fuel to make it back to Norway?

Escort range is not how far the plane can fly. It is about how far the plane can fly with drop tanks gone at 15-20 minutes of internal fuel burned up in combat/evasion.
Remaining internal fuel is what governs the distance the fighters can escort the bombers over.
 
Fw 190 as-is was probably the shortest range fighter in the Axis camp. BMW 801 was a fuel hog, the internal fuel carried was half what the P-47Cs and early Ds carried.
table (mind the non-drop-tank range figure, this has bearing on how much fuel it has to RTB, from that fuel we 'cut' what is used in combat 1st)
 
Fw 190 as-is was probably the shortest range fighter in the Axis camp. BMW 801 was a fuel hog, the internal fuel carried was half what the P-47Cs and early Ds carried.
table (mind the non-drop-tank range figure, this has bearing on how much fuel it has to RTB, from that fuel we 'cut' what is used in combat 1st)
Plus a "reserve" for contingencies.
 
But - and here, I think, my friend is wrong: He says, there never would be any more Allied fighters than about 200 ones in the North

The problem is the British rotated home based fighter squadrons, they were never stationary, particularly ones that were exposed to extensive action. It seems like "when" is as pertinent a question as "how many", as in 1943 the de Havilland Mosquito night fighters are in service.

It's worth mentioning that unless CH is locally disabled - it is almost completely impossible to disable the entire system, your chances of any aerial force entering British airspace not being tracked and intercepted is zero. Let's not forget Steinbock, in which, according to Wiki lost 329 aircraft out of 474 assembled over a five month period of operations. Totally unsustainable attrition rate.

 
Germans had no 600l drop tank, just 300 and 900. 900 was impossible to install under Fw 190 wing - insufficient clearance.
Fw 190 required special modifications to carry 2 drop tanks (fuel + air lines to wing hard points, coax MGs replaced by oil tank). Even with larger drop tanks (or a 3rd 300l belly tank) I doubt they had enough space for an even larger oil tank.
Plus the range issue of course
 
IMO, the Fw 190 needs to 1st switch to a V12 engine ASAP (DB 601E or 605A by 1942) for much better mileage; greater internal fuel tankage is a must (talk at least another 250-300L). Then the 600L in drop tanks (or 900 if three were carried, or perhaps 2 x 400-450L) can be used to boost the range/radius into useful figures.
 
IMO, the Fw 190 needs to 1st switch to a V12 engine ASAP (DB 601E or 605A by 1942) for much better mileage; greater internal fuel tankage is a must (talk at least another 250-300L). Then the 600L in drop tanks (or 900 if three were carried, or perhaps 2 x 400-450L) can be used to boost the range/radius into useful figures.
Had the RLM tried adding balkenkreuz to the FW-190 to improve performance?
 
Last edited:
The next thesis he utters is this (always remember there is no Eastern Frontier, so peace or armistice bertween Germany + USSR, after Hitler was toppled in early autumn 1942):

"German air power (including in reality "nearly ready" types like He 100 and Fw 187) will prevent Allied air power to fully establish in 1943 on British ground."

Allied Air Power was pretty much established in early 1943 - if not in Britain then in North Africa and the Mediterranean. A renewed threat to the UK is going to see the RAF's deployment priorities significantly altered.

I say no to this once more. Sources say, in 1943 GB built 4.270 Spitfires and some Typhoons.

There were a little over 1,000 Typhoon deliveries in 1943.

My friend says, there were not much more than 1000 fighters in active service on British ground.

Air 22 shows RAF strength in May 1943 - the month prior to the formation of 2TAF - as the following

Spitfires: 828 with squadrons, with 739 serviceable
Typhoons: 304/223
Hurricanes: 32/24
Mosquito: 204/170
Beaufighter: 180/162
Whirlwind: 28/25
Boston: 14/14

Total: 1,596 aircraft with 1,357 serviceable

Of that, 1,192 were single seat fighters and 1,011 were serviceable.

USAAF would have 12 squadrons of P-47Cs at 24 aircraft per squadron, for anther 288 single seat fighters.

With the formation of 2TAF, fighter strength in the UK grows to 1839 with 1539 serviceable by the start of September. Don't have time to work out single seat strength at the moment.
 
A renewed threat to the UK is going to see the RAF's deployment priorities significantly altered.
To a degree, but it depends on the nature and composition of the threat. The likelihood of such a thing would be He 111s, Ju 88s and Do 217s (you can immediately discount the He 177 as there were simply not enough available aircraft in 1943, and with the serviceability and engine issues, the type wasn't ready for intensive operations) with Bf 109s and Fw 190s as escort against Spitfire IXs and Typhoons, with P-47s, P-38s and the first P-51s, depending on when this attack takes place, contributing from the US 8th AF - and I'm pretty certain the Americans wouldn't sit on their hands if Britain was attacked BoB style in 1943 because of potential danger to its interests...

I can't see Germany doing any better than what they did in 1940, to be frank. Britain's air defence wasn't stagnant in that time between.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back